AK-47

I believe I have pointed out how I like to collect instances where things seem alike when viewed from one standpoint and seem opposite when viewed from another. The below quote from Instapundit is similar in a way: It can be taken in either of two ways, but they both point to the same conclusion.

HARDLY A SURPRISE: AK-47 Sales Soar, Crime Rates Fall? I mean, would you mug a guy with an AK-47?

"Would you mug a guy with an AK-47?" This could mean, if you were a mugger and a potential victim was carrying an AK-47, you probably would not mug him. It could also mean, if you were the kind of mugger who wanted to carry a weapon, it would almost certainly not be a rifle of any kind. After all, concealability would seem to be a logical concern.

Either of the meanings reinforce the correct conclusion that AK-47 type weapons are not suitable tools for the criminal class, at least not when it comes to mugging.

Let me see if I have this right?

The idea of Veteren's Day is to honor people who served in our military. This is all well and good--even as it may appear to be self-serving, I am all for it.

But why is it a Federal holiday? The largest group of people who get the day off are public employees. They range from generally to overwhelmingly left of center. It is also well-known that the ranks of the military have long been right of center.

So we honor veterens by giving a day off to mostly people who never served.