Archive for June, 2022

Another Disney Woe

Posted in Announcements on June 30th, 2022

Another Disney Woe
Another Disney Woe – International Diversity

Disney, having spent a couple of decades alienating their core audiences, has tried to heavily diversify its programming options. Sadly for them, the South American attempted spins on the classics didn’t translate well. 😉

Dendrobates? We don’t talk about Dendrobates

Bikini Interlude 53

Posted in Society on June 30th, 2022

Bikini Interlude – Less Is More Edition

Just a beautiful interlude wherein I show off the glorious fact that, when it comes to bikinis, less is more – as in less bikini per square inch of proud, confident, beautiful woman.

Wrong Right Side Of History

Posted in Ethics & Morality, Politics, Society on June 29th, 2022
You'all Might Be On The Wrong Right Side Of Histor
You’all Might Be On The Wrong Right Side Of History

One things all these angry, screaming feminists don’t seem to understand, and never have done so, is that America already had an “argument” much like the one they’re fomenting and the outcome was bloodily decided. They just refuse to understand that they’re likely on the wrong “right” side of history when it comes to killing their unborn children aka abortion.

We’ve heard and read time and time again how the South claimed – and many Southerners still claim to this day – that their secession from the Union, which sparked the Civil War, was predicated upon States’ Rights and the Federal Government’s infringement thereupon. And, in all truth, that is an accurate claim. However, the only States’ Right so violently in contention was the right for citizens to own Blacks as chattel slaves.

And now and in recent times we’ve heard and read time and time again how Women’s Rights are being stripped from them. And, again, it is a single right that is in violent contention – their right to have an abortion for any reason or no reason at all.

Not a very great deal of difference between the two positions since they’re predicated upon the victims of that right not inherently being persons. Both the slaveholders of the 19th Century and Feminists of today strongly believe that their rights trump the basic rights of the victims… who, as they aren’t considered persons, can’t be victims in the first place, merely property to disposed of at will.

OK, there is one significant difference. In the South it was illegal for a master to deliberately kill their slaves except for a small number of reasons, and a few – I believe 4 – masters were tried, convicted, and executed for it. That’s right; the South granted more legal right to life to their property than Feminists acknowledge for their children.

Hence, Feminists really need to consider that they may well be on the wrong right side of history in a many we’ve seen and dealt with before. I doubt it’s a history that they really want to repeat.

I Don't Need To Carry

Posted in Politics on June 28th, 2022
I Don't Need To Carry. And Leftists Don't Get To Claim That Matters
I Don’t Need To But Tyrants Don’t Get To Say That Matters

Somewhat overshadowed by certain sorts’ screaming, hysterical outrage of the SCOTUS’ decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, is the rage and hatred inspired, especially by NY politicians, about the highest mortal Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, which declared NY’s second-step, means-end scrutiny, for issuing a concealed carry permit to be unconstitutional and, hence, illegal.

What this means and what this only means is that nobody who can and does legally own a firearm in NY and who wishes to carry it with them in a concealed – aka nonthreatening – manner has to prove to the police department’s satisfaction that: a) carrying a concealed weapon is in my interests; a) carrying a concealed weapon would be effective in furthering my interests; and c) that there is no lesser method than my carrying a concealed weapon that would sufficiently further my interests.

Personally, I believe that this ruling is century overdue. I also believe that certain criteria in the NY laws covering legal firearm ownership need strict review, but that can come and be discussed later.

Consider This If You’re Raging

Before Bruen, if anybody desired to carry a firearm on their person outside of their home – that includes in public spaces of their building, e.g., laundry rooms, if it’s multi-tenanted – they would have to prove to assigned members of the police department that they needed to do so, carrying a weapon would fulfill that need, and that there was no better way of fulfilling that need. And, each person would have to individually prove to the specific officer(s) appointed to that licensing review that all of the above were true. And, if they are denied, they have to practical recourse, as Bruen having to go all the way to the US Supreme Court proves since very few private individuals have the wealth needed to sustain such a legal battle.

Each request is fielded by appoint officers of the local law enforcement body and each is decided upon based up individual, subjective value judgements. That opens up the doors – more like knocks down the whole wall – for bias-based denials. That or those specific licensing officers are Racist for any value thereof? Individuals of the detested race can and likely will be denied. If they’re sexist? individuals of the denigrated gender will be denied? Homo- or Heterophobic? Again, denied. And, in all those cases, that’s it. It’s over. The petitioner had no authority that they could reasonably go to in order to overturn the decision.

So, what those who are raging about this decision are really saying, though the vast majority of them don’t in any way consciously realize, is that they want the police – an organization that they regularly vilify as being violently and lethally racist, sexist, and homophobic, to be the sole authority to issue concealed carry permits based upon criteria that they are the sole arbiters of the meeting thereof.

Better, Objective, Prerequisites

Firstly, allow me to completely, utterly, and irrevocably alienate a large swath of my fellow Americans. I don’t care what you believe, I believe that carrying a weapon on your person, concealed or openly, in public is a privilege and not a right as enumerated by our Second Amendment. As such, it is acceptable to me that there are preconditions for any of us to be allowed to do so.

What I firmly believe is that means-ends testing and other personal, subjective standards to being acknowledged to have that privilege mus be struck down and abolished to the midden pit of history.

But, please do add in objective requirements, especially requirements for basic firearm usage competency and the requirement for training on real world best practices for defensive use of one’s carry piece(s). Just ensure that, whether or not government agencies will offer the training and testing or not, that private entities’ competency/completion avowals are accepted so as avoid returning to the same biased standards through a back channel.

Again, again, and FUCKING again, please fucking do that! I was a certified Range Safety Officer (RSO) and at one time a large part of my job was providing the firearms safety and use training required in my state for getting a concealed permit. I’ve seen what is likely most of the whole range of people with firearms and I don’t want to ever see a number of them walking around “strapped” in public.

You’ve probably never had a fool respond to being corrected on the range by unthinkingly panning his locked and loaded shotgun across his wife and pointing at you as he responds, “What?” I have.

So, technically, I do want “ends testing” insofar as does the applicant have the basic competency so that carrying a firearm could serve his or her perceived needs or desires and wouldn’t exacerbate other people’s need to do so as well. I just want a fixed, objective criteria for proving that.

Some Disclosures And Rant-Like Stuff

I live in NYC, epicenter of this conflict. For over 18 years I’ve been subject to the City and State’s draconian firearms laws. And it hasn’t effected me one whit. I’m writing about this whole thing solely because of my love of the Constitution, not because I have any “skin in the game” at all.

I lived many years when I almost always had at least one firearm on my person or within my easy reach 24 hours per day 200+ days a year, with that number rising to over 300 if one discounts the beach days when my weapon stayed with the rest of my gear, especially my smokes, while I was in the water. But, I haven’t lived that way for almost as many years since then and I don’t miss it at all. I love that I changed my life so that I don’t have yet another piece of gear that have to be constantly concerned about “going adrift.


I have all warranted respect for police officers, but very little respect for the actual level of training in proper combat use of firearms that police officers receive or are de facto allowed to relieve. Hence, their being the authority which determines who can carry a firearm really strikes me as equal parts stupid and hypocritical. Statistically speaking, none of them quite obviously not even many of their SWAT teams – have undergone the training I did, which I actually consider pretty close to the minimum needed vs. something “bad ass,” in Close Fire situations with friendlies and/or collaterals present.

Sadly, due to what it would cost, how many police academy enrollees would fail, and the Liberals’ insane fears of “militarized police,” the police are unlikely to ever receive this training.


This last bit I can figure out no way of saying without sounding like a total arrogant ass who’s most likely just lying to make myself look “tough.” But, here goes anyway, since showing my own bias and “privilege” is important to me in this post:

I am a weapon in a sadly too true sense. I’ve approximately 50 years of training in hand-to-hand and melee weapons combat, a great deal of it being what aficionados would call “street tactical.” A firearm to me is just a force multiplier, and my life doesn’t require me to have one of those anymore. And, if that changes, it’s unlikely that I’m going to care what the laws on the books are, that those laws are still enforceable, or that I would choose to carry a concealable weapon.

So yeah, I’ve earned the privilege of being someone who is unlikely to ever feel that I need a concealed carry permit. That does need to be taken into account as an admission of my bias in this issue.

My Favorite Cosplay

Posted in Society on June 27th, 2022

My Favorite Cosplay – Velma

I spent a lot of years attending and working various Sci-Fi conventions and my wives still do so for a few of them up and down the Eastern Seaboard. It’s, hence, no surprise that I’ve a fondness for cosplay. And my sort of favorite cosplay is Velma from Scooby-Doo.

Face it, Velma is/was awesome for so many values for the best character. She was the “smart chick” and was seriously plump and curvy – and not ashamed to wear a pleated miniskirt to show off those thicc thighs. That’s a lot of good to be said for the character, especially when she was written in 1969.