Tomorrow is the day.
Hopefully, the flames are an illusion and this really is fine, or will be if I stop panicking.
Those who want you to doubt that anarchy (self-ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking you to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are better.
I just don't know how I'm going to get through this.
.
Even all cops are only armed with revolvers or pump-action shotguns.
Would that stop mass shootings?
Nope.
One cop who snapped could kill dozens of unarmed people with his revolver, because who could do anything about it? You think that wouldn't happen? How cute.
There is no way to completely end mass shootings. The best approach is to make certain any potential mass shooter faces armed resistance. And, again, anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted around children.
Including the observation that the only way to stop these things in their tracks is armed people among the things you want to protect. Children and employees, in this case.
And the outcry from the anti-gun bigots is the same as always. "A gun did this and you want more guns? You want to arm teachers instead of taking the guns away from everyone?"
I'll just say what I've said in response: If you don't trust someone with a gun, you shouldn't trust them with your children.
If I don't trust someone with a gun, I don't trust them. Period.
With all the recent and current stressors, I didn't come up with anything topical to write. Not even with the Nashville evil loser's mass murder event.
I'll do better.
![]() |
| Kirby and Tobbles |
He would have turned 1 on April 7, 2023-- just a week and a half from now.
He had a rocky, hopeless start. I did all I could, but the deck was stacked against him. At least I hope he was happy and comfortable most of the time he lived with me.
I buried him under the redbud tree next to his friend Tobbles, who I buried there last July 3.
.
Yes, even if it comes down to one government banning another government's app.
I also don't believe anyone should have TikTok on their phone, or use TikTok. I've never used TikTok, so I freely admit I hate it out of ignorance.
However, from the outside looking in, TikTok is obviously harmful. It brainwashes the young and the weak-minded into beliefs that hurt them and, when used to influence politics, it hurts all of us. But censorship hurts us all, too.
All social media is harmful in the same way, to lesser or greater extents. Don't ban any of them.
I understand the arguments for banning it, I just don't agree.
Some days I don't even know what to say-- the statist stupidity from every direction just seems so ridiculous all I can do is shake my head and (try to) put it out of my mind.
I never thought statists were statists because they are "so smart"-- I realize some are smart; their evil overtakes their smarts, but I just don't see it in most of them.
But even if some statists are smart, statism itself is still dumb. It's like a genius who arranges his life according to a horoscope.
But most statists aren't evil geniuses. Just evil imbeciles.
Most don't seem able to add 2 and 2 without trying to find a political angle that supports their preferred kind of slavery.
It doesn't matter, I suppose. Stupid or evil, the results are the same. Be ready to defy and avoid.
This idea that only government needs to respect your right to speak freely is kind of weird. Yes, they are the only ones specifically forbidden to censor you, but anyone who censors others is a bad guy. A jerk.
There's nothing special or magic about the Constitution. Documents don't create rights-- rights have existed exactly the same throughout history and prehistory; thousands of years before the Constitution was written. Bad people have always looked for ways to violate those rights. That's what defines a bad guy. The Constitution did nothing but lay out a roadmap telling government what rights it was forbidden to interfere with. (And it has been ignored, so the experiment failed.)
The right way to fight lies and "harmful" speech is with more speech, not censorship. Or, ignore it. If you censor (or demand someone else censor on your behalf), you've already lost the argument.
Someone might be able to tell you not to speak freely while on their personal property-- but in most cases I'll consider them a jerk for doing so. No, this doesn't mean I would use government or legislation to force them to let someone speak, just that in my own mind I will put them in the "censor" category and have no respect for them on this issue.
I respect your right to speak freely, and I respect it hard. No exceptions. I am a free-speech absolutist.
Again, if you don't like what someone says, say something better to counter it. Don't try to forcibly silence them. It's a bad look.
However, it's ridiculous to imagine anyone has to wait for a judge to throw out an unethical rule before they ignore it. That's as bad as imagining slaves had to comply with their enslavement until slavery was declared illegal.
It's also ridiculous that the anti-gun political monsters are allowed to keep violating natural human rights and fighting to keep their anti-human rules while they beg the courts to agree with them. And they are allowed to keep making up new rules every time they get smacked down. It should be "You were scolded for your misbehavior and now you're done. Go home and never molest anyone ever again."
That it doesn't work that way illustrates how illegitimate all legislation, politicians, the court system, and the entirety of the whole mess truly are.
If I weren't in the midst of my troubles I'd buy a Polymer80 kit, just to have on hand to finish at my leisure. But, maybe, there's no need to rush now.
They just take it and often think it’s normal. Anyone who objects is the abnormal and unhinged one.
That's sick. It's not something I'll ever be able to go along with.
I found the blog post that this site went toxic karen over. I deleted it after taking a screenshot. Here it is-- from August of 2010:
Either way, as so often in these situations, I felt more like a disinterested observer than anyone who'd be deeply impacted. Like whatever happens, it's fine.
I don't have enough money in banks to worry too much about it, but the thought had occurred to me that an economic collapse might put an end to my upcoming surgery. My feelings on that were mixed. And that was really the only thought I had about it. Just wait and see what happens and whether it will interfere with the surgery.
I know other people (people with more money in banks) would be hurt more than I would. I should care more. Even for people who I've warned and who never listen.
I also know it would end up hurting me more than I might casually assume, even ignoring the surgery. I just can't seem to make myself care much.
Then they do the same around liberals.
I actually sort of agree with this tactic. It avoids unnecessary fights.
As long as you don't lie or avoid the truth when a different topic comes up; one where they'd disagree.
I'm happy to agree with conservatives when they take a pro-liberty position on guns, but I don't shy away when they take the anti-liberty position on cops.
Just like I'm happy to side with liberals when they take the pro-liberty position against Cannabis prohibition and I'll turn right around and stand against them on taxation.
There have been many times when I've had good, spirited agreements with both conservatives and liberals, piling on some stupid thing "the other side" does.
As long as the topic stays one where I can agree I'm not going to bring up the issue where I have to disagree. I enjoy agreement more than disagreement. What they choose to do isn't my concern.
If you know me-- and those who've been reading my blog for a few years should-- you know I don't mind actual progress. I embrace it and want to see it happen. I am excited for Mars colonies, innovative energy sources, cyborg implants for those who need them to enjoy life due to a body that doesn't work well, and all sorts of other things. I've benefitted from medical advancements, without which I would have died long ago.
I think technology and the future can be great. If you don't fall into the trap of imagining that everything that comes along and gets some people excited is an improvement.
Backward ideas (like anti-gun rules, slavery, one-world governments, "identity politics", etc.) aren't progress. Standing against those sorts of bad ideas isn't expressing a fear of the future. It is a recognition that individual liberty is more important than anything else.
Bad ideas belong in the past, not in the future. Advocating for them isn't a way to show how enlightened you are-- quite the opposite.