My Blog List

Showing posts with label Emergency Preps - Attitude. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Emergency Preps - Attitude. Show all posts

Sunday, March 4, 2018

#NeverAgain - The Practical And Non-Emotional Version

For your Oscar Party chit-chat between commercials.....  Originally posted at the BoomerPreps Facebook page:

The rich, pompous, protected-by-armed-guards Hollywood elites will flap their gums in mock righteous indignation at tonight's award ceremony (which I hope none of you are watching). Their rally cry will be #NeverAgain. Well, I've got some #NeverAgain items to add to your list that will actually stop or minimize the slaughter of our school children.

#NeverAgain will we be lulled into a feel-good false sense of security by putting up "Gun Free Zone" signs in an attempt to stop homicidal maniacs.

#NeverAgain will we put our trust in any bureaucracy to keep us safe. Background checks, visits by the police and tips to federal authorities all get overlooked, time and again. Our safety is our personal responsibility.

#NeverAgain will we make it legal for teachers, administrators or other school employees who have been properly trained and vetted, to be disarmed in the place where we most need them armed.

#NeverAgain will we allow the actions of a homicidal maniac to influence and restrict the access to firearms owned and used safely by millions and millions of law-abiding Americans.

#NeverAgain will we stand silent when the ACTIONS of an individual are ignored, and the blame is placed on the inanimate object he used for mass murder.

#NeverAgain will we allow Political Correctness and Social Engineering of school districts to prevent the arrest, suspension or expulsion of dangerous students from our schools. Your actions have consequences in the real world. Teach them that lesson while they're still young.

Share with your friends.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2018 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Another Gun Free Zone Slaughter - And THE Solution

Yet another Gun Free Zone got all shot to shit, with 17 dead.  Apparently, only the Gun Grabbers are surprised by this with their immediate calls that, "Something must be done!!!".

This problem - Gun Free Zones becoming Free Fire Zones - is not going to stop until we do two things - one short-term, and one long-term.  Oh, and the Gun Grabbers and their ilk will not agree with either one of these.

First, let's get some points of agreement:

1.  Any place in the world that does not have a physical deterrent to bad guys is considered a "soft target" and will always be their first choice of attack.  This is why churches, schools, markets/malls, theaters, etc., are nearly always the targets of the attackers.  Lots of people and little or no defense against an attack.

2.  We're into at least our second generation of kids who have not been taught how to deal with adversity.

3.  You will never, EVER be able to stop all mass killings.  I don't care how badly you want to wish it away, humans are violent, have always harmed each other, and will continue to do so.  What we can do - must do - is minimize the damage from each individual event.
---  ---

The liberal, Gun Grabber Fix is wholly useless.  Their demand that background checks be done, and High Capacity (actually, regular capacity) magazines and the guns to which they're attached be banned, are both useless as tits on a bull.

In virtually every mass shooting, the guns were either purchased legally, or were stolen.  Duh.

So, the ones that were purchased legally - so far, without exception, through gun dealers that administered background checks - does nothing.  (This is, once again, the case with the current shooter).  Either the person was normal at the time, or The System fucked up and, even though they had the information that the buyer was not eligible for a purchase, approved the buyer anyways.  Death by bureaucracy.

And it's already illegal to steal shit, so making another Feel-Good law ("At least we did SOMETHING!!") making it even MORE illegal to steal guns, is again, useless.

It's akin to issuing a protective order against someone.  To someone intent on doing harm, a restraining order is as effective in stopping them as the paper it's written on.

So let's just ban the Evil Black Guns all together, m'kay?  How has that worked in Mexico?  Hell, guns are basically illegal yet Mexico has dead, bullet-riddled bodies stacked like cord wood in the streets.

And making the government the sole holder of weapons has worked out perfectly every time it's been done.  Just ask the people from Stalin's Russia, Hitler's Germany and Pol Pot's Cambodia.

And do you really think that law abiding American's are going to give up their guns without a fight?  Seriously?  There's a meme out there along the lines of, "There are a trillion rounds of ammunition and 200 million guns in private hands in America.  If there was a gun problem, you'd know about it!"  Try to confiscate those guns, and you'd know about it in short order.
---  ---

So how 'bout we do something that is actually effective in stopping - or at least minimizing - the carnage wrought by people with evil intent?

Short-Term Fix:  Physically Harden Our Society

This includes physical barriers to limit access, and a greater ability of citizens to physically defend themselves and others.  We're actually seeing progress on both of these things slowly happening, but the pace needs to quicken.

Physical barriers - I think it's very important that these barriers not have the appearance of a prison.  We're seeing some larger cities install those posts along roads where pedestrians are present that will stop a car or truck from just mowing down people.  They also make them look like tree pots.

For things like schools, you MUST limit the entry/exit points.  If schools need money, it needs to go here, and not into the pockets of the liberal teacher's unions.

Each school should only have AT MOST 2 or 3 access points where you can actually come in contact with students and staff.  And (here's the kicker) each of those points needs to be manned by at least two armed individuals.

Notice I said "individuals" and not "police officers".  I guarantee you that if individuals with Concealed Carry Permits were offered the opportunity to spend a few hours a day, one or two days a week to stand guard at each of the access points, you'd have a waiting list a mile long.

Why at least two persons per access point?  Because, if like the shooter in Florida, the bad guy shoots someone before they enter the campus, the back-up can sound the alarm, and then return fire.

And it wouldn't cost the school a dime, other than the time it takes for scheduling.

Along those same lines, if a teacher or administrator has their permit, encourage them to carry as well.

What the above mentioned items also do is to help build a sense of community.  Neighbors looking out for each other.

Now, the liberal response will be, "All of those guns around those children will make them less safe!".

Bullshit.

Right now, if a teacher, administrator, janitor or whatever employee wanted to shoot up a school, they could do it.  Nothing could stop them from wholesale slaughter right now, this very second, in every school in America.

Except another teacher with a gun.

In conjunction with this normalized gun policy, we absolutely MUST exorcise this concept of Gun Free Zones from America.  It is simply the liberal mindset of a Utopian society.

If we put up signs, or disallow guns via legislation, guns will never be present.  Kumbaya, brother.

Good God, that hurts my head.  Sorry, cupcake, your world doesn't exist and it never will.  What is so horrific in your world view is that to be safe, everyone must first be assumed to be guilty - or at least pre-disposed - towards hurting others.  We're taking away your rights for the Greater Good.  So, like the late-great state of California ( and NY, CT, MA, IL, et al), you take away the ability of good, decent citizens to arm themselves, because The Nanny State thinks them all to be threats.

And this, despite all of the evidence to the contrary in Shall-Issue states.  America needs to wake the hell up.
---  ---

Buckle up, comrades.  If the short-term fix caused you emergency Safe Space occupancy, the long-term fix will bring on a full-force melt-down.


Long-Term Fix:  Mentally Harden Our Society

If I had to put a date on when the tipping point occurred, I'd say it was October 1, 1993.  That was the day when Polly Klaas was abducted.  This sweet 12 year old girl was taken from her mother's home and strangled to death.

It scared the hell out of America.  The thought that Small Town America could have strangers entering homes and killing children spread panic throughout America.

The response was to smother your kids with protection and to micro-manage their lives ("helicopter moms").  This full-control ideology seamlessly flowed into the schools of America where, again, everything is managed for you.  If there's a bully, or if someone says or does something you don't like, it is actually against the rules to fix it yourself - you MUST have the (State) school do it for you.

The result has been kids growing up without the ability to solve problems on their own.  The message drilled into our children's heads is, "The State will take care of you."

I remember when my boys were in grammar school in the late 1990's, and they came home with a paper saying that if they were physically attacked at school - and subsequently defended themselves - both the aggressor and my child would be suspended.  The only acceptable response was for my child to turn tail, and find a teacher.

I damned near lost my mind.  I had a talk with them that was clear as rain:  If someone physically hurts you, you WILL defend yourself until they stop.  I told them that they would NEVER be punished by me or my wife for defending themselves.  Never.  I told them that I would take any heat that was dealt out by school officials, and if they were in fact suspended, I'd take the time off work and spend it with them.

(I also made it painfully clear that if they started the aggression, there would be hell to pay.  They believed me).

Around this same time is when the Participation Trophy came to prominence.  It didn't matter what activity mom signed you up for, even if you sucked at it, you got a pat on the head.  Performance was irrelevant.  Reward without effort.

The result of that is kids who expect to get recognition and recompense regardless of their actions or efforts.

Combine those two, and we now have a generation-and-a-half of humans who have been trained to never deal with adversity, and who expect a positive outcome for everything they do (or don't do).  Like a small child, they have been trained that if they throw a hissy fit, they will get attention and what they want.

So, if I've been trained that the State is going to take care of all of my needs, and then the State does something I don't like, what's the outcome going to be?

If I don't have any coping skills, and I'm now not getting the positive outcome I want, well, I'm gonna explode.  I'm gonna throw a tantrum.  If society is lucky, it will just be someone who has a meltdown in a mall, and they just get escorted away and a new prescription for happy drugs.  On the other end of the spectrum, we get a school, church, business or large gathering place all shot to hell, and people die.

Our Cupcake Du Jour - Nikolas Cruz - falls in the latter category.  He was expelled from the school he shot up, his parents recently died, and supposedly, there's a girl who scorned him.

In his eyes, society has shit in his Coco Puffs, and he's going to show them all who's boss the only way he knows how.

The fix for this is both simple and impossible:  We must allow and encourage our children to fix their own problems.  At home, at school, and eventually, at work.

It's never going to happen, though.  Why?  Because that means giving up control in the schools, and centralized control is the core of socialist ideology.  The socialist teachers and administrators will never just teach kids reading, and history, and math.  They see it as their obligation - their mission - to also show them their world view that obedience to authority is paramount.  Without solidarity there can be no society.  None of this individualism, personal excellence or grabbing for the brass ring nonsense.  Those are the ideas of the evil capitalists.

You must work for, and be subservient to the Greater Good.  We Are Borg.  If some kids get killed, or a theater or church gets shot up, well, that's just collateral damage in furtherance of the final goal.
One death is a tragedy;  one million is a statistic.
Joseph Stalin
You're nothing but cannon fodder for the socialists.  But they have the propaganda game down pat.

Hey, we'll fix your interpersonal problems.  We'll feed you.  We'll give you happy drugs.  We'll house and clothe you.  We'll give you some walking around money.  But we demand unwavering obedience.

If you take away the school's ability to make the child's life easier - by fixing their problems and filling their bellies - you take away their power to persuade.

So this is going to have to fall on the shoulders of the parents.  I am not optimistic.

The first batch of kids that were indoctrinated with this statist mentality are now parents.  Most don't know any better than to do the same with their kids.

Some are, gratefully, turning to home schooling.  It's a tough road to hoe, but many are doing it.  Not only are you paying the taxes for the drones in public school, but you've got to pay for the text books and study guides to teach your kid, plus give up a source of income of the parent who stays home to teach their child.

God Bless every home that is trying to get out of the grip of the State.  It's a horrible place to be.
---  ---

So, we're down to only implementing the short-term solution, and even that will be an uphill battle.  The money might be appropriated to reconfigure the schools to limit physical access, but there won't be wide-spread acceptance of armed citizens in schools.
We don't let them have ideas.  Why would we let them have guns?
Joseph Stalin
Disarmament is an important secondary goal of all good socialists.  If The Deplorables don't have guns, they can't resist when things get really sporty.  They sure as hell can't let some uncouth Red Neck look good saving kids in a school.  It goes counter to the propaganda that All Guns Are Evil.

The Central Committee says, "Nyet.  Not gonna happen."

Sleep tight, America, and say a prayer for the next batch of kids that will be shot up at another school in this land.  It's a foregone conclusion.


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2018 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Sunday, January 7, 2018

The Great "White Privilege" Con

So, I'm be-bopping around on Facebook, and run across this "must see" Facebook post titled, "If someone doesn't understand privilege, show them this".  There's a video, and it has been watched over 24 million times.

Dumb-ass me, I get sucked in and watch it.  Blood pressure instantaneously shoots into the 300's.

Well, I'm going to ask you to watch it as well, so when I tear it a new asshole down below, you'll have some context for the comments.

Now, go take your BP medicine, chase it with a cup of Chamomile tea, and watch.  Sorry I had to do this to you.






Ok, here we go.....

Right off the bat, as is espoused by the leftists and their Identity Politics ideology, each race is lumped into one, homogeneous blob.  No individual excellence, effort or talent is acceptable.  This view on life disgusts me, but I'm going to play by their rules - all blacks are alike, all whites are alike, all Hispanics are alike, all Asians are alike.

The supposed analogy of success in a foot race being similar to success in life is absurd and simple-minded.  How do you compare an event that takes seconds with one that spans your lifetime?  Well, you do it when you're selling an idea that is full of shit, and has no basis in reality.

This is nothing more than a leftist propaganda piece designed to make whites feel bad about their earned success, and blacks to feel good about their earned failures.

After the introduction, the "Two Steps Forward" charade begins (queue important, powerful, insightful, maybe even melancholy music).  Did you notice how all of the people that stepped forward were white, and not a single one was black?  Really?  Not a single black there had any of these things?  Bullshit.  But I get it - that doesn't make for a good propaganda video, so it doesn't make the final cut.

When the happy whites jumped forward, the camera immediately cuts to the close-up face of a sad black.  Those whites are happy that the blacks are sad!  Bad, bad whites! 

Joseph Goebbels would be proud!  "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth."  That's White Privilege in a nutshell.  It's a great con.

The message of this propaganda piece is:  Whites have what they have because of privilege, not effort.  No personal choice was involved whatsoever.  Because of this privilege, whites have an unfair, unearned headstart in life that keeps blacks perpetually behind whites economically.  If blacks only had a fair chance, they'd kick the economic shit out of whites.

Let's look at each of the 8 pieces of the Two-Step Privilege Pie -

1.  If both of your parents parents are still married

The Guilt Monger (the guy talking) actually comes right out of the chute with the single most important item.  While he's right that more whites are in dual parent families - and that is HUGELY important in successfully raising a child - his framing of the item is (not surprisingly) all wrong.

WHITE ADULTS HAVE MADE THE CHOICE to maintain nuclear families, and blacks have rejected it in hoards.  Let's introduce some facts into this discussion:

In 1960 - just before the Civil Rights Act - 22% of black families were single parent.  9% of white families were the same.

By 2011, 67% of blacks were single parent families, compared to 25% for whites.

To put this into Simple Talk for the propagandists, two-thirds of black families CHOOSE TO UNDERMINE THE FUTURE SUCCESS OF THEIR CHILDREN by producing kids without two parents being there to raise them.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


2.  If you grew up with a father figure in the home

The Guilt Monger got lazy on this one.  It's an extension of the first item.  In 1960, 91% of those single parent black families were headed by women.  In 2006, it's virtually the same - 91.4%, only now there are three times the number of single parent families.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


3.  If you had access to a private education

Continuing the theme of, "You didn't do shit to get where you are", The Guilt Monger tries to make  whites feel guilty for the good choices they made in life - namely putting great importance on the education of their children.

Personal story:  My wife and I paid for private school for both of our boys up through the 8th grade.  Our thinking was, we'd give them the very best education possible so that when they started high school and became adults in our society, they'd kick ass and take names (it worked, by the way!).

Oh, I forgot:  During 4 of those years, I was under- or un-employed (odd jobs, temp work, night shift pick-up work, commission sales).  I did whatever it took to bring money into our family.  We were heavily dependent upon my wife's clerical job, AND BOTH OF US DID WITHOUT so our kids could succeed.

It's nothing heroic.  It's your fucking job as a parent!

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


4.  If you had access to a free tutor growing up

OK, pump the brakes there, cupcake!  Show me one public school district in America that doesn't have after-school tutoring, OR special ed classes for those falling behind, and I'll show you a public school district that isn't in America, or one in a liberal jurisdiction where the district has pissed away the funding.

It takes effort, you pukes.  Both on the part of the parent and the student.  If you don't want to take advantage of the opportunity, well, that's your choice.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


5.  If you never had to worry about having your cell phone shut off

WTF?  The Guilt Monger is really stretching on this one.  Not being able to chat up your buddies or sexting with your BF/GF is one of the causes of your downfall?

Holy shit, GET YOUR PRIORITIES STRAIGHT.  Here's a White Privilege Tip:  If you have to make a choice between a cell phone and ANYTHING that will make you more educated or employable, choose the latter.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


6.  If you never had to help mom or dad with the bills

First of all, go re-read the previous comments about parents making good economic and educational decisions for their kids.

Not surprisingly, again, The Guilt Monger got this one ass-backwards.  If the parents failed in their primary job of providing for their family, and the kid had to kick in to help out (which is what nuclear families do), these kids should be the ones taking the two steps forward.

They have now tasted reality.  Seen first hand that sometimes bad things happen to good people.  That life isn't always fair.

They learned to deal with it.  Maybe they had to get a minimum wage job to fill in the gaps.  That experience in and of itself was educational:  Get an education so you don't need to work in minimum wage jobs that won't pay you enough to live on.

If you have to work as a kid to support your family, the head of household fucked up.  They didn't get educated enough for the well-paying job needed to raise a family, or they spend all of their money instead of saving for a rainy day, or they weren't motivated enough to do whatever was needed to pay the bills.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


7.  If it wasn't because of your athletic ability, you didn't have to pay for college

Hot cup of racism, anyone?  Holy shit.  The Guilt Monger implies that the only way blacks go to college is via an athletic scholarship, and whites via merit scholarship (ACTUAL scholarship).

More importantly, so what if it WERE true?  Why should whites feel guilty because they studied, got good grades, rose to the top of their class, and went to college because of their effort?  Maybe that's what they're good at.  If a black can go to college because he or she is good at sports, who fucking cares?  They are still being given the opportunity to attend college and get a higher education.

If you don't want to take advantage of that opportunity, you're a fucking idiot.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?


8.  If you never worried where your next meal was going to come from

Ughhh.  More from The Guilt Monger on parental bad choices.  School meals, food charities, public assistance.  If your kid is truly worried about food, you're fucking up big-time, and are a lazy piece of shit to boot.

And I should feel guilty about their shitty choices, why?
---

Not satisfied with the superficial white guilt, The Guilt Monger piled on with these quotes:

I want all of you guys up front to turn around and look (whites turn around to see blacks behind them).  Feel white guilt because of our bullshit exercise.

Every statement I've made has nothing to do with anything you have done.  False as discussed above, and it DOES have everything to do with what their parents have done.

We would be foolish to not recognize we've been given more opportunity.  We don't want to recognize we've been given a head start.  I recognize the shit out of it.  I was given an opportunity by my parents, and I gave the same opportunity to my children.  I hope they continue the trend with their kids.

Because the reality is, if this was a fair race, and everyone was back on that line, I guarantee you some of these black dudes would smoke all of you.  Nice racist statement, you piece of shit.  Continue the stereotype that the only way blacks succeed is through athletic prowess.

And it's only because you've had this big of a head start that you're going to win this race called life.  Go fuck yourself, asshole.  Me and my kids will win our own personal races because of the life decisions we've made.  Us winning will not stop blacks from winning, too.  They just need to start making good decisions, too.

Nothing you've done has put you in the lead you have right now.  Again, go pump a cat.  Make a propaganda video on that.

If you didn't learn anything from this activity, you're a fool.  FINALLY, something we agree upon.  I learned that The Guilt Monger has digested the leftist ideology of victimhood, hook, line and sinker, and refuses to see things as they truly are.  I hope that at least some of the 24 million people that have watched his propaganda were able to see through his bullshit as well.

Roll screen shots of biblical passage.  Hey, try these on for size:
But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
Timothy 5:8 
So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.
James 4:17
---

Last thoughts:

Does racism exist?  Oh hell yes.  When it's done through jobs or education, it's illegal.  If you've been discriminated against, what did you do about it?

Did you just sit back and bitch about it, or did you do something to fix the problem?  Did you go to the NAACP local chapter, tell them your story and have them represent you in a case against the offender?  If not, why not?

If the organization didn't help you, why not?  Isn't that what they're there for?  According to them,
The mission of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate race-based discrimination.
Shit, I agree with everything there, but I can't find a damned thing on their website where they actually did any of that stuff.  All kinds of donation and membership stuff, and promotions for TV shows and their national convention, but no accomplishments.

Even their separate Legal Defense Fund shows squat.

Why's that?  Consider this...
There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. 
--Booker T. Washington

Don't allow yourself to think of yourself as a victim.  Think of yourself as a doer.  You're an individual - not a demographic sector - who can accomplish anything you want to work for.

And if you're a black man, take it upon yourself to find a black boy, and teach him what it really means to be a self-reliant, responsible man.  Lead by example.

Make a difference.



---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2018 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Saturday, July 22, 2017

Short Attention Span Theater: Curse Of Identity Politics

Enjoy...


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2017 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Friday, May 19, 2017

Circus, No Bread Included

I saw this video and it brought a ray of sunshine into my day, so I figured I'd share it with you.

I know, I know, I was ranting about Bread and Circuses last post, but I ain't got no bread for ya, and I'm sure as hell not the government trying to melt your mind.  So just watch it, and enjoy....



---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2017 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Monday, September 5, 2016

What's This Alt-Right Stuff?

So I'm hearing all of this buzz about the "Alt-Right".  A little snip here, a blurb there.  Suddenly, it's everywhere after Hillary goes off on Trump and his ties to the Alt-Right.

I'm thinkin', "If Hillary's soiling her Depends over this, I gotta get me a slice of that!"

So I go to site after site trying to get a clue as to what it is.  When the Tea Party came about, it was pretty clear cut - smaller government, less public spending, less intrusion into our lives by TPTB,

With this Alt Right, it's different.  Some truly were racist-based - spouting white racial supremacy like the NAACP does for blacks, and La Raza does for Latinos.

I'll take a pass, thank you very much.

Racial supremacy ideology is bull shit.  "I'm better than you because of the color of my skin."  Supremacy in life is dependent upon exploiting your natural God-given talents, and applying effort and actions.  

In broad strokes, each race has been given certain innate advantages - be they math, athletics, management, engineering, etc.  To deny this is as foolish as thinking that just because you're of a certain race, you'll be successful at a give task.  Waste those natural talents through lack of effort, and see how well you do in life.

Any-hoooo, I found a site that came thiiiiiisssssss close to getting me to say I was an Alt-Right.  Literally right up to the end.

Here are their criteria -

People Are Different.  Amen to that, brother!  The America I want actually celebrates and encourages that belief.  We all get an equal bite at the apple, but our effort and talents are what separate the wheat from the chaff.

The Left wants us to believe we're all the same, thus we should all have the same outcome in life.  This is Socialism/Communism 101.  We're NOT THE SAME!  Our efforts are what differentiate us.

Our World Is Tribal.  Oh hell yes.  There is a huge difference between when a racial tribe discriminates against another racial tribe simply because of the color of their skin, and when a racial tribe wants to primarily associate with their own tribe.

This tribal association is primal.  You doubt that?  Go to any prison in America and see how the races choose to associate.

Again, the Left wants to force feed racial integration.  How's that working out?  It's not.  People will choose with whom they will associate, government mandates be damned.

Ironically, it is the Left that plays the Identity Politics game - telling each different tribe what they'll do just for that tribe.

Now, for a stir of the racial pot, most races seem to play well with others.  The biggest exception is blacks.  In the big picture, they clash with everyone else.

Why?  Here's something to consider:  Normative Commons.  I'd never heard about it until a few weeks ago, but it's an idea worth considering (the article is long, but well worth your time).
Black males are notoriously prone to violent crime. 6-7% of the population in the US is composed of black males, yet they make up 50% or more of the perpetrators of violent crime, depending on the crime. In 85% of inter-racial violence between whites and blacks, the black is the aggressor.
...
 
Not every black person is a violent criminal and I am not trying to claim that. However, a much larger percentage of the black population is composed of violent criminals than any other racial group. So how should a rational person respond to this undeniable fact?
So, is acknowledging that blacks in general are more prone to violence a racist statement, or is it a recognition of reality?  For me, it's the latter.  Call me a racist if you will, and I'll tell you to pull your head out of your ass.  Now we're even.

Our (the white) Tribe Is Being Suppressed.  Far fetched?  Try starting up the National Association for the Advancement of White People, or the United Caucasian College Fund, or the White Panthers and see how long it takes for you to be labeled as a hate group.  Hell, the phrase, "ALL Lives Matter" got trashed as racist, simply because it included whites.

Kiss my ass.  Now, I don't play identity politics, but I won't be shamed because of my race - I had no choice in the matter!  And as I've noted before, how could anyone be PROUD of their race?  What did they DO to become black, white or brown?  Nothing.  It's nothing more than an excuse of a personal failure when someone has to pull out their Race Card.

If you've been discriminated against because of your race (or gender or whatever), DO SOMETHING and sue the bastard.  Otherwise, stop your whining and shut the hell up.

Men Are Not Women and Women Are Not Men.  I'll now give you reason to call me a sexist in addition to being a racist.

Genetically, and thus historically, men provided primary sustenance and security, and women gave birth to, and nurtured the children, and provided secondary sustenance.  Up until the late 1950's, women weren't prohibited from having a career, and men weren't prohibited from raising the kids, but it wasn't the norm.

Since this change in roles - where everyone works and families (if they exist) don't have as many kids - we've seen a general true economic decline in America.  When I say "true economic decline", I'm talking about the country as a whole.  On the surface, everyone is fat and happy, but it's all funded by debt.  And debt kills.

No?  That big ol' pile of National Debt, if divvied up between all 330 million people in this country, would result in a bill of over $60,000.  Each.  Every man, woman and child.  Cash and credit card payment not accepted - sorry!

As more and more people belly up to the Social Security, Disability, Welfare, et al, bar, AND fewer tax payers are being born to American women, more money must be borrowed and more tax payers must be introduced from outside of the system.

Both political parties understand that the socialist state that is now America can't continue to exist - let alone thrive - if we don't import more bodies.  The problem lies with the standards for admission being lessened or ignored.

It's gotten to the point where if you can steam a mirror, you're allowed in.  The idea of  "assimilation" - becoming American and embracing OUR culture - is racist, nasty and just not discussed in polite company.

It's a joke.  When voting material are required to be printed in a language other than English - and speaking English is a requirement for citizenship - you know you're in trouble.

This was a long way around to the Unintended Consequences punchline.  Everyone working sounds like a great idea.  Like it or not, in practice, it's helped (but is NOT solely responsible) for undercutting The American Way Of Life.

Alt-Righters are pissed.

Freedom Is A Responsibility And Not A Right.  This is HUGE.  Government can't make you free.  In fact, history has shown that it usually attempts to restrict your rights to serve ITS needs.  Your right to benefit fully from your labor, or the guaranteed natural right to protect your life and property, come first to mind.

The Rule Of Law - the idea that all laws are applied equally to all people - is a core concept of American life.  When we see the elites being treated differently, it is incumbent on us take responsibility to change the system, by force if necessary.  Hell, that's how this country was founded (American civics is also a requirement for citizenship - what a joke that is).

See, "Animal Farm" (video, 1+ hour and worth every second) and the phrase of, "Some animals are more equal than others."

If We Must Be A Democratic Society, The Franchise Should Be Limited.  This is perhaps the key concept that has led to the demise of the American way of life.  It was summed up nicely by Benjamin Franklin -
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
In my opinion, the only people that should be able to vote on tax matters are those that would be required to pay the tax.  Anyone who buys stuff should be able to vote on sales taxes.  Car taxes voted on my car owners, property taxes by property owners, income taxes by those that earn income.

If there's not enough money to go around, cut some of the programs that are "going around".

Yeah, I know, racist, sexist and elitist.  Bite me.

"But, but, but Chief!  Think of the children!"  I do.  My children.  Your kids are your responsibility.  People - kids and adults alike - that "fall through the cracks" will be helped by private charities.  They ALWAYS have been.

It's amazing how many people are able to find a job when they don't have a free meal ticket available from government services.

Along these lines, we've got our representatives out there representing us.  We see that all they do is vote to increase our various taxes and levies, and spend, spend, spend.  Think about it:  We give them the power to tax AND to spend.  What the hell is wrong with us?  That's like putting a cocaine addict in charge of production AND distribution.  It won't end well.

I don't know how to even propose it, but my new state of Nevada uses part-time representatives.  They meet every other year for 4 months.

That's it.

Unless there is a special session ordered by the governor or 2/3 of the legislature, if it's not done in 120 days, it ain't gettin' done.

They get a salary for the first 60 days of their session, and get a per diem for every day they are working, including days after the legislative session while they're doing state work.

My state representative is a retired law enforcement officer and business owner.  He happens to live in my new city.  My state senator is a rancher in the "off season" of government.

No full-time, line-your-pockets state legislature.  Quite different from my former home state of Kalifornia, where - much like the federal government - you go in middle class, and come out rich.  Funny how that works, huh?

How do we do this on the federal level?  I know, I know, it's a bigger kettle of fish, but for God's sake, the way we're doing it now just isn't working.  It'll never change, but it could be changed in YOUR state.....

---

And then there's this:

Jewish elites are opposed to our entire program.  Ya lost me there, boys.  It sounds like the Race Baiter's from the other side.

If this is a core belief of the Alt-Right, count me out.

And I've got to say, when reading a number of the comments on the article, there was a lot of crap on racial purity.

I'm good with the over all nationalistic message most of these sites support.  It's why they (and I) support Trump's, "Make America Great Again" message.

But when you start with the "keep the races pure" bullshit, you lose me.  I judge you - and choose to associate with you - by your actions, not something over which you have no control, like your race.



---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Sunday, June 12, 2016

Time To Run And Hide and Confiscate

Seriously, sorry for the dearth of posts.  Explanation below.

First, though, I want to address the stupid bastards with regards to this morning's Muslim terrorist shooting in Orlando.

There will obviously be calls for weapons bans from The Usual Suspects, including the need for Common Sense Gun Controls like detailed background checks to protect us from all of the evil that is out there.

1.  Background checks WERE conducted on this guy.  In fact, he had the super-duper background check you need for a "G" class permit - the one that is required for private investigators, private security (you know, for the big-wigs who want to take your guns, but employ "hired guns" for themselves) and repossession folks.

In short, this bastard was thoroughly vetted, yet this still happened.  Why's that?  Because he was a crazy, Muslim fanatic that thinks gays should be wiped from the face of the earth.

GOING THROUGH A BACKGROUND CHECK ACCOMPLISHED EXACTLY NOTHING, other than keeping a civil servant employed by the licensing fees, and giving the soft-heads in our society the warm and fuzzy feeling that accompanies, "at least we did something".  These people make me want to puke.

2.  There will be calls for banning "Assault Weapons" and/or their ammo (why are they called "patrol rifles" when they are fully automatic and held in the hands of police officers?).

Exhibit 1:  Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris.  These guns are banned in France yet somehow the Muslim fanatics got their hands on them.

Exhibit 2:  Bataclan Theater massacre in Paris.  These guns are banned in France yet somehow the Muslim fanatics got their hands on them.

Exhibit 3:  Inland Regional Center massacre in San Bernardino.  These illegally altered, fully-automatic guns are banned in the US yet somehow the Muslim fanatics got their hands on them.

Do I need to continue or do you get the point?  I could add the daily news reports of Muslim suicide bombers blowing up scores of people around the world.  I haven't checked the facts, but I'd lay good money that every single one of those countries has laws against building bombs and blowing them up in public.

How's that working out?

Banning weapons and ammo only makes it easier for the bad guys to kill the good guys.  Period.

---

So, how do we respond?

Get ready for the onslaught from the Liberal Media, and respond.  Respond forcefully, clear-eyed and often.  Use facts AND passion.

These bastards (the gun-grabbing, liberal politicians and their media Quislings) are going to do a full-court press with this one.  Guns and dead gays - this is going to be a field day for them.

What WON'T happen, is they won't tie it 100% to Muslim fanatics.  The target of their ire will be the tool of their murders, not the murderers themselves.

Push back HARD on this!  "These guns are illegal around most of the world, yet these massacres still happen.  Why is that?  What's the common denominator in all of these acts?"

They will deflect with their answers ("The body count would not have been so high if these guns were illegal").  Bring the discussion back on track ("You have no way of knowing that.  Dozens have recently been killed with bombings in Turkey.  Bombs are illegal, yet they are still detonated.  The issue is the murderer, not the tool he used.").

Adapt and respond.

---

What do we do to protect ourselves?

As noted by The Great And Powerful Remus, stay away from crowds.  Serious as a heart attack.  This is the single most effective way of keeping yourself away from a mass shooting.  Stay away from the masses!

If you were a Muslim fanatic, where would you hit to do the most damage?  I dunno, maybe a nightclub full of sinners (gay or straight).  Or a sports stadium.  Or the church full of the non-believers.  Or a shopping mall.  Or a school full of non-believer kids.  Or a movie theater.

Now, for me, this is easily accomplished.  I no longer attend sporting events (I refuse to voluntarily submit to any sort of search to watch a ball game in person - that's insane).  My clubbing days are WAY behind me (just celebrated wedding anniversary number 30 - woo hoo!).  My kids are grown men, so no worries about schools, I buy most things online (except for the important things), I have pay-per-view  for movies and I've never been a church-going guy (don't you DARE tell me how to speak with God!).

When I must go to malls or grocery stores or restaurants, I'm always armed.  No exceptions.  I refuse to allow the unconstitutional laws of this state and country to put my life at risk.  Not gonna happen.

I understand there are risks in that approach, but my life is more important to me than being "law abiding".  My choice, and I make it clear-eyed.

I encourage you to do a similar self-assessment, and make your own choices.

But, but, but Chief, if you stop doing all of these things, the Muslim fanatics win!  Sorry to break it to you, but they've already won.  As soon as the horrific USA PATRIOT Act was signed into law, they won.

Instead of Bush exhorting the nation to "buck up", "stand tall", "never take a step backwards", he cowered and handed to key of freedom to the Deep State.  Instead of, "There is nothing to fear, but fear itself", we got the DHS, TSA, VIPR squads and the whole lot.

We're encouraged to be weak and timid and compliant.  Just what the Muslim fanatics wanted.  Mission Accomplished.

---

OK, the reason for my lengthy absence:  I'm finally gonna be OUTTA HERE!  We're moving from the liberal cesspool known as the SF Bay Area, and moving to Nevada.  Getting through all of the selection process, making the offer, doing inspections, et al, has been incredibly time-consuming.  So cut me some slack!

If all goes as planned, I'll be a Nevada resident in late July/early August.  The house we're buying faces the Eastern Sierras, so I'll be able to see the dust cloud when California finally implodes to the west of us.  The beer is on me if you want a seat.

I WILL still be an owner of the precious metals store.  I may touch on how that will happen at a later date.

Even though our current town is semi-rural (we do $300-$400 million a year in agriculture) our new COUNTY in Nevada has 10,000 fewer people.  Me likee!

The only drawback to this location is its proximity to Reno.  While we're over an hour away, Reno is an illegal alien haven - yep, a "sanctuary city".  Even more disturbing, is that it has been chosen as one of the upcoming relocation endpoints for a batch of "refugees".

To say that my county and Reno are polar opposites would be an understatement.  But that can change quickly.  California went from giving this country Ronald Reagan, to evacuating its collective bowels and producing Jerry Brown, Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer.

This happened amazingly fast - literally during my adult years.  I can say that I will do all that is in my power to ensure it doesn't happen in my new home and region.

So, for a while, posting may still be light.  I'll eventually finish up the final segment for the Multiple Sources of Income series, as I think it's an important topic.

And if a rant presents itself, well....



---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Sunday, April 24, 2016

Historic Day and More On Multiple Income Streams

First a little note:  This was originally intended on being published on April 19th.  Well, life interceded in my plans, and it's getting posted today.  Still, I want to publish the "preamble" of sorts.
In my opinion, today is the single most important day in American history.  On this day in 1775, "The shot heard 'round the world" was fired in Lexington, Massachusetts, and the American Revolution was on!   They made it official in July of the following year.
Tyrants should take note that the line in the sand that was crossed was over gun control.  The British were on their way to abscond with the the patriot's weapons in Concord.  The line was drawn in the first place over taxes, thievery, brutish behavior, and the destruction of the inalienable rights of the citizens. 
I'm just sayin'....
---

In the last post, I talked a bit about using ebay as an additional income stream.  Follow some rules, and you can have a nice chunk o' cashflow each year.

Today, I want to address royalties.  What exactly am I talking about?

Well, royalties are payments for something that you do once, and get paid when other people use or gain benefit from whatever it is that you produced.

A common item is royalties for actors and musicians.  Act in a movie or TV show, or write or record a song, and you get paid a little bit of money any time your work is seen or heard.

You've also got things like inventions.  Patent a better mousetrap, license the rights to your design, and you get paid for every mousetrap that is produced.

An insurance salesman gets a royalty commission each year when you re-up your policy.

Work once, get paid for a lifetime.

I recently read an article where they discussed how Don McLean gets paid over $300,000 a year for writing and recording "American Pie" in 1971!

So, you may be thinking, "Chief, holy crap!  I'm no song writer or inventor.  You're barking up the wrong tree on this one".

Maybe.  Maybe not.  If that's your attitude, go change the oil in the french fry cooker.

You've just got to come up with a better - or more efficient - mousetrap.

Technology today allows anyone with a laptop, some inexpensive software, a camera and a website to become a "media mogul".  If you can teach someone how to do something better, faster and cheaper, you might have a winner.

Lots of people have Youtube channels on a million different topics.  You can actually make some pretty scary money with a hot Youtube channel,   You can make upwards of $100,000 per year, but you need to put out 20 videos a week!

That sounds too much like work to me!

In that model, you're giving away your content, and getting paid by advertisers.  Think "broadcast TV".  You need constant fresh content to keep the viewers coming back for more.

What I'm talking about is spending some quality time developing quality content that people are willing to pay for once.  More along the lines of producing a great movie or printing a book, as opposed to a weekly sitcom.

---

So you've got to have a niche - your special skill or knowledge that can be taught to others - for a price.

You can get paid in two ways.  First, if you've got a site set up that includes a merchant processing account for payments (stupid easy these days), since you are the writer (who usually only gets the royalties from sales) AND the publisher, you get paid for both jobs.  But, as the publisher, you're also responsible for all advertising and operating expenses.

The second way is you can subscribe to services like Clickbank where other websites advertise your product, and they get a large chunk of the sales proceeds.  Since they're paying for the advertising and use of their site (and traffic count) they will many times be paid up to 75% of the sale, and you get the 25% royalty.  Not a bad gig - the folks that sign up to sell your stuff can reach millions of potential customers.

I'll be doing both on my next project.  I've been on the "get paid for having their product on your site" side of the equation, and it works very well.

OK, your product has got to fill one or more of these human needs and desires (obviously more is better):
  1. Save me time or effort (efficiency)
  2. Make or save me money (monetary gain)
  3. Make me safe and secure (safety)
  4. Make me cool or more desirable to others (vanity)
  5. Teach me a skill or craft (how-to)
  6. Explain something to me in detail (educate)
  7. Titillate me (vice)
Before you get started with your epic training or how-to video series or book, check out the marketplace.  Here's what you want to find:

1.  Is there competition?  I hope so - this is a good thing.  It is very rare that you're going to be the sole subject master on a product or idea that also has a market you can make a buck on.  For instance, you may want to teach people how to make beer.  There are lots of sites and experts on this topic - which indicates a healthy potential market.  The question is, what do you bring to the table that makes your technique different enough for people to pay for it?

2.  Is it legal?  While this type of subject usually has a disclaimer on the materials stating, "for educational purposes only", you may be leaving yourself open for some scratchin' and sniffin' by the authorities.  If you've got a way to save people taxes that is a wee bit iffy, you might be OK.  Teach them how to make an explosive device from household goods, and there WILL be a knock on your door!

3.  Is it ethical?  Obviously, that's a personal call.  I've stated before that products and services about safety, money and vice will always find a market.  Do you want to sell porn?  It makes tons of money, but I'd never even consider it.  Teach someone how to grow better marijuana?  Oh hell yes!  I don't smoke weed (I've tried it AND inhaled, and it absolutely sucks!) but I believe that morally, you have the right to put whatever you want in your own body.  I own me!  Others disagree.  Check your own moral compass.

4.  Along the lines of the competition question, is anyone else making money doing something similar to what you want to do?  Using our beer making example, if I do an online search for, "beer making videos", I get a butt-load of free info, and a smattering of paid sites.  I clicked a couple of them and I can see what they're selling and how they're pricing their items.  Are any of these sites doing exactly what you're doing?  Do you have a way to spin (market) YOUR offering to get people to buy YOUR product?

---

Finally, you must make your product difficult to copy - as in "burning another copy" and giving it to your friends.  While it is impossible to stop all copying, you can make it much more difficult.

With printed material, you have two options:

Hardcover book
Kindle e-book

If you expect to make any kind of money, you can't do it with a PDF formatted book.  Yes, it's the easiest to make, and also the easiest to copy.  I can buy one copy, and send an email to a thousand of my closest friends with it as an attachment.

Hardcover books make producing copies much more difficult and expensive.  Kindle and similar readers have copy protect safeguards that I've yet to find a way around (and I've tried!).

Publishing books on Amazon is very easy, you just have to work to make sure the formatting is done well.  There are tons of helpful sites that can walk you through how to do this.

With video material, you also have two options:

DVD
Subscription Online videos

With DVDs, you must ensure the Copy Protection has been added to the disc to thwart copying.  Obviously, it can still be copied - by shooting a video from the video showing on the TV set - but the quality is crappy, and it's a pain in the butt.

With the online videos, you set up a password protected site, and disable the "copy" function.  Again, people can get around that by sharing passwords, or doing copies of the screen like with DVDs,  All you can do is to make it more difficult for them.

---

My final thoughts on this subject will be on marketing.  Through a lot of trial, error and mis-spent money, I've got somewhat of a clue as to what works and what doesn't.  I'll share those thoughts in the next post.

Now go on!  Get crankin' on that next idea that will slay the world!

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Monday, January 4, 2016

They're Right In Oregon

This Oregon stand-off is a nice mess.  Below, I'll have a link that details the events that brought us to this point, but I want to go back a bit further in history.  Specifically, how is it that the feds are able to own and control such large chunks of land?

Most people - and all statists - just think that, well HELL, they're the federal government.  They can buy whatever the hell they want.

Uhm, not so much.

If we read the Constitution, we see the powers and prohibitions placed on the 3 arms of government.  I read the whole thing, and not one single article, section, paragraph or sentence mentions the feds ability to own and run national parks or wildlife preserves.  Nothing even brushes up against the idea.

There must be a loop hole somewhere.

So, I went to the National Park Service (NPS) and I found the explanation.  They hang their hat on two specific portions of the Constitution.

First, they discuss the authority granting their existence -
Under the Constitution, the federal government has limited powers [nice of them to acknowledge that  .ed]. The authority for creating national parks is found in the Constitution under the “Property Clause” (Article IV, Section 3). “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States….”
Well all-righty then.  Seems pretty clear.  The long and short of it is that they get to make up the rules for the property they own, period.

They then bolster their legitimacy with this -
“Dispose of” is used in the sense of, “the act of transferring care, ownership or possession, or ownership to another”. Congress determined that it was “needful” to conserve certain lands unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. The authority for creating the National Park Service is found in The “Necessary and Proper Clause” (Article I, Section 8). 
“Congress shall have the right to…make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”
Wait, wait, wait.  It says "dispose of" means to transfer to another.  Right there, they said it themselves!  They didn't dispose of it, they kept it!  Still, it doesn't say they MUST dispose of it, so I guess some twit at the NPS just got a bit verbose.

That "needful" thing makes me a bit uneasy - seems like it's opinion-based - but they then back it up with the Article 1 Section 8 stuff, and it seems pretty clear.  It's pretty much a re-statement of the Article 4 stuff.  Got it - they can do as they please with federal land.

But, unsurprisingly, they forgot one thing:  To read the whole Constitution.  Somehow, they managed to miss the paragraph directly before the Article 1 Section 8 citation.  Here, it goes like this -
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;
Oh.  Now that's embarrassing.  No mention of national parks, just forts 'n stuff.  It seems as though the founding fathers, all of the original states, and all subsequent states that joined the union - by accepting the Constitution as the supreme law of the land - decided that the land ownership of the federal government was to be restricted to land uses consistent with the powers granted in the Constitution.

Crazy thought, right?

Chief, Chief, Chief, you piece of crap "Natural Wonders" hater!  I suppose you want to turn Half Dome into a screen for a drive-in movie theater!

While that would be kinda cool, no, I don't.  The beauty of Yosemite Park is hard to describe and it should be preserved.

But by the state of California, not the federal government.

You see, there's another part of the Constitution everyone forgot to read.  It's called The Bill Of Rights, and the tenth amendment kind of clears up any questions -
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Since we've already established that the federal government was not delegated the power to create parks, and the states weren't prohibited from doing so, that means the states get first crack at it.  If they had no desire to establish and run the parks, then the people could do so - or whatever they wanted to do.

It's that very last part of the paragraph - "or whatever they wanted to do" - that Big Government uses to scare the little people into believing of the need to bend or break the Constitution.  Freedom of choice (as in land use) is a dangerous thing, and good ol' Uncle Sam will make it all better.

OK Chief, you constitutional Nazi, what about massive land purchases such as the Louisiana Purchase, or Alaska, huh?  What would you do there, smartass?

That IS a bit of a conundrum, as you'll see.  While the land was in its pre-state form (why else would the federal government purchase vast amounts of land other than to convert it into a state or to act as a political barrier/boundary?), they would be constitutionally restricted to using the land for anything other than the forts, et al.

Doing so would bring civilization and law to the vast wild expanses, which would encourage people to move there, and set the stage for statehood.

And that's exactly what we did with the pre-state territories after the revolutionary war, but before 1803.  We'd offer them protection and law, people moved west, and they became states.

Here's a fun fact, kids!  When one of my heroes - Thomas Jefferson - made the 1803 Louisiana Purchase - he was challenged on.... wait for it.... constitutional grounds.

What the f........?!

Yep, Ol' TJ bent the very rules he had helped to craft -
Before the purchase was finalized, the decision faced Federalist Party opposition; they argued that it was unconstitutional to acquire any territory. Jefferson agreed that the U.S. Constitution did not contain explicit provisions for acquiring territory, but he did have full treaty power and that was enough.
Wow, bubble burst.  I guess no one pushed back because it was such a great deal ($0.03 per acre).  Expediency at the expense of constitutionality.  Sound familiar?

I just threw up a little in my mouth.

Go back and read the Article 1 Section 8 paragraph, and sure enough, the feds are restricted to purchasing land ONLY from existing states.

Well, since we had already crapped on the Constitution, a little bit more poo-poo couldn't hurt, right?  No need to actually go back and do an amendment empowering the federal government to buy land to expand the United States.

BTW, with few exceptions (like Alaska and the 13 formed after the Louisiana Purchase), most states are on land we got after various wars.  I guess that when the Constitution was written, they figured that that was the only way we would ever acquire more land, so they neglected to include the "purchase of land" in powers granted to the feds.
---

THIS brings us back to the issue at hand.  The feds still unconstitutionally buy our land, but now it's done with a gun to the head of the sellers, and prison for those who resist.

As promised earlier, here is the link to the timeline of the Oregon mess.  Read it, and prepare to be enraged.

Then consider -
"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787
THAT is why those guys are in Oregon.  What is so awesome about that quote, is that it was made before our Constitution and Bill of Rights were even ratified.  We have these men - our forefathers - who just challenged and beat the most powerful military in the world, and they forever guaranteed the right of every American to do it again if needed.
"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788
They consist now of the whole people.  Wow.  Words to remember.

Your president - one of those "public officers" - when he makes his pitch in the next few days to restrict your right of gun ownership, should consider -
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783
We're on to you, Barry.  You and your ilk.  Nothing you will propose would have stopped a single one of the horrific shooting sprees you'll use to sell your "necessity" snake oil.

But you know that.

Just like the resistance to the "needful" assertion the NPS uses for its authority, expect resistance to any more unconstitutional infringements directed towards peaceful gun owners.

Here's how King George reacted after April 19, 1775 -



Yeah, it was about gun control.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Monday, June 1, 2015

When You Eliminate Risk, This Is What You Get

To many, I might be considered a "Right-Wing Tax Zealot".  You'd be wrong, as I am neither right-wing (I'm a small-L libertarian) nor a zealot (I don't think being principled makes you a zealot).

When it comes to taxes, I am VERY principled.  I believe that all taxes received must be used for services that are available to every single person inside of that taxing district (with regards to federal taxes, I support any tax that pays for any federally mandated - Constitutional - responsibility of the feds).

Police - check
Fire - check
Emergency medical via 911 - check
Water treatment - check
Schools - check
Parks - check
Public transportation - check
Public roadways - check
Public libraries - check

Every one of those things are equally accessible to any person in the tax district - even the schools.  If you want to enroll in 6th grade, you're legally here from another country or state, enroll and become educated.  Regardless of your age.  More power to you.

Where I will not faulter in my principles is when public funds are used and available only to defined segments within the taxing district.

WIC - denied - must be a poor woman and have a baby
Welfare - denied - must be poor
Health care - denied - must be poor
Public Housing/Section 8 - denied - must be poor
Disabled payment - denied - must be disabled (thru birth, accident or bad choices)

Chief, Chief, Chief - you cranky old man!  How can you literally take food out of the mouths of babies?  And a disabled person?  Are you just mean?!  You don't want to help some kid that's born with no legs?

I get this screed even from my truly right-wing friends.  My answer has never wavered:
These are things for private charity, not government programs.  Charity is voluntary, taxes are not.  Since I did not place any of these individuals in the circumstances in which they find themselves, I will not be responsible for their care.
 I truly, honest to God, believe that giving something to someone without strings attached does more harm than good.  I'm not talking about giving someone a birthday present or wedding gift.  I'm talking about something that makes their lives easier.

Why?  Because without the strings attached, doing so encourages more of the behavior that put them in their current situation where they're unable to care for themselves.

Give a man a fish, and he's looking to you for his fish tomorrow.  Make him struggle to learn how to fish, and he can now provide for himself.

This is no longer even a topic for debate.  We have 60 years of accumulated data in this country that the Marxist ideology of Government Humanitarianism simply does not work.  Not surprisingly, it encourages more people to draw on those programs.

Look what's happened to the number of people on Social Security Disability payments.  Did some freak occurrence happen that suddenly crippled millions of Americans?  Or did it just get easier to be classified as disabled - and get paid for it?

Numbers in Thousands - Source:  http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/dibGraphs.html
In roughly 19 full years from 1996 to the end of 2014, the population grew by 21%.  During that same period (Jan 1996 to Dec 2014) the number of people getting Disability Payments grew by 113%.

Since virtually all safety statistics have improved over that time frame, one is left to surmise that this nearly 6-fold increase in disability recipients is the result of poor personal choices, easier qualification, or both.

I'm betting on both.
---

We've removed risk from society.  Without risk, there can be no negative result from your choices.  We lose innovation, and most importantly, we lose motivation.

You can do as you please, and not be worried about the negative consequences of your behavior.  Go ahead, eat yourself into a food coma each night.  Nanny will pick up the tab because you're a victim and not responsible for the fact you couldn't put down the Ben and Jerry's until the quart was empty.

Instead of having to change your behavior, you're classified as disabled, and get a check each month.

And that's what makes "Strings Attached" so important.  Private charities are more efficient and effective because they can set standards - they can discriminate between who gets their dollars and who doesn't.

They can say, "Young lady, we're going to help you feed your baby.  Regardless of the choices or circumstances that put you in this situation, we're willing to help you out.  Here are the rules:  No more kids until you get your diploma, and a job that pays enough for you to support yourself and your child.   It's that simple.   If you don't like the rules, go somewhere else.  We're not going to pay you to become a burden on society when there are people our limited dollars can really help".

Will some children die as a direct result of this policy?  Doubtful, but maybe.  I'd guess it would be no more than die in households that currently accept WIC and welfare.

What it WOULD do is establish consequences for your behavior.  Straighten your shit up, and we'll help.  Don't, and we won't.

Keep it up - spitting out kids you can't afford to raise - and we'll restrict your freedom because of the burden you're placing on society.  Yeah, we'll throw your ass in jail and take your kids.

By having multiple children you can't afford to raise, you're treating those kids like income-producing property.  Just like a person who tosses their unwanted couch on the lawn of a neighbor expecting them to clean it up, their behavior of dumping their unwanted children on society must have consequences as well.

You can make a similar case for any of the other "entitlements" in the "denied" category above.

Not only does government make the distinction between who does or does not benefit from taxes, they actually go out of their way to encourage people to remain dependent.  They've been VERY successful in their tireless efforts.

They get votes that way.  Lots of them.
What did taxpayers give to the 109,631,000 — the 35.4 percent of the nation — getting welfare benefits at the end of 2012? 
82,679,000 of the welfare-takers lived in households where people were on Medicaid, said the Census Bureau. 51,471,000 were in households on food stamps. 22,526,000 were in the Women, Infants and Children program. 20,355,000 were in household on Supplemental Security Income (ed. NOT Social Security - See Here). 13,267,000 lived in public housing or got housing subsidies. 5,442,000 got Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. 4,517,000 received other forms of federal cash assistance.
That's the evil beauty of Marxist dogma.  Government Humanitarianism seems like such a noble idea.  You take just a few dollars from lots of people, and you can save the world!

Except it never works that way.  Never.  It can't.  It's human nature to take the easiest path to a given goal.  

No multi-millionaire ever decided to triple the cost or amount of time it takes to bring a product or idea to market.  Economy Of Effort motivates you to innovate a quicker and better path.

If your government tells you that you're a victim, and you need nothing more in life than food, housing, clothing - and someone will give it to you at no cost or obligation - well HELL, who wouldn't take that deal?

Because of your choice to NOT avail yourself of a public education, you don't have the skills or knowledge to support yourself.  Your options are to get a market-driven minimum wage job and live in poverty, or don't get a job and get the same thing.

Generation after generation sees how the game works, and follow suit.  Instead of seeing the negative consequences of bad choices - dead of diabetes at 45, or 4 kids taken to Foster homes from a 22 year old brood sow - they see government checks.  Victim-hood pays.

By government encouraging this dependency/entitled/victim mindset, we end up with burger flippers demanding $15 an hour when the skills necessary to perform the task are worth $5 an hour.  Mandate that they must be paid that amount, and you remove the motivation of the flipper to better him or herself.

As an unintended consequence, you will motivate the business owner to innovate.  Suddenly, you could end up with a burger that is made with no human intervention other than the delivery guy who fills the bins with meat, tomatoes, pickles, buns and cheese - that were all prepared in an automated factory.

Oh wait.  Sorry.  They've already done it...

Coming To A Burger Joint Near You!

A hot, juicy burger that wasn't handled by some pre-syphilitic, entitled teen?  I'll take two.

You just keep pushing for that government-mandated $15 an hour "living wage", sport.  The more money you get (as opposed to earn) by raising the taxes or costs of the producers will result in fewer actual human jobs.

It's an old but accurate truism:  Subsidize behavior you want to encourage - Tax behavior you want to discourage.

Hey Mr. Marx!  How's that workin' out?  Ask Mr. Galt - he knows.


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

Guns: Is THAT Premeditation?

Simultaneously Posted At BoomerPreps.com


Anyone who owns a gun for self-defense has thought about the repercussions of having to use the gun to protect their life, or the life of another. I can think of few things that would be more of a emotional jolt than taking the life of another human being.

One of the things that would be worse would be my life being taken because I hadn't prepared for the situation.

We preppers plan. We look at the universe of events that could unfold, and we plan for them.

We put more time and effort into our preps for things we believe are more likely to happen, or which may have a significant, debilitating negative impact on our lives - regardless of the likelihood of the event coming to fruition.

Being killed by some random thug is high on the latter list. The places where I live and work aren't over-run with gun-toting, blood thirsty savages roaming the streets.

But dozens of people get mugged and murdered every day of every week here in America. It's a low probability event for you as an individual, but it's a real possibility.

So we plan. We prepare. We get ready.

We practice with our guns at the shooting range.

We buy memberships and insurance that will protect us if we shoot someone in self-defense.

We select ammunition that will most effectively stop the threat, and stop it quickly.

We learn advanced shooting techniques so we are more able to ensure we come out of the encounter alive.

Many people - the anti-gun crowd, much of government and most of the media in particular - will affix a special term to this kind of preparedness: Premeditation.

Why? Because they know it will scare many non-gun owners into thinking that anyone who uses a gun in self-defense is a cold-blooded killer. "Premeditated" is always coupled with "murder".

Let's first look at the definition of "premeditated" from Merriam-Webster online dictionary -
characterized by fully conscious willful intent and a measure of forethought and planning [premeditated murder]
The word-nerds even have it out for us! So, by definition, all prepping is premeditated. Especially when it comes to guns.

And that's a very good thing. We "gun nuts" genuinely want people to act responsibly with their guns. People are harmed when you do otherwise.

What follows is one video and links to two articles about guns - written by lawyers. In Texas.

"We Don't Dial 911"



The point about the signs influencing a jury is well-taken - especially in a "blue state" such as California, New York, etc.

My biggest problem is that you are advertising that you own guns. To me, it would be the same as posting a sign out front saying, "Don't bother robbing my house. My gold and silver are in a burglar-proof safe."

Not a single one of my neighbors knows I own a single gun - or own an ounce of silver. Publicizing your "stuff" is an invitation for trouble.

Carrying a "Statement Card"

A Statement Card is a card you carry around that gives you a "script" to follow if you're ever involved in a self-defense shooting. An excerpt from this article -
Q: I called my attorney here in Denver to ask him, and he said if the prosecutor ever found out I had contacted him before an incident, which I was doing at that moment, it could be interpreted as premeditation.

A: Great question. Having pre-printed cards to that effect do seem a little premeditated, in that each factual situation is different. These are certainly good and accurate things to say, but having them pre-printed on a card seems a little over the top. Additionally, the invocation of your rights should be made verbally in the case of an incident.
Let me be painfully clear: I do not care how "premeditated" it appears to anyone asking me questions about a self-defense shooting. SecondCall Defense has a "script" they suggest you use if you're involved in a shooting, regardless of how innocent you think you may be.

Unless you're a gun law attorney, call 911, follow the script, then call SecondCall Defense. Then prepare yourself to be arrested. You'll have bail money and an attorney in hours.

You may say the most innocent thing, and it can get you convicted. DO NOT risk your freedom (see "7 Shooting Incident Mistakes").

By the way, as the article notes, most police officers are instructed NOT to say anything for 72 hours after they are involved in a shooting. There's a reason for that. Follow their lead.

Does Your Ammo Choice Matter In Court?

Lots of concern out there about being in possession of ammo with, "greater stopping power". This gets back to the whole "premeditated" angle and the blood-thirsty image portrayed by the media and some prosecutors -
Based on comments in the blog, many Cheaper Than Dirt! readers who might be forced to defend themselves with a firearm worry about how the effectiveness of their ammunition may prejudice how they’re viewed by the courts.

Q: From a legal perspective, does it matter what ammunition I use in my handgun?

A: The short answer is, probably not. But for the purposes of this discussion, let me be very clear — we’re talking only about Texas law here. Unfortunately, not every state can be as reasonable as ours. Some ammo may or may not be legal for possession or use in other states, so be sure to check the local laws to make sure what you are carrying is legal.
The bottom line is, get the most effective ammo that is allowed in your state. If they don't allow effective ammo, move. Isn't your life worth that?

In all of my beginner and advanced pistol classes, I teach that you keep shooting until the threat has stopped. Then YOU MUST stop. Crappy ammo ends up with crappy results. And you may be harmed or dead if you're forced (or choose) to use ammo that will not stop your assailant.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com