Archive for the ‘Stupid is as Stupid Does’ Category

Only in America

May 22, 2012

1. Only in America could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000 a plate campaign fund raising event.

 

2. Only in America could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when we have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black. 12% of the population is black.

 

3. Only in America could we have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury Department and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

 

4. Only in America can we have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

 

5. Only in America would we make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just become American citizens.

 

6. Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as “extremists.”

 

7. Only in America could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

 

8. Only in America could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

 

9. Only in America could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a trillion dollars more than it has per year for total spending of $7 million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.

 

10. Only in America could the rich people who pay 86% of all income taxes be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.

So, what do we actually have to do to get America back on the *straight and narrow* my friends?


Stolen from Texas Fred

Democrats in Washington: Get shot in the back as you try to be a Rabbit!

May 19, 2012

Democrats in Washington are launching an all-out war to destroy state self-defense laws.

A newly-floated Democrat amendment would threaten to cut off crime prevention grants to any state with a Stand Your Ground law on the books, forcing states to eliminate the law in order to receive the grant.

These rabid anti-gunners are demanding that states put the law on the side of armed criminals, or else!

Will you take action right now to oppose the destruction of Stand Your Ground self-defense laws by filling out your Stand Your Ground Citizen Survey below?

After the Trayvon Martin incident in Florida, the gun-grabbers and their pals in the press are working feverishly to whip up anti-gun hysteria nationwide.

Their goal is to DESTROY our right of self-defense by gutting or repealing Stand Your Ground Laws wherever they’re found and pass a host of new anti-gun initiatives.

The bad news is, without your IMMEDIATE help, I’m afraid they may succeed.

Stand Your Ground Laws simply state that law-abiding gun owners do not have a “duty to retreat” and cannot be prosecuted for defending themselves against criminal attack.

Do you really want to be second-guessing yourself if an armed thug is attacking you or a loved one?

Well, in states without Stand your Ground, being targeted by an anti-gun prosecutor is almost as dangerous as being attacked by a criminal.

After all, there’s nothing prosecutors with big egos and bigger political ambitions love more than to say they’re “tough on gun crime.”

So they look for every opportunity to nail law-abiding gun owners to the wall and crow as if they’ve just locked away a few Bloods’ and Crips’ gang bangers for good!

Worse, even if the armed citizen is found innocent, it can be virtually meaningless.

That’s why it’s vital you fill out the Stand Your Ground Citizen Survey below — RIGHT NOW!

In a recent tragic case in Iowa — which has no Stand Your Ground Law — a black former law enforcement officer and security guard, Jay Rodney Lewis, was thrown in jail for 112 days after defending himself against two white attackers.

One of the thugs was a drunken convicted felon with over 40 criminal charges going back 15 years!

Mr. Lewis was finally found innocent of all charges.

But during the time he was imprisoned, he lost his home, his car, his firearms collection and nearly everything else.

So where were the outraged headlines about this story?

Why didn’t the national media — so desperate to play the race card — ever report on this tragedy?

You and I both know the reason.

Guns are used an estimated 2.5 MILLION times per year by law-abiding citizens to deter crime, but there’s literally NEVER a mention about that fact in the press.

Instead, the gun-grabbers lay and wait with baited breath for a story where they can twist the facts to SMEAR our country’s “gun culture” and complain that we’re not more like Europe where victims are disarmed and criminals can roam free.

Now, the gun-grabbers and the national press are deriding Florida as the “Gunshine State” for daring to protect law-abiding gun owners’ rights to self-defense!

Worse, their scheme is working.

Florida’s Republican Governor, Rick Scott, has announced he’d be willing to “to look at any laws that made citizens feel uncomfortable.”

And sadly, Governor Scott isn’t the only Republican nationwide who suddenly went spineless.

In fact, I’m afraid if Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law falls, it could create a domino effect all over the country.

Not only could we see these critical laws repealed, but it could embolden anti-gun politicians to ram through even more new gun control schemes at the state level, including:

*** Psychological “screening” and “proof of need” requirements designed to arbitrarily allow government officials to deny law-abiding citizens before they can obtain a concealed-carry permit;

*** “Permit to purchase” requiring gun owners to go through an extensive training and permitting process just to be able to buy a handgun;

*** So-called “Assault Weapons” Bans designed to ELIMINATE gun ownership of all semi-automatic rifles and shotguns — even those commonly used for hunting.

As fights begin to heat up throughout the country, my goal is to deliver surveys to key legislators and Governors to prove that it’s you and me who truly have the backing of the grassroots.

The gun-grabbers can yell and scream all they want. But at the end of the day, they’re a paper tiger.

If I can run a full-scale program, they simply won’t be able to match our grassroots muscle.

But without a program like this, the only noise politicians will hear will be coming from the anti-gun media.

And THAT is a recipe for disaster.

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

P.S. The Trayvon Martin incident in Florida has given the gun-grabbers a new crusade — and that’s to REPEAL Stand Your Ground Laws and a host of other anti-gun initiatives.

It’s up to you and me to FIGHT BACK.

Help the Cause!

The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation. The National Association for Gun Rights’ mailing address is P.O 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404. They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570. Its web address is www.NationalGunRights.org/

Not produced or e-mailed at taxpayer expense.

WordPress and Global Tags

May 19, 2012

One of the really neat things about WordPress has been the Global Tags feature. Recently though someone there decided that they were not needed any longer. Man, am I happy that I didn’t sign up for making this domain mine offering. Heck, it doesn’t even appear that pingbacks function properly anymore. Then, when I inquired about the problem, this is what I got!

macmanx wrote:

The Global Tags pages were discontinued not too long ago, but you still see specific tags in your Reader: http://wordpress.com/#!/read/topic/politics/ >

Read this post on the forums: http://en.forums.wordpress.com/topic/politics-blogs?replies=4#post-889495 >
You’re getting this email because you subscribed to ‘Politics Blogs.’
Please click the link above, login, and click “Unsubscribe” at the top of the page to stop receiving emails from this topic.

I suppose that all good things must end someday

So why bother working on a blog if you cannot readily communicate with others that share your interests?

TSA continues to abuse Americans; Terrorist’s in our midst…

May 7, 2012

“Okay, I now have definitive proof that al Qaeda has actually won. It hasn’t achieved the dissolution of the United States, or succeeded in murdering millions of Americans, or re-established the Caliphate, but it has caused our government to debase itself in the name of security.” – Jeffrey Goldberg

I told Congress to abolish the TSA. I sent this letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System…  

I have four items for you, and some questions.

1. A four year-old girl in Wichita was treated like a terrorist because she violated TSA protocol by hugging her grandmother at the airport. (http://bit.ly/IP6Dv1)

If a private security firm did this, wouldn’t it face horrible publicity and lose business? Might Congress call the CEO of that firm to testify before a committee, so your colleagues could grandstand?

2. Rep. Francisco Canseco (TX-23) got into an altercation with an overly-aggressive TSA agent. (http://bit.ly/Ic4bP7).

Rep. Canseco asks, “What on earth is a U.S. congressman going to do on a plane? Pull out a gun and shoot everybody?” (http://politi.co/JG1zsK)

He’s right; no Congressman is going to shoot up the plane. But wouldn’t private security firms compete with each other to be less invasive, and respect the dignity of all passengers?

3. TSA agents asked a 79 year-old woman about “an anomaly in the crotch area” — loud enough for others to hear. Refusing a pat-down, she passed through the scanner again. (http://bit.ly/IuzWI2)

Again, wouldn’t private security firms compete with each other to be less invasive, and respect the dignity of passengers?

And why are the body scanners so unreliable?

4. Current and former TSA employees are under indictment for receiving bribes from drug couriers in Los Angeles and New Haven. (http://lat.ms/IMQIxS)

Wouldn’t a private security firm be more interested in detecting weapons and explosives, instead of drugs?

The TSA is a typical government agency. It has no incentive to please the customers. If airline security was completely privatized, airlines would compete with each other to provide not only safety, but also a dignified process and a pleasurable trip. Customer satisfaction would be their priority.

Don’t “fix” or “reform” the TSA. Abolish it.

END LETTER

If you agree with us that the TSA should be scrapped, please send a letter as well. You can borrow from or copy the above letter.

And, we invite you to follow us on Twitter and retweet our posts: https://twitter.com/#!/DDCDispatch

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Lunatic Reds… In Black Gowns, again…

April 19, 2012
Reid to Push Gun-Grabbing Judge for Nevada!
Sen. Dean Heller blocks anti-gun nomination
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is attempting to push yet another radical anti-gunner through the U.S. Senate.  This time it’s Elissa Cadish, who flatly denies that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental right.
Asked in 2008 by a group called Citizens for Responsible Government whether she believed an individual citizen had a constitutional right to keep and bear arms, Cadish answered:
“I do not believe there is this constitutional right.  Thus, I believe that reasonable restrictions may be imposed on gun ownership in the interest of public safety.  Of course, I will enforce the laws as they exist as a judge.” [sic]
Now, she claims that she was only stating the law as it existed before the Supreme Court’s Heller v. D.C. decision.
But let’s count the “red flags” raised by Cadish:
First, the “militia” theory was not “the law” prior to Heller, either in terms of the Framers’ intentions or in terms of the Supreme Court’s admittedly muddled jurisprudence.
Second, the concept that “restrictions … on gun ownership [further] public safety” is a thinly veiled suggestion that, once on the bench for life, Cadish will do everything possible to thwart gun owners’ rights.
Third, we’ve heard the “enforce the law” lingo from other Obama nominees, including Sonia Sotomayor, who, as soon as she had secured confirmation, went on an anti-Second Amendment rampage.
Thankfully, Nevada’s other Senator, Dean Heller, is using his prerogative as one of the nominee’s home state Senators to keep this confirmation from moving forward.
It’s called the “blue slip” procedure, an informal custom in which the Senate refuses to move on a nominee that does not have the support of his or her own Senators.
But in response to Sen. Heller’s standing firm, every gun-hating liberal in Nevada — including Harry Reid — have crawled out of the woodwork to blast his efforts to protect the right to keep and bear arms.
Sen. Heller is not backing down from this fight, in the face of enormous political pressure from the White House and the powerful Majority Leader.  We need to encourage him to continue to hold firm, and to rally other Senators in opposition to this nominee.
ACTION #1:  Send Senator Heller an email at info@deanhealler.org.  Thank him for opposing the confirmation of Elissa Cadish on Second Amendment grounds, and for standing up to Harry Reid and the Obama machine.
ACTION #2: Contact your own Senators and urge them to join Sen. Heller in opposing Elissa Cadish.

You can’t say that we didn’t warn you Colorado!

April 9, 2012

(Denver) – Recently, the Regional Transportation District (RTD) Board of Directors decided to refer a hybrid request to the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), to approve a revised plan to implement the FasTracks project. Included in this plan is a 100% increase in the RTD sales tax, dedicated to completing the FasTracks project.

A local citizens group, ‘Truth About Transportation‘ (TAT), has studied the promises made by RTD in 2004 versus what RTD will actually deliver.

You can read the details of the entire 2004 FasTracks plan from RTD here.

Those promises included:

  • A 12 year completion plan. (2017) to complete the project
  • At a cost of $4.7 billion
  • Provided by a 0.4% sales tax
  • New and expanded rapid transit in nine major travel corridors, funding over 119 miles of light rail and commuter rail
  • And a plethora of other promises made and not kept

Truth About Transportation is a citizens group that opposes any further tax increase to fund the FasTracks project, beyond the 0.4% sales tax that voters approved in 2004. TAT believes that RTD should be held accountable to voters to deliver what was promised in 2004.

TAT will be highlighting this lack of accountability and failure to deliver, over the next several months.

For more information you can contact Ken Katt at 303.338.9149. You can visit the TAT web site at TATColorado.com or email us at kennethkatt@aol.com.

###

Our Mission at Truth About Transportation –TAT: To provide useful and accurate information to Colorado citizens about the transportation issues which may affect their daily lives.

Proposition 103: What is the Cost to Colorado Taxpayers?

October 22, 2011

IP-7-2011 (October 2011)
Author: Barry Poulson and John D. Merrifield

PDF of full Issue Paper
Scribd version of full Issue Paper

Introduction:

Proposition 103 is an initiative that will increase Colorado tax rates and require the state to spend the money on government schools. Prop 103 increases the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, and the statewide sales and use tax for the years 2012 through 2016.

The Fiscal Impact Statement prepared by Colorado’s Legislative Council Staff estimates the cost of the tax increase at $2.9 billion. However, the cost for Colorado taxpayers will be significantly greater than staff estimates. Legislative Council uses static analysis, measuring only the direct impact of the higher taxes on state revenue. They ignore the negative impact the tax increase will have on economic growth and jobs in Colorado.

SOURCE

So, even with built in automatic tax increases Colorado Schools (Unions) need even more money. Now why couldn’t I have guessed that?

Nevertheless, I’m sure that the people of Colorado will vote in favor of this measure. Because after all is said and done the people there are stuck on stupid.

Violence Policy Center’s “research?” Stuck on Stupid!

October 14, 2011

Violence Policy Center Continues to Misfire on Concealed Carry Holders

This year, Wisconsin became the 49th state to recognize the right of its citizens to carry firearms.1  Now, only one state remains in the Dark Ages — that being the state of Illinois.

But as can be imagined, the anti-gun media is predicting that letting citizens carry firearms will result in carnage in the streets, shootouts in bars, and angry parents settling scores on the ball field with their firearms.

And to supposedly prove their point, they cite a bogus report of the Violence Policy Center (VPC), entitled “Concealed Carry Killers.”  The faux report says that “since May 2007 at least 300 people — including 11 law enforcement officers — have been killed by private citizens legally allowed to carry handguns in killings not ruled self-defense ….”2

An article at PajamasMedia.com has done a good analysis of the VPC “report,” showing that the anti-gun group:

  • Double counts victims to inflate their statistics;
  • Counts people who are still alive today, as though they had been murdered by concealed carry permit holders;
  • Includes deaths that were caused by rifles, beatings or strangulation — in other words, tabulating deaths that were clearly NOT caused by concealed handguns; and
  • In some cases, even counts “murderers” who were later cleared in court as having acted in self-defense.3

According to the Pajamas Media analysis, less than half of the deaths which were attributed to concealed carry holders by the VPC were actually “committed by a permit holder drawing and firing his or her concealed weapon.”4

Less than half?

Yes, less than half of the killings were actually committed by a handgun that was in the possession of a concealed carry permit holder.  That was the analysis as of December 21, 2009.  Sadly, VPC’s reporting has not gotten any better in the following two years.

VPC still embellishing its figures to demonize gun owners

With the Wisconsin law set to go into effect on November 1, 2011, VPC is excoriating the Badger State for ignoring the “bloody record of police deaths, mass shootings, and attempted political assassination” which have supposedly been perpetrated by concealed carry holders.

There are some in the media who are peddling this hype and using VPC’s bogus statistics to scare the public.5  But what goes unnoticed by a gullible media is that VPC is still inflating the number of “concealed killers,” even while they ignore the fact that the average citizen — yes, even the average cop — is much more likely to commit a crime with a gun than is a gun owner with a concealed carry permit.  (More on this below.)

As for inflating the statistics, the VPC:

  • Counts non-permit holders who, in some cases, were even prohibited by law from carrying a firearm;
  • Uses non gun deaths to inflate “concealed carry” killings; and
  • Adds accidental killings to its totals — even including a case where an errant shot was fired at a robber.

Okay, let’s take these up one-by-one.

Non-permit holders prohibited by law from carrying a firearm.  Over the past couple of years, the VPC has counted several non-permit holders in their “concealed carry killers” tally.  But a notable case that is still currently on their website is Jared Loughner, who shot Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords — injuring her and killing six people.

The VPC claims that because of Arizona’s new law which allows law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns without a permit, “Loughner was able to legally carry his pistol to the Giffords event in his assassination attempt.”

But what VPC misses is that this right applies ONLY to law-abiding citizens.  Arizona law clearly states that,

A person commits misconduct involving weapons by knowingly:  (1) Carrying a deadly weapon … concealed on his person or within his immediate control in or on a means of transportation in the furtherance of a serious offense … [or] (8) Using or possessing a deadly weapon during the commission of any felony offense.”6 (Emphasis Added.)

Thus, Arizona’s law specifically PROHIBITS and DISALLOWS the concealed carry of a handgun with the intent to commit a crime!  Jared Loughner was most certainly NOT able to legally carry his pistol to commit the crimes he perpetrated in January, 2011, as the VPC claims.

But this sloppy “scholarship” (if you can call it that) is just the tip of the iceberg.  Take this next category.

Non gun deaths used to inflate “concealed carry” killings.  VPC has the audacity to inflate its statistics by using murders that were not committed by handguns — and, in some cases, were not even committed by any type of firearm at all.

A classic case is that of Tony Villegas, a Florida man who strangled a woman in her own garage. Did you get that?  She was strangled by Villegas’ hands (presumably) and not his gun.

Commenting on this twisted logic by the VPC, Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman asks, “How can strangulation be blamed on a concealed weapon permit?  If a fisherman kills someone, do we ban fishing rods?”7

Using non gun deaths is not the only way that VPC inflates its statistics.  Consider how the organization slips non permit holders into its “concealed carry killers” totals.

Accidental killings — by non-permit holders.  Accidental shootings have been the long-time shibboleth of anti-gun legislators and media.  They like to demonize all gun owners because of the tragic accidents that occur with firearms.

But if we’re going to follow VPC’s logic, then we should also ban those items which accidentally kill far more people than guns do — things like cars, doctors, trans fats (which lead to heart disease), etc.  It’s strange that the anti-gunners never seem to much care about these other deadly killers, or about the fact that food and water kill more children than guns do.8

Nevertheless, anti-gunners focus on the gun — and the gun only.  To wit, VPC on several occasions lists examples where children have accidentally fired a gun, killing themselves or others.  While these cases are very tragic, one has to ask:  Why are these unintentional shootings being added to the list of “concealed carry killers”?

Well, the answer is probably obvious.  The VPC is desperately trying to inflate its statistics.  And that is why they have included examples where children grabbed a parent’s gun and unintentionally inflicted harm.

Again, these cases are very tragic, but let’s be clear.  One can peruse the newspapers and find examples where the children of POLICE OFFICERS have experienced the same type of tragedy.  So, to follow VPC’s logic, should police officers be disarmed?

Accidental killings — including errant shots fired at criminals.  Now, as mentioned above, some of the accidental killings listed in the VPC report don’t even directly involve the concealed carry holder.  But setting that aside, VPC includes the case of Edward Bell, who accidentally shot an innocent bystander while he was being robbed.

Mr. Bell is a 65-year old man who lives in a very dangerous area of Detroit.  He was working in his yard one day when a gunman held him up and stole his Chevrolet Suburban sport utility vehicle.9

Bell’s mistake, while understandable, is that he fired at the crook after he drove off.  It has long been established in the Common Law that self-defense ends when the attack is over.  While that’s the law, it’s understandable that Mr. Bell — with his adrenaline pumping and being upset that his vehicle was just stolen at gunpoint — wanted to get it back.  Bell fired at the thief, and one of the bullets entered a home and killed Geraldine Jackson, who was cooking dinner at the time.

Certainly, this does not excuse Mr. Bell’s miscalculation.10  But for VPC to include this story as evidence that concealed carry holders are perpetrating crimes is simply disingenuous.  And it ignores the fact that this same problem happens with police officers, as well.

Just last month, police injured two innocent bystanders in San Francisco by firing at a suspect who was running away from them.11  Of course, this sounds similar to Mr. Bell’s case.  Which makes one wonder:  had the bystanders in the Bay area died, would the VPC have included these two police shootings in their “concealed carry killers” totals?

Permit holders more law-abiding than average population — even more so than cops!

The VPC wants to focus on the few bad apples in the concealed carry community and suggest that citizens can’t be trusted to carry firearms.  But using their own logic, they should be arguing for cop disarmament, because they break the law far more often.

As compared to concealed carry permit holders, the average American is almost 8 times more likely to be convicted of crimes and over 40 times more likely to be convicted of burglary — and police officers are almost 800 times more likely to violate the law.12

There are an estimated six million citizens who possess a concealed carry permit.13  The number of legal concealed carriers is probably higher, considering the growing number of states that recognize the right of their citizens to carry without a permit.

Press reports indicate that concealed carry is at an ALL TIME HIGH, even while crime rates have been dropping in the U.S. over the past few years.  Yet, we’ve been hearing the Chicken Little cries of doom and gloom as far back as the mid-1980s, when Florida kicked off the modern concealed carry movement with the enactment of its “shall issue” law.

Prior to its passage in 1987, there was a vigorous debate in the Florida legislature.  Opponents of the law claimed that a carry law would turn the Sunshine State into the “Gunshine State.”  It was a cute jingle, but their dire predictions never materialized.  Murder rates started dropping immediately after the passage of the law, prompting one of the chief opponents, Rep. Ron Silver, to admit that he had been wrong about concealed carry.

Such was the case in Texas, as well.  One of the chief opponents in the Lone Star State was Senior Cpl. Glenn White, who is president of the Dallas Police Association.  White lobbied against the law in 1993 and 1995 because he thought it would lead to wholesale armed conflict.

Senior Cpl. White admits, though, “All the horror stories I thought would come to pass didn’t happen.  No bogeyman. I think it’s worked out well, and that says good things about the citizens who have permits. I’m a convert.”

It takes guts to look at the evidence and admit you were mistaken.  Kudos to Rep. Silver and Senior Cpl. White for being “man enough” to admit they were wrong.

Who knows, maybe the VPC will own up and admit they were also wrong about all the fear and paranoia they’ve peddled in their faux report.  But then again, don’t hold your breath.

 


1 – While there are 49 states which allow for concealed carry in some shape or form, there are various levels of restrictions in those states.  Wisconsin’s carry law goes into effect on November 1.  At that point, 40 states will have relatively liberal policies regarding concealed carry.  Most of them are known as “shall issue” states, where the officials must issue permits to those who apply — as long as the law does not disqualify the applicants from possessing firearms in some way.  Of these states, four (Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming and 98% of Montana) also provide an option for citizens to peacefully carry their firearms without getting a permit or permission from the government.  This is similar to the law in Vermont, which does not require or issue permits at all.  Nine states are “may issue” states which means just that — officials “may” issue a permit to applicants (but they don’t have to do so) — even if the applicant is not prohibited by law from possessing a firearm.  Only Illinois completely bans concealed carry. 

2 – The “Concealed Carry Killers” report can be found at:  http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm

4 – Ibid.

5 – Steven Elbow, “Open or concealed? Gun owners in Wisconsin will soon be able to choose mode of carry,” The Capital Times, June 22, 2011, at:  http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/crime_and_courts/blog/article_8729ec02-9c46-11e0-91ec-001cc4c002e0.html

6 – Arizona Statutes, Section 13-3102 at:  http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/03102.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS

7 – Steve Chapman, “False fears about concealed guns — Illinois should give licensed citizens the right to carry around weapons,” Chicago Tribune (March 31, 2011) at:  http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-03-31/news/ct-oped-0331-chapman-20110331_1_concealed-carry-permit-holders-brady-campaign

8 – See the Gun Owners of America Fact Sheet at:  http://gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

9 – At the moment the robbery was occurring, Mr. Bell had no way to know that the thief was actually using a fake gun.

10 – In July 2010, Mr. Bell received one year of probation for the events that occurred on May 12, 2010.  See “Edward Bell to get probation deal in shooting death of grandmother,” The Michigan Standard (July 9, 2010) at:  http://www.michiganstandard.com/edward-bell-to-get-probation-deal-in-shooting-death-of-grandmother

11 – “Two bystanders wounded in S.F. police shooting,” San Francisco Chronicle (Sept. 17, 2011) at:  http://blog.sfgate.com/crime/2011/09/17/bystanders-wounded-sf-police-shooting

12 – Crime statistics related to concealed carry permit holders are difficult to come by, as every state does not publish detailed figures relating to their permit holders.  Some (like Texas) do provide these statistics.  Interestingly, a study of concealed carry in Texas over a four year period (2002-2005), found that non concealed carry permit holders are 7.89 times more likely to be convicted of crimes than permit holders — and 40.58 times as likely to be convicted of burglary.  [See Tables 1 and 3 in Howard Nemerov, “Concealed Handguns: Danger or Asset to Texas?” at http://www.prattontexas.com/documents/Texas%20CHL%20Study.pdf.%5D  Moreover, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 4.72% of all officers (state and local) were found to have committed police abuse in 2002.  [Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Citizen Complaints about Police Use of Force [in 2002]” (published 2006) at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/ccpuf.pdf.%5D  Comparing the BJS figures to the Texas data — showing that just over six-thousandths of one percent (.0062%) of permit holders were convicted of crimes in 2002 — one can make some interesting correlations.  While somewhat different, it is interesting to note that police reviewing authorities found that officers had committed crimes at 761 times the rate that the Texas study found for convictions of concealed carry holders for the same criminal acts.  [Compare BJS, “Citizen Complaints” to Nemerov, “Concealed Handguns.”]

13 – Mike Stuckey, “Record numbers licensed to pack heat — Millions obtain permits to carry concealed guns,” MSNBC.com (June 24, 2010) at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life/t/record-numbers-licensed-pack-heat

14 – Clayton E. Cramer and David B. Kopel, “‘Shall Issue:’ The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws” (1994), p. 14.

15 – Scott Parks, “Charges Against Texans with Gun Permits Rise; Law’s supporters, foes disagree on figures’ meaning,” Dallas Morning News (December 23, 1997).

SOURCE

Ah, the good old days: Protestors arrested

October 2, 2011

Seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same. At least a lot of the time. Whats at the top of Google News today?

An anti capitalist protest that ends in arrests that’s what!  Along with the usual complaints about the police. But wait! Most were released immediately!

Read about it here.

So what’s missing? Well, bashed in heads, tear gas, flying feces, and other assorted acts of mayhem by both sides (allegedly) of the dispute.

More

Back in the day there would have been real protestors. Shin kicking below the cameras viewfinders, accusations of female groping by arresting officers, the occasional Molotov cocktail, and of course, interjection of completely unrelated societal complaints by the lucky few that made it in front of the television crews about unjust wars, wars in general, capitalism being the work of Satan, oh, and religion and family and anything else that could be thrown into this Mulligan stew of Hate America First expressionism.

These people are a bunch of amateurs at best...

DREAM Act (Part II) reaches Jerry Brown

September 19, 2011

California Governor Jerry Brown has the chance to make some undocumented and illegal California residents’ dreams come true if he signs AB 131, the second part of the so-called California Dream Act. Passed through the State Assembly and Senate in the past weeks, it now sits on the Governor’s desk.

The California Dream Act, authored by Assemblyman Gilbert Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), comprises two bills known as AB 130 and 131. Brown signed AB 130 this July – a bill allowing undocumented residents and college students in the state to receive private funding and scholarships.

AB 131, if Brown signs it, will allow undocumented college students to receive public funding from the state as of January 1, 2013. Undocumented college students in California are currently ineligible for such state funding. But federal law currently allows a state to provide “any state or local public benefit” to eligible undocumented residents if state law “affirmatively provides for that eligibility.”

AB 131 passed the California State Senate on August 31 and the State Assembly on September 2. Should the bill become law, it would provide undocumented residents “with more education benefits than they have in any other state,” according to the New York Times.

The text in AB 131 would amend state education law to require the trustees, board of governors, or regents in charge of the various California public college systems to follow the new procedures. For undocumented students who qualify, universities would have “to establish procedures and forms that enable students to apply for, and participate in, all student aid programs…to the full extent permitted by federal law.”

The bill would provide financial aid in the form of community college district fee waivers, institutional aid from CSU and UC schools, and access to Cal Grants (which students do not need to pay back) for eligible undocumented residents. A Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary estimates the fiscal impact for the 2013-14 school year to be $13 million in Cal Grants, $7.5 to $15 million in fee waivers, and $11.4 to $12.2 million in institutional aid.

AP Photo: Dream Act part 1 (AB 130) held by California Governor Jerry Brown in July.

This article was written by JOEY JACHOWSKI; full article at the STANFORD REVIEW