We recently saw how Utah was moving toward the establishment of the M1911 as the first official state gun. Now, Arizona is aiming to beat Utah to the prize by naming the Colt single-action Army revolver as its official state gun.
Over 40 Arizona state legislators have called for the establishment of the state gun.
Here is the full bill as far as I can tell:
State of Arizona
Senate
Fiftieth Legislature
First Regular Session
2011SB 1610
Introduced by
Senators Gould, Pearce R, Smith; Representatives Burges, Forese, Gowan, Harper, Kavanagh, Montenegro, Proud, Seel, Smith D: Senators Allen, Antenori, Biggs, Griffin, Klein, Melvin, Murphy, Nelson, Pierce S, Shooter; Representatives Barton, Brophy McGee, Crandell, Dial, Fann, Farnsworth, Fillmore, Goodale, Gray R, Jones, Judd, Lesko, Olson, Patterson, Robson, Stevens, Ugenti, Urie, Vogt, Weiers J, Yee (with permission of Committee on Rules)AN ACT
AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 4.1, ARTICLE 5, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING SECTION 41-860.02; RELATING TO STATE EMBLEMS.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 41, chapter 4.1, article 5, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 41-860.02, to read:
41-860.02. State firearm
THE COLT SINGLE ACTION ARMY REVOLVER IS THE OFFICIAL STATE FIREARM.
Source: New Times found on Reddit.
If I don’t get an answer by tomorrow, I’ll just
send a copy of my driver’s license in with this claim form and hope that the sponsor will contact me directly if there is an issue of me proving I am me. Phuket is undoubtedly the best gift by the Mother Nature to the mankind. Surrounded by giant phallus, Lady Bess remains unperturbed as she selectively photographs images for Play Girl magazine.
To be clear, Brian. It’s not the difference of your life that is the problem. I’m all for different. Hell, many of my friends are odd and I myself am peculiar.
It’s the social destructiveness of your postulate and your refusal to defend it logically and with proof that are the problem. I’m squarely against tyranny and ideas that aid tyranny. I don’t give a damn how different the propagators of such ideas are either. Their poison is to be confronted by any reasonable means. And words are quire reasonable given the alternatives.
RE: Mike Spindell, February 23, 2011 at 5:55 pm
Mike, Thanks for your shared views, I find them helpful. I will intermix my writing, using italics, within your comment, in the hope that my doing so will make my writing easier to understand in terms of my intended context.
“Referring to H. G. Wells, “The Outline of History”:
The Adversarial Process totally precluded and prevented:”
Brian,
Wells completed the “Outline of History” in 1920. I’ve read it because I have all three volumes, which I bought at a yard sale.
Interesting book, written in a similar style to Gibbons “Decline and Fall……,” which I also have and read. The copy of The Outline of History I have is the “Third Edition, Revised, published as a single volume in 1921, and my wife owned it before we were married. To me, it is a “period piece” with what I experience as a “broad brush” approach and is “intensely biased” in terms of a form of Anglophiie mindset reality-model filtering. I study works which I experience as biased the better to learn about and understand bias, and I do that to gather tools for recognizing bias and setting bias aside in ways I would like to be wise, to such extent as that be possible. While I found both to be interesting they are a bit long in the tooth by now and many more archaeological discoveries have rendered much of their discussion of the ancient world out of date, though Gibbon’s work has still remained quite relevant. I recall that some of Gibbon’s work is yet in safe storage among the bulk of my family-personal-research library. While I was writing my doctorate, we lived in an eleven-room home, with a separate building for my engineering work, and there was bookshelf enough for the whole of my library to be available. What I continue to experience as the unspeakably atrocious dishonesty and presumed corruption of the Door County Circuit Court, following the deaths of our son and his wife on February 10, 1996, resulted in my being unable to earn enough money for us to be able to stay in that Door County waterfront home, at 1253 Cove Road, Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin, and we “abandoned” our waterfront home by finding ourselves inescapably driven to and through Chapter 7 bankruptcy. I find the way my family was treated by the Door County Circuit Court, particularly through the decisions of Judge Diltz and Judge Koehn, and by the court filings of James O. Ebbeson, Esq., to be a stunning form of as-though punishment for having adopted our late son, Michael, and having provided him with a safe home and having even bought, for cash, a home at 25 East Pine Street, where, until their deaths our son, Michael, and his wife, Shelly, lived rent-free with their children, Shannon and Shawn. I find no fault with those judges as I find no fault with Atty. Ebbeson. They lived and acted in accord with the ways they were raised by their parents in the society where and when they were raised. Were I to fault those members of the Bar who financially devastated my family through their unwittingly and unintentionally destructive decisions regarding my family, including me, surely I would find even more fault with myself, and I find that I am vastly too sensitive to abuse to likely survive so doing. I recognize that, were I to find fault with myself and/or my life, I would be able to find fault with other people and their lives, except that I also recognize that, were I to actually do that, I would experience such overwhelming inner terror as to be driven to effective suicide almost immediately. I do not find fault with people because, were I to do that, I always experience really doing that would so shatter my brain function as to render me incapable of living any longer than it would take for me to permanently stop living. Thus, it is not by choice that I find no fault with people; the way in which I have been given to be autistic renders me, as best I can discern, incapable of surviving actually deeming any person to be truthfully at fault for anything whatsoever. Instead of finding fault with people, whether as individuals or as groups of any size, I study the human environment, in an effort to recognize and understand such circumstances and other situational factors as can, and sometimes do, take actually-innocent people along pathways of life which are as though they assign personal responsibility to a person for situational and environmental factors which are actually not sufficiently within a person’s achievable control as would allow truthful personal attribution. Mentioned before is the book by Stanford University Professor Emeritus, Philip Zimbardo, “The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil.” However, in stark contrast with the premise of Zimbardo’s subtitle, it is my observation that Zimbardo made the sort of error to which his book raises objection.I find that deception is rather like that. Deception, as I observe, is as though having a proclivity to especially deceive those who study deception as to what deception is and deception does. In my research and its findings, it is impossible for anyone to ever actually turn evil; something quite different actually happens, and that which actually happens is effectively and ultimately the antithesis of evil.
Am I any more resistant to deception or to being deceived than is anyone else? Not that I can tell, understand, or learn. Yet there is one detail in which my life may notably contrast with the lives of the vast majority of people, and I here next attempt to give a useful account of this detail.
Deception enters my life with no more difficulty than it enters the life of anyone else, as I am able to observe. The contrast with my life and others, to the extent of such contrast, is not the ease with which I take in deception; the contrast is found within what I am able and unable do with deception.
I have mentioned, perhaps painfully many times, that I do not “think in words.” It appears to me that “thinking in words” is typically a left-hemisphere cerebral activity, much as “thinking in pictures” appears to me to be a typically right-hemisphere cerebral activity. While my consciousness has demonstrable access to words and pictures, brain scan studies inform me that my actual center of conscious is toward the back of my brain in ways statistically markedly abnormal. At the main sites of my conscious awareness, there are, as I observe, neither places nor structure capable of the abstractions of words or pictures.
Words and pictures are, as I can fathom the activity of human brains, purely of connotation, that is, purely of symbolic representation of internalized reality, whereas my consciousness is at the level of denotation, the level of internalized reality without being represented symbolically.
S. I. Hayakawa, in his “Language in Thought and Action,” attempted to clearly demonstrate the contrast between connotation and denotation in somewhat the following way. Denotation can be made apparent by pointing to something, such that it is recognized without using words. Connotation is possible only by allowing words (or pictures) to spin about in one’s head until the words take the form of a usable pattern.
My conscious awareness is predominantly denotative (with access to connotation as may be useful), and is located is toward the back of my brain; whereas it seems to me that people who think in pictures (Dr. Temple Grandin?) and who think in words (almost every adult?) have their conscious awareness in the frontal lobes. I find that I have decent access to my frontal lobes; I just do not live my life only within their severely limiting constraints.
Had my parents not been able to live lives in which everything harmful was totally forgivable, and had they not been able to share with me how they were able to do this, the abuse which has entered my life would plausibly have led me along a path of violent retaliation as horrible as any violent retaliation has yet been. Having been given the way of absolute and unconditional forgiveness for every harm ever done to me, and, it now appears to me, also the way of absolute and unconditional forgiveness for any and every form of harm and/or abuse that can ever be done to me, I may indeed live in a world people whose live circumstances differ sufficiently from my life circumstances will be certain is completely impossible.
However, all I need to do to demonstrate that my life is possible and is real is to continue living it.
My life will speak for itself.
The problem for Wells work was in the context of the fact that it was perforce an “Outline” and so was short on specifics save for Wells’ own conclusions and opinions. Also Wells was dealing with all of world history, while Gibbons could just concentrate on the Roman/Constantinople Empires, allowing more meat on the historical bones. Wells was very Euro-centric historically and that for anyone who knows anything about archaeology and
anthropology is a grave misunderstanding of true world history.
Contrary to the beliefs of Wells’ time, the worldwide cultural interactions were much greater and the human commonality of political/sociological/religious/moral thought was far more homogeneous.
I observe that people live the lives which they find possible for them to live. While, for example, a sincere person may claim that unification of religion and science is simply not possible, perhaps because their domains are forever separate, there have been and are many scientists, scholars, and philosophers who find unification of science with religion not only possible but among the most worthy of human efforts. Thch Nhat Hahn, M. Scott Peck, Mary Mackenzie, Ernest Becker, Ian G. Barbour, Karl Schmidt, Philip H. Phenix, The Dali Lama, Jonathan Edwards, Walter M. Elsasser, Jacob Bronowski, Don Piper, Raymond Moody, and the list goes on and on and on…
I find I have learned enough from BiL to begin to make sense of the life of Jimmy Durante, who murdered Grace and Sumner Harris after being expelled from seminary during his attempt to become a priest. I am grateful for the help BiL has given me.
Every person has a world view no less constrained by the person’s life experiences than constructed of the person’s life experiences. In that respect, I find the hope for a world of people who have learned to be at peace with their inner lives sufficiently well as to also be at peace with the lives of others, regardless of the extent to which the lives of different people differ.
My life is speaking for itself.
“Referring to H. G. Wells, “The Outline of History”:
The Adversarial Process totally precluded and prevented:”
Brian,
Wells completed the “Outline of History” in 1920. I’ve read it because I have all three volumes, which I bought at a yard sale.
Interesting book, written in a similar style to Gibbons “Decline and Fall……,” which I also have and read. While I found both to be interesting they are a bit long in the tooth by now and many more archaeological discoveries have rendered much of their discussion of the ancient world out of date, though Gibbon’s work has still remained quite relevant.
The problem for Wells work was in the context of the fact that it was perforce an “Outline” and so was short on specifics save for Wells’ own conclusions and opinions. Also Wells was dealing with all of world history, while Gibbons could just concentrate on the Roman/Constantinople Empires, allowing more meat on the historical bones. Wells was very Euro-centric historically and that for anyone who knows anything about archaeology and
anthropology is a grave misunderstanding of true world history.
Contrary to the beliefs of Wells’ time, the worldwide cultural interactions were much greater and the human commonality of political/sociological/religious/moral thought was far more homogeneous.
Mike Spindell,
lol
… and he probably has no idea what you’re talking about
‘Tennessee lawmaker would make practicing Islamic law a felony”
The pol has no concept of comedic irony and that is tragic.
SL,
One lives to be of service.
BIL,
Well done!
Speaking of distain for non-whites, looks like the fine people of Tennessee are just as bright as Arizonan’s:
Tennessee lawmaker would make practicing Islamic law a felony
By Adam Clark Estes
SalonClaiming a danger to homeland security, a Republican state senator in Tennessee introduced a bill to make the practice of Shariah law a felony. Often associated with jihad, Shariah is the sacred law of Islam — God’s law — that is often interpreted differently amongst different factions within the religion. The law proposed by Bill Ketron from Murfeesboro would include even basic practices of the law. According to The Tennesseean newspaper in Nashville:
“The threat from Shariah-based jihad and terrorism presents a real and present danger to the lawful governance of this state and to the peaceful enjoyment of citizenship by the residents of this state,” the bill reads.
The bill exempts any peaceful practice of Islam. But it also claims that any adherence to Shariah law — which includes religious practices like feet-washing and prayers — is treasonous.
Read full coverage at The Tennesseean
http://www.salon.com/news/islam/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/02/23/tennessee_islam_law_felony_bill
The last paragraph above is just … stunning.
Buddha,
You are right about the need for the rule of law to matter once again. These same idiots in Arizona are also trying to claim eminent domain over Federal lands! Arizona has cornered the market on the nutcases. Maybe it is that dry heat!
SL,
You are correct about Brewer.
She is indeed the inverse function of this song . . .
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0aT0GXW8jw&w=480&h=390]