A school in WI censors certain religious expression in art from one somewhat obsessive student yet allegedly allows others. Administrators apparently don't realize the sh*tstorm they just unleashed and tell said kid he's violating other people's rights.
I like this little contradiction:
Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.
vs.
Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students’ rights.
So some students have rights but others don't?
I can see some tax dollars flying out the window on this lawsuit.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Jayne Lyn Stahl: Still Clueless on Guns
In her recent HuffPo post, she goes after a new Indiana law requiring book sellers to register if they are selling adult related material. Most of it is her standard incoherent rambling and nonsense:
HB 1042, which was signed, two weeks ago, by Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, does not go into effect until July, and groups like the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression are organizing to compel the governor to veto it.
How can it be vetoed after he already signed it? If I'm ignorant on that subject, please educate me.
In one point she flat out lies:
Under this law, a bookseller must not only pay a usurious $250 registration fee, but also provide a detailed description of the work which may include not only novels, but school texts dealing with health, and sexuality issues.
Yet the law states:
b) The term does not include: (1) birth control or contraceptive devices; or
(2) services, programs, products, or materials provided by a:
(A) communications service provider (as defined in IC 8-1-32.6-3);
(B) physician; or
(C) public or nonpublic school.
However, in this rant, she has to take another swipe at firearm ownership:
While the Supreme Court gets to ponder whether or not to allow the D.C. handgun ban to stand, think about this: you're not legally required to register your rifle, shotgun, or handgun in the state of Indiana, but if you own a bookstore in that state, you're now required to register books that contain "sexually explicit materials," according to a new law...
..it is yet another symptom of just how demented it is to mandate registering books, and not firearms.
Obviously in all her research, she forgets that FFL dealers are required to keep exacting records of their inventory and sales while purchasers are required to undergo background checks. But one shouldn't let the facts get in the way at a good PSH.
I actually agree w/ her that the law is a first step in a slippery-slope. Now she knows how we feel. At least she shows that our statements on what would an anti writer do if the 1A was held up the same "reasonable restrictions" as what they want for the 2A have been shown to be accurate.
HB 1042, which was signed, two weeks ago, by Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, does not go into effect until July, and groups like the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression are organizing to compel the governor to veto it.
How can it be vetoed after he already signed it? If I'm ignorant on that subject, please educate me.
In one point she flat out lies:
Under this law, a bookseller must not only pay a usurious $250 registration fee, but also provide a detailed description of the work which may include not only novels, but school texts dealing with health, and sexuality issues.
Yet the law states:
b) The term does not include: (1) birth control or contraceptive devices; or
(2) services, programs, products, or materials provided by a:
(A) communications service provider (as defined in IC 8-1-32.6-3);
(B) physician; or
(C) public or nonpublic school.
However, in this rant, she has to take another swipe at firearm ownership:
While the Supreme Court gets to ponder whether or not to allow the D.C. handgun ban to stand, think about this: you're not legally required to register your rifle, shotgun, or handgun in the state of Indiana, but if you own a bookstore in that state, you're now required to register books that contain "sexually explicit materials," according to a new law...
..it is yet another symptom of just how demented it is to mandate registering books, and not firearms.
Obviously in all her research, she forgets that FFL dealers are required to keep exacting records of their inventory and sales while purchasers are required to undergo background checks. But one shouldn't let the facts get in the way at a good PSH.
I actually agree w/ her that the law is a first step in a slippery-slope. Now she knows how we feel. At least she shows that our statements on what would an anti writer do if the 1A was held up the same "reasonable restrictions" as what they want for the 2A have been shown to be accurate.
7 dead, 14 wounded over weekend.
in handgun free Chicago. The reaction? Calls for more gun laws and a march in the relative safety of downtown w/ our good buddy Snuffy. Why don't they march in Englewood were most of these killings are occurring? Why is it always "good kids" that are being caught up in gang violence? How can there still be so much gun related crime when guns are effectively banned in Chicago?
While fellow gang members gathered outside the hospital to hold a vigil for him, rival gang members showed up at the hospital and opened fire into the crowd. One man, who was affiliated with Haro's gang, was struck by gunfire.
Initially, police said the bullets may have come from a tavern about a block away, where street gang members had been kicked out about the same time, the source said.
A 25-year-old man was shot in the lower back in a drive-by shooting in the Stony Island Park neighborhood on the South Side on Friday evening. Less than two hours later, two men were shot in a drive-by shooting on the Far South Side.
As the officer attempted to intervene, one or more of the men pulled out a gun and began firing shots,
The girl was walking with people who were the intended targets, and the shooting appears to be gang-related, according to Calumet Area detectives.
Miguel Pedro, 15, was shot to death on the Northwest Side on Friday night, just a few doors down from his home on the 1600 block of North Keeler Avenue, after someone shouted gang slogans at him.
Many of the 120 students from the housing project have not been to school since March 7 because they fear retaliation after a reputed gang member from ABLA shot and killed another student who lived on a rival gang's turf.
Oh, right. All those "rural white males" driving up w/ pickups full of mind controlling guns to sell them on the streets. I forgot.
While fellow gang members gathered outside the hospital to hold a vigil for him, rival gang members showed up at the hospital and opened fire into the crowd. One man, who was affiliated with Haro's gang, was struck by gunfire.
Initially, police said the bullets may have come from a tavern about a block away, where street gang members had been kicked out about the same time, the source said.
A 25-year-old man was shot in the lower back in a drive-by shooting in the Stony Island Park neighborhood on the South Side on Friday evening. Less than two hours later, two men were shot in a drive-by shooting on the Far South Side.
As the officer attempted to intervene, one or more of the men pulled out a gun and began firing shots,
The girl was walking with people who were the intended targets, and the shooting appears to be gang-related, according to Calumet Area detectives.
Miguel Pedro, 15, was shot to death on the Northwest Side on Friday night, just a few doors down from his home on the 1600 block of North Keeler Avenue, after someone shouted gang slogans at him.
Many of the 120 students from the housing project have not been to school since March 7 because they fear retaliation after a reputed gang member from ABLA shot and killed another student who lived on a rival gang's turf.
Oh, right. All those "rural white males" driving up w/ pickups full of mind controlling guns to sell them on the streets. I forgot.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Herb Meeker responds..
You have a point, but if you noticed I was quoting Associated Press from ATF stats. I do know a few people possessing authentic AK-47s not necessarily cheapie clones. However, they are not criminals and obey the laws. I once owned and shot an SKS from China. And I have shot a friends' AR-15 (personally, I think it sucked) and his M-14 (It really rocked), but never any fully automatic weapons. It was fun to use the SKS on empty plastic oil containers, 2-liter sodey bottles and other items for "ballistic tests." Since marriage I am all but unarmed. The drawback of marrying a pacificist. I believe I did note in the story the AR-15s with MPD are semi-automatic weapons, not submachine guns. But you are right on misconceptions on these weapons by the general public, and gun haters. People think they are bullet sprayers.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Night Firing.
Weather: 3rd Quarter Moon clear night
Terrain: Woodland
Distance: 25m
Position: Kneeling, Unsupported
Target: Green Humanoid Silhouette (AKA Charlie)
Nightvision: Gen 1 Goggles
Firearms: SKS & SAR-1 w/ iron sights
Rounds Fired: 10/10
Hits: 1/2
I need practice and a dedicated NV scoped rifle. However Charlie w/ never be able to father children. :)
Terrain: Woodland
Distance: 25m
Position: Kneeling, Unsupported
Target: Green Humanoid Silhouette (AKA Charlie)
Nightvision: Gen 1 Goggles
Firearms: SKS & SAR-1 w/ iron sights
Rounds Fired: 10/10
Hits: 1/2
I need practice and a dedicated NV scoped rifle. However Charlie w/ never be able to father children. :)
We're with the Gov't, we're here to help.
PSYCH!! Time to repay back that money we gave you to rebuild your lives because we screwed up.
Here's my favorite line:
Brann pointed out that 5,000 collections cases would represent a 4-percent error rate for the Road Home that is "quite good for large federal programs."
But a less than 1% error rate is enough for large federal programs to indict private citizens as being "willful".
Here's my favorite line:
Brann pointed out that 5,000 collections cases would represent a 4-percent error rate for the Road Home that is "quite good for large federal programs."
But a less than 1% error rate is enough for large federal programs to indict private citizens as being "willful".
She was obviously a threat...
So the "Only One" Tazed her. The issue? She was 11.
So an adult, highly trained in techniques to deal w/ physical confrontations, can't handle a hostile ELEVEN YEAR OLD!? Why am I reminded of the officer who called for backup when he tried to harass a group of Girl Scouts and the mom's started yelling at him?
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. — A Florida elementary school student was tasered Thursday after punching a school security officer during a fight.
The incident began when teachers at the Moss Elemenary School in Orange County confronted an 11-year-old girl for allegedly attempting to push another student into ongoing traffic outside the campus, MyFOXOrlando.com reported.
Authorities say the young female ignored the teacher and walked inside the homeroom, where she was again approached by teachers over her behavior. The student responded by thowing a desk and chair and attempting to spit on the instructor, according to MyFOXOrlando.com.
Donna Hudepohl, a school resource officer called to remove the troubled girl from the classroom, was allegedly pushed and punched in the face during a struggle to restrain her.
Hudepohl responded by tasering the girl.
The student was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer, disrupting a school function as well as resisting with violence and is being held at the juvenile detention center.
Hudepohl was treated for a possible broken nose.
So an adult, highly trained in techniques to deal w/ physical confrontations, can't handle a hostile ELEVEN YEAR OLD!? Why am I reminded of the officer who called for backup when he tried to harass a group of Girl Scouts and the mom's started yelling at him?
Military Style Paramilitary Rifles..
being purchased by local police departments? No. Just AR-15's to counter the potential of WASR's and SAR's.
I know Herb so I wrote him a polite letter.
Here's the letter I sent to the editor covering both pieces:
I know Herb so I wrote him a polite letter.
Here's the letter I sent to the editor covering both pieces:
With all good intentions I’m sure, Mr. Meeker fell into the same trap that has been plaguing the media for years. What they call AK-47’s are NOT being used by criminals in the US nor are they being purchased here to be smuggled into Mexico. An AK-47 is a weapon that will continue to fire as long as the trigger is depressed. That is known as “fully automatic”. To purchase a fully-automatic weapon, one has to go through a rigorous background check, obtain a special license, and pay a $200 tax. The general going price for any one is rarely less than $4000. What is generally available in the US are “SEMI-automatic” . One pull of the trigger fires one bullet. One. That’s it. To fire another you have to pull the trigger again. While they may look like real AK’s, they are not. They are no different from any semi-automatic rifle (just like many hunting rifles) except in appearance.
The Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 also did not ban any firearms. What it did was restrict multiple cosmetic features such as bayonet mounts and pistol grips. A firearm without several of these features were still perfectly legal to purchase and own. They functioned no differently than “pre-ban” firearms. One pull of the trigger. One bullet. In fact, all the ones made previous to the law were still legal to own, sell, and purchase. They were just more expensive.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Charles Wallace Murry hired by MAIG..
to stump for the prohibition of firearms in non-traditional colors.
A cookie to the first one who gets the reference.
A cookie to the first one who gets the reference.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
AP BS
This just in, Matt Sedensky is an idiot. Perhaps he should spend more time actually researching instead of trying to grab headlines.
I'm not even going to bother fisking this piece of fishwrap. I wrote a letter. Will he respond? I doubt it.
I'm not even going to bother fisking this piece of fishwrap. I wrote a letter. Will he respond? I doubt it.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
In Northern Elbonia..
..training more Anti-Communist Guerrillas. All the mud makes posting difficult. Things will be light for a few days.
"I don't need to present evidence.."
"because I'm rational and you're not"
This is an actual argument presented by a poster over on Tom King's blog when pressed to present evidence that a militia could not stand up to a modern military. I presented numerous examples from the last fifty years including Iraq and Afganistan. The response was avoidances, insults, and histrionics.
His closest defender presents examples from 150 years ago (The US Civil War) and two examples where the irregulars were helped w/ (guess what) primarily small arms.
One would think that an alleged Phd student of history would be able to defend his claims w/ actual history.
This is an actual argument presented by a poster over on Tom King's blog when pressed to present evidence that a militia could not stand up to a modern military. I presented numerous examples from the last fifty years including Iraq and Afganistan. The response was avoidances, insults, and histrionics.
His closest defender presents examples from 150 years ago (The US Civil War) and two examples where the irregulars were helped w/ (guess what) primarily small arms.
One would think that an alleged Phd student of history would be able to defend his claims w/ actual history.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Peter Hamm wants mayhem from police..
As he encourages them to spray fire from the hip at multiple targets :
The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence said it understands the moves to assault weapons. "Police officers need to be able to defend themselves and the rest of us, and they need the weapons to do so," said spokesman Peter Hamm.
This is a change in their stance that have no use in a defensive situation and that the police are not wanting or needing weapons that would harm innocent bystanders.
How are the police able to use "assault rifles" "with bullets designed to break apart on impact " yet in civilian hands "In a conventional home with dry-wall walls, I wouldn't be surprised if it went through six of them."
So is Peter saying that it's now OK for police to be more lethal and more dangerous to civilians or is he following the claim that "Assault Weapons" magically transform into less dangerous "Patrol Rifles" in the hands of "Only Ones"?
The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence said it understands the moves to assault weapons. "Police officers need to be able to defend themselves and the rest of us, and they need the weapons to do so," said spokesman Peter Hamm.
This is a change in their stance that have no use in a defensive situation and that the police are not wanting or needing weapons that would harm innocent bystanders.
How are the police able to use "assault rifles" "with bullets designed to break apart on impact " yet in civilian hands "In a conventional home with dry-wall walls, I wouldn't be surprised if it went through six of them."
So is Peter saying that it's now OK for police to be more lethal and more dangerous to civilians or is he following the claim that "Assault Weapons" magically transform into less dangerous "Patrol Rifles" in the hands of "Only Ones"?
Friday, March 21, 2008
Playing the Bogus race card..
Uncle has a bit on it and now Josh Sugarmann is rehashing the same old racism and junk research from Bogus.
Sorry Josh. If you're still citing Bellisiles as a source, you can hardly call yourself a "scholar". It's a "hidden" history because it only exists in the minds of you and the other anti's. Notice the lack of support in the responses to Bogus's post.
Notice how the Anti's have gone from proclaiming the SCOTUS rulings to the heavens to now referring to them as "political hacks" and only having a "little knowledge" even before a ruling has been made?
I guess when you're running scared, insults and the race card is all you have left.
Sorry Josh. If you're still citing Bellisiles as a source, you can hardly call yourself a "scholar". It's a "hidden" history because it only exists in the minds of you and the other anti's. Notice the lack of support in the responses to Bogus's post.
Notice how the Anti's have gone from proclaiming the SCOTUS rulings to the heavens to now referring to them as "political hacks" and only having a "little knowledge" even before a ruling has been made?
I guess when you're running scared, insults and the race card is all you have left.
The police will protect you
Why do you want a gun. The police are right there to help you..... 200 surveillance cameras at Van Dyke houses fail to stop rape suspect.
Yea and Pigs Fly....
Yea and Pigs Fly....
71 and counting...
That's how many counties in Illinois have passed resolutions supporting the 2A. Three more (McHenry, Mclean, and Jersey) are proposed and I've been informed there's a strong push currently going on in Lake County. Best wishes to the State Line Rifle Association who are spearheading the effort.
Sticks and rocks
Good Morning Boys and Girls:
It’s Friday and we have all had some good news this week. But back to reality, and the answer to the question,” what does a disarmed society look like”? One needs look little further than your TV remote, local paper, or the internet, a part of the world that gets very little attention under normal conditions. Tibet. No oil, no manufacturing plastic junk and shipping it to the US, Just Mountains, people and a ruthless invader. Yes the country that bought and paid for Bill Clinton, most likely bank rolling Hillary, and many of the “Progressives” I would not be surprised if the Joyce Foundation was not in their pockets as well.
China yes the same one sends lead tainted toys to this country.
The Tibetan people are not allowed to have firearms. They can not fight back; China has admitted to killing four, some unofficial sources have the numbers 80 to 360. These people are bravely standing and defending themselves with rocks and sticks against an army with modern weapons. This would be the dream for the left and the anti firearm anti freedom groups.
I would suggest everyone take a long look, this holy weekend. Thank God for where you live. Thank the few who stand to protect this country. And the freedom we enjoy.
It’s Friday and we have all had some good news this week. But back to reality, and the answer to the question,” what does a disarmed society look like”? One needs look little further than your TV remote, local paper, or the internet, a part of the world that gets very little attention under normal conditions. Tibet. No oil, no manufacturing plastic junk and shipping it to the US, Just Mountains, people and a ruthless invader. Yes the country that bought and paid for Bill Clinton, most likely bank rolling Hillary, and many of the “Progressives” I would not be surprised if the Joyce Foundation was not in their pockets as well.
China yes the same one sends lead tainted toys to this country.
The Tibetan people are not allowed to have firearms. They can not fight back; China has admitted to killing four, some unofficial sources have the numbers 80 to 360. These people are bravely standing and defending themselves with rocks and sticks against an army with modern weapons. This would be the dream for the left and the anti firearm anti freedom groups.
I would suggest everyone take a long look, this holy weekend. Thank God for where you live. Thank the few who stand to protect this country. And the freedom we enjoy.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
3 Second Trigger Locks?
Not according to Maryland Governor Parris Glendening. Here's the transcript from 2000 on CNN when they showed the press release of him taking over 2 minutes to open one:
The National Rifle Association has lined up its sights on this bill. A television commercial produced by the NRA took advantage of Maryland Governor Parris Glendening's two minutes of fumbling while he tried to demonstrate to reporters the ease of using the locking device.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NARRATOR: Glendening wants an integrated trigger lock on your handgun.
GOV. PARRIS GLENDENING (D), MARYLAND: Part of my job here is to show, in theory, how easy this is. It should be very simple.
NARRATOR: But if your family's in danger, how much time will you have to unlock the firearm you depend on for protection.
Tell Speaker Taylor that you oppose integrated trigger locks...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Push the back piece to the side again.
NARRATOR: ... because your safety is no laughing matter.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FRAZIER: The governor said later he should have been trained in the proper use of the locking device before he took it before a news conference.
LIN: Maryland's full House will vote on the bill next week, and if it passes the governor will, of course, sign it.
And look who else happened to be featured in the same article. Ed Shultz, the Smith & Wesson CEO who sold out the company to the Clintons and John Rosenthal of an anti-gun alliance in Massachusetts has met with Shultz over the years.
There's also a comment from a Glock VP about good ol' (former) Gov. (then AG) Spitzer:
You know, I think it was General Spitzer himself who told me that, you know, we are going to have bankruptcy lawyers knocking at our door if we didn't kowtow to his extortion.
FRAZIER: Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York?
JANNUZZO: Yes, sir.
Then there's our buddy Dennis Henigan who, in 1998, couldn't open one either:
"At a recent antigun conference in Chicago, Mr. Henigan, who is the top lawyer with Handgun Control Inc., the country's largest gun control organization, waved a version of the [Saf T Lock], extolling how easy it is to operate. Then, punching in what he thought was the correct combination, the lawyer failed to unlock the gun, much to the evident discomfort of the sympathetic audience." He excused his failure with the words, "Even if a klutz like me fumbles on the first try, the benefits of having a lock outweigh the risks." (Barrett, "A Simple Invention Points Up Complexity of Gun-Control Suits," Wall Street Journal, 4/23/99, A1).
Apparently even SCOTUS judges know more about firearms than anti-gun advocates.
The National Rifle Association has lined up its sights on this bill. A television commercial produced by the NRA took advantage of Maryland Governor Parris Glendening's two minutes of fumbling while he tried to demonstrate to reporters the ease of using the locking device.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NARRATOR: Glendening wants an integrated trigger lock on your handgun.
GOV. PARRIS GLENDENING (D), MARYLAND: Part of my job here is to show, in theory, how easy this is. It should be very simple.
NARRATOR: But if your family's in danger, how much time will you have to unlock the firearm you depend on for protection.
Tell Speaker Taylor that you oppose integrated trigger locks...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Push the back piece to the side again.
NARRATOR: ... because your safety is no laughing matter.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FRAZIER: The governor said later he should have been trained in the proper use of the locking device before he took it before a news conference.
LIN: Maryland's full House will vote on the bill next week, and if it passes the governor will, of course, sign it.
And look who else happened to be featured in the same article. Ed Shultz, the Smith & Wesson CEO who sold out the company to the Clintons and John Rosenthal of an anti-gun alliance in Massachusetts has met with Shultz over the years.
There's also a comment from a Glock VP about good ol' (former) Gov. (then AG) Spitzer:
You know, I think it was General Spitzer himself who told me that, you know, we are going to have bankruptcy lawyers knocking at our door if we didn't kowtow to his extortion.
FRAZIER: Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York?
JANNUZZO: Yes, sir.
Then there's our buddy Dennis Henigan who, in 1998, couldn't open one either:
"At a recent antigun conference in Chicago, Mr. Henigan, who is the top lawyer with Handgun Control Inc., the country's largest gun control organization, waved a version of the [Saf T Lock], extolling how easy it is to operate. Then, punching in what he thought was the correct combination, the lawyer failed to unlock the gun, much to the evident discomfort of the sympathetic audience." He excused his failure with the words, "Even if a klutz like me fumbles on the first try, the benefits of having a lock outweigh the risks." (Barrett, "A Simple Invention Points Up Complexity of Gun-Control Suits," Wall Street Journal, 4/23/99, A1).
Apparently even SCOTUS judges know more about firearms than anti-gun advocates.
Gura Responds..
Thanks for your support.
The solution to 922(o) will have to be political in the end. The fact is,
outside the gun community, the concept of privately owned machine guns is
intolerable to American society and 100% of all federal judges. If I had
suggested in any way -- including, by being evasive and indirect and fudging
the answer -- that machine guns are the next case and this is the path to
dumping 922(o) -- I'd have instantly lost all 9 justices. Even Scalia.
There wasn't any question of that, at all, going in, and it was confirmed in
unmistakable fashion when I stood there a few feet from the justices and
heard and saw how they related to machine guns. It was not just my opinion,
but one uniformly held by ALL the attorneys with whom we bounced ideas off,
some of them exceedingly bright people. Ditto for the people who wanted me
to declare an absolute right, like I'm there to waive some sort of GOA
bumper sticker. That's a good way to lose, too, and look like a moron in
the process.
I didn't make the last 219 years of constitutional law and I am not
responsible for the way that people out there -- and on the court-- feel
about machine guns. Some people in our gun rights community have very....
interesting.... ways of looking at the constitution and the federal courts.
I don't need to pass judgment on it other than to say, it's not the reality
in which we practice law. When we started this over five years ago, the
collective rights theory was the controlling law in 47 out of 50 states.
Hopefully, on next year's MBE, aspiring lawyers will have to bubble in the
individual rights answer to pass the test. I know you and many others out
there can appreciate that difference and I thank you for it, even if we
can't get EVERYTHING that EVERYONE wants. Honestly some people just want to
stay angry. I'm glad you're not among them.
You want to change 922(o)? Take a new person shooting. Work for "climate
change."
Thanks,
Alan
Brady's say "We're F*cked"....
So give us money.
Because they're f*cked and they know it. I'm not as optimistic as most about this case but watching Paul, Sarah, Daley, etc. this worried makes be a little bit more "glass half full".
"As I watched the presentations to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, I was constantly aware how critically, and immediately, the Justices' decision will impact gun laws that protect you and your family today, and in the future . . .
. . . from the Brady background check law and the federal machine gun ban to strong state gun laws in California, New York, Illinois, and many others.
Please help us defend these laws by making as generous a contribution as you can today to the Brady Gun Law Defense Fund.
As the Court deliberates over the next few months, your support is critical. We need to be prepared for the outcome, whatever that might be. This is no time to play wait-and-see."Because they're f*cked and they know it. I'm not as optimistic as most about this case but watching Paul, Sarah, Daley, etc. this worried makes be a little bit more "glass half full".
Really. There's no Slippery-Slope.
They won't try and make laws more restrictive or close registration offices. Really they won't. They promised.
Daley crapping himself over DC..
Guess he'll need his publicly funded security detail to clean him up.
March 19, 2008
LOS ANGELES — If the Supreme Court strikes down the ability of municipalities like the District of Columbia to regulate guns, Chicago and other cities with handgun bans would see a return of gun stores and an upswing in crime, Mayor Richard Daley said Tuesday.
"That would open a Pandora's box," he said following a news conference with Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to promote federal legislation requiring microstamped identifiers on cartridges fired from semiautomatic handguns.
Of course he ignores the fact that Chicago has seen an upswing in crime even w/ less gun stores. Not like it really matters what SCOTUS says. Daley has a history of ignoring federal laws and requirements when they don't fit his personal agenda.
March 19, 2008
LOS ANGELES — If the Supreme Court strikes down the ability of municipalities like the District of Columbia to regulate guns, Chicago and other cities with handgun bans would see a return of gun stores and an upswing in crime, Mayor Richard Daley said Tuesday.
"That would open a Pandora's box," he said following a news conference with Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to promote federal legislation requiring microstamped identifiers on cartridges fired from semiautomatic handguns.
Of course he ignores the fact that Chicago has seen an upswing in crime even w/ less gun stores. Not like it really matters what SCOTUS says. Daley has a history of ignoring federal laws and requirements when they don't fit his personal agenda.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Criminalize lawyers..
Since Prof. George Nation feels that firearm manufacturers should be held accountable because they should expect their products to be used by criminals, the following is proposed:
Any non-public defender who gets his client off is to be held legally accountable for any criminal actions the client later commits.
Any judge who releases a defendant on bail or finds a defendant Not Guilty will be held legally accountable for any criminal actions the defendant later commits.
Any board member who releases a convicted criminal out on parole will be held legally accountable for any criminal actions the convict later commits while on parole.
It just makes sense. They should expect that someone suspected of or haveing earlier committed a crime "may" actually commit one later. Right?
Think the Bar Association would support this?
Any non-public defender who gets his client off is to be held legally accountable for any criminal actions the client later commits.
Any judge who releases a defendant on bail or finds a defendant Not Guilty will be held legally accountable for any criminal actions the defendant later commits.
Any board member who releases a convicted criminal out on parole will be held legally accountable for any criminal actions the convict later commits while on parole.
It just makes sense. They should expect that someone suspected of or haveing earlier committed a crime "may" actually commit one later. Right?
Think the Bar Association would support this?
A Contrast in Responses
From the NRA:
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Arguing the Ban
I was at the Supreme Court today, and based on what I heard, I have every expectation that the Court will soon restore the Second Amendment to the District of Columbia.
Everything I saw in court shows the District's ban on functional firearms is out of sync with American history. The arguments today clearly indicated the Second Amendment is an individual, and not a collective, right. The District's attorneys spent their time swimming upstream against the U.S. Constitution.
In Washington, D.C., the law is simple. Once a gun becomes usable, it becomes illegal. That means when your window breaks at 2 a.m. and you're facing an armed criminal heading towards your bedroom, the politicians in D.C. want you to just call 911 and pray help arrives before it's too late.
That's why the District's law isn't just unconstitutional, it's unreasonable. The D.C. Gun Ban has been on the books for decades and hasn't increased public safety. In fact, the crime rate has skyrocketed. When you couple the gun ban with the District's revolving-door criminal justice system, it's open season on honest people.
The District seeks the supremacy of the government. The NRA believes that individual freedom is of the utmost importance in our country. The idea that the government can protect you from all harm is a fantasy. Even the beat cops, the law enforcement officers who risk their lives every day, will tell you that.
This case is ultimately about the good people in society, and what rights they have to protect themselves against those who ignore our laws. It's about whether the good people will have their God-given right of self defense returned to them. And after what we've seen today, I'm confident the Second Amendment will soon return to the District.
From the Brady Campaign:
Today, the Justices of the Supreme Court thoroughly discussed the Second Amendment of the Constitution for the first time in nearly 70 years, in the District of Columbia v. Heller case. Their probing questions, and the lawyers' responses, highlighted the complex history and competing approaches to gun regulation in our country. I am hopeful that their ruling will uphold the right of people in communities like the District to enact common sense gun measures they feel are needed to protect themselves and their families.
"One of the reasons we have weak or nearly non-existent gun laws today is because a lot of politicians, and many citizens, think the Second Amendment limits our ability to enact common sense gun restrictions. Today's arguments, however, demonstrated broad support from all sides for responsible regulations concerning guns.
"Think how much safer we all would be if we made it harder for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons nationwide, not just in a few areas."
A complete defacto ban being "reasonable" vs "unreasonable".
Individualism vs Collectivism.
Self-Reliance vs Dependence
Common man vs the "Elite"
That's what the debate really boils down to doesn't it?
At least Paul had the intelligence to add a qualifier to his earlier "non-existent" laws claim.
Update: The Videos. NRA v BC
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Arguing the Ban
I was at the Supreme Court today, and based on what I heard, I have every expectation that the Court will soon restore the Second Amendment to the District of Columbia.
Everything I saw in court shows the District's ban on functional firearms is out of sync with American history. The arguments today clearly indicated the Second Amendment is an individual, and not a collective, right. The District's attorneys spent their time swimming upstream against the U.S. Constitution.
In Washington, D.C., the law is simple. Once a gun becomes usable, it becomes illegal. That means when your window breaks at 2 a.m. and you're facing an armed criminal heading towards your bedroom, the politicians in D.C. want you to just call 911 and pray help arrives before it's too late.
That's why the District's law isn't just unconstitutional, it's unreasonable. The D.C. Gun Ban has been on the books for decades and hasn't increased public safety. In fact, the crime rate has skyrocketed. When you couple the gun ban with the District's revolving-door criminal justice system, it's open season on honest people.
The District seeks the supremacy of the government. The NRA believes that individual freedom is of the utmost importance in our country. The idea that the government can protect you from all harm is a fantasy. Even the beat cops, the law enforcement officers who risk their lives every day, will tell you that.
This case is ultimately about the good people in society, and what rights they have to protect themselves against those who ignore our laws. It's about whether the good people will have their God-given right of self defense returned to them. And after what we've seen today, I'm confident the Second Amendment will soon return to the District.
From the Brady Campaign:
Today, the Justices of the Supreme Court thoroughly discussed the Second Amendment of the Constitution for the first time in nearly 70 years, in the District of Columbia v. Heller case. Their probing questions, and the lawyers' responses, highlighted the complex history and competing approaches to gun regulation in our country. I am hopeful that their ruling will uphold the right of people in communities like the District to enact common sense gun measures they feel are needed to protect themselves and their families.
"One of the reasons we have weak or nearly non-existent gun laws today is because a lot of politicians, and many citizens, think the Second Amendment limits our ability to enact common sense gun restrictions. Today's arguments, however, demonstrated broad support from all sides for responsible regulations concerning guns.
"Think how much safer we all would be if we made it harder for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons nationwide, not just in a few areas."
A complete defacto ban being "reasonable" vs "unreasonable".
Individualism vs Collectivism.
Self-Reliance vs Dependence
Common man vs the "Elite"
That's what the debate really boils down to doesn't it?
At least Paul had the intelligence to add a qualifier to his earlier "non-existent" laws claim.
Update: The Videos. NRA v BC
The Silence is deafening
Prowling the news this morning, even going on to the Brady Bunch site and VPC web sites guess what nothing. No chest pounding we won some minor victory, no twisting the facts and offering the brain washed some semi sweet tid bits. No just silence.
To the pro freedom folks this is a good thing. I’m hoping June will bring even better news for the pro freedom side.
But one thought still occurs to me, this should never have been needed. The Bill of Rights is clear. I think our side should send a bill for legal expense to D.C. and the rest of the freedom hating groups, and maybe a bill to “Cryan” Bryan Miller directly. Just a nice thought.
Melody
To the pro freedom folks this is a good thing. I’m hoping June will bring even better news for the pro freedom side.
But one thought still occurs to me, this should never have been needed. The Bill of Rights is clear. I think our side should send a bill for legal expense to D.C. and the rest of the freedom hating groups, and maybe a bill to “Cryan” Bryan Miller directly. Just a nice thought.
Melody
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WON
BELLEVUE, WA – Today’s oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of District of Columbia v Heller produced a clear victory for the individual citizen’s right to keep and bear arms, the Second Amendment Foundation said.
“We are confident,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “that the high court will hand down an opinion that affirms the Second Amendment means what it says. Based on the questions that the justices asked, it is clear that they read the amicus briefs submitted by our side in support of District resident Dick Anthony Heller. We were impressed with the depth of questions asked by all of the justices, and we have no doubt that the court has a clear understanding of Second Amendment history, and that ‘the people’ are all citizens.
“We believe the District presented a very weak defense of its handgun ban that is not supported by court precedent or historical fact,” he continued. “Attorney Alan Gura, and Solicitor General Paul Clement, however, both provided a clear and proper perspective on the meaning of the Second Amendment. Mr. Gura’s remarks left the justices with a clear understanding why the District’s handgun ban is unconstitutional.”
Gottlieb believes that Gura, one of three attorneys representing District resident Dick Anthony Heller, who is challenging the 32-year-old handgun ban, “won the oral argument.”
“While we do not expect the Supreme Court to strike down every gun law and regulation on the books,” Gottlieb said, “we anticipate that the court will rule once and for all that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental individual civil right, and that gun bans, even on specific types of commonly-owned firearms, do not stand up under even modest scrutiny.
“An affirmative ruling, which we anticipate sometime in late June,” he concluded, “will provide a foundation upon which other Draconian firearms laws can be challenged, and more importantly, it will destroy a fantasy that has become a cornerstone argument for restrictive gun control laws. This should put an end to the lie that the Second Amendment only protects some mythical right of the states to organize a militia. That was not true when the amendment was written, it is not true today, and it will not be true tomorrow, regardless how hard extremist gun banners try to make it so.”
“We are confident,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “that the high court will hand down an opinion that affirms the Second Amendment means what it says. Based on the questions that the justices asked, it is clear that they read the amicus briefs submitted by our side in support of District resident Dick Anthony Heller. We were impressed with the depth of questions asked by all of the justices, and we have no doubt that the court has a clear understanding of Second Amendment history, and that ‘the people’ are all citizens.
“We believe the District presented a very weak defense of its handgun ban that is not supported by court precedent or historical fact,” he continued. “Attorney Alan Gura, and Solicitor General Paul Clement, however, both provided a clear and proper perspective on the meaning of the Second Amendment. Mr. Gura’s remarks left the justices with a clear understanding why the District’s handgun ban is unconstitutional.”
Gottlieb believes that Gura, one of three attorneys representing District resident Dick Anthony Heller, who is challenging the 32-year-old handgun ban, “won the oral argument.”
“While we do not expect the Supreme Court to strike down every gun law and regulation on the books,” Gottlieb said, “we anticipate that the court will rule once and for all that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental individual civil right, and that gun bans, even on specific types of commonly-owned firearms, do not stand up under even modest scrutiny.
“An affirmative ruling, which we anticipate sometime in late June,” he concluded, “will provide a foundation upon which other Draconian firearms laws can be challenged, and more importantly, it will destroy a fantasy that has become a cornerstone argument for restrictive gun control laws. This should put an end to the lie that the Second Amendment only protects some mythical right of the states to organize a militia. That was not true when the amendment was written, it is not true today, and it will not be true tomorrow, regardless how hard extremist gun banners try to make it so.”
-END-
| Copyright © 2008 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved. |
The Fat Lady
Well the Fat Lady is singing:
NO NOT ME you idiots. 130.ok .add 5 to 8 lbs. We can only hope she sings a tune that speaks of freedom.
In my travels I found some good news
Reuters: The highest U.S. court generally seemed supportive of the argument by opponents of the law that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does contain at least some form of an individual right to keep and bear arms. The court's four liberals seemed most sympathetic to the law during the arguments.
SCOTUSblog: The Supreme Court’s historic argument Tuesday on the meaning of the Constitution’s Second Amendment sent out one quite clear signal: individuals may well wind up with a genuine right to have a gun for self-defense in their home. But what was not similarly clear was what kind of gun that would entail, and thus what kind of limitations government cut put on access or use of a weapon.
Associated Press: A majority appears to support the view that the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns, rather than somehow linking right to service in a state militia. But it is less clear what that means for the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns, perhaps the strictest gun control law in the nation.
The Blog of Legal Times: Based on extended oral arguments this morning in the case D.C. v.. Heller, a substantial majority of the Supreme Court appears poised to declare that the Second Amendment protects some kind of individual right to bear arms. But how tethered that right is to the functioning of state militias is less clear at the end of vigorous debate and active questioning from all the justices -- except, as usual, Clarence Thomas who asked no questions. Only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and possibly Stephen Breyer and David Souter appeared to question the individual rights view. At least some parts of D.C.'s gun control ordinance seemed in jeopardy. Justice Anthony Kennedy, always under the spotlight as a potential swing vote, seemed strongly convinced that the Second Amendment declares an individual right to bear arms "in addition to" the "very important" protection it contains for state militias.
USA TODAY: Several key justices, including Anthony Kennedy, suggested by their questions today that they believed the Second Amendment was rooted in a concern for Americans' ability to protect themselves. Kennedy referred to the "concern of the remote settler to defend himself and his family against hostile Indian tribes and outlaws, wolves and bears and grizzlies and things like that."
If a Supreme Court majority does broadly rule for an individual right to guns, the decision would dramatically reverse a trend in recent decades in lower courts that the Constitution protects gun rights associated with state militia. Such a decision would also spur new rounds of litigation over whether various gun regulations are constitutional.
I am sure that somewhere in the Chicago area, and in Paulie’s house there are long faces right now.
I just hope the final verdict is a good one. But that will simply be a small reprieve trust me the evil powers at the Brady cave, and the VPC Sewer are conjuring up a new move. We need to stay on our toes.
Melody
NO NOT ME you idiots. 130.ok .add 5 to 8 lbs. We can only hope she sings a tune that speaks of freedom.
In my travels I found some good news
Reuters: The highest U.S. court generally seemed supportive of the argument by opponents of the law that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does contain at least some form of an individual right to keep and bear arms. The court's four liberals seemed most sympathetic to the law during the arguments.
SCOTUSblog: The Supreme Court’s historic argument Tuesday on the meaning of the Constitution’s Second Amendment sent out one quite clear signal: individuals may well wind up with a genuine right to have a gun for self-defense in their home. But what was not similarly clear was what kind of gun that would entail, and thus what kind of limitations government cut put on access or use of a weapon.
Associated Press: A majority appears to support the view that the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns, rather than somehow linking right to service in a state militia. But it is less clear what that means for the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns, perhaps the strictest gun control law in the nation.
The Blog of Legal Times: Based on extended oral arguments this morning in the case D.C. v.. Heller, a substantial majority of the Supreme Court appears poised to declare that the Second Amendment protects some kind of individual right to bear arms. But how tethered that right is to the functioning of state militias is less clear at the end of vigorous debate and active questioning from all the justices -- except, as usual, Clarence Thomas who asked no questions. Only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and possibly Stephen Breyer and David Souter appeared to question the individual rights view. At least some parts of D.C.'s gun control ordinance seemed in jeopardy. Justice Anthony Kennedy, always under the spotlight as a potential swing vote, seemed strongly convinced that the Second Amendment declares an individual right to bear arms "in addition to" the "very important" protection it contains for state militias.
USA TODAY: Several key justices, including Anthony Kennedy, suggested by their questions today that they believed the Second Amendment was rooted in a concern for Americans' ability to protect themselves. Kennedy referred to the "concern of the remote settler to defend himself and his family against hostile Indian tribes and outlaws, wolves and bears and grizzlies and things like that."
If a Supreme Court majority does broadly rule for an individual right to guns, the decision would dramatically reverse a trend in recent decades in lower courts that the Constitution protects gun rights associated with state militia. Such a decision would also spur new rounds of litigation over whether various gun regulations are constitutional.
I am sure that somewhere in the Chicago area, and in Paulie’s house there are long faces right now.
I just hope the final verdict is a good one. But that will simply be a small reprieve trust me the evil powers at the Brady cave, and the VPC Sewer are conjuring up a new move. We need to stay on our toes.
Melody
Feeding Frenzy..
Uncle, SIH, ScotusBlog, etc. etc. etc.
I think I'll wait for the chum to settle before throwing in my line.
Update: Do you know how hard it is to solder when one of the most potentially important court cases of our generation is being liveblogged?
I think I'll wait for the chum to settle before throwing in my line.
Update: Do you know how hard it is to solder when one of the most potentially important court cases of our generation is being liveblogged?
Pure unadulterated Zumbo...
From USA Today.
Ahab beats the Fudd out of it.
Note that the piece is by an "authorized journalist" who shot a friend (meaning the gun was pointed at him) when it "inexplicably discharged" (meaning he pulled the trigger).
Ahab beats the Fudd out of it.
Note that the piece is by an "authorized journalist" who shot a friend (meaning the gun was pointed at him) when it "inexplicably discharged" (meaning he pulled the trigger).
March 18th
Hello Boys and Girls:
Are you all ready? Today is March 18 a day that could decide if we are still a free nation with a working constitution, or have we digressed in to a nanny state, of socialism, where a minority decides what rights we should or should not have.
I have never felt that gun control is about safety, or saving lives. It is simply about control. I look at our representatives that push gun control, and a funny similarity emerges. They are all “Limousine liberals” Example: Barbara Boxer, Millionaire, funneling contracts to her husbands company, and a concealed carry license holder. Yet wants all out handgun bans to you and I.
This is all too familiar, and common a profile. I have asked the question, what has happened to our country? I have seen a quantum shift since the 1960’s in personal liberty’s and the scary part, the ones that are advocating the nanny state are the same ones protesting during the 60’s for freedom.
I recall my Grandfather, saying that LBJ’s war on poverty was actually a war on the middle class. I did not understand it at the time but oh do I understand now. I have seen a marked increase in crime, and I would directly attribute it to the lack of personal responsibility. We were all told when we were kids “Nothing comes for free”. “Work builds Pride” And you thought it was just noise when you were young. But how true those words are.
Let’s all keep our fingers crossed, for a good verdict.
~Melody~
Monday, March 17, 2008
And for IL hunters who STILL don't think they're on the "list"..
Naomi Jackobsson, the same woman that sponsored HB4349 Ammo Encoding, is a member of the Illinois Legislative Sportsmen's Caucus.
Can we say Fifth Column boys and girls?
So yes. You'll keep your bolt-action rifle. However you'll be paying $5 per round and saying "Thank you Sir" that it wasn't more.
Can we say Fifth Column boys and girls?
So yes. You'll keep your bolt-action rifle. However you'll be paying $5 per round and saying "Thank you Sir" that it wasn't more.
Illinois Governor stealing money.
Gov. Blagojevich has a habit of "sweeping" money out of various state funds to pay for his pet projects. Here's one:
71. Firearm Owner's Notification Fund _________ $107,203
Gun Owners Monies in the fund shall be used exclusively to
pay the cost of sending notices of expiration of FOID cards.
Excess monies in the fund shall be used to ensure prompt
and efficient processing of applications.
Now here's the law on that:
(430 ILCS 65/5) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑5)
(Text of Section before amendment by P.A. 95‑581)
Sec. 5. The Department of State Police shall either approve or deny all applications within 30 days from the date they are received, and every applicant found qualified pursuant to Section 8 of this Act by the Department shall be entitled to a Firearm Owner's Identification Card upon the payment of a $5 fee. $3 of each fee derived from the issuance of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards, or renewals thereof, shall be deposited in the Wildlife and Fish Fund in the State Treasury; $1 of such fee shall be deposited in the State Police Services Fund and $1 of such fee shall be deposited in the Firearm Owner's Notification Fund. Monies in the Firearm Owner's Notification Fund shall be used exclusively to pay for the cost of sending notices of expiration of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards under Section 13.2 of this Act. Excess monies in the Firearm Owner's Notification Fund shall be used to ensure the prompt and efficient processing of applications received under Section 4 of this Act.
(Source: P.A. 94‑353, eff. 7‑29‑05.)
(430 ILCS 65/13.2) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑13.2)
Sec. 13.2. The Department of State Police shall, 60 days prior to the expiration of a Firearm Owner's Identification Card, forward by first class mail to each person whose card is to expire a notification of the expiration of the card and an application which may be used to apply for renewal of the card. It is the obligation of the holder of a Firearm Owner's Identification Card to notify the Department of State Police of any address change since the issuance of the Firearm Owner's Identification Card.
(Source: P.A. 91‑690, eff. 4‑13‑00.)
So Rod is in violation of the law. Shock.
71. Firearm Owner's Notification Fund _________ $107,203
Gun Owners Monies in the fund shall be used exclusively to
pay the cost of sending notices of expiration of FOID cards.
Excess monies in the fund shall be used to ensure prompt
and efficient processing of applications.
Now here's the law on that:
(430 ILCS 65/5) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑5)
(Text of Section before amendment by P.A. 95‑581)
Sec. 5. The Department of State Police shall either approve or deny all applications within 30 days from the date they are received, and every applicant found qualified pursuant to Section 8 of this Act by the Department shall be entitled to a Firearm Owner's Identification Card upon the payment of a $5 fee. $3 of each fee derived from the issuance of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards, or renewals thereof, shall be deposited in the Wildlife and Fish Fund in the State Treasury; $1 of such fee shall be deposited in the State Police Services Fund and $1 of such fee shall be deposited in the Firearm Owner's Notification Fund. Monies in the Firearm Owner's Notification Fund shall be used exclusively to pay for the cost of sending notices of expiration of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards under Section 13.2 of this Act. Excess monies in the Firearm Owner's Notification Fund shall be used to ensure the prompt and efficient processing of applications received under Section 4 of this Act.
(Source: P.A. 94‑353, eff. 7‑29‑05.)
(430 ILCS 65/13.2) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑13.2)
Sec. 13.2. The Department of State Police shall, 60 days prior to the expiration of a Firearm Owner's Identification Card, forward by first class mail to each person whose card is to expire a notification of the expiration of the card and an application which may be used to apply for renewal of the card. It is the obligation of the holder of a Firearm Owner's Identification Card to notify the Department of State Police of any address change since the issuance of the Firearm Owner's Identification Card.
(Source: P.A. 91‑690, eff. 4‑13‑00.)
So Rod is in violation of the law. Shock.
Good day for Chicago Gun Laws
3 killed in separate shootings in Chicago
18-year-old killed in Southwest Side drive-by
Two people shot in Austin neighborhood
So the response should be to make guns MORE illegal and blame the rest of the state where these things are not happening nearly as often.
18-year-old killed in Southwest Side drive-by
Two people shot in Austin neighborhood
So the response should be to make guns MORE illegal and blame the rest of the state where these things are not happening nearly as often.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Another BAG day.
Why not? It was a good deal and I had some extra cash.
Norinco SKS. Wood stock and all matching numbers. My local pusher didn't have the bayonet w/ him so he'll get it to me later.
Some cans will have improved ventilation later this afternoon.
Norinco SKS. Wood stock and all matching numbers. My local pusher didn't have the bayonet w/ him so he'll get it to me later.
Some cans will have improved ventilation later this afternoon.
I made my call. Did you?
312-603-6400 then options 1, 1, and 2 to oppose Cook County's Gun Bans.
Not like it really matters. As has been reported, Suffredin is a paid anti-gun lobbyist and even if they are opposed 100:1 like in PA, they'll just legislate in secret.
Such high ethical values our anti-gunners have.
Not like it really matters. As has been reported, Suffredin is a paid anti-gun lobbyist and even if they are opposed 100:1 like in PA, they'll just legislate in secret.
Such high ethical values our anti-gunners have.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
She relied on a piece of paper to protect her..
Just like the authorities tell us to. Like so many other examples, it failed when her ex decided he didn't feel like abiding by it.
The law didn't save her
She tried a court order. She had him arrested. She took all the legal steps she could right up to the day her ex-boyfriend shot her dead in a parking lot.
When will these organizations stop taking a passive approach to personal safety?
The law didn't save her
She tried a court order. She had him arrested. She took all the legal steps she could right up to the day her ex-boyfriend shot her dead in a parking lot.
When will these organizations stop taking a passive approach to personal safety?
Breach of Contract?
The SOS of Montana thinks so:
There was no assertion in 1889 that the Second Amendment was susceptible to a collective rights interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the Second Amendment to be consistent with the declared Montana constitutional right of “any person” to bear arms.
As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honored so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era of unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the United States and Montana, and many other states.
There was no assertion in 1889 that the Second Amendment was susceptible to a collective rights interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the Second Amendment to be consistent with the declared Montana constitutional right of “any person” to bear arms.
As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honored so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era of unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the United States and Montana, and many other states.
Clement to "amend his position" on Heller?
That's according to Robert Novak of the Chicago Sun Times:
That has not lessened puzzlement over Clement, who has tried to explain his course to the White House by claiming he feared Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court's current swing vote, would join a liberal majority on gun rights if forced to rule on Silberman's opinion. The more plausible explanation for Clement's stance is that he could not resist opposition to individual gun rights by career lawyers in the Justice Department's Criminal Division (who clashed with the Office of Legal Counsel in a heated internal struggle). Newly installed Attorney General Michael Mukasey, a neophyte at Justice, was unaware of the conflict and learned about Clement's position only after it had been locked in.
The cause needs help from Clement in his 15 minute oral argument, but not if he reiterates his written brief. The word was passed in government circles this week that Clement would amend his position when he actually faces the justices -- an odd ending to bizarre behavior by the Justice Department.
I'll believe it Tuesday when/if I hear it.
That has not lessened puzzlement over Clement, who has tried to explain his course to the White House by claiming he feared Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court's current swing vote, would join a liberal majority on gun rights if forced to rule on Silberman's opinion. The more plausible explanation for Clement's stance is that he could not resist opposition to individual gun rights by career lawyers in the Justice Department's Criminal Division (who clashed with the Office of Legal Counsel in a heated internal struggle). Newly installed Attorney General Michael Mukasey, a neophyte at Justice, was unaware of the conflict and learned about Clement's position only after it had been locked in.
The cause needs help from Clement in his 15 minute oral argument, but not if he reiterates his written brief. The word was passed in government circles this week that Clement would amend his position when he actually faces the justices -- an odd ending to bizarre behavior by the Justice Department.
I'll believe it Tuesday when/if I hear it.
Women Bearing Firearms Increasing
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day. So goes the New York slime. I came across this article. Women Bearing Firearms Increasing. This is an older article but is good reading. It points out the myths that the VPC, Brady, and Ceasefire attempt to pass off as fact.
Link
Link
Friday, March 14, 2008
Brady Campaign: Help Defend Gun Bans
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Case Next Week!
We need your help to defend America's gun laws
Dear Thirdpower
Brady Gun Law Defense Fund [image]
This Tuesday, March 18, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear what could be the most significant Second Amendment case in our country's history — and your Brady Center will be there.
Thanks to your support and the support of members like you, we will be in the courtroom on Tuesday — and then speaking to the press on the steps of the Supreme Court immediately afterwards. We've already contacted ABC, CNN, and Fox News and have done advance interviews with other media outlets.
The Brady Center's team of lawyers have been hard at work preparing our arguments and providing in-depth expertise to those involved with the case over the past twelve months since a U.S. Court of Appeals struck down a gun law as violating the Second Amendment for the first time in American history.
And in November, when the Supreme Court decided to take the case, thanks to your support, we put together an amicus brief that was co-signed by nine national law enforcement groups. In addition, the Brady team helped to coordinate and support other friend-of-the-court briefs that were filed by doctors and nurses, law professors, historians, and others who believe in sensible gun laws.
In the past few weeks, a barrage of national and regional media requests have come in to the Brady Center. These will continue — beyond when the Supreme Court's decision is announced later this spring. And our goal is to use the media's coverage of the case to educate the public on what the Second Amendment means for gun laws in our country.
The U.S. Supreme Court has the opportunity to reverse a clearly erroneous decision and make it clear that the Constitution does not prevent communities from having the gun laws they believe are needed to protect public safety. The Brady Center will be there — for you — to defend America's gun laws.
We will keep you posted on what develops — and updates will be available Tuesday afternoon at www.BradyCenter.org, including links to the courtroom audio.
Sincerely,
Sarah's Signature (100x43)
Sarah Brady, Chair
Translation: We will continue to lie and distort the issue using the media and every other method at our disposal because, if we lose, this could be our death knell.
Send us money.
We need your help to defend America's gun laws
Dear Thirdpower
Brady Gun Law Defense Fund [image]
This Tuesday, March 18, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear what could be the most significant Second Amendment case in our country's history — and your Brady Center will be there.
Thanks to your support and the support of members like you, we will be in the courtroom on Tuesday — and then speaking to the press on the steps of the Supreme Court immediately afterwards. We've already contacted ABC, CNN, and Fox News and have done advance interviews with other media outlets.
The Brady Center's team of lawyers have been hard at work preparing our arguments and providing in-depth expertise to those involved with the case over the past twelve months since a U.S. Court of Appeals struck down a gun law as violating the Second Amendment for the first time in American history.
And in November, when the Supreme Court decided to take the case, thanks to your support, we put together an amicus brief that was co-signed by nine national law enforcement groups. In addition, the Brady team helped to coordinate and support other friend-of-the-court briefs that were filed by doctors and nurses, law professors, historians, and others who believe in sensible gun laws.
In the past few weeks, a barrage of national and regional media requests have come in to the Brady Center. These will continue — beyond when the Supreme Court's decision is announced later this spring. And our goal is to use the media's coverage of the case to educate the public on what the Second Amendment means for gun laws in our country.
The U.S. Supreme Court has the opportunity to reverse a clearly erroneous decision and make it clear that the Constitution does not prevent communities from having the gun laws they believe are needed to protect public safety. The Brady Center will be there — for you — to defend America's gun laws.
We will keep you posted on what develops — and updates will be available Tuesday afternoon at www.BradyCenter.org, including links to the courtroom audio.
Sincerely,
Sarah's Signature (100x43)
Sarah Brady, Chair
Translation: We will continue to lie and distort the issue using the media and every other method at our disposal because, if we lose, this could be our death knell.
Send us money.
Anti-gunners and IGOLD
It wasn't only the MMM and BC who weren't to be seen, apparently Emil Jones, President of the IL Senate, was also difficult to locate, just like last year. After "not being available" for scheduled appointments, he was apparently seen hiding out in the cafeteria w/ several other anti-gun legislators after closing time.
In 4 days
People:
In 4 days the US Supreme Court justices will hear arguments. March 18 is the day a ruling is likely by the end of June.
Fact is three out of four Americans — 73% — believe the Second Amendment spells out an individual right to own a firearm, this is according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll of 1,016 adults taken Feb. 8-10.
Couple of things, when interacting with our anti Freedom friends they are forgetting that the right to arms is a Right, not a privilege at the pleasure of the government. Crime control is a proven effective method. Gun control is and has always been a failure.
Ask them, are you willing to give up the freedom of speech? Freedom of the Press? Or, Freedom of religion? How about the right to a trial?
Remind them, regardless of what some seemingly well meaning people will tell them, giving up your any of your rights as a citizen never is a good. I would point out history in the last 150 years an what gun control has produced...
I am keeping my fingers crossed, for a good verdict.
Melody
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Only One Housecleaning
Top cop replaces 21 of city's 25 district commanders
Now the question is, is this an actual housecleaning to bring in fresh ideas and eliminate some corruption or is the 'new boss same as the old boss' and these are the ones that had the clout?
The first part begs the question then that if we're supposed to rely on the "Only Ones" for our protection because they are screened, highly trained, and more qualified to do so, why would they need to clean house?
The second part needs no qualifying question. This is Chicago.
Industrialized?
A common PuSH'er meme is "Look at any industrialized nation that has gun control and we see lower homicide rates."
Is this universally true? Is Russia not industrialized? They have a homicide rate 4X that of the US. Mexico? 3X. South Africa? 10X. All three have strict gun control and are considered industrialized.
Perhaps they use a different definition to determine whether a country is "industrialized" or not? Is there a list of objective qualifications out there that they use?
Why do they have to include the qualifier "industrialized" at all? Does that make them "more like us"? Does "industrialization" somehow instill improved moral values? What about the countries that aren't industrialized? Are the citizens of these somehow less developed morally and ethically than the others?
That sure seems like a discriminatory way to defend ones ideology.
Is this universally true? Is Russia not industrialized? They have a homicide rate 4X that of the US. Mexico? 3X. South Africa? 10X. All three have strict gun control and are considered industrialized.
Perhaps they use a different definition to determine whether a country is "industrialized" or not? Is there a list of objective qualifications out there that they use?
Why do they have to include the qualifier "industrialized" at all? Does that make them "more like us"? Does "industrialization" somehow instill improved moral values? What about the countries that aren't industrialized? Are the citizens of these somehow less developed morally and ethically than the others?
That sure seems like a discriminatory way to defend ones ideology.
Len Savage on Lou Dobbs 3/13/08
Lou Dobbs Tonight is featuring him in two segments. Per show producer Chris Murphey:
So it may be one segment tonight and another segment tomorrow. Anyway, plan on watching this, or else program your recorder if you can't. Expect legal and technical issues to be explored that you have not seen on "mainstream" television before. At this point, we have every reason to believe the coverage will be fair and comprehensive.
We will possibly split this story into a two part event…either way we’ll be running something tonight in the show…airs 7P-8p EST on CNN…unsure of the hit time for this piece, but expect it in the first half-hour.
So it may be one segment tonight and another segment tomorrow. Anyway, plan on watching this, or else program your recorder if you can't. Expect legal and technical issues to be explored that you have not seen on "mainstream" television before. At this point, we have every reason to believe the coverage will be fair and comprehensive.
IACP endorses denying due process
Joining Sen. Lautenberg in pissing on the 5th Amendment.
The Lautenberg-King bill seeks to close the "terror gap" in federal gun laws by giving the Attorney General the power to block gun sales to those on the federal government’s terror watch list.
The same list "riddled w/ errors" .
The Lautenberg-King measure specifically:
• Provides the Attorney General with discretionary authority to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of a firearm or explosives license or permit when a background check reveals that the purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist and the Attorney General reasonably believes that the person may use a firearm or explosives in connection with terrorism;
Translation: Whomever he/she feels like denying.
• Includes due process safeguards that afford an affected person an opportunity to challenge a denial by the Attorney General; and
Translation: As long as they choose to fund said "safeguard".
• Protects the sensitive information upon which terrorist watch lists are based.
Translation: We're going to keep it secret so you don't know if you're on the list or not, then, when you try to buy a gun and are denied, we're going to arrest you for committing a felony permanently denying your ability to own. Unless you can afford to resurrect and hire Johnnie Cochran.
Nothing surprising from a group funded by the Joyce Foundation.
Hattip to SIH.
The Lautenberg-King bill seeks to close the "terror gap" in federal gun laws by giving the Attorney General the power to block gun sales to those on the federal government’s terror watch list.
The same list "riddled w/ errors" .
The Lautenberg-King measure specifically:
• Provides the Attorney General with discretionary authority to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of a firearm or explosives license or permit when a background check reveals that the purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist and the Attorney General reasonably believes that the person may use a firearm or explosives in connection with terrorism;
Translation: Whomever he/she feels like denying.
• Includes due process safeguards that afford an affected person an opportunity to challenge a denial by the Attorney General; and
Translation: As long as they choose to fund said "safeguard".
• Protects the sensitive information upon which terrorist watch lists are based.
Translation: We're going to keep it secret so you don't know if you're on the list or not, then, when you try to buy a gun and are denied, we're going to arrest you for committing a felony permanently denying your ability to own. Unless you can afford to resurrect and hire Johnnie Cochran.
Nothing surprising from a group funded by the Joyce Foundation.
Hattip to SIH.
Irony.
ID thief arrested because person he was claiming to be had an outstanding warrant.
I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.
I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.
Uncle gets more Reuters attention.
On the AHSA.
Ne'er we forget that John Rosenthal also has his own Brady subsidiary blogs on HuffPo. You remember him? The guy that put up the big anti-NRA sign in Boston? Board member of AHSA?
Ne'er we forget that John Rosenthal also has his own Brady subsidiary blogs on HuffPo. You remember him? The guy that put up the big anti-NRA sign in Boston? Board member of AHSA?
Being in the middle..
From a post on the GunDebate.com Forum:
If you think you believe that there is an individual right to keep and bear arms, but see nothing wrong with Chicago or DC imposing an absolute ban, you're not in the middle. When you tell the gun nuts you do, you're either lying to them or you're lying to yourself, and either way they won't listen to you.
If you think that we should require licenses for gun owners, and see nothing wrong with jurisdictions in which the officials in charge of issuing carry permits have full discretion as to who they will and will not issue to, with no objective standards, and no consequences, then you're never going to get the gun nuts to listen to you.
If you think you believe that there is an individual right to keep and bear arms, but see nothing wrong with Chicago or DC imposing an absolute ban, you're not in the middle. When you tell the gun nuts you do, you're either lying to them or you're lying to yourself, and either way they won't listen to you.
If you think that we should require licenses for gun owners, and see nothing wrong with jurisdictions in which the officials in charge of issuing carry permits have full discretion as to who they will and will not issue to, with no objective standards, and no consequences, then you're never going to get the gun nuts to listen to you.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Blogger Milestone
Since I started keeping stats shortly after I started this blog, I have logged over 30,000 visits as of today.
Page Loads Unique Visitors First Time Visitors Returning Visitors
Total 40,940 30,265 18,995 11,270
Average 234 173 109 64
Page Loads Unique Visitors First Time Visitors Returning Visitors
Total 40,940 30,265 18,995 11,270
Average 234 173 109 64
Ammo accountability
According to IL Rep. Burke's office, HB4259 went before the Exec committee today and failed.
One down. More to go. Including at least two more serializing bills.
Update:
NBC report on it.
Voting card via IllinoisCarry.
One down. More to go. Including at least two more serializing bills.
Update:
NBC report on it.
Voting card via IllinoisCarry.
The Numbers Game.
Anti-gunners claim public support of at least 2-1 in favor of "Gun Control". If that were true, where were the 5000-6000 counter protesters in Springfield?
Where were the ICHV, BC/MMM, Jesse Jackson, Rev. Pfleger, et al. ?
Photo blatantly stolen from IllinoisCarry.
More Photos.
Where were the ICHV, BC/MMM, Jesse Jackson, Rev. Pfleger, et al. ?
Photo blatantly stolen from IllinoisCarry.
More Photos.
Media bias..
The IGOLD attendence is being estimated as over 2,000 individuals. The reaction by the major media? Effectively Nil. Some local stations ran blurbs as well as some local papers. What were the reactions in the big Chicago papers? Sun-Times: Nothing. Chicago Tribune: An anti-gun editorial and a Daley rant.
Why would they ignore this? It isn't because they didn't know about it. Press releases were sent out as well as letters sent by individuals. It must be something else. What could it be?
Update: Apparently they did do a short cutnpaste from the AP. The same one that's been published in the small papers adn about 1/4 the space of the anti-gun articles on the same day.
Why would they ignore this? It isn't because they didn't know about it. Press releases were sent out as well as letters sent by individuals. It must be something else. What could it be?
Update: Apparently they did do a short cutnpaste from the AP. The same one that's been published in the small papers adn about 1/4 the space of the anti-gun articles on the same day.
A great idea from Mayor Bloomberg
State Legislators Against Illegal Guns
No more worries about group rankings and endorsements. Just a nice simple list of people to campaign and vote against in the elections. Thanks Bloomie.
Apparently the new "Coalition" of six individuals includes Illinois Rep. Elizabeth Coulson.
I sent her an e-mail regarding their use of trace data to justify their position. Will she respond? I've also put a post up on Illinois Carry and contacted the ISRA.
This Communication Revolution thing is great.
No more worries about group rankings and endorsements. Just a nice simple list of people to campaign and vote against in the elections. Thanks Bloomie.
Apparently the new "Coalition" of six individuals includes Illinois Rep. Elizabeth Coulson.
I sent her an e-mail regarding their use of trace data to justify their position. Will she respond? I've also put a post up on Illinois Carry and contacted the ISRA.
This Communication Revolution thing is great.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
A man we knew as "Solitude"
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I would like to take a moment to remember “Solitude” we knew him well. We all must remember his laugh and charm, in a way “Solitude” was a part of many of us. Perhaps he will show himself one more time at the big pancake house in the sky.
Bow your heads……..OK then don’t
Melody
Another Amendment..
Why do most gun owners oppose registration and mandatory "Safe Storage"? Because then the authorities can walk into your home anytime they like to see if you're following the law. Just like they're doing in Australia. Now boys and girls, which amendment does that violate? But that could never happen here, right? There's no slippery-slope, is there?
Hint: 2+2
Thanks to War on Guns for the link.
Hint: 2+2
Thanks to War on Guns for the link.
IGOLD '08
I wasn't able attend due to work issues but here are some photos.
#1, #2, #3
Once again, more people showed up in support of state gun rights than showed up for the national protests organized by the Brady Bunch and Rev. Jackson. Last year we had between 1,200 and 1,500 people.
To put things in perspective, I've had as many or more visitors on this blog today (174), a day I didn't even post anything till evening, than Rev. Jackson had followers at his Aug 28th non-event.
#1, #2, #3
Once again, more people showed up in support of state gun rights than showed up for the national protests organized by the Brady Bunch and Rev. Jackson. Last year we had between 1,200 and 1,500 people.
To put things in perspective, I've had as many or more visitors on this blog today (174), a day I didn't even post anything till evening, than Rev. Jackson had followers at his Aug 28th non-event.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Backing a loser..
Seems to be Philly mayor Nutter's strong suit. First highly illegal gun bills and now increasingly unpopular presidential contenders.
Hillary for DNC !! She's got my support.
Hillary for DNC !! She's got my support.
Want to hear about the other amendments?
Anti's are regularly harping on how we as "gunnuts" don't as vigorously defend the rest of the amendments on our gun blogs as we do the Second. Well Duh. So here you go, a DOJ official trying to intimidate into silence what would be most closely attributed to a very thick and abrasive brick wall.
The Second Amendment. Defender of the rest.
The Second Amendment. Defender of the rest.
Spitzer playin' w/ his gun too much?
Elliot Spitzer, current Gov. of NY and the AG who started the lawsuits against firearms, has been connected to prostitution rings in his fine state according to the NYT and AP. Scheduled announcement this afternoon.
Update: Yep. The same guy that prosecuted prostitutes and their houses was at the same time frequenting them while probably telling his wife and kids he was "working". Hypocrite. Maybe he should sue himself as a public nuisance.
Update: Yep. The same guy that prosecuted prostitutes and their houses was at the same time frequenting them while probably telling his wife and kids he was "working". Hypocrite. Maybe he should sue himself as a public nuisance.
We need more Gov't created lists.
Because they handle the ones they have now so efficiently.
Not even going into the "Terrorist Watchlist" or BATFE fiascos, here's my recent experience w/ bureaucracy and lists. We're on state insurance. I need to go for an outpatient procedure so my wife called our family Doc. Doc says they don't do it there so we need to get referred through the state. Wife calls the state office. After being transferred several times, she finally is connected to the right office and is given a list of area Doctors who do said procedure and accept the insurance.
EVERY SINGLE NUMBER SHE WAS GIVEN WAS WRONG OR NOT IN SERVICE!!!
So instead she talks to a relative who had the same procedure done and calls that Doctor. He accepts the insurance and is local but his name wasn't even on the list given.
But they'll be able to accurately keep registration, medical, and suspect lists on millions of individuals.
Sure. Pull the other one.
Not even going into the "Terrorist Watchlist" or BATFE fiascos, here's my recent experience w/ bureaucracy and lists. We're on state insurance. I need to go for an outpatient procedure so my wife called our family Doc. Doc says they don't do it there so we need to get referred through the state. Wife calls the state office. After being transferred several times, she finally is connected to the right office and is given a list of area Doctors who do said procedure and accept the insurance.
EVERY SINGLE NUMBER SHE WAS GIVEN WAS WRONG OR NOT IN SERVICE!!!
So instead she talks to a relative who had the same procedure done and calls that Doctor. He accepts the insurance and is local but his name wasn't even on the list given.
But they'll be able to accurately keep registration, medical, and suspect lists on millions of individuals.
Sure. Pull the other one.
WE'RE #1, WE'RE #1!!!
Gun 'Blobbers" have over taken Corrupt Gun Dealers on the Triangle of Death. I knew we could do it.
Reasoned Discourse
Q: What do you call an up and coming historian who cites a fraudulent paper then tries to claim he didn't really cite it?
A: A fry cook.
More here, here, here, here, and here.
Update: Cramer et al. v. Kozuskanich
A: A fry cook.
More here, here, here, here, and here.
Update: Cramer et al. v. Kozuskanich
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Reasoned Discourse
Q: What do you call someone who blatantly misrepresents (ie lies) about what someone else said and then has what was actually said rubbed in his face for all to see?
A: A Ceasefire Board member.
A: A Ceasefire Board member.
Classic Political Cartoons
Armed and Safe brought it to my attention that he had never seen several political cartoons that I remember as being one of the first things I found when I got into advocacy. This is my personal favorite:
They were originally done for Keep and Bear Arms and archived here w/ his other works also available. Clicking on the Cartoon link at the top of the KABA page has more from other artists.
They were originally done for Keep and Bear Arms and archived here w/ his other works also available. Clicking on the Cartoon link at the top of the KABA page has more from other artists.
Every Day can be BAG day...
Why wait?
Bulgarian 9mm Makarov
Update: Yes DOJ, I bought it legally through a licensed dealer.
Bulgarian 9mm Makarov
Update: Yes DOJ, I bought it legally through a licensed dealer.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Illinois Gun Registration.
I've blogged about it here and here. ArmedandSafe has more . Now WaronGuns asks the question" So, Illinois gun owners--what are you gonna do about it? Each and every one of you, personally?"
I'll tell you what I WON'T do.
I WILL NOT register.
I will not hand over my guns when they change the law to confiscate them. Chicago. New York. California. New Jersey. Washington DC. New Orleans. This isn't an if. It's a when. There IS NO OTHER PRECEDENT. Just like the push for Brady II and the current expansion of the Federal AWB, NJ Assemblywoman Joan Quigley says it plainly "I feel good, but it is only the first step in the process,". And that "process" is a defacto or dejure ban on all firearms.
I WILL NOT register.
And the politburo will have created a criminal out of a citizen.
I'll tell you what I WON'T do.
I WILL NOT register.
I will not hand over my guns when they change the law to confiscate them. Chicago. New York. California. New Jersey. Washington DC. New Orleans. This isn't an if. It's a when. There IS NO OTHER PRECEDENT. Just like the push for Brady II and the current expansion of the Federal AWB, NJ Assemblywoman Joan Quigley says it plainly "I feel good, but it is only the first step in the process,". And that "process" is a defacto or dejure ban on all firearms.
I WILL NOT register.
And the politburo will have created a criminal out of a citizen.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
GunsAmerica Fraud..
Got an E-mail from them today stating to avoid TRUSTe payments as there is apparently a group of scammers out there using it:
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL GUNSAMERICA FRAUD ALERT
Do NOT send payment to anyone asking you to use TRUSTe.
If the price of an item is unusually low - be suspicious.
If you suspect fraud, email GunsAmerica customer service.
There is a group of con artists who are targeting buyers on private selling sites such as GunsAmerica.
These frauds advertise items they do not have, take your money, then never deliver.
One very common ploy they use is to send an email to you telling you about TRUSTe secure payments.
They will also try to convince you that GunsAmerica has approved payment through TRUSTe.
This is a scam!!
They will also tell you GunsAmerica has a payment protection program or buyer protection plan - this is not true.
We can not and do not have a payment protection program.
HOW TO PROTECT YOURSELF:
Be sure to read our FAQs on FRAUDS & SCAMS.
http://www.gunsamerica.com/FAQ.htm#fraudscams
Most scams of this type will be selling items at a very low price.
Always question a deal that seems too good to be true - because it probably isn't true.
Always get the seller's first and last name, address, phone number, and the name of the FFL who will be shipping to your FFL (if applicable).
If the seller does not want to give you the FFL info, he must at least give it to your FFL dealer before you make payment.
Always check a seller's name, address, and phone number in known databases (white pages, USPS.com, etc.).
NEVER send payment using MoneyGram or wire transfers - they are almost always used by scammers.
If you do not feel comfortable, if something doesn't feel right - do NOT deal with that person.
If you suspect fraud please send an email to customerservice@gunsamerica.com - be sure to give us the GA Listing Number.
Customer Service
www.GunsAmerica.com
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL GUNSAMERICA FRAUD ALERT
Do NOT send payment to anyone asking you to use TRUSTe.
If the price of an item is unusually low - be suspicious.
If you suspect fraud, email GunsAmerica customer service.
There is a group of con artists who are targeting buyers on private selling sites such as GunsAmerica.
These frauds advertise items they do not have, take your money, then never deliver.
One very common ploy they use is to send an email to you telling you about TRUSTe secure payments.
They will also try to convince you that GunsAmerica has approved payment through TRUSTe.
This is a scam!!
They will also tell you GunsAmerica has a payment protection program or buyer protection plan - this is not true.
We can not and do not have a payment protection program.
HOW TO PROTECT YOURSELF:
Be sure to read our FAQs on FRAUDS & SCAMS.
http://www.gunsamerica.com/FAQ.htm#fraudscams
Most scams of this type will be selling items at a very low price.
Always question a deal that seems too good to be true - because it probably isn't true.
Always get the seller's first and last name, address, phone number, and the name of the FFL who will be shipping to your FFL (if applicable).
If the seller does not want to give you the FFL info, he must at least give it to your FFL dealer before you make payment.
Always check a seller's name, address, and phone number in known databases (white pages, USPS.com, etc.).
NEVER send payment using MoneyGram or wire transfers - they are almost always used by scammers.
If you do not feel comfortable, if something doesn't feel right - do NOT deal with that person.
If you suspect fraud please send an email to customerservice@gunsamerica.com - be sure to give us the GA Listing Number.
Customer Service
www.GunsAmerica.com
Escort Helicoptor Carriers
A good idea being initiated by the JMSDF under the title Aircraft Carrying Destroyer. Not as big as traditional carriers or even helicopter carriers, it's about the size of a traditional destroyer class ship. It can carry 4 to 12 helicoptors or VTOL aircraft. These would be a nice capital asset for smaller navies.
Tough NJ laws stop school massacre..
Oh wait, no they didn't. A rumor did.
One person has been charged in the ongoing investigation, which began this week after officials at Belvidere High School heard allegations that a 17-year-old senior male student was developing a hit list of students and teachers, State Police spokesman Capt. Al Della Fave said Wednesday night.
But it would have been w/ illegal guns from PA w/ all their lax gun laws, right?
Della Fave said that all the weapons were legally registered and that the father has been assisting investigators.
So what good did those tough laws do again?
One person has been charged in the ongoing investigation, which began this week after officials at Belvidere High School heard allegations that a 17-year-old senior male student was developing a hit list of students and teachers, State Police spokesman Capt. Al Della Fave said Wednesday night.
But it would have been w/ illegal guns from PA w/ all their lax gun laws, right?
Della Fave said that all the weapons were legally registered and that the father has been assisting investigators.
So what good did those tough laws do again?
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Quote of the Day..
From LongHornJeff in Comments:
"For more information on this legislation and how to get involved in the gun violence prevention movement in Illinois, please contact your local Illinois Million Mom March Chapter"..
My local MMM chapter president went to jail.
HeeHee.
"For more information on this legislation and how to get involved in the gun violence prevention movement in Illinois, please contact your local Illinois Million Mom March Chapter"..
My local MMM chapter president went to jail.
HeeHee.
Bryan Miller shows again why Tiahrt is in place.
In his recent post:
The evidence of one-way movement of illegal guns from PA to NJ is abundantly clear.
According to 2006 statewide data compiled by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), more than 74% of guns recovered from crime in the Garden State and traced back to their original purchase point came from out-of-state. PA was the top external source state, accounting for almost 18% of the total.
And yet he ignores page 2 of every single report he cites:
DisclaimerPublic L. No. 109-108, Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2006, SEC. 621
(1) Firearm traces are designed to assist law enforcement authorities in conducting investigations by tracking the sale and possession of specific firearms.Law enforcement agencies may request firearms traces for any reason, and those reasons are not necessarily reported to the Federal Government.Not all firearms used in crime are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime.
(2) Firearms selected for tracing are not chosen for purposes of determining which types, makes or models of firearms are used for illicit purposes.The firearms selected do not constitute a random sample and should not be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals, or any subset of that universe.Firearms are normally traced to the first retail seller, and sources reported for firearms traced do not necessarily represent the sources or methods by which firearms in general are acquired for use in crime.
Why would he possibly do that? Ignorance perhaps? Maybe he just skipped over the boring parts (like an FBI warning on a movie) to get to the good parts? Maybe he never read the CRS report. It wouldn't be blatant dishonesty would it?
The evidence of one-way movement of illegal guns from PA to NJ is abundantly clear.
According to 2006 statewide data compiled by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), more than 74% of guns recovered from crime in the Garden State and traced back to their original purchase point came from out-of-state. PA was the top external source state, accounting for almost 18% of the total.
And yet he ignores page 2 of every single report he cites:
DisclaimerPublic L. No. 109-108, Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2006, SEC. 621
(1) Firearm traces are designed to assist law enforcement authorities in conducting investigations by tracking the sale and possession of specific firearms.Law enforcement agencies may request firearms traces for any reason, and those reasons are not necessarily reported to the Federal Government.Not all firearms used in crime are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime.
(2) Firearms selected for tracing are not chosen for purposes of determining which types, makes or models of firearms are used for illicit purposes.The firearms selected do not constitute a random sample and should not be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals, or any subset of that universe.Firearms are normally traced to the first retail seller, and sources reported for firearms traced do not necessarily represent the sources or methods by which firearms in general are acquired for use in crime.
Why would he possibly do that? Ignorance perhaps? Maybe he just skipped over the boring parts (like an FBI warning on a movie) to get to the good parts? Maybe he never read the CRS report. It wouldn't be blatant dishonesty would it?
They didn't even stop to wipe off their shoes..
As the Brady Campaign spreads the blood of the NIU victims around to push their agenda. An agenda that wouldn't have stopped the shooter in any way. Oh, and send us money.
![Brady Campaign [logo]](http://www.bradynetwor.org/images/content/pagebuilder/13483.gif)
Sincerely,
![Sarah's Signature [image]](http://www.bradynetwor.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12908.gif)
Sarah Brady, Chair
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
So call your Reps and Senators. Tell them to "Vote NO on HB 4357, SB 1007, and HB 758".
ILLINOIS: EMAIL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, HELP US SAVE LIVES
Dear Illinois Brady Campaign Member,
As witnessed by the rash of recent tragic shootings in our state, dangerous people have far too easy access to dangerous weapons. This year in Illinois, we have the opportunity to pass strong gun laws that will ban military-style assault weapons (HB 4357), high capacity ammunition magazines (SB 1007) and require a background check on the sale of every handgun (HB 758). Please help us pass this life-saving legislative package.
EMAIL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE TODAY!
Tell him/her: "Vote YES on HB 4357, SB 1007, and HB 758"
Last year, the Illinois State Senate passed a life-saving bill, SB 1007, to ban deadly ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 bullets. If it passes the State House we will be one step closer to enacting it into law. Both HB 4357, a bill to ban dangerous military-style assault weapons, and HB 758, a bill to require a background check on every handgun purchaser, will soon be voted on in the State House.
Here is what you can do today:
1. Click here to email your State Representative today.
Tell him/her: "Vote YES on HB 4357, SB 1007, and HB 758"2. Forward this e-mail to friends, family, and colleagues in Illinois.
3. Click here to contribute to our efforts in Illinois and across the country.
For more information on this legislation and how to get involved in the gun violence prevention movement in Illinois, please contact your local Illinois Million Mom March Chapter, the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, and the Illinois Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
We must pass these life-saving bills! Please email your State Representative today.
Sarah Brady, Chair
If this e-mail was forwarded to you, click here to sign up for your own Brady Campaign alerts.
Donate to Support the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
You can also mail a check to:Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
So call your Reps and Senators. Tell them to "Vote NO on HB 4357, SB 1007, and HB 758".
But the PuSH'ers want to give them MORE information.
More FBI privacy violations confirmed
WASHINGTON - The FBI improperly used national security letters in 2006 to obtain personal data on Americans during terror and spy investigations, Director Robert Mueller said Wednesday.
Speaking before the FBI chief, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., urged Mueller to be more vigilant in correcting what he called "widespread illegal and improper use of national security letters."
"Everybody wants to stop terrorists. But we also, though, as Americans, we believe in our privacy rights and we want those protected," Leahy said. "There has to be a better chain of command for this. You cannot just have an FBI agent who decides he'd like to obtain Americans' records, bank records or anything else and do it just because they want to."
So add this w/ the 10%+ error rate of the "Terrorist Watchlist" and what do you have?
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Technical Glitch or "Reasoned Discourse"?
Not only are numerous posts being "moderated" over on Huffpo, but now they're disappearing after being "approved". While they are switching over to some new system, there's to much precedent to give them the benefit of the doubt anymore.
Critical Hit
D&D co-creator Gary Gygax passed away this morning at his home. He was 69 and a cultural icon.
WIntemute providing "data" to CA
Using their registration system to confiscate illegally owned firearms. Sounds good right? They get registered guns out of the hands of convicted felons, and the mentally disturbed. However, there's a nice little catch:
Nearly 70,000 people statewide, and more than 15,000 in the Bay Area, either kept their guns in violation of state law, or records of their sale or transfer were never entered properly.
So don't fill out the paperwork correctly (like putting "N"), it gets confiscated. Got a gun CA doesn't like anymore, it gets confiscated. And they know where you are to get it.
And who's helping them decide? Why good ol' Wintemute. The one who thinks anecdotes and his own personal impressions = "research"
WaronGuns and SaysUncle have more.
Nearly 70,000 people statewide, and more than 15,000 in the Bay Area, either kept their guns in violation of state law, or records of their sale or transfer were never entered properly.
So don't fill out the paperwork correctly (like putting "N"), it gets confiscated. Got a gun CA doesn't like anymore, it gets confiscated. And they know where you are to get it.
And who's helping them decide? Why good ol' Wintemute. The one who thinks anecdotes and his own personal impressions = "research"
WaronGuns and SaysUncle have more.
Peace and Love for the low low cost of freedom..
Give us money. Another claim of 10,000 members, a hundred thousand "donors", and zero accomplishments since 1999. All I've seen so far are a few posts in comments on various sites. Anti-gun spammers. Just what we need.
Ahab shows it's a fake group. I'ld be inclined to agree completely if I hadn't seen other inane ideas from the hoplophobes in the name of "peace". I think I'll start up my own anti-gun group and collect money to get firearms off the streets and into my safe.
Good. But the VPC blog is better.
Ahab shows it's a fake group. I'ld be inclined to agree completely if I hadn't seen other inane ideas from the hoplophobes in the name of "peace". I think I'll start up my own anti-gun group and collect money to get firearms off the streets and into my safe.
Good. But the VPC blog is better.
Monday, March 3, 2008
I will now commit a crime..
or at least the Brady Bunch and VPC think so. My PA CCW permit arrived in the mail today.
"Only Ones" and alcohol.
A bad combination.
An off-duty Chicago police officer who was detained in connection with a bar disturbance was drunk Saturday night when he struck two Forest Park officers and a paramedic, police in the west suburb said Monday.
As has been noted. Not the first situation w/ 'off-duty' Chicago Police and bars. Maybe Daley is right in not allowing Only One CCW from his city.
An off-duty Chicago police officer who was detained in connection with a bar disturbance was drunk Saturday night when he struck two Forest Park officers and a paramedic, police in the west suburb said Monday.
As has been noted. Not the first situation w/ 'off-duty' Chicago Police and bars. Maybe Daley is right in not allowing Only One CCW from his city.
Homegrown terrorists...
ELF. Causing ecological damage since 1996. And who financially supports them? Why PETA. And why isn't the FBI shutting down PETA for supporting a terrorist group? They go after the muslim organizations.
And not a single firearm used.
And not a single firearm used.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
So which is it Dennis?
Is America's "Gun Culture" dying or are there so many people that support it that Attorney Generals of 31 states are pandering to their constituents in support of an individual right? Can't have it both ways buddy.
But of course I'm asking this of a "Constitutional Lawyer" who can't even properly quote the Constitution.
But of course I'm asking this of a "Constitutional Lawyer" who can't even properly quote the Constitution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)