The Epitome of Stupidity

I just heard a report on CBS that was so unbelievable that I just had to verify it before writing on it. Sure enough, it’s accurate according to NPR (Becky Sullivan)

Henceforth, VISA, Mastercard and American Express will (or have) created a code for gun sales. This is in hopes of decreasing gun violence.

Sorry, that will have little or no affect. The reason can be determined by a smart 6th grader (One who does not attend public school). Those who plan to use guns illegally are not likely to use a credit card to buy a gun. Hidden near the end of the article is a stat that pretty much confirms this. About 7% of those using guns during crimes buy them legally. There is no record of the purchase of over 90% of guns used in crime.

If I decide to buy a gun without my M.C., all I need do is go to the ATM and withdraw 6 or 7 hundred dollars and go find someone interested in selling their 9 mm.

I have no such plans nor do I currently have any guns, although if the FOCs continue to run things as they do, I just might go out and buy a few automatic pitching machines with which to defend my home. I’m not sure, but I’d think it would be a good legal way of defense. Any smart burglars burglaring my home would be wise to bring their baseball glove.

As I have said before, the way to stop gun violence, or any kind of of violence is three-fold. Teach respect of human life in the home, in the schools and from the government. Pray and encourage prayer before the violence. It doesn’t help much after. Make sure everyone knows basic gun safety.

One more thing thing that would help is to lock up those who commit crimes, especially the violent kind. Many violent crimes are committed by known criminals, most which don’t use guns.

Surprise, Not All Stove Are Hot

It is something, likely, as old as stoves. Most folks quickly learn not to touch hot stoves.

Actually, it is not so important today as it was a couple of centuries ago when ole Ben first started building stoves. Generally speaking, when someone would touch a hot stove, they were not apt to repeat it.

Actually, I suspect it went back even farther than that. Before there were stoves, there were fireplaces. Before fireplaces campfires, or their equivalent.

I even heard a tale of one of the big wigs at Levi learning not to kneel next to campfires…first time. It was then that they decided to remove one or two of the rivets from the area just below the fly of their famous canvas trousers.

The one thing brought away from the first experience was the probability of pain, sometimes a little embarrassment too. However, here’s the news. Not all stoves are hot. Not all rivets are hot. It just is that once exposed to these experiences we mostly come away thinking they are, or at least can be. It is referred to as inductive reasoning. Because the first stove we touch is hot, we assume all stoves are hot.

What if the reverse is true. What if the first stove you touch is ambient temperature? Do we then assume that all stoves are cool to the touch. If we do this, we expose ourselves to many painful experiences. This is called inductive reasoning.

While it is useful, it can easily lead to errors. For instance, if we see a brown Labrador retriever, it would be wrong to assume that all dogs are brown and weigh eighty pounds. Indeed, it would be wrong to assume that all Labs are brown. Oddly there are some that are black.

On the other hand, suppose we touch a hundred cool stoves. Can we then assume are stoves are cool? If we see a hundred brown Labs, are we to assume that all labs are brown.

You see, even though we see a large number of examples, we cannot truly assume anything.

Until we see a large enough number of examples, we cannot positively say that we know all labs are brown and that all stoves are cool. Even when working with large numbers, inductive reasoning can lead us astray.

I wish that kids in the eighth grade were required to spend a few hours learning about inductive and deductive reasoning. I am convinced the concept is extremely important in so many parts of life.

Let’s take for instance, the woman that is robbed by an African American. Is it right for her to be afraid of all African Americans? Of course, not. Yet, it may take her years to get over the experience. Our fears are not always founded on good logic. Indeed, her fear might keep her from many good friendships.

The somewhat opposite of inductive reasoning is deductive reasoning. In deductive reasoning, we draw conclusions from many, perhaps exhaustive numbers of examples. It is best that these examples are at random. It is the way that medical research is done. I suppose we can say that statistics and deductive reasoning are interrelated. The more the examples and the more random, the more accurate will be the stats deductive reasoning that depends on the stats.

If we have a random selection of a million dogs, it is likely that only a few will be Labs and we will likely see a few black dogs, white dogs and even a few multi-color dogs. Therefore, we can have a more accurate idea of the coloring of dogs. If we take a random measurement of a million stoves, we might actually find that only 30% are hot enough to cause pain, or even discomfort. (only a wild guess, not am actual statistic)

I’m not going to try to create an equivalent example with the thievery. It’s far too complex and there are too many ways it can go wrong with my imaginary statistics. Moreover, I am not going to suggest that a woman should get robbed a million times. Two or three maybe, but no more. Still, the principles remain firm. With a larger number of examples, we would be able to draw more accurate deductions.

However, we need to be careful about drawing snap conclusions. When we go from the millions of examples and try to derive a single situation from millions of examples, we can still be wrong. For instance, if I may. It would not indicate that a thief is of any ethnicity, and it would be wrong to make any such suggestion.

Yet, every day, I see some people blame Black men because of individual as well as vast statistical data. Those methods just don’t work. And, by the way, the methods don’t work on Caucasian policemen, again, regardless of past inductive or deductive reasoning. You cannot convict a policeman based on past experience just as the woman cannot convict based on past thieves.

Perhaps the most horrible example of inductive reasoning is when the person says, “Single parent families are just as good as two-parent families.” Then they go about calling out two, three or four examples of good kids brough up by single parents. That logic has two holes. First, it is based on a very small count of examples. Second, there is the probability that, if there is a second parent, the child would likely have turned out better. The statistics back it up. We are talking millions of examples not just two or three.

On the other side of the coin, I see people say that a particular person turned out good or bad because of his parent(s). The stats prove that some good kids come from bad or broken homes and bad kids come from homes with good parents.

In this case, the inductive logic gets us nowhere and the deductive logic only shows trends. The trend shows overwhelmingly that two parent homes are better. But logic tells us that it is only true if they are good parents. Abusive and or alcoholic parents rarely qualify as good parents. Yet, again, some good kids come from homes with abusive parents. Sorry. I have no explanation for that. I’m not sure there is one.

For those who are not truly familiar with the terms inductive and deductive reasoning, may I suggest you take an hour or two and look into it on the net. Most will find it far more complex than most of us realize. For instance, one thing that must accurately be determined in inductive reasoning is an accurate correlation. For instance, that dance by that Voo-do doctor likely has nothing to do with that solar eclipse. On the other hand, all that rain I dumped on my lawn the other day likely had nothing to do with the thunderstorm we got the next day, though it did seem a little coincidental. If we collected enough data, it is likely to be proved that the one thing had nothing to do with the other.

Almost Paradise

As I considered the title to this post, I realized I came up with something of a good book title. At least, it seemed that way to me. Now, I need is a good book to go with it. Come to think of it, maybe someone did already. It would be a shame if someone else beat me to it.

The point is that the place I moved to in 1977 was really nice and had been for decades. It was almost paradise, though there were a few problems.

Some of the roads were spread with pot holes. My poor little car had a real problem with the little trailer bouncing around behind us. There were but a small smattering of places to eat and we could find but 1 doctor office, 1 dentist and one pharmacy. The closest hospital was 15 or 16 miles away.

However, the schools were nice and there weren’t many police. Wasn’t much need for them. It truly was almost paradise.

In this world there are problems with paradises. Southern California, before 1950 was an almost paradise. Now, look at it. I won’t go through the list of problems there now. Everyone knows. The desire to live in paradise has destroyed it. Now the U-hauls are leaving and the people are going to other paradises; as Texas, Florida, etc.

in all likelihood, those paradises will be spoiled too. It almost always happens. Unfortunately, paradises draw the unsavory element as well as the exemplary.

It’s happened and is happening where I live. If I possible, I’d leave as soon as i could. If there were an army of police, it would not be enough. The undesirable element is drifting south from Memphis. It does say something about Memphis. No one wants to leave a good place for a worse one.

We now have doctors hospitals dentists, the whole works. Even the streets are smooth. However, it seems that every fourth car I see nowadays has Shelby County plates.

Don’t actually have too much of an objection if they want to spend Tennessee dollars in Mississippi, but they bring their driving habits too. Not only that but they bring their crime, mostly drugs, and robbery too. A couple of years ago, I posted a story about a break in in my house. Dumb thief! One look at my little 900 square foot house and he’d have known I don’t have anything.

The area right across the state line had two big thriving malls and the area around it had a multitude of stores, restaurants and businesses. The malls are now all but closed and the parking lots are all baren.

Needless to say, the value of my little house has skyrocketed. Every time Memphis comes up with a bad idea my property value goes up.

The problem is that as they leave what used to be a near paradise, they bring their stupid ideas with them, and ruin our neighborhoods.

It is not just a local problem. It won’t be long that the illegal aliens will bring their ways to our nation and destroy our national paradise.

This reminds me of a passage in the Bible in which it says that murderers, thieves, liars, adulterers, etc, etc, and so forth will never go to heaven (paradise).

At the time I first read it, I did not see the full significance as I do now. You see, any place where such people are allowed would not be paradise. It would not be long before even the steets of heaven would be ruined. When the corrupt are denied access, about anywhere would be great. Then, with Jesus there too, it will be perfect.

If you would like to go there, you need a reservation. The only way to get the reservation is to accept Jesus as your savior. Then, he will cleanse you. Those not born again are not cleansed. They will not enter paradise. They will only see eternal punishment.

if you think about it, it makes sense. Who wants a paradise full of corruption and the corrupt. Certainly, God doesn’t.

Now if I could just get all these liberals to go back to Memphis where they belong!!

Did Someone Say Something About Home made Guns?

Actually, I did, years ago.

Now, I’m hearing reports that the former premier of Japan was killed by one. I hate that. Mostly, as a pro-life person, I always hate such horrble things. In this case, it is especially horrid. I would not have been so upset if it had happened to the likes of Putin or that no-account who treats all those in China so badly. Then again, if either of them were to begin experiencing the after life, he most certainly would be replaced with someone worse.

Regardless, that aside, the man proved my point. In a country where gun control is the norm, the culprit either made his weapon or he bought it from someone who knows his gunsmithing. I neither wanted nor welcome the proof, but all must accept it when it becomes obvious.

Now that we are in a society that wants to take guns from lawful citizenry, we must face the fact that the criminals will be carrying homemade guns, perhaps fully automatic. This is especially noteworthy considering that the next mistake the FOCs will make is to remove the guns from the police.

By the way, when no one but criminals have guns, every gun becomes an effective assault weapon. It’s precisely what the libs want: a nation ruled by criminals. It is a world they can fix into a nation like China.

The Inevitable Result of the Pipeline

It is one of those old laws so to speak of the pipeline. If what you put in is bad, most likely what you get out the other end will be bad. So let’s take a quick look at the pipeline and what we are putting in and just what is coming out.

We put in children from broken Godless homes. We send them through schools where no one can say anyting about God, or even speak the truth about good and evil without someone losing his job. We teach that mankind has no greater importance than a whale, porpoise or ape, and the kids come out believing all things they are taught.

If a person is no more than an animal, but more intelligent and with apposing thumbs: if all man is doing is destroying plants, animals and the climate, then why not believe he has improved the world by destroying some of the horrible human inhabitants?

Don’t all animals go around killing others, even of their own type? Why shouldn’t men kill other men? We are only soulless animals as all the others.

Indeed, as a society, we kill even the youngest and most innocent. Joe speaks as if it is our duty kill babies before they have a chance to breathe the air we breath, to be sure, before they are protected by law.

If there are any statistics, I suspect they would prove at least 8 out of 10 killers come from broken homes where the Bible was never read.

And so it would seem that I’m blaming broken homes for all the shootings. Nothing could be farther from the truth. God tells us we each are responsible for our own actions.

After all, Eve blamed the snake. Adam blamed Eve and even implied God was guilty because He made Eve for him.

Mankind always looks for excuses, a way out. Yet, when we do we always make things worse. So, Joe tries to blame the weapon instead of the shooter. That makes about as much sense as Cain blaming the rock for his killing Able. You notice even Cain was not that dumb.

I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it till the day I die. The time to pray is before the disasters. Afterwards is too late. But then, the government won’t let us pray beforehand, only after.

So, the pipeline made up of broken homes and atheist schools keeps turning out kids who know not the difference between good and evil. To that degree, society is guilty. How can they know right from wrong when no one is permitted to teach them.

Hearsay of Hearsay

During court trials, hearsay is not normally permitted. It is a witness account of what someone else said.

It is rarely acceptable as evidence unless it can be somehow substantiated.

Normally I don’t watch the kangaroo court called the Jan 6th hearings but it was on the TV at the doctor’s office while I waited.

I couldn’t help but notice all the hearsay being entered as evidence. Indeed almost everything the witness said was hearsay. Moreover, some of it was hearsay of hearsay. It was not substantiated, none of it.

And they want us to believe it?

Even more important, how do we know she has not been threatened or, possibly, rewarded? We don’t and without cross examination, we never will. No one asked her.

It is why none of the so-called hearing should be believed.

As an aside, why do all those representatives have to have such irritating voices and mannerisms. It was all I could manage to keep from going up and turning off the TV.

1 more thing. Why can’t these representatives investigate important things, like why are drugs killing our youth faster than we can count them. Why don’t they investigate why we are short on baby formula? Why can’t they investigate why our border is open? Maybe they could find out why there were some districts that had more votes than voters. Maybe it’s because they are afraid of what they’d find. They just might end up seeing the obvious.

The Biggest Fear of Our Forefathers

As they were froming the federal government, one fear drove them more than anything else. It is the reason for having 3 separate parts:legislative, executive and judicial. Each has its own powers and limits. That way, the hope was that no one person or group of people would exceed their authority.

In addition, they added 10 amendments. If you study them carefully, you’ll see that, while each has its purpose, collectively they have 1 purpose, to protect the individuals from the government.

Now, why did they feel the need for protection from our government. It’s because they were afraid of the tyranny of the majority.

Without the bill of rights, the majority could take control of the government. Then, ironically it could be ruled by a small minority. If you doubt the fear to be valid, look at what we have now, a one party rule.

The hope of the forefathers was that a free press would keep them in check. On the contrary, they are doing all they can to assist the overthrow of our constitution.

Now the Bill of Rights is on the verge of being trodden under the feet of socialists. They hate freedom of religion and they are destroying our rights to have our say. They want to remove our right to defend ourselves. I could go on but I’m sure you get the picture.

Still, I must add one more remark i heard lately. It would seem that the dems interpret the 10th amendment as reserving all powers not specified in the Constitution to the democrat party.

Maybe it’s a joke, but I am sure they would accept said power without a second thought.

To be sure, we just might be realizing the tyranny of the majority within the decade. It was the primary fear of the framers of our Constitution and today, the threat stands before us and it isn’t even well hidden. What a legacy to leave for our children, especially considering the freedom we inherited.

A Problem With the January 6 Logic

The number 1 logical reason that we hear from the FOCs for the January 6 Capitol building event is that it was provoked by President Trump. The problem with that logic is that he was the only one who tried to stop it by authorizing national guard troops two days in advance. Nancy, on the other hand, in all her experience and wisdom turned them down, knowing of the possibility. By the way, putting a few dozen troops around the Capitol would have done the job with little or no consequences. Do you suppose she got what she wanted? Do you think, maybe she liked the idea to use it all as a club to use on the Republicans as she has. It sort of worked out convenient for Nancy, didn’t it…sort of as if she planned it all.

By the way, what happened to the Constitutional promise of a prompt trial for those arrested 1 1/2 years ago. (I would say charged over a year ago but some are not yet charged. )

One more question. Why isn’t Fauci, a real criminal, not looking out between prison bars? He is responsible for the deaths of over a million people, worldwide. It surprises me that we haven’t heard cries far and wide for his head…a year ago.

Apology in Order

I guess about a week ago, Tucker Carlson used terminology something like that eye patch wearing guy. I am sure he meant it it to be derogatory.

He should remember Rep. Dan Crenshaw (TX) lost his eye and nearly lost the second fighting for our country. To use such disparaging language reflects back at Tucker and Fox News. It is but one reason I am losing repect for Fox. Never had any respect for Carlson. Even less now.

As an aside, I heard an interview by Sandra Smith on News Sunday of Rep MO Brooks R ala, Every time he started suggesting fraud in last election, she started shouting over him. If he had proof positive, he’d not had a chance to present it. So much for “We report. You decide. ” It would appear she, and possibly the network decided MOs point of view would NOT be reported at any price.

Even so, Brooks got his point in, and good ones too.

Regardless, it’s the wrong argument. Many laws were were intentionally and obviously disobeyed. The most obvious one was by the sec of state of Pennsylvania. Though he admitted breaking the law, he was not charged. Had he been convicted, there would have been no penalty. Maybe fraud will never be proved, but it will forever go down as the least trusted election in history. Nothing will change that because every effort to prove fraud ended in a shutdown before it started, and the established rinos did what they could to help the FOCs.

I think MS Smith owes Rep. Brooks an apology..

However , I’m not holding my breath. I’m suggesting that no one else hold their’s either.

God’s Solution

Okay. It has been close to a week since the last tragedy. Horribly, 19 kids and 2 teachers were killed. We have heard the solutions barked out repeatedly by the dems, including the occupier of the Oval Office. It would seem, according to them, it is as simple as outlawing guns.

I see two errors in that logic. Guns have been available since before the Constitution and mass killings have only started in about the last 40 years. Certainly, the problem wasn’t around when I graduated high school.

In the 1960s, the gun laws were minimal. When the shootings started, the gun laws increased. If they would be effective, the shootings would have decreased. Obviously, they had no effect. Indeed, the shootings have only increased.

On the other hand, the Republicans want us to turn our schools into fortresses. Perhaps we need motes around them with draw bridges. We need high windowless stone walls.

I don’t yet know but that might actually work. However, there are still weaknesses in such a plan, though I will not go into the reasons now. They should be obvious.

Instead, I ask why should anything be done? Certainly, I am not suggesting that we shouldn’t do anything. Rather, I ask why the necessity? What happened 40 years ago that started the killings?

To understand, we must look at four things that had its beginning in 50s and 60s

First, and most importantly, Americans began an indifference toward God, His word and His law. This caused many other problems.

Satin and his his minions, the communists, the atheist and people who claimed to have an expert knowledge of the human mind…particularly the child psychologist, started teaching ideas contrary to the Word of God.

As things started turning south, these minions began blaming anything and everything but themselves.

As time went by, the minions turned their attack toward the family, knowing the family is the basic building block of any nation.

Then they turned towards destruction of the schools. Beginning with the colleges, the college students undermined every element of our culture.

The result is that this country bears little resemblance to the 1950s.

Now, they have set their sights on the Constitution, specifically on the 1st and 2nd amendments, which are the most important ones. While on the way to these goals, they are well on the way to destroying our voting systems.

So, what should we do. It’s simple but so difficult. Turn back to God. If the people would turn back to God, the families will be healed and their will be no need for gun laws or motes around our schools.

It is God’s solution and it is the only one that will work. Everything else will fail.

The closer a people are to God, the simpler the solutions

The farther a people are from God, the more difficult the problems.