Starvin Larry

Weapons and computer and robotics technology will continue to spur the decentralization of violence, making it ever more difficult to combat insurgency. From Peter W. Singer at defenseone.com:

The author of “Ghost Fleet” has some guesses — and some questions that U.S. defenders will have to answer.

The government, particularly the TSA and border authorities, continue their wars on the First and Fourth Amendments. From Dagny Taggart at theorganicprepper.com:

“Go to any airport in this country and you’ll see how well our government is dealing with the terrible danger you’re in. TSA staffers are wanding 90-year-old ladies in wheelchairs, and burrowing through their suitcases. Toddlers are on the no-fly list. Lipsticks are confiscated. And it’s all done with the highest seriousness.

It’s a show of protection and it stirs the fear pot, giving us over and over an image of being in grave personal peril, needing Big Brother to make sure we’re safe.” – Ann Medlock, Home of the Brave

The federal government wants us to believe that its growing disregard for our First and Fourth Amendment rights is in the interest of national security.

Thankfully, there are organizations that are attempting to bring attention…

A once great country continues to plummet. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

If ever we needed proof of the expression that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” look no further than Britain, where families may have to start practicing cutting their steak and bread at dinner with a spoon. This is, of course, because Britain’s politicians have now made the absurdly ridiculous move to call for the banning of what Reason magazine called “the most useful tool ever invented” – the knife.

Reason reported this morning that British politicians have “declared war on knives” and are moving swiftly to try and ban them, since gun laws aren’t working to help stop crime altogether:

Having failed to disarm criminals with gun controls that they defy, British politicians are now turning their attention to implementing something new and different: knife control. Because criminals will be much more respectful of knife laws than…

I’ve generally stayed away from doing “junk on the bunk” articles. What works for me simply is not going to work for you, given differences in circumstance, and experience. What I typically see when some “Former Action Guy” does any sort of “this is how I set up my gear” articles, is a whole bunch of mouthbreathers run out and mimic it, even though they don’t have the mission FAG did, or the training, background, and experience he did.

Nevertheless, talking to another FAG the other day, it was mentioned to me that, despite the predilection of some people to simply mimic, a lot of guys are smart enough to just use it as a framework to figure out what would work for them to fill the same or similar gaps, relevant to their specific needs. So, I decided to go ahead and do a series of articles based on…

The income tax is not only theft, its progressive theft, with those who make more being robbed disproportionately. From Richard M. Salsman at aier.org:

The rich in America don’t pay their “fair share” of taxes, according to critics of capitalism and of inequality who propose a near doubling (to 70 percent) of the current top federal tax rate on personal income. Many such critics also demand a new wealth tax on previously earned income that’s been saved and invested. But what’s a “fair share?” Why is 70 percent the right and proper tax take? Why not 50 percent? Is today’s top rate of 35 percent inherently fair? Why not 10 percent?

Ask anyone who’s willing to define or defend “fair share” in this context — whether a tax expert, an editorialist, or a neighbor — and you’ll likely hear not hard facts and solid logic but a host of…