Void Where Prohibited

Sued for the truth?

Intimidation Tactics: Freescore.com Sues Yahoo To Reveal Blogger's Identity.

Freescore.com is one of those ugly online companies that offers a free service, but then attempts to enroll its customers in a $30/month subscription service. Now they're suing Yahoo in an attempt to reveal an anonymous blogger who quoted a Reuters article when describing their service as "predatory bait and switch," and who revealed that Freescore is owned by a company with a long history of billing customers without permission.

You may have seen Ben Stein hawking Freescore.com on your TV in recent months. (It's why he was fired from the New York Times in August, in fact, because of a perceived conflict of interest.) It's no different from any other "free" credit report nonsense out there in that after a short trial period—7 days in this case—you have to pay for what you can get for free once a year from annualcreditreport.com. The company exists to lure in people who don't mind paying unnecessary fees, as well as people who don't read fine print, as well as those who do read fine print but forget to cancel within that 7 day window. Freescore.com is even more obnoxious in that it will charge you $1 to access your "free" initial results; the fine print says that if you choose to cancel within 7 days, "remember to ask for a refund of your $1 processing fee."

For those reasons, Reuters blogger Felix Salmon called Stein a "predatory bait-and-switch merchant" in July, and someone called "Flâneur de fraude" repeated the claim in a blog post, where he showed that Freescore is ultimately owned by Vertrue Inc., a company that has a BBB rating of "F", mostly due to complaints that Vertrue's various membership companies enrolled customers without their knowledge or permission.

I don't have much to add to this, but I get a little annoyed when someone has two people say something bad and then goes after the weaker one.  And I also love to get to repeat something bad about someone while simply reporting the story.  I guess they'll try to sue me next.  RTWT.

This is wrong!!!

Valley couple sues Wal-Mart after kids get taken away - Phoenix Arizona news, breaking news, local news, weather radar, traffic from ABC15 News | ABC15.com.

    Anthony and Lisa Demaree said they took vacation photos to a Wal-Mart store in Peoria last fall.
    Some of those pictures included bathtime photos that showed their three young daughters partially nude, according to attorney Richard Treon.
    Treon said a Wal-Mart employee turned the pictures over to police, and Child Protective Services then took custody of the children for an entire month while the state investigated.

(emphasis mine)

Okay there's several things wrong here and I have some questions??

1)  Was the Wal-Mart person so prudish they didn't look at these pics and say "awww, how cute"?

2)  Was the CPS worker so clueless that they didn't immediately dismiss this after sayin "awww, how cute"?

3)  Are the state laws so rigid that they had to take the children away and spend one month investigating this bullshit??

I'm angry about this and they're not even my kids.  I can't even imagine how the parents feel.  Heads should roll for this.  And I don't mean figuratively.

The drug war is a failure

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition: ONE DRUG ARREST EVERY 18 SECONDS IN THE U.S..

A group of police and judges who want to legalize drugs pointed to new FBI numbers released today as evidence that the "war on drugs" is a failure that can never be won. The data, from the FBI's "Crime in the United States" report, shows that in 2008 there were 1,702,537 arrests for drug law violations, or one drug arrest every 18 seconds.

It has always seemed rather obvious to me that the drug war is a failure.  I feel that treating marijuana and alcohol differently is just hypocritical.  If you were to legalize all, and I do mean all, drugs and tax their sale the government would make money rather that lose it.

Of course this is the point where everyone starts screaming that we'll have druggies everywhere and it won't be safe to drive down the street.  And that's nonsense.  DUI laws would still be in effect.  Regulations that dictate certain jobs must be drug free will still be in effect.  So okay then, how about all those people dying from overdoses.  This is where I guess I become a bit hard-hearted.  So what?  If you can't use responsibly then being removed from the gene pool is probably appropriate.

Ace of Spades, I believe it was, had a article about legalizing drugs and how all those drug dealers are not going to simply drop their prices.  Why would someone pay their outrages prices if the drugs can be purchased at the local drug store?   Perhaps they won't.  But if they don't they'll simply go out of business.   What happens when a $500 a day habit becomes a $50 a day habit?  What happens to crime caused by the need to support an expensive habit?  No, it won't go away because there are too many that would rather steal than work.

Think about what legalizing drugs would do to the drug cartels?  To turf wars?  For that matter what it would do to the illegal arms industry.

Prohibition didn't work in the 20's and it's not working now.

h/t SayUncle

Please don't hotlink pictures

The OP on this thread committed a internet faux pas.  He directly linked to a picture stored at another site.  This is a no-no.

The OP said this in his defense "'Actually, someone else sent me the link to just the pic. I did go to his blog to try to find the original post, but his blog software sucks donkey balls - it has no search capability that I could find - and I was unable to find his original post in the few minutes I had between meetings when I posted it.'"

My response? "if he had the link to the pic, he could've saved the pic, stored it and pointed to that. And still pointed to your blog since it was in the URL for the pic. He's a dick."

Don't YOU be a dick.

If you see a pic that you want to show save it to your own site and point to that with appropriate credit.

And btw, here's the original post at Robb Allen's.

GBR IV thank yous

People:

Mr. Completely and KeeWee:  We couldn't have done it with out them.

Larry Weeks of Brownell’s.   A great guy.

Rachel from NRA ILA.  Did a great job talking to us.

Daniel from Cheaper Than Dirt.

Bill Brassard of the National Shooting Sports Foundation who writes for the NSSF blog.

Bloggers by the dozen.  AnarchAngel, JohnOC, TSM, Say Uncle, The Packing Rat, and more that I can't remember off-hand.

And Chuck.  Especially Chuck.  Thank you.

Companies:

Bison Armory for that nice 6.8mm upper I had fun shooting.

ParaUSA  - I didn't win the GI Expert but I had a lot of fun firing it.

Glock for providing some things to give away

Crimson Trace I got two t-shirts and a hat. 

Hi Point firearms for donating that brand new, not on the market, carbine.  Too bad they couldn't be there as I wanted to ask them some questions about the HiPoint 9mm.

And don't forget Soldiers Angels - Project Valour-IT.   Donate through their website or your local United Way campaign.

I met a hero this weekend

His name is Chuck.   Of course that's not his full name but it should do for now.  He's a Major in the US Army and served in Iraq.  But that's not why I think he's a hero.  He was also badly injured by an IED in 2005.  But that's not why either.  Doesn't take a hero to be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time, just bad luck.

No, I think he's a hero because of what he did with his injuries, and because of his injuries.  While in the hospital he was visited by Soldiers Angels.  And when asked what he needed, he replied "a laptop" (says he was too drugged up at the time to think of asking for a Mazerati) as he needed to communicate with the outside.  He needed to find out how his men were, although he was the only one seriously injured in the blast.  (this is not being a hero either, just a good CO).  However, since he had one arm in a cast, and the other in a splint, typing on a computer was somewhat of a chore.  Fortunately he'd heard of  Dragon Software's "Naturally Speaking" and mentioned on his blog that perhaps someone could help him fund it.  Instead someone bought him the whole package.   Chuck said "It was the first time I felt whole since I’d woken up wounded in Landstuhl.

Since that time he was worked with Soldiers Angels Project Valour-IT to bring this technology and more to our wounded servicemen.  He speaks to them and for them.  He rose above his injuries to show that you needn't be slowed down.  And he speaks from personal experience not some abstract ideal.

And that's why I think he's a hero.  And so should you.

Back from Gun Bloggers Rendezvous IV

I've got things to say and pictures to post.   But not tonight

However, please go contribute to Project Valour IT

MHI Patch Contest Bleg « Armed & Amphibious

MHI Patch Contest Bleg « Armed & Amphibious.

If you haven’t voted yet, please go give the the Atomic Nerds a hand and vote for their entry in the MHI Patch Contest.

Just type “Exite! Chemicus Sum!” in the comments here to cast a vote.

Just do it already!

Matt G asks for advice

Better And Better: Let me have your take on this:.

When is a suit mandatory for a man to wear?
When is a dress shirt and tie mandatory?
When are tennis shoes out of the question?
When are walking shorts out of the question?
You opinon on caps and hats?
Collared shirts (golf shirts, polo shirts) versus T-shirts?
Tucked shirt vs. untucked?
And finally, buttoned-down collars on dress-shirts vs. non-buttoned-down collars?

I'm not sure I can really answer these questions. After 13 years in the Army I seemed to have lost the ability to know how to dress for what occasion. Because for 13 years I was told exactly what to wear and when to where it.

But even overall there has been a "casualization" of America. Even the elderly are dressing in track suits and tennis shoes for most situations. As a child and teenager it was pretty straight forward. (late 50's through the 60's). Jeans and sneakers were play clothes. Slack and shirts were school clothes. You wore a tie to church and sometimes a coat. (This was in Florida).

But today I wear jeans and a polo shirt to work with tennis shoes. But what I wear and what I think is appropriate are two different things.

So to answer the questions:

I think a suit and tie is mandatory for weddings and funerals.  And job interviews.

Dress shirt and tie?  Office work.  Church.

Tennis shoes out of the question?  Any time it's not appropriate to wear jeans.

Walking shorts?  Maybe if you're out for a walk.

Caps and hats?  If you're wearing jeans you can wear a ball cap.  A nice hat can be worn almost anytime.  However!!  Take off your hat in church, at the office, and at the table!!  I hate ball caps on people sitting in restaurants.

T-shirts vs collared shirts?  T-shirts are for play or for manual labor.  NOT appropriate for the office.

Tucked vs un-tucked.  Depends on the shirt, but tucked in any situation that calls for slacks.  But untucked is almost necessary for concealed carry.  Fortunately open-carry is perfectly legal in Arizona and you're not going to be hassled too much if your gun is spotted.

Button down vs non?  Button down shirts should be worn if you're wearing a tie.  Unless it's a bolo tie. 

Ok, there's my take.  Of course as I said I don't even follow my own fashion advice.  But as I gained weight I've cared less about appearance and more about comfort.

You can carry a weapon while drunk in NYC?

Snowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » Is This a Problem in New York City?.

I really don't understand Bloomberg.  He's making such a big deal out of making sure that it becomes illegal to carry a weapon while drunk in NYC that it appears that it must be legal now, it's become a problem, and something needs to be done to stop it.

Since you can't carry a gun in NYC (except for a privileged few) I don't see how this could possible be a problem.  And if it's not a problem why is he up in arms (sorry) about it?

OH!!   I see.   It's more empty rhetoric.  Ok then.