We’ve all wondered that, haven’t we? (especially after listening to ♫My Fair Lady♫?!)
Seriously, on a more earthly fashion, there are differences.
Witness THIS maker of equality…
While I have known a number of woman who have demonstrated their proclivity to ‘void’ in the wildness,
this device seems to take it up a notch!
How do I know about such a device? Knowledgeable women have shared such info with me.
And now, with age and infirmity, sometimes, I’ve a need for such a device! 😦
(fortunately, the come in pink, lavender, and – for the girl/guy on the go – KHAKI !)
(PS – I get NOTHING. FTC, go away!)
I try to limit the flotsam and jetsam (i.e. Spam) in my primary email inboxes. Not because I fear viruses (I do!) but because they are a waste of time.
But, spam filters being imperfect, sometimes ‘things’ get through!
(From a free DVD!)
Would You Like To Own A 100% Legal Glock 9mm That The Government Doesn’t Know Exists?…
Using Nothing But A Hacksaw, File, Drill And This Breakthrough FREE DVD You Can Literally Create A Fully Functional Undetectable Glock 9mm In Your Garage In Under An Hour, Just Like This…
P.S. This is currently 100% legal in all 50 states and I’d love to give it to you for free right now…
(Now, if memory serves, BATFE rules state you can ‘make’ your own firearm for personal use. Whether or not this kind of ‘making’ is allowed under the rules I’m reluctant to test! And the rules may have been changed w/o them notifying me!)
Not to mention, I’m mechanically challenged. I can completely disassemble (and reassemble) a standard AR15, a S&W ‘old-school’ revolver and most Browning-designed semiautomatics. I ‘accurized’ a 1911 by taking a raw barrel bushing and using only my hands, sanded the barrel contact surface until the barrel just made it through. Took about 4 hours.
BUT, building a ghost gun from parts?!
Yeah, I don’t know…
Plus, what if you are carrying it and questioned by the local police. Will they know it is technically legal?
And there’s that whole BATFE thing!
Not for me!
To the spam cave!
(If you are interested in such things, I’m certain the Internet will provide the link. I won’t.)
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK)
THEN: “This law is not affordable for anyone in Alaska. That is why I will support the bill that repeals the ACA and wipes out its harmful impacts.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
Dean Heller (R-NV)
DEAN HELLER (R-NV)
THEN: “The repeal of this law will not only reduce federal spending, but it will also allow Congress to address problems within the current health care system.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV)
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO (R-WV)
THEN: “I have consistently voted to repeal and replace this disastrous health care law, and I am glad that a repeal bill will finally reach the president’s desk.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
LAMAR ALEXANDER (R-TN)
THEN: “Obamacare was an historic mistake, and should be repealed and replaced with step-by-step reforms that transform the health care delivery system.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
Susan Collins (R-ME)
SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME)
THEN: “I believe that we made – that Congress made – a real error in passing Obamacare, we should repeal the law so that we can start over.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
John McCain (R-AZ)
JOHN McCAIN (R-AZ)
THEN: “It is clear that any serious attempt to improve our health care system must begin with a full repeal and replacement of Obamacare.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
Rob Portman (R-OH)
ROB PORTMAN (R-OH)
THEN: “[Obamacare] is fundamentally flawed. I do think we ought to delay … and then we’ve got to repeal this thing and start over.”
NOW: Voted Against Repeal
There is simply no excuse for their opposition to repeal.
The above (in part) was sent to me by the Senate Conservatives Fund, begging for money.
Which is funny, as I have none.
What to do with these RINOs? Vote them out in the primaries for going against their word?
(Not to mention I am not looking for a replacement for the Democrats version of health care with a Republicans. I’m looking for a free market solution.)
What to do, what to do…?
Here’s what that bastion of liberal thought, Harvard University, has to say about it:
(from the Daily Wire)
Harvard Study: Minimum Wage Hikes Killing Businesses
Erik Mcgregor/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
A new Harvard Business School study found that minimum wage hikes lead to closures of small businesses. “We find suggestive evidence that an increase in the minimum wage leads to an overall increase in the rate of exit,” the researchers conclude.
The study, titled Survival of the Fittest: The Impact of the Minimum Wage on Firm Exit, looks at “the impact of the minimum wage on restaurant closures using data from the San Francisco Bay Area” from 2008-2016.
Researchers Dara Lee Luca and Michael Luca chose the Bay Area due to their frequent minimum wage hikes in recent years. “In the San Francisco Bay Area alone, there have been twenty-one local minimum wage changes over the past decade,” they write.
The Lucas found that lower-quality restaurants (indicated by Yelp scores) were disproportionately affected by wage hikes, increasing their likelihood of closure relative to higher-quality, established restaurants.
“The evidence suggests that higher minimum wages increase overall exit rates for restaurants. However, lower quality restaurants, which are already closer to the margin of exit, are disproportionately impacted by increases to the minimum wage,” says the study. “Our point estimates suggest that a one dollar increase in the minimum wage leads to a 14 percent increase in the likelihood of exit for a 3.5-star restaurant (which is the median rating), but has no discernible impact for a 5-star restaurant (on a 1 to 5 star scale).”
While “firm exit” was the focus of the study, the researchers also noted that there are often other consequences from wage hikes, such as worker layoffs, increased pricing and hour-cuts for existing workers:
While some studies find no detrimental effects on employment (Card and Krueger 1994, 1998; Dube, Lester & Reich, 2010), others show that higher minimum wage reduces employment, especially among low-skilled workers (see Neumark & Wascher, 2007 for a review). However, even studies that identify negative impacts find fairly modest effects overall, suggesting that firms adjust to higher labor costs in other ways. For example, several studies have documented price increases as a response to the minimum wage hikes (Aaronson, 2001; Aaronson, French, & MacDonald, 2008; Allegretto & Reich, 2016). Horton (2017) find that firms reduce employment at the intensive margin rather than on the extensive margin, choosing to cut employees hours rather than counts.
Such findings were backed up by Garret/Galland Research’s Stephen McBride, who highlighted in March the “minimum wage massacre.”
“Currently, rising labor costs are causing margins in the sector to plummet. Those with the ability to automate like McDonalds are doing so… and those who don’t are closing their doors. In September 2016, one-quarter of restaurant closures in the California Bay Area cited rising labor costs as one of the reasons for closing,” McBride wrote in Forbes.
“While wage increases put more money in the pocket of some, others are bearing the costs by having their hours reduced and being made part-time,” he added.
As noted by Red Alert Politics, the Bay Area is headed for a $15 minimum wage in July of 2018, though they’ve already seen over 60 restaurants close since September.
While it would behoove the Bernie Bros picketing for $15 an hour to take a look at this study, it’s entirely unlikely that such evidence would deter their entitled attitudes.
I posted regarding this phenomena before, but I obviously don’t have the gravitas of Harvard (nor, apparently the other sources I borrowed
It’s basic economics – businesses expect X dollar profit to be profitable – having the gov’t mandate paying their employees more money lessens profit. Something has to give.
We’re seeing many more kiosks on restaurant tables and counters these days.
They cost less.
“Come With Me If You Want To Live!”
Harvard ‘Shock’ Study: Each $1 Minimum Wage Hike Causes 4-10% Increase In Restaurant Failures
When I was making minimum wage, I changed jobs when I saw I couldn’t make rent and eat on that income. This was in the 70s, when I began making $1.60 an hour, and moved up to $2.10…
(from Peter – Bayou Renaissance Man)
If Facebook were actively trying to define itself as ‘creepy’, it couldn’t do much better than this. Two reports over the past few weeks have caused me to wonder at the sanity of anyone who still uses the service.First, it seems Facebook actively marketed to advertisers its ability to ‘target 6.4 million younger users, some only 14 years old, during moments of psychological vulnerability’. Wired reports:
Data mining is such a prosaic part of our online lives that it’s hard to sustain consumer interest in it, much less outrage. The modern condition means constantly clicking against our better judgement. We go to bed anxious about the surveillance apparatus lurking just beneath our social media feeds, then wake up to mindlessly scroll, Like, Heart, Wow, and Fave another day.
But earlier this month, The Australian uncovered something that felt like a breach in the social contract: a leaked confidential document prepared by Facebook that revealed the company had offered advertisers the opportunity to target 6.4 million younger users, some only 14 years old, during moments of psychological vulnerability, such as when they felt “worthless,” “insecure,” “stressed,” “defeated,” “anxious,” and like a “failure.”
The 23-page document had been prepared for a potential advertiser and highlighted Facebook’s ability to micro-target ads down to “moments when young people need a confidence boost.” According to The Australian’s report, Facebook had been monitoring posts, photos, interactions, and internet activity in real time to track these emotional lows. (Facebook confirmed the existence of the report, but declined to respond to questions from WIRED about which types of posts were used to discern emotion.)
There’s more at the link.
Not content with that, it seems Facebook is trying to patent ‘creepy technology which spies on people and automatically analyses their facial expressions’. The Sun reports:
The social network applied for a patent to capture pictures of a user through their smartphone.
The creepy designs, which date back to 2015, were discovered by software company CBI Insight, which has been analysing Mark Zuckerberg’s “emotion technology”.
. . .
Researchers at CBI Insights warned that the plans could put a lot of people off using the service.
“On the one hand, they want to identify which content is most engaging and respond to audience’s reactions, on the other emotion-detection is technically difficult, not to mention a PR and ethical minefield,” it wrote in a blogpost.
Again, more at the link.
So Facebook now wants to use the camera on your smartphone to watch you while you use the device. Why would anyone in their right mind allow a social media network this kind of intimate access to their thoughts, feelings and emotions? Is there no value attached to privacy any more?
From my moral perspective (which is admittedly that of an older generation), this seems not only an invasion of privacy, but actively evil – trying to use your own emotions to manipulate you, and/or sell data about you to advertisers and others (for example, political parties analyzing voter emotions and behavior) who will use it to manipulate you.
News reports like this make me devoutly grateful that I have no Facebook presence at all! If you do, in heaven’s name, why do you want to expose yourself to this???
I joined FB long before I began blogging, or even reading other’s blogs. I liked the Internet, and it just seemed to be the social thing to do. (I was doing the IRC and bulletin boards before THAT!)
Yeah, I’m old. 😛
But, considering Pandora’s Box has already been opened, do I want to make it even easier for the alphabet soup of government, or private corporations or citizens? Is it even worth the effort, now that the cat’s escaped the bag?
Maybe. I am considering leaving FB. Most folks who care I blog know Guffaw is my nom-de-Internet, and can do research to determine my FB moniker and extrapolate real info and data from there.
As if that’s worth anything…
I’ve always owned a car. At least, since I was a licensed driver.
First, a loaner from my parents, then a used car (bought with assistance from my parents). Then, a succession of beaters (to which Dave-the-mechanic can attest!).
Finally, after the accident, I bought my dream car – a 1989 Isuzu Trooper! This was in 1995. Most of my previous cars were at least 10 years old when purchased. I just never had the money/credit to buy new.
When the Izuzu ‘gave up the ghost’ seven years later, I already had begun looking for a replacement. The engine blew, and I needed a car. I was still working, commuting, and one really needs a car to get around the Valley.
Credit, money, income limited my choices. I ended up with a 2000 Oldsmobile Intrigue. (This was 2002!) She was NOT my first choice, but I did qualify for her.
Who knew she would last fifteen years?
The sad part is, now she is worth maybe $500, if I’m lucky. She still runs (the engine is still powerful), but needs major work – rack and pinion leak, crankcase leak, a/c compressor, engine mounts and window regulators, and many other things. I’ve been advised not to drive her unless it’s absolutely necessary.
And, as I now drive J’s car (a 2006 Honda Element, the a/c works!) it seems silly to insure two cars. We rarely need both.
SO…I’m either selling or donating the car.
It will be the first time since 1970 (broken beater car downtime excluded) that I’ve not actually HAD a car.
I’m looking at one Internet site who claims to buy cars. As well as Father Joe’s Villages charities and the Salvation Army.
And it makes me sad and a little scared.
I can no longer walk very far w/o pain. And, what if J’s car goes South – then what?
To get the Olds road-worthy is a minimum $1000. Seems silly on a $500 car, when a second car is available.
So she’s on the block.
(from TFB, in part)
Brink’s Adopts The FN 509 | The First FN 509 Contract Awarded
As much as people want to shun the FN 509 for being yet another polymer framed striker gun that is easy to overlook the hidden greatness, Brink’s saw the benefit in the new plastic wonder gun. The adoption of the FN 509 by Brink’s marks the first major purchase of the 509 since it was announced on April 17, 2017.
There is no word on how many pistols Brink’s has purchased and what the details of the sale were other than a Dallas, Texas based FN Law Enforcement Dealer called TK Tactical brokered the deal between Brink’s and FN’s law enforcement sales team.
We have previously covered the FN 509 on TFB TV and found the pistol to be a hidden gem that many will no doubt overlook when they are in the gunstore. If large contracts like the Brink’s one continue to be awarded to the FN pistol I expect we will see a ton more of the pistols in civilian hands.
The press release can be found HERE, but I have pasted it below.
(McLean, VA – April 25, 2017) FN America, LLC, the manufacturer of the world’s most battle-proven firearms, announces the award of a long-term firearms contract by Brink’s, Incorporated, a premier provider of secure logistics and security solutions throughout the United States. After extensive testing of all major pistol manufacturers over the course of nine months, Brink’s has selected the all-new FN 509™ striker-fired 9mm pistol and will issue the new sidearm to its armed security guards.
FN’s law enforcement sales team worked with TK Tactical, an FN Law Enforcement Distributor based in Dallas, Texas, to develop the lead, and then directly with Brink’s to provide a firearms solution that met and exceeded the needs of its armed personnel. The first order of pistols will begin shipping in early June. Brink’s Incorporated, is the first major private security company to adopt the FN 509 since its official release in April 2017.
“We are proud to announce the contract with Brink’s, Incorporated,” said Mark Cherpes, President and CEO for FN America, LLC. “Like FN, Brink’s has a long and honored history. Brink’s is one of the most iconic private security firms in the world. The decision to purchase the FN 509 is an important achievement for our organization. It is validation of the hard work that our team put into designing, producing and supporting this pistol.”
The FN 509 was born out of the company’s effort to produce a contender for the U.S. Army’s Modular Handgun System (MHS) competition and has been further enhanced to meet the needs of U.S. law enforcement and commercial customers. Built on the proven architecture of the FNS™ Compact, FN made changes internally and externally to meet the rigorous performance standards of the MHS requirements and further developed the platform into the FN 509 with help from industry experts. Over the course of development, the platform has been tested extensively for reliability, ammunition compatibility and durability – totaling more than 1 million rounds.
Check out FN America online for more information about the FN 509.
Times have changed. Traditionally, private security has followed the coattails of the military and police, many times with mixed results. It took years for the civilian police to follow the military from revolvers to semiautomatics and even more for private security to get on board.
Perhaps because most private security has less stringent training than the police, and pays less to support it.
I recall working for another national security company, in the late 70’s. The post-issued weapon was a Colt Official Police revolver, of early manufacture, complete with five green rounds of .38 Special in the six-round cylinder. Issued in a right-handed Hunter holster (I’m left handed.) No reloads were supplied, and no training/qualification offered.
AND, the barrel was LOOSE! I never pulled on it, for fear it would separate from the frame!
(Fortunately, my Captain permitted me to carry my Ruger Security Six, on long-term loan from Dave-the-mechanic (thanks. again, Dave!), a gun I had shot competitively with (and now own – thanks yet again, Dave!)
It nice to see Brink’s stepping up to obtain quality firearms for it’s troops. Hopefully, they will be issued to all, not just the elite of the service.
And, properly trained-for and maintained…
(Naw – no political agenda attached here…) 😛
I attended a small, non-political meeting of personal interest to me yesterday morning. One of the ‘rules’ is we don’t discuss politics – AFTER the event begins.
BEFORE it began, however, one of the participants began whining how later Saturday morning there was scheduled to be a ‘Climate March’. I inquired if it was for or against the climate.
She didn’t get it.
I saw THIS, this morning on Free North Carolina…
Leftists commies marched today to protest ‘climate change justice’ whatever that means, and did so by marching with Communist flags in front of the White House.
I guess an ideology that killed over 100 million people will bring justice to the United States. Leftists don’t even hide their support for Communism anymore. These people are historically illiterate, most likely a product of ‘higher education’.
Climate Change Justice? I guess Lenin’s Useful idiots* were out in full force, yesterday.
The idea that humanity (read Western Civilization) is responsible for all of the problems in the World, including changes in the climate (due to industrialization, pollution, and probably being White) is ludicrous, especially given the freedom and prosperity brought to more individuals from these systems that at any time in recorded history. (And ignoring the blackmail and bribery used to fudge the climate figures!) The fact they see the solution to this situation as rampant globalization, human rights abuses, and income redistribution (leveling the playing field) and refusal to acknowledge the continued failure of collectivism toward these ends points to the useful idiots part.
*Lenin’s Useful idiots – how Vladimir Ulyanov characterized college students as easily-manipulated dupes, because of their unformed idealism and lack of Life experience.
One of my memories of first getting into shooting (way back in the ’70s) was buying, carrying and shooting SuperVel 9mm ammunition. If I remember, it was a 90 gr. bullet, hollow point, and cost roughly twice what ball 115/125 gr. ammo cost ($13.95 vs. $6.00, per 50). It was alleged to leave the barrel at 1375 fps! (I’m certain this was a test barrel, as opposed to my lowly Model 39-2 Smith 4″).
I would spend my hard-earned 1970’s cash on SuperVels (when I could afford them) based on the idea that I should practice with what I carried.
But, as with many things, SuperVel went TangoUniform. And ammo designer Peter Pi went to another company. (I still have an ammo wallet of 18 rounds I acquired somewhere – don’t tell anyone! Kinda silly as I currently do not currently own any 9mm pistols…)
Fast forward to now. Oleg Volk (photographer extraordinaire and gun rights advocate) posted on VolkStudio Blog the following:
(from the link, in part)
I’ve mentioned “Zeurillium” (zinc alloy) bullets before. MI Bullet offers a 1050fps 90 grain load that has next to no recoil and excellent accuracy. It works very well in blowback pistols like Hi-Point C9 and in conventional tilt-barrel locked breech semiautos. Due to the nonexistent recoil, it does not work in rotating breech pistols like Beretta Cougar or my favorite GP XCalibur. Should I wish to run it exclusively, XCalibur does come with a weaker recoil spring that would accommodate the lightly loaded round, but then I would have to change it out when switching to the carry load.
Fortunately, Velocity Munitions is about to start selling the full-power 1400fps version of this load. Fans of 7.62×25 Tokarev round will observe that the bullet weight and the velocity are very similar between the two loads. While the 9mm load doesn’t expand, it starts out with slightly larger frontal area and does have a decent meplat for punching clean holes. Since the zinc alloy is harder than lead, it has overall penetration similar to jacketed ball.
Now I’m an ‘old-school’ guy and have graduated to heavier, wider projectiles. BUT, the velocity of these rounds do interest me.
Now, if I could just afford a 9mm pistol? 😦
Joel posts THIS!:
Here comes a link from Landlady to further damage my calm…
State Supreme Court Finds Dogs Are “ Sentient Beings,” Not Mere Property, In Landmark Ruling
[T]he court granted legal significance to the dog’s “ sentient ”—his capacity to experience feelings, and pain.“It is really a landmark ruling,” says Attorney Lora Dunn of the Animal Legal Defense Fund—which filed an amicus brief in this case, on behalf of the winning side. “In this specific context, the animal sentience matters.”
Find me an animal, from an earthworm to a gorilla, that can’t feel pain.
“A landmark ruling?” That’s a scary ruling. “Feelings and pain?” By that definition, the rabbits currently infesting my yard and the pork currently warming my stomach are or were sentient.
I recognize that the word has such wide meaning as to be essentially meaningless. But as far as I can tell, the Oregon court just outlawed meat-eating. And for that matter, the ownership of all animals.
PETA (and their fellow four-footed travelers) must be dancing!
In homage to this well-thought-out (sarcasm) decision, I bring you the following, courtesy of Tamara:
(Now, if I could only afford a good one… 😦 )