This thread sponsored by American Tourister (NOT by Samsonite, despite what you might think!):

Good day, Morons and Moronettes. Welcome to your weekly Travel Thread. Today I thought we’d spend a little bit of time talking about travels, near and far, to historic places. This was inspired by the numerous comments a couple of weeks ago many of our morons and ‘ettes who are fortunate to live near, or to have visited, famous battlefields, memorials, and other historic sites.

(Continued below the jump.)

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 01:52 PM | Comments (228)
Post contains 896 words, total size 8 kb.

Jean-Baptiste Say, an 18th-century economist and follower of Adam Smith, recognized one of the most fundamental laws in all economics: the entirely common-sense observation that consumption requires production. This axiom is called Say's Law of Markets.

However, this axiom is often mis-stated as "production creates its own demand". This is incorrect -- production is necessary for consumption to take place, but production anticipates demand, it does not cause it. Production is speculative in this sense. The simple act of producing some good or service does not, in and of itself, create demand for that good or service. (This is true even for basic commodities.)

What Say's Law really says is that production is the source of wealth. Market-driven production creates value and provides choice to consumers. Inventors and innovators bring new products to market, and as consumers are exposed to these new products, demand rises with the utility or desirability of these new products. New markets are opened by innovators who are able to tap into needs and wants that consumers didn't even know they had until a new product or service is offered. more...

Posted by: Monty at 06:15 AM | Comments (333)
Post contains 1213 words, total size 7 kb.

Nope, NYT, It's Not a "Stand-Your-Ground" Case

Our friend Andrew Branca is covering the Florida "loud music" murder trial of Michael Dunn at his blog, with crossposts at Legal Insurrection, and he's live-tweeting it when court is in session.

The gist of the case is that 4 men in an SUV were confronted outside a convenience store in Florida and asked to turn down the volume of their sound system. Words were exchanged and defendant Dunn wound up pumping nine rounds of 9mm into the SUV, including 3 that went into the rear quarter panel and window as it was fleeing the scene. One of the first 3 shots killed one of the passengers.

Defendant Dunn has claimed self-defense and says the victim was armed and that the passengers in the SUV must've gotten rid of their gun in all the confusion, which is why no gun was found on them.

The New York Times, of course, can't resist calling this case a trial of Florida's self-defense laws and "Stand Your Ground".

*sigh*

As Branca reminds us:

... Stand-Your-Ground deals only with the issue of retreat in the context of lawful self-defense. It does not authorize any greater degree of force, nor does it allow you to use force under any lesser degree of threat. You must still meet every other qualification for lawful self-defense—innocence, imminence, proportionality, and reasonableness. If you are the aggressor in the fight, for example, you don’t qualify for self-defense in the first place, and Stand-Your-Ground has no application. In particular, Stand-Your-Ground in no way authorizes a “shoot first, ask questions later” approach to self-defense, despite what so many political activists have claimed.

From Branca's reporting, it seems pretty doubtful that Dunn has a valid self-defense claim at all. But that doesn't stop the NYT from propagandizing against self-defense laws anyway.

Related: The owner's manual for your concealed carry permit - The Law of Self Defense

Buffalo: Known For Its Sweet, Delicious Irony

More than a dozen cop cars, the SWAT team, K9 units and the Erie County SheriffÂ’s Air One helicopter swarmed Harvey Austin Elementary School in Buffalo on Thursday after reports of a man with a gun near the school or on the grounds. Dwayne Ferguson, head of the Buffalo chapter of MAD DADS, was taken into custody.

Why is this schadenfreudelicious, you ask?

News 4 interviewed Ferguson in March of 2013 at a rally in support of the NY SAFE Act. At the time, Ferguson stated the law did not go far enough.

“Our kids are not buying assault weapons, they’re buying pistols and they’re buying them right out of community stores and back here in the school. So this is serious. It needs to go further than what it is,” he said.

Guns for me but not for thee, eh Mr. Ferguson? Have fun in the legal system you advocated for.

(via an unnamed moron on the tip line)

Gun Of The Week

(answer below)
more...

Posted by: andy at 08:00 AM | Comments (157)
Post contains 886 words, total size 8 kb.

In the late 1980s the Poles came up with a clever slogan in its struggle against the Soviet-controlled Polish communists: “2+2=4”. It was the concept expressed by George Orwell in his book, Nineteen Eighty-Four, that universal truths such as “2+2=4” are a threat to a state built on deceit, a definition that any client state of communist Russia would meet. It was also a rather cheeky way of protesting the communists without appearing to do so: “2+2=4” is hardly the same as “Kick Out the Russians”. Even in the Soviet bloc, the Polish puppet government found it difficult to conduct a massive round up of citizens displaying placards that purported a basic math equation that any first grader would see as an obvious truth. The Poles beat the enemies of clarity at their own game.

I was reminded of this event during a business trip to Russia last summer, which had just passed an anti-gay law in the name of protecting young children from learning about sexual issues in an age-inappropriate way. Certainly an honest policy discussion could occur on the best way to handle sex education with small children. However, as with much of Russian government action throughout the ages, the “age-appropriate” argument is simply cover for suppressing free speech.

It turns out that what this Russia law does is prohibits speech of any kind related to homosexuality that could be viewed by children of any age. You could be arrested if your travel bag proudly displays your grandfatherÂ’s 42^nd Infantry Division patch (itÂ’s a rainbow) or for wearing a Will & Grace T-Shirt. Under this vague law the government can arrest anyone they wish, as there are few things worn in public that cannot be interpreted as a violation of the law.

Years after the Soviet system collapsed, free speech is still a struggle. Russian journalist and vocal Putin critic Anna PolitkovskayaÂ’s murder was soon followed by the death of her ally, Alexander Litvinenko. Having accused the Russian government of PolitkovskayaÂ’s murder he promptly died from Polonium-210 poisoning, the first known instance of an assassination with a personal Weapon of Mass Destruction.

Understandably, both gay and free speech advocates are upset over this law, which adds to signals from the government that it is indifferent to crime if the victim is gay. A Russian official explained to me that a recent attack on a homosexual victim was not a prosecutorial priority, despite the entire crime being captured on video. It seems that intimidating people from peacefully supporting what they think is equal treatment is far more important than putting criminals in jail.

To combat this terrible situation, I propose a method to protest the Russian law that the government may be hard pressed to retaliate against. Since there is real danger of being arrested in Russia right now for showing any obvious signs or symbols of gay pride, Russian gays, gay supporters, and free speech advocates of every stripe could adopt the “Our army is the army of liberation for all workers in the world” image, a famous WWII Russian Army propaganda postcard. It depicts a Russian red army soldier liberating German-occupied land, with a grateful peasant giving the Russian solider a kiss directly on the mouth. In the spirit of the anti-communist Poles utilizing “2+2=4”, the protesters in this arena could adopt this classic icon – well known in Russia – as their unofficial logo.

What will the Russian government do? Claim that a 75 year old, well loved Russian iconic image is and was always a symbol of gay equality? That the state sponsored communist artist, Victor Koretsky, was being subversive? While we should put nothing past a state that wants to exert power over a minority group, I suspect that utilizing this image will allow protesters to be heard while also allowing the Russian government to save some face and not enforce the law on those displaying the Koretsky image. As seen with its declining to prosecute anti-gay crimes, the Russian government knows how to pick and choose what to prosecute and what to ignore.

— The 2nd Amendment Texan writes and speaks about foreign policy, among other things, and has experience in both the White House and the Pentagon. You can follow him on Twitter: @MichaelJames357

Posted by: Guest Blogger at 05:00 AM | Comments (238)
Post contains 734 words, total size 5 kb.

More fun than the Olympics.

Posted by: andy at 03:55 AM | Comments (140)
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

This is where we discuss lemon pies. Politics thread is below.
Do NOT discuss politics in the lemon pie thread.

Just lemon pies, guys. Please stay on topic.

Posted by: LauraW at 05:12 PM | Comments (221)
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

This open thread for non-book discussions is brought to you by a silly argument: more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 06:33 AM | Comments (71)
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

How we all imagine the Biathlon.

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 04:52 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

How we all imagine the Biathlon.

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 04:52 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

How we all imagine the Biathlon.

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 04:52 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.