Wait A Minute

Okay, okay… this is seriously good news:

Renowned firearms manufacturer Smith & Wesson ditched deep blue Massachusetts and moved its headquarters to friendlier pastures in Tennessee.  Although the move was announced in 2021, it was on Saturday that the company officially opened its new 650,000-square feet building in Maryville as part of a $125 million relocation effort.

The company has been in New England since its founding in 1852, but Massachusetts’ strict gun laws are at least partly to blame for their exodus.

Not to mention the Massholes’ steep taxes, which the article notes.

And there was shooty fun and joyousness all round, you betcha:

Yesterday at Smith & Wesson’s new headquarters in Tennessee, Jerry Miculek set the #NRA World Record for hitting six steel plates with a 9 mm revolver at seven yards after a 1.88-second run.

So:  apart from not wanting to stay in the People’s Soviet of Massachusetts, why the move?

S&W CEO Mark Smith cited a welcoming regulatory environment and close collaboration with the Tennessee state government as a crucial piece of the plan to relocate. The company has said the new facility would create hundreds of jobs.

Tennessee has moved to loosen gun restrictions in recent years under Republican leadership. In 2021, the state passed a law to allow most adults 21 and older to carry handguns without a permit that requires first clearing a state-level background check and training.

Yeah, okay fine, but what are we Texans?  Chopped liver?  We have all the good stuff that Tennessee has, also better BBQ.

But let me not quibble.  Anytime a company — any company — comes to its senses and gets out of Communist America, it’s a good thing.

These are just a few of the S&W guns I used to own (before that tragic day crossing the Brazos by canoe), and under the right circumstances, I’d own quite a few more again.

Too Much?

I see that the cash prize for the Powerball lottery is now $756.6 million — three-quarters of a billion dollars.  (And yes, I know the odds of winning are only an infinitesimal fraction higher than not winning — let’s ignore that for the moment, it’s a different discussion.)

My question is:  how would an individual’s life change if he were suddenly win an amount that large?  (Let’s also take the IRS Shylock out of the equation, and allow that about a third of that amount would be confiscated / stolen / appropriated by the FedGov — once again, a topic for another discussion.)  So you’re left with “only” half a billion dollars.

How do you spend that amount of money?

As a rich guy once said:  “When you have that much money, ownership becomes only a matter of time.” 

I have some serious misgivings about suddenly coming into wealth to that degree, because along with that all sorts of lifestyle changes come into play;  for example, you’d have to pay for a security service both for yourself and your family, but also for your house(s) and other property.

Some people would say, “Oh, I’d buy a small business and run it.”  Seriously?  You’d carry on working?  (One man of my acquaintance had an excellent take on it:  “I’d buy a minor-league baseball team and run it”, which actually makes a great deal of sense if you’re a baseball fan.  Forget pro league teams;  too expensive — even for a semi-billionaire — and too many headaches.)

Then there’s property.  In my own situation, I’d get a small condo / townhouse in the Dallas area, simply as a primary residence for tax purposes, and also because I’d be doing a lot of international travel, you betcha, and DFW airport is perfect for that.  I’d also want some kind of property (in a friendly state, i.e. not one with stupid gun- and tax laws) large enough for me to set up a small shooting range, where I could blast away with my somewhat errrr enhanced gun collection as often as I wished.  New Wife loves the New England coast, as do I, so a small beachfront property somewhere in Maine (see above for qualifications) would make a nice summer getaway.

Or would it?  Considering that you would only be there for the summer (Maine winters, nuh uh), would it not be better to find a decent hotel in somewhere like Boothbay Harbor and just use it as needed, thus eliminating the hassle of maintaining a place all year round?

The same is true with having a place outside the U.S. (Nassau, Bermuda, Monaco etc.).  Using Monaco as an example, you could stay in an oceanview suite at the Fairmont Hotel for a month each year for fifty-odd years, for the cost of a decent condo in the Principality.  Ditto London and the Ritz, Paris and the George V, and so on.  (Given my age, that strikes me as somewhat more appealing than just having a place to brag about.)

I don’t have any desire to own a boat or private jet, so forget that shit.  First-class accommodations, in almost any quantity, are cheaper than owning (and docking, crewing, and maintaining) a decent-sized yacht, and ditto a private jet and its associated costs.  I might be rich, but I ain’t a complete idiot.

In fact, I’m also at that stage of  my life where possessions are somewhat meaningless, because I figure that at best, I’d have proper use of them for about a dozen years before I croak.  So other than that BMW Z8, I probably wouldn’t have a serious car collection — maybe a vintage 1954 Merc 300 SC for nostalgia purposes, a “guns & groceries” car like a Merc G550… and that’s it.

All my adult life, I’ve had to own cars as utility vehicles — band equipment, family conveyance, etc. — so I’d like to indulge myself just a little.  Of course, there are other options — Dino 246GT (but no, because of the time it would spend with Tony The Scuderia Mechanic), the Eagle E-type Jag (2-year waiting list, nope) and so on.  My criteria for cars are simple:  they have to be reliable (capable of being driven every day without hesitation), and they have to be beautiful (the G550 gets a pass on that because it’s a utility vehicle).

By the way, those are also my criteria for guns.

As for other rich man’s hobbies:  I no longer drink wine in any quantity, so no wine collection, ditto  single-malt Scotch (although I would have a few different ones around, if only for variety’s sake).  So just the guns, and lots of time shooting.  I’d also be tempted to get a Class III FFL, just for convenience, and so I could track down and purchase a Steyr MP-34:

I might — repeat might — be tempted to fund a department at Hillsdale, but only for them, and provided that there was a tax advantage attached;  ditto a few scholarships (also only at Hillsdale — I’m not going to give money to any of today’s little Leninist think-tanks).  I might also be tempted into paying the Second Amendment Foundation a large one-time sum because Alan and his guys seem to be the only ones actually doing something about the Second Amendment.

Otherwise, the rest of the world could just fuck right off.

Forget charity.  I’m not a charitable person at the best of times, and one thing I’ve learned about all charities is that the people running them do a lot better than the intended recipients, so screw them all.

Finally, forget investments.  With that amount of cash in hand, I’d have no need to grow it nor even preserve it, given that dozen-year time limit.  (The family would already have been taken care of through trust funds, so if I were to die with a hundred dollars left in the checking account, that would be quite okay.  Also, no death duties — fuck the IRS, they already had their pound of flesh.)

Just to recap:  paying for all the above — family trusts included — would leave me with about a hundred million dollars unspent.

You see the problem?


And then there’s this guy — although it should be noted that he was a young ‘un when he won.

A Good Start

Looks like the Izzies have got the bit between their teeth:

The Israeli Air Force (IAF) destroyed the Islamic University of Gaza — dropping bombs on what the Israeli military said was a training hub for engineers who helped carry out terrorist attacks.

The Israel Defense Force (IDF) confirmed the bombing, saying the university served as “an important center of political and military power” for Hamas and a “training institution for the development and production of weapons,” The Times of Israel reported.

Sorta like the West Point of Muslim Terrorism, huh?  One can only hope that there were lots of casualties among both staff and students.

Keep it up, guys.

Two Solutions

Several people have written to me to ask why I haven’t commented on the Iranian-backed Hamas attack / invasion of Israel — especially as I’ve long been a strong supporter of both Israel and my Tribe friends.

Frankly, I’ve been thinking about the situation, and devising some kind of suggested response that would be appropriate for Israel.

There are, as the title for this post suggests, two solutions for Israel to consider.  The first is simple.

Set aside your inherent loathing of ethnic cleansing.  I know, I know:  Hitler tried to do just that to Jews (and look where it got him), and ever since then Jews (and their parent state Israel) have recoiled from any idea of doing the same to people who hate them and want them destroyed.  Let’s clear up a couple of misconceptions first.

Firstly, clearing out the entire Gaza Strip (destroying all their buildings — every last one) and killing any Arab who tries to resist is not “ethnic” cleansing, in its purest sense, because there is no genetic difference between Arabs and Jews:  they’re both Semitic, genetically speaking.

Secondly, what the wholesale destruction of Gaza and its inhabitants represents is not therefore anything other than a military operation of retaliation — retaliation against an indiscriminate slaughter of Israelis (and, lest we forget, a whole bunch of non-Israelis as well).  To allow this “Palestinian” state to exist and continue to be a threat to Israeli citizens would be a complete failure of a government whose primary (some would say sole) duty is to protect those same citizens.

I’m not interested in people who wail that innocent Palestinians would be killed in such an operation, because there are no “innocent Palestinians” — witness the celebrations of these Arabs not just in the Middle East but worldwide over the slaughter of, ahem, innocent Israelis.  They don’t consider any Israelis to be innocent, so why should you treat them any differently?  Hell, the Hamas terrorists use their own civilians as shields against retaliation, relying on the Israelis’ reluctance to kill innocent people;  if that’s how they regard civilians, why should anyone else care about them?

To go from the specific retaliation to a broader one:  Hamas must be destroyed:  its leadership, its followers, its bases of operation and, most importantly, its support structure.

Which means taking on Iran.  I leave that to the Israeli military to pick the options here, but other than the obvious ones (destroying Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and killing the Iranians tasked with supporting Hamas), Israel should start a wholesale destruction of Iran’s oil apparatus:  the oilfields, the refineries, the ports and oil export infrastructure, the lot.  No Iranian money, no Hamas.  It’s that simple an equation.

All that comprises only the first of the two solutions of the title of this piece.  Here’s the Second [sic].

We are all accustomed to seeing pictures of off-duty Israeli soldiers walking around with their rifles slung.

However, it should be remembered that these are active-duty soldiers, not ordinary civilians.

In fact — and this is their dirty little secret — it’s almost impossible for civilian Israelis to get to own guns, any guns, for their own protection.  It is, to my mind, the single-largest failure of the Israeli government:  not having an equivalent of our Second Amendment.

In essence, what the Israeli government is saying is:  “Leave your protection to us, and to our Defense Force.”

The recent attack on a music festival (i.e. a civilian event with, it should be noted, no Army presence) should end that little charade right there in its tracks.  Or, as we Americans would put it, “When seconds count and the police are minutes away.”  The IDF’s immediate response to the Hamas invasion was quick (bit not quick enough), but neither decisive nor concerted.

Here’s another little event which happened at the same time as the invasion:

Hamas militants terrorists indiscriminately gunned down civilians and took control of a police station in a small Israeli city in Saturday’s surprise offensive.

Sderot, home to 30,000 people, was one of the first settlements to come under attack by the Hamas militants, who moved through the city shortly after dawn.

Using motorbikes, pickup trucks, motorised gliders and speed boats, more than 1,000 fighters streamed into Israel – targeting cities including Ashkelon, Ofakim and Sderot – in an attack that caught authorities completely off-guard.

Harrowing footage of the assault captured by survivors has since emerged, showing how the heavily armed assailants rode into the city on the back of pick-up trucks, killing dozens of civilians before besieging and ultimately seizing its police station.

Note that they were essentially unopposed while they played their little reindeer games and did not come under fire until after the game was played out — the IDF plowed down the police station and crushed these “militants” to death in the rubble — but it was too late for those unfortunate civilians shot at before.  Take a look at this pic:

I’ll bet that there’s not a single gun among these alte kakers, although all of them are of an age where they could have fought in the Yom Kippur War of 1973.  To deny these men their right to self-defense, to not allow them to be armed while they play their peaceful little board game, is to turn them into potential victims of Hamas terrorists.

The Israeli government should, with immediate effect, allow civilians to purchase and possess whatever guns they wish, and carry them as they go about their daily business.

Yes, there may be the occasional accident or even homicide — just as we tragically experience here in the U.S. — but the greater good is, if anything, even greater in Eretz Yisrael  than it is here.  Otherwise, there’s going to be a whole lot more of this:

…and it will all be entirely the fault of the government.

Get it done, Izzies.

Not Here, It Ain’t

Here’s one from Britishland that’s guaranteed to make yer blood boil:

Shoppers trying to arrest shoplifters could expose themselves to legal action and even imprisonment for assault, a lawyer has said.

Chris Philp told a fringe event at last week’s Tory Party conference that members of the public should make citizen’s arrests on thieves and called on security guards to step in where it is safe to do so.

But Ed Smyth, partner at Kingsley Napley, said that the law generally only permits citizen’s arrests for serious cases that could be tried in a crown court. They could also be used for low value shoplifting cases, but the force used must always be reasonable in the circumstances.

And guess what?  You don’t get to decide what’s “reasonable”.

No wonder that law-abiding Brits just cower in the face of villainy.  The law is not on their side.

When The Girls Come Out To Play

Earlier this week there was some silly awards thing (which nobody cares about) called the “Pride Of Britain”, which as far as I can see is just an excuse for showbiz houris  to show off their boobs.  You’ll recognize some but not others, but I simply couldn’t be bothered with names because, as I said above, nobody cares.  Here’s a sample:

 

 

 

 

 

You have to know things are bad when Carol Vorderman (#1) is the most restrained of the lot.