I know it is summer and I know it is too hot to be “overdressed.” But please, please wear socks. I know you like to look and feel “cool” but when I see somebody with shoes not wearing socks on purpose, all I see is somebody more interested in appearances than being ready.

Also, wearing socks indicates differences between the sexes. Let me explain. When a woman has to rush into a public bathroom and once inside the stall realizes too late that there is no toilet paper, she only has to ask for help and immediately 3 hands will appear from the sides and the front with offerings. Same situation with a guy and he will only hear laughter and the sound of the bathroom door closing as he is left all alone to fend for himself without the three seashells.

If he is smart, he will leave the bathroom clean, and looking cool wearing shoes without socks.  😉

Ours come in a slighter bigger size.

Gator removed from yard.

And people up north wonder why we carry shotguns while mowing our lawns

Hugo takes one page from the Bradys’ book and adds a great new twist. Crime is so high and violent in Venezuela that congress is actually about to adapt the idea of Gun Free Zones Plus. Pablo Fernandez, technical secretary and spokesman of the Presidential Commission for Disarmament indicated that:

[It] will be done in spaces where the population of people is greater, “as parks, shopping centers, road traffic areas near schools or in urban areas.”

Yep, cities too. But it is not as bad as you think…

Fernandez said that there will not elimination of bearing arms, “but will be similarly restricted in those spaces and times to be defined, if at all a week or more occurs where the highest incidence is in hours of Friday in the afternoon until Monday morning”

To get this new plan implemented, they are checking the stats and figuring out what days of the week and what times of the day there is more crime so they can restrict the already tight rules for carrying a concealed weapon. Or basically telling criminals that during certain days at certain hours, they can perpetrate thir crimes without fear of a Venezuelan Subject being able to defend himself.

Genius!

IN BULK

According to Merriam-Webster: in large quantities.

According to CSGV: Two.

As stated in the new ATF Form 3310.12:

This form is to be used by licensees to report all transactions in which an unlicensed person acquired, at one time or during five consecutive business days, two or more semi-automatic rifles larger than .22 caliber (including .223/5.56 caliber) with the ability to accept a detachable magazine.

Must be the results of being educated under that ole New Math 😉

Last night a new young fella started to work with us. It fell on me to instruct him on some stuff and also to tell him that no matter what our less than distinguished and moronic supervisor may have failed to tell him, we have to deal with some people that are less than illustrious. When I told him that in a bit over a year we had four deaths, one by natural causes, two by overdose and one suicide with firearm, his eyes got big.

-“He shot himself?”

-“Yep. Right in the head.”

-“But guns are not allowed on property, right!”

-“Nope.”

-“But…but how was that possible.”

-“My guess, he ignored the warnings.”

-“But that is not right!”

-“Words on a sign do not stop a person determined to do harm. You may want to remember that.”

The new pup was a bit distressed about the whole ordeal. I reminded myself that our job never ends and that the Unicorn Farting Rainbows fairy tales are still flowing strong out there.

After that, I did not have the heart to tell him about the assault with deadly weapons and other happenings. We do need the fresh meat.

From the Brady Campaign Facebook Page. It is unbecoming of us….funny as hell though. 🙂

Snap Crackle Pop looks like a fake account just made to screw with the poor Bradys.

Here is the full sized pic: A Desert Eagle in .50 BMG.Click to enlarge the photoshopped pic.

I am thinking three in the mag plus one in the pipe?

UPDATE: Damn it! there is at least one Brady Left Winger that knows photoshop and even maybe guns…

It will probably be gone before long. [sigh]

Miami Herald today complaining about the law coming up in October that provides teeth to gun owners against local governments ignoring that the legislature is the only one allowed to pass gun laws.

Black is a realist. The Miami activist knows the violence of neighborhoods like Liberty City is impervious to whether guns are legal in city parks or not.

But she’s uncomfortable with allowing guns in government buildings.

“I’m concerned about some deranged person who doesn’t like what our government is doing coming in and shooting someone,” she said. “If I can go now into the Miami Riverside Center, the main operating office of Miami, or any municipal building — and there’s always someone who’s walking into that door who’s not happy with government. Maybe you put a lien on my property, and I think that’s not right — I can walk in with a gun and shoot you.”

I must have missed the New England Journal of Medicine edition where they published the study that day a law will cure nutjobs intended to do harm.

But imagine my surprise when my favorite anti gunner is quoted in the article!

The NRA has been trying to shift gun rules to state legislatures because th group can appeal to conservative lawmakers from rural areas who are more likely to be pro gun, said Ladd Everitt, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.

“It’s terrible policy. It’s ill advised. It will cost lives,” he said. “And it has nothing to do with the intent of the founders. They always intended to allow local control.”

Ladd has become quite the Constitutional scholar just like the actual resident of the White House.  Although rewriting the intention of the Founding Fathers is not quite what scholar means.

The best quote did come from Marion Hammer:

When asked why it why it was OK for state leaders to allow cities to beef up their local laws on a host of other issues, such as where sex offenders can live, but not gun control, the NRA’s Hammer replied, “sex offenders are not protected by the Constitution.”

Well, except maybe in San Francisco.