Tag: Evil Bastards

Pointless Existence

Modernism

I was going to wrote a long article about why I think we have more young men indulging in mass shootings than before in our history.  But David Goldman (a.k.a. “Spengler”) beat me to it, and explained it more briefly.

They are individuals cut off from society, destabilized by change and despairing of their own place in the world.

That’s a pretty good summation of the problem. What’s more interesting is the underlying cause:

Everyone used to matter. No-one matters anymore, not at least in the postmodern dystopia of invented identity.

And if nobody matters, of course, then killing another person, or a group of people (in the mind of the shooter) is of no consequence — and more chillingly, can be triggered by just about any event that “traumatizes” these people.

Stood up for yet another date?  Load up Mom’s AR and head for the mall.  Cut off in traffic?  Start shooting at random cars from an overpass.  Hear some politician say something that upsets you?  Oh, look: a primary school.  And so on.

What’s frightening about all this is that these fragile snowflakes can be set off by literally anything — sheesh, a dropped connection on their phone call could lead to ten innocent people dead.

And if there’s no chance of escape, then it’s small wonder that these shooters commit suicide because, as Goldman so accurately notes, if literally nobody’s life means anything, then your own is just another worthless existence.

What this means is that we’re seeing the end game of post-modernism and the anomie it creates — and it’s small wonder that the most outraged at its manifestation are those who have engendered the mindset.

Read the whole article at the link.  Kevin Williams also points out that America didn’t get an escalation of terrorist attacks after 9/11 from Al-Qa’eda:

We got it from a lot of dysfunctional young white guys from suburbia.

What’s troubling is that I don’t see how we can reverse post-modernism quickly without a series of totalitarian solutions.  Leftists, of course, want to enact their own  series of totalitarian “solutions”:  gun control / confiscation, First Amendment limitations (like this one), and even Fourth- and Fifth Amendment encroachment (e.g. red flag legislation), when all but the most dense people know full well that these won’t solve anything.  (For Lefties, of course, that doesn’t matter because for them, intention is all that counts:  outcome is irrelevant.)

Ignoring the loonies above, it seems clear that what our society needs is a return to First Principles:  Honor, Family, Love Of Country, and so on.  How to get there, even gradually, is not easy and I don’t think we can do it.

I just wish we had people of the stature of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington to create and guide the process.  What I’m afraid we’re going to get instead is Robespierre, Lenin and Pol Pot — and all the squalling from the media aside, those three are going to come from the Left.

I think I’m going to go and buy another gun.  From an individual, not a FFL.  You all know why.  Something small, handy and pretty, but effective.  Like this Henry lever rifle in .357 Magnum (so I don’t have to stock up with yet another  caliber):

What worries me is that no sooner will I get it than it will be lost in an unforeseeable canoeing accident.  What a waste…

Oh, Wonderful

Technology, Travels

Continuing with my series on air travel this week, I see this little snippet:

A security researcher has reportedly discovered a code leak in a Boeing 787 Dreamliner that would allow hackers access to the in-flight entertainment system and possibly systems like controls.

I just flew on a 787 last week for my return to Dallas.  Yeah, this makes me feel SO good about flying, when some neckbeard asshole (or, for that matter, some recently-shaved Islamist asshole) could mess around with the airliners’ control system while in the air.

Somebody remind me why I hate the Internet Of Things so much… oh never mind, I just remembered.

“Alexa, go fuck yourself.”
“I’m sorry, Kim, I can’t do that.”

Copyright Maze

Legal Stuff, Two-Minute Hate

It appears that the U.S. Senate is getting serious about people using stuff they found on the Intarwebs:

A bi-partisan bill working its way through Congress could drastically change how copyright claims are processed, and would create a system to impose up to $30,000 in fines on anyone who shares protected material online.
In other words, the Congress wants to make it easier to sue people who send a meme or post images that they didn’t create themselves, essentially a giveaway to lawyers who sue unsuspecting suckers for a living.

…and once more, a little more of life’s pleasures is sucked dry by the lawyers and politicians.

One of these days, I can see people going to a party sued by the studios (especially the godless Disney Corporation) just for wearing a character’s costume without prior approval from an attorney at Bloodsucker, Lamprey and Leech LLP.

Having recently been sued (and forced to settle out of court) by some cocksucker and his copyright huckster attorney for using an old photograph (which can be found all over the Internet and which had no attribution when I found it, so copyright was impossible to establish in the first place), I know exactly what’s involved here.  (And if he or his shyster butt-buddy should chance to read this:  by not identifying you or the work involved, I’m not breaking the terms of our agreement, you money-grabbing motherfuckers.  It’s the principle  I’m talking about — not that either of you would even begin to comprehend the word.  FOAD.)

So as of today, expect to see only memes and such created by myself (e.g. see below), unless linked to the site of origin.

And that goes for the lawyers’ little lickspittles in the Senate as well.  FOAD all of you, too.

What We Face

Bad News, Marxists, Two-Minute Hate

As we conservatives gird up to face what would destroy us and our beloved country, consider this article a warning.

Under a prevalent view that has emerged from universities in recent years, a wrong opinion is seen as tantamount to a thrown punch or even an indication of a willingness to genocide—which invites the idea that an offended party who throws a real punch (or worse) is simply acting in self-defense. This idea has become so pervasive and is so taken-for-granted at this point that even workaday journalists now pay homage to this academic conceit in their work.

Who defines what constitutes a “wrong” opinion?  (Hint: it isn’t you.)  Read the whole disgusting thing.

And as a wise man once said:

“Of course, the game the Left has always played is to use violence as a pretext to impose their preferred policies. We’ve had waves of left-wing violence since the Obama administration, all intended to elicit a response. Those responses are used to justify what amounts to political terrorism.”.

Feel free to see what people think, here.

Damn, and I was only at the range a couple days ago, practicing with a sniper rifle.

Well, if you’ll excuse me… that 1911 isn’t going to shoot itself.  Maybe it’s also time for a little AK practice, too.

With All Due Respect, Fuck Off

Gummint

So the Attorney General thinks we should allow Gummint access to our private lives, does he?

U.S. attorney general William Barr has said consumers should accept the risks that encryption backdoors pose to their personal cybersecurity to ensure law enforcement can access encrypted communications.
In a speech Tuesday in New York, the U.S. attorney general parroted much of the same rhetoric from his predecessors and other senior staff at the Justice Department, calling on tech companies to do more to assist federal authorities to gain access to devices with a lawful order.In remarks, Barr said the “significance of the risk should be assessed based on its practical effect on consumer cybersecurity, as well as its relation to the net risks that offering the product poses for society.”
He suggested that the “residual risk of vulnerability resulting from incorporating a lawful access mechanism is materially greater than those already in the unmodified product.”
“Some argue that, to achieve at best a slight incremental improvement in security, it is worth imposing a massive cost on society in the form of degraded safety,” he said.
The risk, he said, was acceptable because “we are talking about consumer products and services such as messaging, smart phones, e-mail, and voice and data applications,” and “not talking about protecting the nation’s nuclear launch codes.”

Really?  That little speech probably sounded better in the original Chinese.

Then there’s the tu quoque  argument:

The U.S. is far from alone in calling on tech companies to give law enforcement access.
Earlier this year U.K. authorities proposed a new backdoor mechanism, the so-called “ghost protocol,” which would give law enforcement access to encrypted communications as though they were part of a private conversation.

As though we should emulate the British — who, lest we forget already  has governmental powers which allow them to preemptively ban anything to be published which they don’t like.  (It’s called a “D notice”, FYI.)

Here’s my take.  But first, a reminder:

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Considering how the “security services” have already violated this Constitutional precept against one person they didn’t care for (FISA?  Russian collusion, anyone?), why should we trust that these fucking spies won’t abuse this power against anyone else?

OF course, the fucking feds will no doubt blackmail the tech companies into doing their foul work for them:

Barr did not rule out pushing legislation to force tech companies to build backdoors.

I’ll bet he didn’t.   And Barr, lest we forget, is supposed to one of the good guys?  Can you imagine giving this power to a Justice Department, CIA, NSA DHS or any of the other little Stasi acronyms, under a future Democratic Socialist administration?

We might as well live in Communist China or 1970s East Germany.  Which is doubtless exactly where these pricks, all of them, would like us to be.  All for our own security, of course.

FOAD, all of you.

That’s my First Amendment right coming into play.  You don’t want me invoking the Second, you motherfuckers.  There’s another wholly different meaning to “going dark”.

Executioner’s Song

Crime

Every time I rethink my position on the death penalty — i.e. that maybe I should reconsider my support thereof — I somehow stumble across a story like this one:

A convicted killer who had already murdered one girlfriend was left free to kill a second following a catalogue of police and probation service blunders, a jury has ruled.
Paul O’Hara, 48, was on life licence after serving 15 years for killing a former partner when he met businesswoman Cherylee Shennan.
They began a relationship but within weeks manipulative O’Hara, who had been diagnosed with psychopathic traits in prison, began controlling and beating the 40-year-old mother of one.
Over the following months police missed several chances to stop the ‘high-risk violent predator’.
When unprepared and unarmed officers did finally go to Miss Shennan’s home, O’Hara attacked them before stabbing his girlfriend to death.

So basically, this murderous asswipe was out on parole when he killed Victim #2.

Everyone who favors the abolition of execution for murder is all “O noes, what about the innocent people wrongly convicted?” when in fact they should be all “O noes, what about the innocent people killed by assholes wrongly freed?”

It’s bullshit.  Anyone convicted of murder should be locked away forever while the appeals process grinds on, then executed.  There should be NO parole (or “life licence” — what a crock of shit) for convicted murderers, ever.

Unless, maybe, we go all Hammurabi and if a parole board releases a murderer who then goes on to murder someone else, then the members of the parole board responsible should also face life imprisonment (or execution — a.k.a. Full Hammurabi) for having allowed Murder #2.

And while I’m still in a charitable mood, why hasn’t convicted cop-killer Wesley Cook (alias  Mumia Abu-Jamar) been executed yet?