October 7, 2017

An interesting comment I heard about Trump vs. Obama regarding gun control... true or not?

Given recent talks we've all seen that the NRA and GOP congress is willing to sit down to "talk about" slide fire stocks or other gun control, someone I know (who is very repubican, very into guns, and really dislikes Trump... for his ineffectiveness, lol) mentioned to me in disgust:

"If they ban slide fire stocks or hi cap magazines, Trump and the GOP will have passed more gun control laws than Obama and the gun-hating domcrats did in the 8 years they controlled everything."

I hadn't though of it like that and didn't have much to respond with. Is that even true?
Were there NO gun control laws during the 8 years preceding trump?

EDIT: Yes, I knew the Dems did not "control everything for 8 years". That was his phrasing. But Dems did hold a thurough majority for at least some of the time to do something had they tried harder, if I'm not mistaken. I mean, that's how we got ACA through. The part I'm really questioning is that Obama passed NO gun control laws?

October 4, 2017

We cant have rushed debate on Puerto Rican Relief Aid in the immediate aftermath of mass devastation

It would be ridiculous for anyone to seriously espouse, "We can't have rushed debate on a Puerto Rican Relief Aid package in the immediate aftermath of the most massively devastating storm they've ever encountered."

It'd be crazy, right?

but, yeah... it's about like saying, "We can't have debate on gun control in the immediate aftermath of the most devastating mass shooting ever encountered."

October 4, 2017

Interesting observation on MAIG/Everytown website

As of 9pm 10/3, Everytown's website has ZERO information, statements, or even acknowledgement of the horrific Vegas Shooting that happened 2 days ago. I even hunted around the site for some sort of statement or update.

I find that incredibly odd for the premier anti-gun lobbying group around to be AWOL.

(Everytown was formerly known as Bloomberg's MAIG - who joined up with Mom Demand Action)
https://everytown.org/

October 3, 2017

Need A good photoshop artist please...

We need to change this sign's text to "But The 2nd Amendment" and also photoshop the water in the picture to be a flooded sea of empty bullet shell casings.

October 3, 2017

Information at hand versus gun debates and passing gun control laws.

Regarding all the talking points of, "when is it time to talk guns" and the need for more gun control before something like this happens again (and again (and again)).... Do we even have all of the necessary information to engage in a productive discussion of how to address this situation??

Shooter Identification?
Time & Location?
How Many killed? Wounded?
Any victim demographic information that is relevant?
Motive?
What guns were used?
Where did he acquire the guns and ammo?
Was he allowed to own the Guns?
Was there anything (technical or otherwise) unusual about the guns or ammo?
Were the guns and ammo legally obtained? Were they Legally Possessed? Legally Carried/transported?
Was there any warning signs or opportunities missed to prevent this from happening?

As far as I know, the only information released has been the name of the shooter, his background info, information about the dead/wounded victims, and details of the of the actual shooting events. I haven't seen any of the information of events leading UP TO the shooting, or any technical details involving the implements of the shootings... arguably the two most important aspects of discussing how this could have been prevented.

Do we have this information, yet?

September 7, 2017

I'm unsure why everyone keeps wishing for Mar-a-lago and other Trump properties to be destroyed.

1) Like any property owner, I'm certain the properties are well insured.
2) Because Trump lies about everything, I'm certain his property values are insured for very inflated values.
3) I'm also certain his properties are suffering financial downturns due to his massive political unpopularity.

So the best thing for Trump's properties at this time would probably be total destruction via natural disaster. He'll get an insurance payout much more substantial than what he could sell them for at this point in his life.

I once had a roommate that now owns several properties for subsidized housing in lower income neighborhoods. They are functional and do generate positive income for him. But every now and then one burns down or something and he elated because they are typically insured for values significantly exceeding what they cost him.

August 10, 2017

NRA Called Me on the phone today...

First question out of the gate (without even a, "do you have time to answer questions" or "would you like to participate in a poll" ) was "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with job the President Trump is doing right now". Oh man, my brain whirred and I felt like a fat kid in a candy shop. So many awesome responses to this question he just soft-balled in there. But then I decided to see what he had to say so I answered his questions as unenthused as I could muster.

Me: Um, Dissatisfied... I guess (lol, see what I did there)

Him: "I feel ya, I can respect that, man". (I could really feel the love.) Then he went on beating the "they're trying to take your guns away" drum pretty hard for a few minutes. I learned the reason I was dissatisfied with Trump was that the "obstructionist liberals and democrats ... led by Billionaire Bloomberg" are hindering Trumps ability to make progress. There are evidently many of "Billionaire Bloomberg's paid trolls and protestors" disrupting trumps agenda and rallies. Lots of boogymen out to get me and my guns. So now I know that it's their fault I don't approve of Trump. Gotcha

And then the real reason he called...

I can offer you a 3 year membership at a $??? Discount! Can I sign you up?

Me: No.

I can offer you a 5 year membership at a $??? Discount! Can I sign you up?

Me: No.

Well Wayne LaPierre has personally authorized me to offer you our $1000 lifetime membership for only $600 to help preserve your rights and counter the threat of liberals and Bloomberg's assault on your 2nd Amendment rights. Can I sign you up today?

Me: No. Is my current Membership expired or something? I don't pay attention to it very much.

Him: No, uhhh, it doesn't expire for another year and a half or so.

Me: Well, I guess I'm fine then... have a nice day. (click)


They must be hard up for money since the orange one got elected and now there's no scary black man or democratic majority around to gin up fears and have scared people send them money anymore.


Full disclosure... I DO have a NRA membership to fulfill a membership requirement at the private fishing/hunting club I belong to. Something about their sporting club insurance which is provided through the NRA requires club members to hold current NRA memberships as well. This is actually not at all uncommon for many private shooting/range clubs across the country. There's not a whole lot of places to shoot longer ranges in the city or suburbs, so this is the nearest place I can enjoy shooting outdoors.

August 10, 2017

It just dawned on me... for years we've been making fun of Kim Jung Un's hiarcut. (gag warning)

But Have you guys seen the US President's Hair? HOLY SHIT!

In fact, it's so terrible that no one has yet talked him out of wearing that hideous MAGA red hat. Somehow that hat is preferable to looking at that rug on his head. It's a hideous red MAGA hat or that horrendous comb-over. It's a lose-lose situation.

August 8, 2017

Autonomous F-16s and F-35s... not remote/drone but actually autonomous. !

How many people have heard or knew about this?
I heard this in a conversation today and had to look it up.

The ability to tell an F-16 to attack a target (air-to-air or air-to-ground strikes) and it then goes ahead and figures out how to do it and executes the mission. Not just a pre-programmed flight path and mission, but actual autonomy. I guess in the trials they even "surprised" it with enemy air threats and it responded to them and then continued on about it's original objective.


I know the military has been doing this for years with testing autonomous helicopters and cargo drops. But actually having a warplane able to execute kinetic strikes and even respond to incoming threats is a whole other level of, frankly, scariness. I think the primary enabler is the fly-by-wire nature of the F16... but then if you think about it, the F35 is also all fly-by-wire so there's no reason to think stealth fighters couldn't be flying around autonomously, too. And beyond that, without having to support a pilot and limiting the planes performance to the human's capabilities... if you designed a new small fighter jet around the idea that it is only going t obe autonomous... well that's going to be amazing.

https://themerkle.com/us-air-force-successfully-trials-autonomous-f-16s-in-combat-situations/

August 7, 2017

Legal Question Re: Trusts & Wills... specifically the "Memorandum of Trust" ?

So a family member brought a Revocable Trust to me to ask a question because I have one so they must have assumed I know all about them. I don't. He was asking about something in the trust's Schedule A (property held) section, but I noticed something else that really confused me and I figure maybe some of the legal-types here could tell me what I saw. I didn't want to worry him so I didn't say anything... but if it is a problem I can let him know.

So like any revocable trust there was a "Declaration of Trust" (the actual meat-and-potatoes document). It was pretty straightforward and had a signed & notarized date of something like June 23, 2013. There was also a an amendment attached to the Declaration of Trust changing some beneficiaries and whatever that was notarized and signed about a couple years later, like December 15 2015. It was a pretty typical amendment.

Here's where it got weird...

The "Memorandum of Trust" (sometimes called "Affidavit of Trust" ) specifically called out the existence of the "XYZ Revocable Living Trust by Declaration of Trust dated June 23, 2013" and then went through all the normal memorandum things... address, grantor, trustees, specific powers, etcetera. Except when I got to the Notary and signatures at the end of The Memorandum, the notary seal and other signatures were all dated December, 15 2015. In other words, the Memorandum of Trust post-dates the actual Declaration of Trust document by 2+ years and has the same date as the Amendment.



After looking through it and asking a question or two, I figured out that at some time between the original creation of the trust (June 23, 2013) and the time of the amendment (December 15 2015) he had moved to a new address. So he took it upon himself to get rid of the Original Memorandum, rewrite it with the new address, and when he got the Declaration of Trust Amendment signed and notarized on December, 15 2015... he simply had the notary sign and date the new modified Memorandum of trust at the same time, too.

Can you do this? I know you can't simply "change" the Declaration of trusts like this - by deleting old info, writing new info, and signing a whole new document. You have to use amendments to strike out and replace prior sections. But what about the "Memorandum of Trust"? I've never seen an amended Memorandum, now that I think about it. It is still referring to the original trust document by exact name and original date... it's just got that address change and obviously has the newly notarized/signed dates at the end.

It's odd to me, and if it's a non-issue I won't worry him. But if it's somehow invalid I should tell him to have an estate attorney fix it.