Gun Culture

Statism

Sunday, June 15, 2008

Brown White Feather

Thursday, December 13, 2007

Object Demonification

My old cock-sparrow Simon over at From The Barrel of a Gun, laments the ridiculous business that is the banning of ‘cheap, easily available samurai swords’.
More horseshit from the ruling class.  I say ruling class not Labour Government because exactly the same shite is churned out by all the main political parties.
By failing to recognise that the socialist/neo-Marxist principle applied over the past 50 years has utterly failed society, the ruling class is left with nothing to do other than flail about banning various items that nutters or criminals use to go about their business.  The fact that these laws are not going to stop or reduce these crimes doesn’t seem to have occured to them.  They have ‘done something’ and that is all that matters to them.
When are we going to throw these useless creatures out on their arses?

Monday, November 26, 2007

Shoot Em Up Posters ‘Banned’

A little behind the curve on this one…

I’ve just noticed that the promo posters for a film have been banned because they:

could be seen to condone violence by glorifying or glamorising the use of guns

What a load of shite.  Reminds me of the fuss over the Landrover Freelander ad many moons ago.  Clearly the gun grabbers will wet themselves with outrage at any image or suggestion of a gun.  No doubt they’d love to see guns banned from films, excepting where they cause some kind of demonic tragedy for the owner.  The likes of Gill Marshall-Andrews no doubt think that guns are glamourised by films, I think it more likely that films are glamourised by the use of guns.  Hollywood is riddled with gun grabbers and yet films constantly feature guns.  Why?  Because guns have an appeal, a glamour of their own.  Not so much the sombre sporting arms that we are used to in Blighty but more the handguns and military style rifles that one sees in films.
There were also complaints that the promotion coincided with the shooting of the young lad in Liverpool.  So?  The death of the lad was clearly a tragedy, but the world keeps turning.  The world of the lads family has ended but the rest of us keep going on doing what we do.  What is this collective sense of offence that we seem to need to take?  Pain by proxy? 

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Government ID Security Shambles

Was anyone really surprised to learn that the Government lost a huge amount of data with enough details for an identity theif to pretty much steal your life?
I mean genuinely surprised, not faux surprised in a Government Minister type way.
Surely this exposes the lie that the ID database and associated ID cards will in anyway prevent identity theft?  Far from it, it will make these kind of balls ups more likely and make it easier for hackers to get their grubby little mitts on your personal details.
That said, I would not even slightly put it past the Government to declare that ID cards will be the solution to their own cockup.

Monday, September 03, 2007

The Role of the Police

A couple of weeks ago I read a definition of the police which both amused me and saddened me because of the truth of the matter.
I think it was Peter Hitchens who described the police as:

The paramilitary wing of the Guardian

Once, not so many years ago it could have been described as an offshoot of the Daily Mail I suppose - which model do you think worked better?

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

But of course…

I believe that I now know where the prompt for my visit by two uniforms came from.
I received an email today from the webmaster of the British Association for Women in Policing informing me that a link I had to their site was now broken.  Which was nice and I’ve now fixed the link and pointed it to a Wiki entry.
Lightbulb!  Given that the officers biggest beef with me seemed to be the largely tongue in cheek post regarding a spokesman for BAWP commenting on large handgun’s unsuitability for women firearms officers this seems to square the circle rather.

Monday, August 13, 2007

MI5 is watching

I occasionally joke about being watched by MI5 or whatever on account of this blog, this of course became less funny when two coppers pitched up at my door.
On this line of thought from an article in the Sunday Mail

I first met David when we were both working in F2, the counter-subversion section of MI5, where we were repeatedly reassured that MI5 had to work within the law.
We were young and keen to help protect our country. I noticed David immediately, as he was very bright, and always asked the difficult questions.
Over a period of a year we became friends, and then we fell in love.
In the run-up to the 1992 General Election we were involved in assessing any parliamentary candidate and potential MP.
This meant that they all had their names cross-referenced with MI5’s database.

MI5 say in Myths and Misunderstandings

Ministers and MPs are not subject to vetting.

As Mandy Rice-Davies nearly said, well, they would say that wouldn’t they?

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Conservatives “half right”

"Conservatives half right, half wrong” says Libertarian Alliance Director Sean Gabb.

“They are right when they admit that fifty years of social engineering by Conservative and Labour Governments have been a miserable failure. We have been taxed. We have been subsidised. We have been regulated. We have been endlessly preached at. And, after two generations of all this, we have, as a nation, been made neither happier nor more virtuous. There is more illegitimacy, more divorce, more drunkenness, more crime.

“But the Conservatives are wrong when they believe that the harms of social engineering can be cured by different social engineering”

This seems to sum up the present incarnation of the Conservative Party, and indeed the whole political mainstream in the UK.  Social engineering is accepted as a ‘Good Thing’ by all three parties and most of the media.  Is it any wonder that people can’t be arsed voting when presented with this Hobson’s Choice?

Thursday, July 05, 2007

The Secret People

I’m not normally a fan of prose or poetry, however I think this deserves an airing.

The Secret People

Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget,
For we are the people of England, that never has spoken yet.
There is many a fat farmer that drinks less cheerfully,
There is many a free French peasant who is richer and sadder than we.
There are no folk in the whole world so helpless or so wise.
There is hunger in our bellies, there is laughter in our eyes;
You laugh at us and love us, both mugs and eyes are wet:
Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet.

The fine French kings came over in a flutter of flags and dames.
We liked their smiles and battles, but we never could say their names.
The blood ran red to Bosworth and the high French lords went down;
There was naught but a naked people under a naked crown.
And the eyes of the King’s Servants turned terribly every way,
And the gold of the King’s Servants rose higher every day.
They burnt the homes of the shaven men, that had been quaint and kind,
Till there was no bed in a monk’s house, nor food that man could find.
The inns of God where no man paid, that were the wall of the weak,
The King’s Servants ate them all. And still we did not speak.

And the face of the King’s Servants grew greater than the King:
He tricked them, and they trapped him, and stood round him in a ring.
The new grave lords closed round him, that had eaten the abbey’s fruits,
And the men of the new religion, with their Bibles in their boots,
We saw their shoulders moving, to menace or discuss,
And some were pure and some were vile; but none took heed of us.
We saw the King as they killed him, and his face was proud and pale;
And a few men talked of freedom, while England talked of ale.

A war that we understood not came over the world and woke
Americans, Frenchmen, Irish; but we knew not the things they spoke.
They talked about rights and nature and peace and the people’s reign:
And the squires, our masters, bade us fight; and never scorned us again.
Weak if we be for ever, could none condemn us then;
Men called us serfs and drudges; men knew that we were men.
In foam and flame at Trafalgar, on Albuera plains,
We did and died like lions, to keep ourselves in chains,
We lay in living ruins; firing and fearing not
The strange fierce face of the Frenchman who knew for what he fought,
And the man who seemed to be more than man we strained against and broke;
And we broke our own rights with him. And still we never spoke.

Our path of glory ended; we never heard guns again.
But the squire seemed struck in the saddle; he was foolish, as if in pain.
He leaned on a staggering lawyer, he clutched a cringing Jew,
He was stricken; it may be, after all, he was stricken at Waterloo.
Or perhaps the shades of the shaven men, whose spoil is in his house,
Come back in shining shapes at last to spoil his last carouse:
We only know the last sad squires ride slowly towards the sea,
And a new people takes the land: and still it is not we.

They have given us into the hands of the new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger and honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
Their doors are shut in the evenings; and they know no songs.

We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst.
It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.

G.K. CHESTERTON

I’ll not hat tip the person who brought it to my attention just in case we get accused of inciting insurrection or somesuch crazyness, but he knows who his is!
Given that Chesterton died in the 30s, I wonder what he would make of the oppression of the English people in the late 20th Century and early 21st Century?  Liberties Chesterton took for granted have been swept away with nary a whisper.

Thursday, February 08, 2007

Insurrection?

Over at Samizdata there is a post from Guy Herbet which talks of his sympathy, even passive support, for the letter bomber who seems to be attacking the State machinery related to speed camera facism.
His views seem to mirror my own, as a rabidly law abiding person by nature even I feel a certain comradeship with the perpertrator.  I don’t want to have workers find explosives in the mail nor do I wish harm to them.  However the fact seems to be that these people are collaberating with an oppressive regime.  They are profiting from working for a regime which is increasingly facist in it’s outlook and modus operandi.  It shows just how far this has come when ordinary citizens start to feel sympathy with what is terrorism, like the fuel protesters of a few years back we feel that they are striking against The Man only this time actual violence is being employed.  How much further will this go?  How much further will the State push the people of Blighty before a grumbling acceptance turns from sympathy with the terrorist to tacit support of ‘freedom fighters’?
There is a saying that those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.  The State machinery here and in Brussells is making revolution necessary, that same machinery in arms with our liberal media and political classes are making peaceful revolution impossible.  Any blood shed in collaborative organisations is firmly on the hands of these evil bastards.
I remain hopeful that we could roll back the ever encroaching state but history does not support my wishes.  I fear for the future.

Monday, January 29, 2007

Season Shot?

This can’t be for real - can it?

Season Shot is made of tightly packed seasoning bound by a fully biodegradable food product. The seasoning is actually injected into the bird on impact seasoning the meat from the inside out. When the bird is cooked the seasoning pellets melt into the meat spreading the flavor to the entire bird. Forget worrying about shot breaking your teeth and start wondering about which flavor shot to use!

Props to Trixx over at British Blades for this one.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Hypocrisy of symbolism

A news item on Radio 1 yesterday left me fuming.
Apparently a shop in the Milton Keynes region was selling some sew on patches which featured the Swastika symbol.  A woman complained to the shop staff and was told that she was perfectly welcome not to shop there if she didn’t like it - quite reasonable in my opinion.  The story doesn’t make it clear who contacted the police but the police were never the less contacted.  Why?  Why is it a police matter if someone is selling unpleasant product?  We do not have a ‘right’ to not be offended, bullshit like this propogates the idea that should we see something we do not like we should get the state powers involved.  From the picture in Milton Keynes Today I can’t quite see if the patches actually say ‘Fuck the niggas/jews/pikeys/whatever’ but I suspect that they do not.  It seems reasonable to assume that the intention of the makers of at least one of the pictured patches is to suggest a link with Nazism but the other two are not quite so clear cut.  Interesting to me that the complainant was described as being a ‘mum’ both in the rag article and the radio item - does this give her opinion more gravitas than if she had not had sexual congress at the right time resulting in progeny?  If the complainant was not childed would their opinion be null and void?  Not entirely rare to hear women, and it is always women never men, preface their view with a statement regarding their status as a parent - “As a mother, I find....”.  Fuck off you smug self centred tosswank, your world may well revolve around the issue of your loins but don’t expect everyone else to.
The end result is that the shop has stopped selling these patches, the fact that they have in part been prevented from doing so by police pressure leaves me with a very uneasy feeling.
Perhaps there are some people out there still unaware that the Nazis did not invent the Swastika symbol?  The symbol has been around for thousands of years in many cultures as a symbol of good luck and of meaning permanent victory, hence it’s attractiveness to Nazism.  For more background on this have a look at Reclaim the Swastika

Let’s consider for a moment that the shop, instead of selling Swastikas was selling Hammer and Sickle badges.  Would the same sense of outrage be felt?  Would the national yoof radio station have picked up on it?  Would the police have got involved?
Most assuredly not.  Yet under the recognised symbol for communism far more innocents have been murdered, tortured or dispossessed than by Hitler and his cronies.  Some estimates suggest that Stalin alone was responsible for up to 30 million deaths, either through direct action or starvation due to forced collectivist policies.  How can anyone say that this symbol does not represent evil?
What of that other symbol beloved by socialists, the image of Che Guevara?  A relentless totalitarian and founder of Cuban labour camps, an inspiration for generations of insurgencies and enemies of democratic freedom.  In short another evil fucker prepared to murder anyone standing in the way of his vision of the world.
These symbols feature on posters, badges and t-shirts of dumb fuckers up and down the land with nary a whisper of complaint, much less the police stamping the jack boot of Government authority on the peddlers.
So why the hypocrisy?  One could speculate that the communists leftists feel that the cause of the likes of Guevara or Stalin was just and noble, that the deaths were perhaps regretable but born of pure intent.  I’m thinking that whether you died in a Gulag, Cuban Labour camp or a Nazi concentration camp your death and persecution was evil.  The glorification of any of the symbols discussed here is at best naive and certainly wrong.
However it is not the business of the state to dictate what symbols a shop can sell or which symbols we can buy or wear. That is totalitarian thinking, anti-freedom and yes - evil.

Friday, January 05, 2007

We don’t need no edumacation

Currently as seen on all the best blogs (An Englishman’s Castle, The Devil’s Kitchen and you read it there first - Bishop Hill), the following quote from the great John Stuart Mill which I make no apologies for reproducing here.

A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another: and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, a priesthood, an aristocracy, or the majority of the existing generation, in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body.

The political force embodied by Nu-Labour Fabianism of course exploits this to the full, the current education system seeks to produce social collectivist thinking automatons dumbed down to an acceptable level to become good little Nu-Labour voters all reliant on the State machine for their living.  Lately we’ve been hearing how school leavers find it acceptable to use txt spk ‘text speak’ in job applications, this sums up the abject failure of the current failure of the education system to produce functioning members of civilised society despite having our youth in it’s care for eleven years minimum.
Of course this is not just a function of the Nu-Labour regime, twas ever thus.  Even in my youth as a pupil during the Thatcher (Gawd bless you Ma’am) years the education system was infested with Fabian thinkers who would miss no opportunity to try to infect their vulnerable charges with their brand of communist thinking. 
These are the people who libertarian thinker Sean Gabb would call The Enemy Class

What I will call the Enemy Class exists in and around the public sector. It comprises the great majority of those administrators, lawyers, experts, educators and media people whose living is connected with the State. Its leading members are people like Anthony Giddens, Greg Dyke, Elspeth Howe, Mary Warnock, Polly Toynbee, Peter Mandelson, and others. They articulate and advance the interests of perhaps a million other people - from television producers and heads of executive agencies, down through the university lecturers and social workers and white collar bureaucrats, to the lowest grades of civil servant and local government officer. Add to the list all the racism awareness and anti-aids consultants and the workers in those non-government organisations that receive money and status from or via the State.

These are the people who really govern the country. They are the ones who decide what statistics to gather and how and when to publish them. They decide what problems can be identified and what solutions can be discussed. They advise on policy and implement policy. Because of their numbers and education and beliefs, and the formal and informal bonds that hold them to each other, and because of their ability and willingness to give and withhold benefits, they set the tone of society. They can require not only external conformity to their will, but can even to some extent shape the public mind so that conformity seems right and natural. They provide the boundaries and language of debate. They define the heretics and schismatics, and arrange for them to be persecuted. They are the modern equivalent of an established church. More precisely, they are what Coleridge called the Clerisy.

I’m tempted to call them enemies of the state but of course they are in some ways the exact opposite, they are the Commissar’s of the State.  These people are the truest enemies of freedom and independent thought in the modern world and these are the ones who have charge of forming our future generation.

Monday, September 25, 2006

Herr Blair

Apparently this ad appears in The Guardian, I don’t read it and I don’t expect you do either.
Click on the pic to go to the No2ID site and read up, if you haven’t already done so there is a click to donate box on the web site.

Thursday, March 02, 2006

Voter Reform

John at The England Project points out that Peter Hitchens has a blog.
It was here that I found this little gem

And if we brought back the old pre-1914 rule, that nobody who received a public salary or welfare payment could vote, then governments would have to stop trying to bribe people to vote for them by giving them jobs or handouts. Instead they’d have a real reason to keep taxes low and to cut the public payroll. So that won’t happen.

I’ve been saying for years that there should be no representation without taxation, in other words if you aren’t paying the piper you don’t get to call the tune.  This method would help in two ways.  Firstly there’s the one that Peter points out, there’s no point in New Communism creating dependants if they can’t vote their own bread and circuses.  Secondly the sort of beared, sandle wearing, arran jumpered Guardian reading wanker that votes Lib-Dem or New Communist is more likely to be on the pay roll anyway.  Think of the professions most likely to contain these odious creatures and many of them are directly or indirectly Government funded such as teaching or quango meisters.
Double whammy.  Sadly as Mr Hitchens says it ain’t ever gonna happen.