Posts Tagged ‘Domestic Violence’

Epic fail obama pundit get handed her head on national show

January 19, 2013
Gun Owners of America

Gun Owners of America (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Gun Owners of America on MSNBC tells it like it is.

Plus she can’t seem to figure out who she is trying to debate.

In any case the point of the add was that the elites are hypocrites when it comes to their own protection or their families. Whether you agree with more police in schools, armed teachers and principles or not.

Not to mention that already they, as in Governor Cuomo and others are already talking about confiscation. In other words, even more ex post facto law. For years I have raged about the insult to our freedoms imposed by the Lautenberg Domestic Violence Act’s ex post facto provision. Well, I don’t have any problem with disarming people in the heat of the moment or even for as long as it takes to complete consoling and jail time. But damn it! If you are going to take someones rights away forever then convict them of a felony, period. But no, based upon political correctness and misandry (sexism) they trashed out the Bill of Rights, and that has set the groundwork for even more.

A great night for the Second Amendment: Or was it really?

November 5, 2010

The Second Amendment had a great night on Tuesday. Across the nation, the right to arms is stronger than ever, and the stage has been set for constructive reforms in 2011.

U.S. Senate: The net result of Tuesday was a gain of +6 votes on Second Amendment issues.

In not a single U.S. Senate seat did the gun control lobby gain ground. Three open seats switched from anti-gun to pro-gun: Ohio (Rob Portman replacing George Voinovich), West Virginia (Joe Manchin taking the seat of the late Robert Byrd), North Dakota (John Hoeven replacing Byron Dorgan). In Arkansas, John Boozman’s victory over Blanche Lincoln is a significant gain.

Full Story

It just so happens that I agree with Dave Kopel about 99% of the time. Now, having said that..? Just how many of these new kids on the block will take on Lautenberg and Schumer. Two men devoted to the destruction of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? How many will put forth legislation doing away with GCA 1968? Or the ex post facto law portion, if not the entire Lautenberg Domestic Violence Act? The abortion known as obamacare? With it’s hidden as well as blatant un Constitutional mandates..? I myself, am sick of hearing how this or that “D” is pro Second Amendment then all they do is pay lip service… Unless it’s election time, and that goes for RINO’s like McCain as well!

HERE is another good read that, especially if you read the comments. Shows to what extremes some people will go to for the sole purpose of “Lording it over” you and I.

Will the hoplophobia continue on. It is, after all, politically correct mental illness.

Totalitarianism in America continues to march onward

November 27, 2009

The forces of totalitarianism continue the march against freedom and liberty here in America as well as abroad. While there has been some good news on the immoral Lautenberg ex post facto domestic violence law, for the most part we are under assault on many fronts.

Most of what follows is from the National Rifle Association. They talk tough, but have a terrible record of caving in to various statist and groups based in sexism and political correctness. Pleas note that I am indeed a Life Member. I’m sure that groups associated with Gun Owners of America will be chiming in soon.

When it comes to rights and Americans I have a single response to the enemies of freedom and liberty; Molan Labe!

Over the last few weeks, we have received many inquiries regarding the UN and the impact of international treaties on our Second Amendment freedom.

The NRA has been engaged at the United Nations and elsewhere internationally in response to anti-small arms initiatives for over 14 years.  In most cases, agendas for the elimination of private ownership of firearms are disguised as calls for international arms control to stem the flow of illicit military weapons.   These instruments are generally promoted by a small group of nations and a large number of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) working in conjunction with departmental bureaucracies in multi-national institutions such as the UN and European Union.

The new U.S. administration, to no one’s surprise, has changed direction in the UN with respect to international small arms control initiatives that were resisted by the previous administration.

The current issue under discussion, the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), is in the early stages of the negotiation process.  There is no actual draft text at this time.  Work on the ATT is scheduled to continue by a consensus process between now and 2012.  It should be noted that any treaty must be approved by two thirds of the U.S. Senate for ratification.

Attempts to thwart our freedoms should be no surprise, given the anti-gun climate of the international community in general, and the current U.S. administration in particular.

More generally, the NRA does not concern itself with foreign policy or arms control initiatives—except to the extent they would directly or indirectly affect Second Amendment rights.

We have been actively opposing transnational efforts that would limit Second Amendment freedoms.  For many years, NRA has been monitoring and actively fighting any credible attempts on the part of the UN to restrict our sovereignty and gun rights.  As a recognized Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) at the United Nations since 1997, NRA gives gun owners a strong voice in the UN’s debate over global “gun control.” As one of over 2,000 NGOs representing everyone from religious groups to the banking industry, NRA has access to UN meetings that are closed to the general public, and is able to distribute informational materials to participants in UN activities.

Most importantly, NRA’s status as an NGO allows us to monitor more closely the internal UN debate over firearm issues and report back to our members.  The role NRA plays within the UN as an NGO is almost identical to the role our registered lobbyists play every day on Capitol Hill and in state capitals across the nation—educating and informing decision-makers of the facts behind the debate, and working to protect the interests of American gun owners and NRA members.

Due to our NGO status, NRA was able to take an active role in thwarting the absurdly titled “UN Conference to Review Progress Made in the Implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects” in 2006, and the previous meeting, the “UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons” in the summer of 2001.

The UN Small Arms Conference ended in deadlock with no formal conclusions or recommendations, due in large part to the NRA.  In the final analysis, the complexity of the issue and the concerns of hunters, sport shooters and firearm owners world-wide prevailed.  The failure of the program was total; no recommendations on ammunition, civilian possession or future UN meetings, or for that matter any other subjects, were adopted.

In addition to its UN activities, NRA is a founding member of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities (WFSA).  The WFSA is an association of hunting, shooting, and industry organizations that was founded in 1996.  The WFSA includes over 35 national and international organizations, and represents over 100 million sport shooters worldwide.

NRA members may rest assured that we are actively engaged in international matters.  We have never hesitated, nor will we hesitate, to use the political and other resources available to us to resist any international agreement that could in any way affect our Second Amendment rights.


As we reported last week, on November 16, the NRA filed its brief with the U.S. Supreme Court as Respondent in Support of Petitioner in McDonald v. City of Chicago. The NRA brief asks the U.S. Supreme Court to hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment.

The McDonald case is one of several that were filed immediately after last year’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Court upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right and invalidated Washington, D.C.’s ban on handgun possession, as well as the capital city’s ban on keeping loaded, operable firearms for self-defense in the home.

In September, the Supreme Court agreed to consider the McDonald case, on appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. That court incorrectly claimed that prior Supreme Court precedent prevented it from holding in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment. As we argued at the time, the Seventh Circuit should have followed the lead of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Nordyke v. King, which found that Supreme Court precedent does not prevent the Second Amendment from applying to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

As a party in McDonald, the NRA is actively involved in this case and we believe our brief makes a clear and strong case in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment (to see a copy of NRA’s brief, please click here).

Support for incorporation of the Second Amendment is very strong, and numerous additional briefs have recently been filed and signed by both federal and state officials.

This week, an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate signed an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” brief supporting the NRA’s position that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The amicus brief bears the signatures of a record 251 Members of Congress and 58 Senators—the most signers of a congressional amicus brief in the history of the Supreme Court (in last year’s historic Heller case, a then-record 55 Senators and 250 Representatives signed an amicus brief supporting the Second Amendment as an individual right).  (To see a copy of this brief, please click here.)

In addition to the federal brief, a large bipartisan group of state legislators and other elected officials from all 50 states, along with more than three-fourths of state attorneys general also filed amicus curiae briefs in the McDonald case this week.  They, too, are supporting the NRA’s position that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

The state legislators’ brief bears the signatures of 891 state legislators and other elected officials—including two governors and three lieutenant governors.  The state attorneys’ general brief was prepared by the office of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R) and bears the signatures of attorneys general from 38 states.  Both of these briefs were filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday.  (To see a copy of the state legislators’ brief, please click here.  To see a copy of the state attorneys’ general brief, please click here.)

The NRA is gratified that so many members of Congress along with a large number of state legislators and state attorneys general have joined this historic effort in support of our Second Amendment freedoms.  Along with gun owners everywhere, we are grateful for their participation in ensuring that the Second Amendment applies across the nation, not just in federal enclaves.

“It is our sincere hope that the Supreme Court will follow the Constitution’s true meaning and hold that the Second Amendment applies to all law-abiding Americans, no matter what city or state they call home,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox.

Chicago has had a handgun ban and other restrictive gun laws in place for 27 years. The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments on McDonald v. the City of Chicago case in February 2010.


Then we have…

In another transparent attempt to undercut the Second Amendment fresh on the heels of his hidden-camera attack on gun shows, Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, has alleged that the multiple murders that took place on Ft. Hood recently could have been prevented by changes in federal gun laws.

In an ad in the Washington Post on Monday, Bloomberg’s group claimed that the Ft. Hood murder suspect’s “gun purchase could have been key to the FBI’s investigation into his association with terrorists.”

Incredible. It has already been reported that before the suspect purchased the gun allegedly used in the murders, the FBI knew that between December 2008 and June 2009, he had sent 16 emails to a radical Islamic cleric based suspected of having ties to al-Qaeda. In one, he told the cleric that he could not wait to join him in the afterlife.

Nevertheless, after reviewing the e-mails, the FBI and other federal agencies concluded that the suspect was not a threat, and it has since concluded that the crimes of which he is suspected were not part of organized terrorism.

On November 9, the FBI stated “Major Hasan came to the attention of the FBI in December 2008 as part of an unrelated investigation being conducted by one of our Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs). JTTFs are FBI-led, multi-agency teams made up of FBI agents, other federal investigators, including those from the Department of Defense, and state and local law enforcement officers. . . . Investigators on the JTTF reviewed certain communications between Major Hasan and the subject of that investigation and assessed that the content of those communications was consistent with research being conducted by Major Hasan in his position as a psychiatrist at the Walter Reed Medical Center. Because the content of the communications was explainable by his research and nothing else derogatory was found, the JTTF concluded that Major Hasan was not involved in terrorist activities or terrorist planning. . . . [T]he investigation to date indicates that the alleged gunman acted alone and was not part of a broader terrorist plot.”

Bloomberg says that if the federal law requiring the FBI to purge the NICS system of records of approved gun purchasers had not been in place, the FBI would have known that Hasan had bought a gun and changed its judgment about him. But while few Americans exchange e-mails with radical clerics suspected of ties to al Qaeda, there are about 12 million NICS firearm checks annually. To Bloomberg, apparently, buying a gun is reason enough to be suspicious.  Bloomberg also says that Congress should approve legislation introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), to allow Americans placed on the FBI’s terror watchlist to be prohibited from buying firearms, but to deny them the right to confront their accusers and the “evidence” against them. Both concepts received a nod from the Obama Administration on November 18. During hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) asked Attorney General Eric Holder whether the administration supported legislation to allow to FBI to retain NICS gun purchase records, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) asked Holder whether the administration supported legislation “closing” the so-called “Terror Gap.” Holder responded in the affirmative on both counts.

You would think that someone who can spend $200 million of his own money to get elected mayor of New York City three times could afford copies of the U.S. Code and the Constitution. Not only does federal law stipulate the specific grounds for denying a person the right to arms, the Fourteenth Amendment states that no one shall be deprived of liberty without due process of law.

And while he is at it, he could buy a copy of another well-known publication, Webster’s Dictionary, and look up the word “obsession.”

To see Bloomberg’s Washington Post ad, and whether your town’s mayor is allied with his group, see


Which is followed by…

U.S. Congressman Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., released the following statement in response to heinous accusations from Mayor Bloomberg’s political organization Mayors Against Illegal Guns. “The mayors who politicized the tragic deaths of those whose lives were taken along with the dozens who sustained injuries at Fort Hood should immediately issue a public apology to the victims and their families,” said Tiahrt. “Their use of soldiers’ deaths, their smear campaign against me, and their attempt to deceitfully change public policy disgraces their reputations as public servants. Using the Fort Hood massacre to advance a devious ad campaign dishonors the freedoms our men and women in uniform have paid the ultimate sacrifice to protect. Americans everywhere should be outraged and demand that each of these mayors be held accountable. “The Tiahrt trace data amendment prevents the release of confidential law enforcement data to the public while making certain it is provided to local, state and federal law enforcement officials for use in criminal investigations.”

Read About It: U.S. House of Representatives
While we are at it let us not forget that the obamacare bill has hidden gun control in it.The devil is always in the details friends.

Man Convicted of Domestic Violence Wins In Federal Lautenberg Law Case..Gun Rights Still Intact

November 25, 2009

Somethings just plain different about this… Judges actually got it correct!

A Federal Appeals Court has ruled that the anti gun “Lautenberg Law” is overly inclusive. It’s a win for a Wisconsin hunter. The man was fortunate enough to have Appeal Judges in his case that applied “Originalist” interpretations of the Second Amendment in deciding his appeal.

Steven Skoien was convicted of domestic battery in a Wisconsin state court and was sentenced to two years in prison.

As a result of his conviction, he was subject to anti gun sanctions of the “Lautenberg Law.” Federal Law stated that he couldn’t own or possess firearms or ammunition because of his domestic violence conviction.

He appealed, arguing that applying the additional “Lautenberg Law” penalty to him violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms as explained in Heller.


Which is

Matt Mead rejected as governor: Wyoming does the right thing

November 21, 2009

When it comes to Governors never back an attorney for the office. To be blunt, they kiss butt way too much. Wyoming Gun Owners points out the obvious with a very informative piece that outlines the threat to states rights, as well as the federal mandate based in mysandry and ex post facto law.

While Wyoming did go a long way toward correcting a fundamentally flawed law it did not go nearly far enough. Nor do I see any way that the law that was passed could, or would, be recognized by other states. Or that a person that had been convicted in another state could use Wyoming residency to have their rights restored in Wyoming. Read on, and I hope that Wyoming Gun Owners start allowing comments at some point. At least from dues paying members such as myself.

By Anthony Bouchard
The headline should read “Gun owners beware of formers U.S Attorneys”. But it’s best that you decide…

In 2004, The Sovereign State of Wyoming enacted legislation that established a procedure to expunge misdemeanor convictions “for the purposes of restoring any firearm rights lost”.

This was specifically to aid Wyoming citizens in restoring gun rights if they had a misdemeanor such as domestic violence on their record. The NRA backed Lautenberg legislation bans gun ownership and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. Wyoming legislators recognized there was nothing to protect individuals that were erroneously convicted.

Full Story HERE

Parental Rights or prescription for yet another honor killing?

September 26, 2009

Both Atlas Shrugs and Creeping Sharia have been all over this story. Since the three of us have a different readership I thought that it might be a good idea to post about the situation here.

While most 17-year-old girls dream of high school proms, Fathima Rifqa Bary fears for her life. The Ohio teen fled her parents’ home after her father allegedly threatened to kill her for converting from Islam to Christianity. Now in foster care in Florida, she awaits a court decision that could force her to return to Ohio, to the father she fears.

Rifqa’s father denies threatening her life, yet his disclaimer is suspicious, especially given his attorney’s work for the Council on America-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which denies any connection at all between Islam and “honor” killings — a denial contradicted by Islamic law itself and by documented cases of such murders here in the United States.

Of course, Rifqa’s conversion would be a non-issue if it were from Christianity to Islam. And it is an interesting contrast to our recent report of a New Hampshire court’s ordering of a Christian homeschooled girl to attend public school for “exposure to different points of view.” Parental rights remain an issue not to be taken lightly — indeed, too often, they are when the shoe is on the other foot — but Rifqa’s very life could be at stake. Florida authorities argue her concern is “subjective and speculative,” but if she is returned to Ohio and murdered, what then? Who would be held accountable? Florida officials? Not likely.

In related news, Muslims held a prayer rally at the U.S. Capitol Friday. One of the chief organizers was Hassen Abdellah, a lawyer who has previously represented Islamic terrorists, including some involved with both the 1993 and 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center. The objective was to display their patriotism and religious freedom — two things that non-Muslims definitely do not enjoy in Islamic countries.


Now, can anyone say “Domestic Violence?” I knew ya’ could!

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: A wake up call?

July 12, 2009

For several years I have posted on various forums, and blogs about the domestic violence law, and the abuse of that law. We were first informed of just how evil all men are, and were by Patricia Schroeder from Colorado. Men were / are Al Bundy’s at best and at worst, well, what ever could be dreamed up.

Then, as always, there have to be Supermen! They had to please, and be praised no matter the cost of dignity and honor. The two most famous have to be Frank Lautenberg, and Charles Schumer. Both men of power, and as ruthless in their search for praise and recognition as any gunfighter in a fiction movie about the “wild west.” Both men have sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Yet, Lautenberg sneaked through a law that bans people from exercising rights that are defined as unalienable for less than felonious acts, and Schumer keeps blocking the funding so that rights could be restored. That’s bad enough, but the original act of treason, by Lautenberg, was to implement ex post facto law. For those that don’t know what that means, the short version is changing the rules after the game is played.

Here’s one example of how this has played out that I have personal knowledge of. Around 1957, at Von’s Market in Oceanside California, my stepfather and mother got into an argument. No hitting or anything, just some pretty loud yelling about whether they were going to buy Olympia beer, or Lucky Lager… A policeman happened to be in the store, and cited them both for disturbing the peace. Not really a big deal? Well, they both paid a ten dollar fine, and? Other than the Marine Corps dishing out a punitive tour at Adak, Alaska, all was well. Or so we thought…

Comes the year 2002, and mom wanted to go bird shooting with the grand-kids and some friends. She goes to the local store, and buys a shotgun, a regular old used Remington 870. But? The sale gets blocked. Based upon domestic violence (that wasn’t) from 1957! Years before the law was enacted! That friends, is how the domestic violence ban works. It is immoral, and goes beyond the Constitution all the way back to the Magna Carta, and The Rights of Englishmen. Remember those? Those little things that led to the “shot that was heard around the world?”

Now folks, I’m just a dumb old retired Paramedic but even I was able to see just how these laws were applied in a sexist manner. Not to mention in an un-Constitutional manner on a day to day basis. Now it seems that after all these years a few other folks have figured out what I have been talking my head off about for years.

$4 billion abuse industry rooted in deceptions and lies

By Carey Roberts
web posted July 6, 2009

Erin Pizzey is a genial woman with snow-white hair, cherubic cheeks, and an easy smile. It wasn’t always that way. The daughter of an English diplomat, she founded the world’s first shelter for battered women in 1971. To her surprise, she discovered that most of the women in her shelter were as violent as the men they had left.

When Pizzey wrote a book revealing this sordid truth, she encountered a firestorm of protest. “Abusive telephone calls to my home, death threats, and bomb scares, became a way of living for me and for my family. Finally, the bomb squad asked me to have all my mail delivered to their head quarters,” she would later reveal.

According a recent report, the domestic violence industry continues to engage in information control tactics, spewing a dizzying series of half-truths, white lies, and outright  prevarications. The report, “Fifty Domestic Violence Myths,” is published by RADAR, Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting:

How often have you heard the mantra-like claim, “domestic violence is all about power and control”? That’s code for the feminist dogma that domestic violence is rooted in men’s insatiable need to dominate and oppress the women in their lives.

And the obvious solution to partner abuse? Eliminate the patriarchy!

I know it all sounds far-fetched, but that’s what the gender ideologues who get their funding from the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) believe. And no surprise these programs have been an abject failure. As Dr. Angela Parmley of the Department of Justice once admitted, “We have no evidence to date that VAWA has led to a decrease in the overall levels of violence against women.”

Once you blame the whole problem of partner abuse on patriarchal dominance, the women who proudly call themselves the “VAWA Mafia” find themselves compelled to dress up the fable with a series of corollary myths.

Here are some examples: When a woman attacks her boyfriend, claim she was only acting in self-defense. Shrug off her assault with the “He had it coming” line. Aver her short stature prevents her from ever hurting her man. Or assert she grew up in an abusive household, as if that somehow lets her off the hook.

Above all, the ideologues will never admit that partner violence is more common among lesbians than heterosexual couples. Just consider the case of Jessica Kalish, the 56-year-old Florida woman who was stabbed 222 times last October with a Phillips screwdriver wielded by ex-girlfriend Carol Anne Burger. But no one dared call it “domestic violence.”

Once you begin to play tricks with the truth, you need to invent ever grander prevarications.  So sit back and get ready for a good chuckle, because there’s not a shred of truth to any of these claims regularly put forth by the domestic abuse industry:

1. A marriage license is a hitting license. (Truth is, an intact marriage is the safest place for men and women alike.)

2. Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women. (The leading causes of female injury are unintentional falls, motor vehicle accidents, and over-exertion. Domestic violence is not even on the list.)

3. The March of Dimes reports that battering is the leading cause of birth defects. (The March of Dimes has never done such a study.)

4. Women never make false allegations of domestic violence. (That’s the biggest whopper  of all.)

5. Super Bowl Sunday is the biggest day of the year for violence against women. (Will the abuse industry never tire of its demagoguery?)

These are just five of the 50 domestic violence myths documented in the RADAR report.  As former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once deadpanned, “You’re entitled to your own opinions; you’re not entitled to your own facts.” Hopefully the $4 billion partner abuse industry will begin to pay attention. ESR

Carey Roberts is a Staff Writer for The New Media Alliance. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.


Some dorks just can’t wait

July 6, 2009

Some people just can’t wait to jump on their favorite bandwagon despite recent history that one would think people would learn from. Can innocent Marines tried by the press before any trial come to mind?

I’m talking about the unfortunate death of football great Steve McNair. While never mentioning domestic violence the MSM and blogs are silent on the subject. This is a clear cut case of hopolophobia on the one part, (check the first link), and blatant mysandry on the other.

This is political correctness gone amok. If, and at this point it’s a very big if, this situation was in fact a murder suicide. Blame it on human nature, not on inanimate objects, and call it what it is. Domestic violence, pure and simple. Yes, even when it appears that the person that pulled the trigger was a woman. Even when that is not politically correct.

H.R. 2153 The Second amendment restoration act

May 2, 2009

The NRA backs this well intentioned, but flawed act. The fact remains that taking away unalienable rights based upon less than felony behavior without any chance of restoration of the persons rights forever is immoral. This is most especially true when it is an ex post facto application of the law.

All to often the forces of political correctness prevail and mysandry is the order of the day. During my career as a Paramedic I went on so many Domestic Violence calls that it is mind staggering. In ninety percent of the cases there was no visible trauma, and in fact care and transport were refused by the “victim.” Yet, the “offender” was taken to jail and charged with a multitude of various offences.

Most often these people would take the carrot offered by the courts, and plead guilty. Then serve thirty six weeks, three times a week, of so called counseling where they learned that women are incapable of doing any wrong whatsoever. Further, that all men are evil, period. Not to mention the three days that they are required to spend in jail as a “cooling off” period.

Too be honest, women do get arrested for non felony Domestic Violence. The statistics at least at my last perusal reveal that this happens a whopping three percent of the time, and that when that does happen, the male is also taken to jail at least half the time too! He get the treatment noted above while she gets sent to “parenting classes” for twelve sessions, and that is in the very few cases where the charges are not dropped completely. I quit checking those statistics a few years ago because they just never changed more than a point or two over several years time.

Face it, domestic violence is something that should never happen irrespective of who initiates it male or female. However, the cure is worse than the problem. (I’m speaking of non felony situations here, not felony.) In addition to the clear fact that women are using this law as a weapon, along with the police and court system to get revenge for whatever reason without a crime having actually happened.

This new proposed legislation is a step in the correct direction but to be blunt, does not go anywhere near far enough. Read on…

WASHINGTON – U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) has introduced legislation to restore the gun rights of individuals convicted of minor, non-violent crimes.  H.R. 2153, the Second Amendment Restoration Act, ensures states have the discretion to restore individuals’ gun rights after conviction of minor crimes.  The National Rifle Association (NRA) has endorsed the legislation.

“The Second Amendment provides for the right to bear arms and individuals should not forfeit that right due to convictions for minor crimes,” Stupak said.  “I appreciate the support of the NRA as I attempt to clarify that individuals convicted of minor crimes decades ago should not be subject to lifetime bans on gun ownership.”

Federal law prohibits individuals convicted of felonies from owning guns.  Federal law also gives states the discretion to determine which state crimes are treated as felonies.  Due to the way the courts have interpreted some of the most antiquated state laws, some individuals who were convicted of minor misdemeanors at the state level are treated as felons for the purposes of gun ownership, prohibiting them from owning a gun.

The Second Amendment Restoration Act would make it clear that a person with a conviction for a minor, non-violent crime, whose civil rights were never taken away, should not be treated any more harshly than a convicted felon whose rights were restored.  It would also allow states to give individuals limited restoration of rights.  Federal law currently allows for states to restore all or none of an individual’s gun rights but nothing in between.

The issue was brought to Stupak’s attention by a constituent who, now in his mid-50s, was convicted in 1971 of entering a non-occupied building.  He was 18 at the time and the building was a deer camp.  He completed his probation in 1972.  In 2003, he applied to the county gun board to have his right to own a firearm restored.  But because the 1971 crime he was convicted of was a minor, non-violent crime, he is still denied the right to own a handgun under Michigan law and therefore no gun rights can be afforded to him.

“To be absolutely clear, the NRA believes it is both constitutional and appropriate to disarm convicted felons,” NRA Director of Federal Affairs Chuck Cunningham wrote in a letter of support for the bill.  “However, we also believe that no person should lose the right to arms due to convictions for minor, non-violent crimes, especially those that occurred many years in the past.”

“I am a strong supporter of our Second Amendment rights,” Stupak said.  “The vast majority of gun owners are responsible sportsmen and women who like to hunt and shoot for sport.  These activities are essential parts of our economy and our cultural heritage.  I have consistently urged my colleagues to work for effective ways to curtail violent crime in America, but not by simply passing gun laws that unfairly penalize responsible gun owners.”

The NRA’s letter of support is available at:


Colorado Politics run amok!

March 3, 2009

Senator Greg Brophy keeps us all informed about the goofy, illogical, and at times immoral things that go on under the golden dome on Colfax avenue. Reprinted here is his latest newsletter, with my commentary in bold.

The Car Tax

SB09-108, the Car Tax passed the House 34-31 on Wednesday. All of the Republicans and three Democrats voted against it.

I thought Ref. C was supposed to take care of things like that, and a whole lot of other things as well!

Kudos to State Rep Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling) for adding an amendment to allow new axle configurations to be used by trucks in Colorado. This is something that I have been working on since my first year in the House and Jerry pulled it off!

So? There are some with a sense of logic down there? Astounding, simply astounding!

I expect the Senate to concur with House amendments today, Friday the 27th. I am truly sorry that we were unable to derail this quarter billion dollar tax increase levied during a recession.

Hold on Colorado! A full blown depression is heading your way like a train with a stuck throttle! Brought to you by the Bill Ritter Express!

Another Car Tax

Senator Morse (D-Colorado Springs) added an additional buck to each car registration for a grant program for emergency services.

A dollar here, a dollar there. Special Districts are probably the fastest growing taxes in the state. People regularly over-ride Tabor for Special Districts without really understanding the consequences, and now this?

Of course, administering the grant program will require three brand new state employees. Take a look at the fiscal note for SB09-002. You can see that this grant program already exists and has about $2.9 million available each year, but adding another $4.9 million to it will require more state employees. Why can’t the existing employees dole out the money? This can’t be that hard; I’m absolutely positive that existing staff can write more checks.

Bureaucracy in action !

The additional new employees aren’t the only insulting part of the tax (fee) increase. Only 11% of emergency service calls go to car wrecks. Eleven percent. Eighty nine percent of the time our car registration will be subsidizing other emergency services.

I think the stats are off a bit, but the point is still the same. Most cited statistics that I have seen for fire departments ( which respond to medical emergencies along with Police, and EMS) show that ninety percent, or even higher are for medical calls. In my experience Motor Vehicle Accidents account for roughly twenty percent of those emergency responses. Sounds a lot like using cigarette taxes for anything but smoking cessation programs.

Will this ever end?

Paper or Plastic?

We killed the Plastic Bag Reduction Act on Tuesday.

The bill would have taxed plastic bags at grocery stores and other large stores six cents each bag for the next three years and then banned the plastic bags altogether in 2012.

I know, don’t we have more important things to do? Well, yes, but Senator Veiga introduced the bill and under our Constitution, it had to have a hearing.

The background story is this: the idea was brought by a bunch of high school kids who have been brain washed about the importance of saving the environment from humans since grade school. So they decided to rid the earth of the scourge of plastic bags.

The problem is that the alternative of convenience, for those times when folks forget to bring their canvas bags is paper and paper actually fills up land fills three times faster than plastic bags, plus bringing the paper bags to the stores takes three times as many trucks!

Talk about unintended consequences.

Or maybe “stupid is as stupid does..?”

Marriage Tax

Senator Tax Morse is back raising taxes and calling them fees by this time taxing marriage.

The current charge for a marriage license is $10. Seven dollars goes the local county clerk for handling the transaction and the other three dollars is spent on state record keeping of the data.

That’s just what a government fee is supposed to do, cover the cost of administering the program.

Along comes Senator Morse with a strong desire to find a way to fund domestic violence programs in the state, so what does he do? Increase the fee on a marriage license from $10 to $30 and convert that additional twenty bucks into domestic violence funding.

Fact: Men are overwhelmingly charged with non-felony D.V. in Colorado. Unless you are a celebrity of have social or political connections you are denied probation, and still have to attend thirty-six weeks of “counseling” that the man has to pay for in full. Additionally, the court assesses fines, much of which already goes toward DV programs such as safe houses and hot lines. Court ordered mysandry and the lawmakers refuse to deal with it because of political correctness.

Never mind that married couples are three times less likely to have domestic violence issues. Never mind that fees are supposed to be related to the cost of the program. He just wants the money.


I have decided to join the world of FaceBook. I am not the most professional politician in the world, so I am actually using mine as it was intended – almost strictly for social purposes. If you want to “friend” me, search FB for Greg Brophy. I think this link will work:

I am also using Twitter as SenatorBrophy. You can follow me on Twitter go to for that.

Finally, I always appreciate a campaign donation you can do that through PayPal by clicking on the “Donate” button, but don’t click if you are a lobbyist or have a bill in front of the legislature this session.

Pay Now

%d bloggers like this: