Some Rights are More Equal than Others | SlowFacts

Some Rights are More Equal than Others | SlowFacts.


First they came for the cheesemakers…

First they came for the gun owners, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a gun owner.

Then they came for the photographers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a photographer.

Then they came for the cheesemakers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a cheesemaker.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

What will our loving, benevolent masters choose to protect us from next?  

A sense of disbelief and distress is quickly rippling through the U.S. artisan cheese community, as the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) this week announced it will not permit American cheesemakers to age cheese on wooden boards.

Recently, the FDA inspected several New York state cheesemakers and cited them for using wooden surfaces to age their cheeses. The New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets’ Division of Milk Control and Dairy Services, which (like most every state in the U.S., including Wisconsin), has allowed this practice, reached out to FDA for clarification on the issue. A response was provided by Monica Metz, Branch Chief of FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition’s (CFSAN) Dairy and Egg Branch.

In the response, Metz stated that the use of wood for cheese ripening or aging is considered an unsanitary practice by FDA, and a violation of FDA’s current Current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) regulations. Here’s an excerpt:

“Microbial pathogens can be controlled if food facilities engage in good manufacturing practice. Proper cleaning and sanitation of equipment and facilities are absolutely necessary to ensure that pathogens do not find niches to reside and proliferate. Adequate cleaning and sanitation procedures are particularly important in facilities where persistent strains of pathogenic microorganisms like Listeria monocytogenes could be found. The use of wooden shelves, rough or otherwise, for cheese ripening does not conform to cGMP requirements, which require that “all plant equipment and utensils shall be so designed and of such material and workmanship as to be adequately cleanable, and shall be properly maintained.” 21 CFR 110.40(a). Wooden shelves or boards cannot be adequately cleaned and sanitized. The porous structure of wood enables it to absorb and retain bacteria, therefore bacteria generally colonize not only the surface but also the inside layers of wood. The shelves or boards used for aging make direct contact with finished products; hence they could be a potential source of pathogenic microorganisms in the finished products.”

The most interesting part of the FDA’s statement it that it does not consider this to be a new policy, but rather an enforcement of an existing policy. And worse yet, FDA has reiterated that it does not intend to change this policy…

From Cheese Underground: Game Changer: FDA Rules No Wooden Boards in Cheese Aging.



More illegal guns traced to Mass., despite tough laws – Metro – The Boston Globe

Almost half the illegal guns seized and traced in Boston last year came back to manufacturers and dealers in Massachusetts, a startlingly high ratio for a state known for its tough gun laws.

Mayors Daniel Rizzo of Revere (left), Daniel Rivera of Lawrence (center), and Dominic Sarno of Springfield attended the gun summit. WENDY MAEDA/GLOBE STAFF

Keep clapping guys – your silly local laws are so effective!

via More illegal guns traced to Mass., despite tough laws – Metro – The Boston Globe.

H/T highheelsandhandguns

What needs to be understood is that stricter gun laws in the state keeps rightful owners from protecting themselves. It does not, by any means, keep criminals from breaking your new laws. What needs to be understood is that criminals will continue to break laws and illegally traffic and own guns regardless of what laws you implement.




Does “Speed” Really “Kill”?

This is a great article on speeding and how in the name of “safety” our independence and personal responsibility are being “safey-safed” away from everyone, even those who are not “unsafe”.  From

Yesterday I took one of my motorcycles out and rode it three times faster than the posted speed limit. According to the Clovers of this earth (read more about them here) I shouldn’t be sitting here at my keyboard typing this. I should be dead – since “speed kills.”

Yet, I did not die  – or even scratch the paint. I have done this – “speed” – numerous times over several decades, without once dying. Or causing anyone else to die, either.

Logically – and despite what we’re constantly told – “speed” apparently does not “kill.” At least, it did not kill me.

Well, why not?

The Clovers of this earth will inevitably retort with their usual control freak authoritarian jibber-jabber about the increased risk that attends “speeding.” But, take note. They have conceded the point, much as they will recoil once they realize it.

I “speed” – and live. Therefore, “speed” doesn’t kill.

It might – but that’s an altogether different argument.

Clover is now in the position of the woman in Winston Churchill’s story who has agreed to have sex with a guy who has offered her $1 million dollars to do the deed . . . but takes umbrage at his reduced offer of $10.

They’re haggling over price – not the principle of the thing.

In Clover’s case, it’s “speed” we’re arguing about. It’s clear that it does not always or necessarily “kill.” If it did kill, literally millions of people would get killed today.

Because millions of people will “speed.” As they do every day. As cops do, routinely.

Of course, millions will not die.

The vast majority will get to their destination without incident. I speed every time I drive – or ride. You probably do, too. Almost everyone does – even Clovers. We’re still alive, most of us.

Therefore, “speed” does not “kill.”

At least, not always – or even often.speed kills 3

Much less necessarily.

Which means we can throw Clover’s axiom – “speed kills!” – in the woods. It’s of a piece with other false universal statements (e.g., the Jews control the media; all blacks are violent).

Clover will fall back on “increased risk.” Youmight lose control and wreck – and cause harm.

But this is an intangible, something that cannot be definitively quantified. I ride my motorcycle at three times the posted speed limit – and nothing happens. Later that day, a driver doing 5 MPH below the posted speed limit loses control of his vehicle – for any of several possible reasons – crashes and is killed.

Did “speed” kill him?

Or was it because he wasn’t paying attention, then overcorrected after his right wheel dipped off the road?

If it is “speed” that’s the universal, all-explanatory problem, then – logically – the “safest” speed is no speed at all. All movement should cease. Or at least – for safety’s sake – a national maximum speed limit of 25 MPH ought to be imposed. Especially on highways. That would “save lives” – cue the familiar Onager refrain from the Clover chorus.

But, a 25 MPH maximum would be inconvenient.

So, we’re allowed to travel at a “speed” deemed to be “safe”  . . . by the Clovers – the bureaucrats who impose these arbitrary velocity maximums, the people who supportthese arbitrary maximums and, of course, the cops and courts that enforce them.

They are comfortable with 65 or 70 on the highway – and 35 or 40 in town. So those “speeds” are decreed “safe” – and anointed as lawful. On the other hand, they feel 25 MPH on the highway is too slow – even though (using their logic against them) 25 is surely “safer” than 65 or 70.

Remember: “Speed kills.” The slower, the safer. So let’s all go really slow.


But because they’d like to get where they’re going, too – just like us “speeders” – they scoff at the prospect of a 25 MPH national maximum speed limit. They don’t want their commute to work to take an hour rather than half an hour – no matter “the children” or “safety.”

If a 25 MPH National Maximum Speed Limit were imposed, they’d ignore it – and “speed” – just like us. And they’d resent it – just like us – when they got waylaid for this “offense” by an armed costumed, lectured about “safety” by a judge, fleeced of a couple hundred bucks in fines, then hit with a “surcharge” by their insurance company on the basis of their “unsafe” driving record.clover king

But they’re not comfortable with 75 or 80.

That’s “too fast”  . . .   slow down! What’s yourhurry?

Because they’re not comfortable driving 75 or 80 – because they feel it’s “too fast” – you aren’t permitted to drive that fast.

It does not matter that you’re comfortable driving at higher-than-Clover speeds. Nor that you haven’t lost control of your vehicle – or in any tangible, objective way given reason to worry that you might. You may be able to point to decades of “safe” driving; you’ve never lost control of your vehicle, never harmed anyone . . .  even though you were “speeding” pretty much the entire time.

It does not matter. It carries no weight.

Clover feels that driving 75 or 80 – or whatever the arbitrary number happens to be – is “too fast.” Therefore, it is too fast – under the law.

It becomes “speeding.”speed 4

Which, technically, it is.

Anytime one drives in excess of a posted maximum, one is by definition “speeding.”

Whether it’s unsafe to “speed” – that’s another question.

And the answer to that question is one that the Clovers of this earth are not interested in hearing.

Throw it in the Woods?

via Does “Speed” Really “Kill”? » Eric Peters Autos.

Stopping the madness

Today I bring to you two articles from our nations capitol, the District of Columbia.  You see, there are so many robbers and other criminals that use violence against others to get what they want that it is illegal to possess any firearm unless you get a permit AND that firearm meets the requirements of this sixteen page DC police “Firearms Eligible for Registration” guide.   Now to be fair, only three of those pages are rules about guns – the last thirteen is just a exclusive list of pistols you are generously permitted to own if you apply for and receive a weapons permit.  Unless you have a permit for a weapon, you can’t have ammunition (live or spent shells) or that is a crime against the public safety too.

There have been two relatively recent cases where the absurdity of these laws was on full display.  A recently discharged soldier accidentally brought some pistol ammunition into the District of Columbia.  Security guards at the Veterans Affairs office found it and hauled him off to the police station for arrest and processing.

muzzleloaderjpg_s640x853A second case even more crazy was where a DC resident was found guilty of being in possession of muzzle loading bullets.  Now muzzle loaders ARE legal to own in the district.  They require bullet, powder, and a percussion cap to fire to weapon.  But this man, seen here on the right, was convicted of “illegal possession of ammunition” for having just a few lead bullets in his house.

Steal millions from those you “represent” and have others point guns at them to ensure you get your hush money – ok!  Forget to check your bag from a day at the range, or have some formed lead in your posession – bad!


The ancient problem of assault bows

Unknown to many, there was a lost panel to the Bayeux Tapestry dealing with the medieval problem of commoners owning assault bows…

Judge, can thoust tell the commoners assault bow from the sheriffs patrol bow?

Judge, can thoust tell the commoners assault bow from the sheriffs patrol bow?


Created from