Posts Tagged ‘Law’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Firearms Legislation In The 111th Congress

July 12, 2009

Seems like there is an awful lot of misinformation going around the Internet lately concerning new gun laws that are, or are not on the table. This is a synopsis as of today from Gun Owners of America.

Firearms Legislation In The 111th Congress

Gun Owners of America Analysis of Current Gun Bills

House:H.R. 17 (Bartlett): This bill would reaffirm the right to use firearms for self-defense and for defense of one’s home and family.

H.R. 45 (Rush):  This bill would require a license for handguns and semiautomatics, including those currently possessed.  The applicant must be thumbprinted and sign a certification that, effectively, the firearm will not be kept in a place where it would be available for the defense of the gun owner’s family.  The applicant must also make available ALL of his psychiatric records, pass an exam, and pay a fee of up to $25.  The license may be renewed after five years and may be revoked.  Private sales would be outlawed, and reports to the attorney general of all transactions would be required, even when, as the bill allows, the AG determines that a state licensing system is sufficiently draconian to substitute for the federal license.  With virtually no exceptions, ALL firearms transactions (involving semiautos, handguns, long guns, etc.) would be subject to a Brady check.  In addition, the bill would make it unlawful in nearly all cases to keep any loaded firearm for self-defense.  A variety of “crimes by omission” (such as failure to report certain things) would be created.  Criminal penalties of up to ten years and almost unlimited regulatory and inspection authority would be established.

H.R. 197 (Stearns):  This bill would establish national standards for concealed carry reciprocity, but would not protect residents of pro-gun states like Vermont and Alaska which do not require paper permits.

H.R. 256 (Jackson-Lee):  This bill would, among other things, impose a ten-year prison sentence (a life sentence if death or kidnapping results) for using a firearm to cause bodily injury on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin.

H.R. 257 (Jackson Lee):  This bill would take the already Byzantine restrictions on teaching your kids the responsible use of firearms and extend them from handguns to semi-autos; increase the age of applicability from 18 to 21; and increase potential penalties to up to 10 years in prison.

In addition, the bill prohibits unaccompanied minors from gun shows, and subjects parents to up to 3 years in prison for keeping an unloaded gun (with ammunition in the vicinity) if a jury finds that they disregarded a risk, that a kid (including a burglar) would get a hold of the gun and the unauthorized user causes injury.  This provision effectively eliminates having guns available for self defense.

H.R. 265 (Jackson-Lee):  This bill is intended to remove the disparity between sentencing for crack cocaine (perceived as a drug used more frequently by blacks) and powder cocaine (perceived as a drug used more frequently by whites).  The bill is, among other things, intended to relieve sentencing on the basis of the fact that crack cocaine was the drug involved, but increase sentencing on the basis of the fact that a weapon was “brandished.”

H.R. 442 (Rehberg):  This bill would provide amnesty for a veteran who acquired a “souvenir” (such as a machine gun) while serving overseas, so long as it is registered during a 90-day grace period.

H.R. 455 (Welch):  This bill would add the Missiquoi and Trout Rivers in Vermont to the Wild and Scenic Rivers system, and commission a study on, among other things, the possession of weapons on lands adjacent to the area.

H.R. 495 (Rodriguez, Teague, Engel, Reyes): This bill would authorize $15,000,000 for two years to the BATFE for the purpose of enhancing its project to thwart the transportation of firearms across the Mexican border.

H.R. 510 (Kind et al.):  This bill would provide that the manufacturer’s excise tax on recreational equipment be paid quarterly.

H.R. 623 (Reyes):  This bill would suspend minimum sentencing requirements in the case of a person who was authorized to carry a firearm in connection with his employment and committed the crime during and in relation to his employment.  (See, also, H.R. 834 and H.R. 866.)

H.R. 642 (Flake):  This bill would provide that, except for overriding reasons such as national security or safety, public lands should be open to recreational shooting.  It would generally require that withdrawal of lands from recreational shooting be offset, and would require congressional committees to be notified in writing before such a withdrawal.

H.R. 673 (Filner, McHugh):  This bill would make changes in the federal employee retirement system with respect to certain law enforcement personnel.

H.R. 675 (Filner):  This bill would provide police, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement personnel in the Department of Defense with the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.

H.R. 808:  This bill would create a Department of Peace, which would be tasked with, among other things, analyzing policies with respect to “tools of violence, including handguns.”

H.R. 834 (Poe):  This bill would suspend minimum sentencing requirements in the case of a person who was authorized to carry a firearm in connection with his employment and committed the crime during and in relation to his employment.  (See, also, H.R. 623 and H.R. 866.)

H.R. 866 (Brady et al.):  This bill would suspend minimum sentencing requirements in the case of a person who was authorized to carry a firearm in connection with his employment and committed the crime during and in relation to his employment.  (See, also, H.R. 623 and H.R. 834.)

H.R. 1022 (Schiff and Bono Mack):  This is the 111th Congress’ incarnation of the “gang bill.”  It would, among other things, define a “criminal street gang” to include an informal group of five or more people (such as a family or business), each of whom has committed one or more “gang crimes” (such driving by a school with a gun in the car under 18 U.S.C. 922(q)), including a violent felony (such as defending your family against a criminal under circumstances in which a prosecutor feels you should have retreated).

H.R. 1048 (Sires, Hare, Wilson, Frank, Meek):  This bill would prohibit the HUD secretary from accepting any fees for enforcing any provision of a dwelling lease agreement that requires registration of firearms or prohibits their possession for sport or self-defense.

H.R. 1074 (Scalise): This bill would allow for the interstate sale of firearms, provided that the laws of the State in which the transfer is conducted and the State of residence of the transferee are complied with, in addition to federal law.

H.R. 1448 (Rodriguez et al.):  Like H.R. 495, this bill would authorize $15,000,000 a year to send BATF agents to the Mexican border and to Mexico in connection with “Project Gunrunner.”  In addition, it would provide $9,500,000 a year to do things like trace firearms recovered in Mexico, presumably for the purpose of building a case for anti-gun legislation in the U.S.  It also contains $150,000,000 a year for other border security operations and $15,000,000 for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

H.R. 1620 (Boozman):  This “Vermont-friendly” bill would authorize a person who can lawfully carry concealed in his state of residence — or has a concealed carry permit from any state — to carry a concealed firearm in all states.  Unlike some reciprocity bills, it allows non-permit states like Vermont to benefit from its provisions and does not set “national standards” for carrying firearms.

H.R. 1684 (Hastings):  This bill would codify the Bush Administration’s regulations concerning guns in National Parks.

H.R. 1913 (Conyers, Frank): This is the controversial House-passed Hate Crimes bill.  It would impose a 10-year prison sentence for a simple “attempt” to cause bodily injury if a firearm was involved.

H.R. 2159 (King of New York, Rangel, McCarthy, et al.): This bill would allow Eric Holder to declare any person a “prohibited person” (revoke licenses of, etc.) if he “suspects” that individual of aiding terrorism. Given recent disclosures that the government regards pro-lifers, pro-gun advocates, veterans, and other conservatives as potential terrorists, this has to be regarded with some alarm. This is particularly true because Holder is specifically authorized by the bill to withhold information concerning the basis for putting conservatives on his “enemies list.”

H.R. 2296 (King, Space): This is a reincarnation of a bill which contains a hodge-podge of relatively minor good things — and one really bad thing which was used to secure the cosponsorship of the Judiciary Committee Chairman on the Senate version of the bill.  The bad thing is that the bill would allow BATFE to impose, for the first time, civil penalties on federal firearms licensees. Civil penalties could easily put a small licensee out of business, but can be imposed without the burden of proof, disclosure requirements, and other protections accorded criminal defendants. And, although proponents argue that civil penalties will allow BATFE to impose penalties short of license revocation, there is no requirement that license revocations be reduced commensurately. While GOA has pushed other provisions in the bill tightening state-of-mind requirements and gun definitions, these are not enough to offset giving the BATFE a tool which has served as the central engine for expanding the power and jurisdiction of other agencies (like the SEC).

H.R. 2324 (Castle, McCarthy, et al.):  This bill is a reincarnation of the year-after-year effort to effectively ban gun shows by allowing them to be regulated and inspected to an unlimited extent.  In addition, any gun show sponsor would be subject to up to two years in prison if he failed to notify every single attendee of his responsibilities under the Brady Law.

H.R. 2401 (McCarthy): This bill is a reincarnation of legislation to make “prohibited persons” of everyone on an administration “terrorist watch list.”  Suffice it to say that:

  • there are virtually no guidelines to who can or can’t be placed on one of these lists, and they have prohibited boarding by people like Ted Kennedy;
  • it is impossible to find out why you are on the list and very difficult to get your name off.

Senate:

S. 160:  This is the Senate-passed bill to grant a voting representative for the District of Columbia in the House.  As a result of an amendment added on the Senate floor by Senator John Ensign, it would repeal the gun registration and microstamping provisions of D.C. law, and would bar the District from passing new anti-gun statutes.

S. 296 (Chambliss, Cornyn, Coburn, Isakson):  This bill would replace the federal income tax with a national sales tax.  Although the language is a little muddy, it appears that the 1934 National Firearms Act is retained.

S. 325 (Cochran):  The bill would allow pest control pyrotechnics to be exempted from the explosives provisions of Title 18.

S. 371 (Thune, Vitter):  This “Vermont-friendly” bill would authorize a person who can lawfully carry concealed in his state of residence — or has a concealed carry permit from any state — to carry a concealed firearm in all states.  Unlike some reciprocity bills, it allows non-permit states like Vermont to benefit from its provisions and does not set “national standards” for carrying firearms.

S. 556 (Vitter):  Current law allows long guns to be purchased in a face-to-face transaction with a gun dealer in a state outside the purchaser’s state of residence.  This bill:

* extends that law to all firearms;

* allows the gun to be purchased at a gun show; and

* rescinds provisions that allow the state of residence to reach into another state and prohibit a transaction which has nothing to do with its jurisdiction.

S. 632 (Baucus et al.):  This bill would provide that the manufacturer’s excise tax on recreational equipment be paid quarterly.

S. 669 (Burr):  This bill would protect veterans by first requiring a finding by a judge or magistrate that an individual is mentally incompetent before his guns are taken away under laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.  This would replace the current method, which has resulted in the disarmament of more than 100,000 veterans by government psychiatrists, who have issued opinions claiming that PTSD symptoms require a returning veteran to get help to manage his financial affairs.

S. 816 (Crapo):  This bill would codify the Bush Administration’s regulations concerning guns in National Parks.

S. 845 (Thune, Vitter):  This is the GOA-supported “Vermont-friendly” concealed carry reciprocity bill.

S. 941 (Crapo, Leahy): This is the Senate counterpart to H.R. 2296 and is a reincarnation of a bill which contains a hodge-podge of relatively minor good things — and one really bad thing which was used to secure the cosponsorship of Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy.  The bad thing is that the bill would allow BATFE to impose, for the first time, civil penalties on federal firearms licensees. Civil penalties could easily put a small licensee out of business, but can be imposed without the burden of proof, disclosure requirements, and other protections accorded criminal defendants. And, although proponents argue that civil penalties will allow BATFE to impose penalties short of license revocation, there is no requirement that license revocations be reduced commensurately — and it’s pretty clear (and GOA has in fact been told) that this anti-gun provision was added as an inducement for the support of Leahy and Obama. And, while GOA has pushed other provisions in the bill tightening state-of-mind requirements and gun definitions, these are not enough to offset giving the BATFE a tool which has served as the central engine for expanding the power and jurisdiction of other agencies (like the SEC).

S. 1317 (Lautenberg): This bill would allow the Attorney General to deny the purchase of a firearm pursuant to an Instantcheck (or a permit which would allow a person to by-pass the Instantcheck) if he “suspect[s]” that the person has been engaged in conduct “related to terrorism” and the Attorney General has a “reasonable belief” that the firearm might be used in connection with terrorism. The Attorney General is specifically permitted to withhold any information concerning his “reasonable belief.” Take into consideration, in evaluating the application of this bill, that DHS in 2009 circulated an advisory attempting to link mainline Second Amendment and pro-life groups to “terrorism” — and a number of recent newspaper commentaries have argued that groups like GOA and the NRA are, in some way, responsible for criminal acts recently committed in Pittsburgh and Wichita.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Uncategorized, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Firearms Legislation In The 111th Congress

The Big lie is back…

July 9, 2009

It just never goes away, at least for the hopolophobes. The “ninety percent” lie that is. These people like to make it appear that you can just go down to your local Walmart and load up on grenades, machine guns, and RPG’s.

Mexican Standoff On Second Amendment

By DAN GIFFORD AND MICHAEL I. KRAUSSPosted 07/07/2009 05:41 PM ET

Big lies die slowly.

After a claim by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that 90% of Mexican drug dealers’ military weapons (machine guns, hand grenades and missiles) come from American gun stores was exposed as a lie several months ago, it’s back — this time with the imprimatur of the Government Accountability Office.

A June 21 CBS “60 Minutes” report by Anderson Cooper was clearly coordinated to coincide with release of the GAO report and a similar one by “activist” Josh Sugarmann.

You are likely to soon hear and read that the GAO report commissioned by Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., confirms what Mexico’s attorney general, Eduardo Medina-Mora, told Cooper: “Two thousand two hundred grenades, missile and rocket launchers!”

Cue Cooper as a video of machine guns, hand grenades and other weaponry fill the screen: “It turns out 90% of them are purchased in the U.S.”

That’s not all. You will hear from Sugarmann that Mexican drug dealers are buying FN Herstal Five-seven pistols from licensed U.S. gun merchants because those pistols fire bullets that penetrate protective body armor.

What you are unlikely to hear and read is that all such military weapons are illegal in the U.S., that Mexican criminals are supplied through an international black market and that this black market prominently features weapons the U.S. sold to the Mexican military and that are resold to drug cartels by corrupt Mexican officials.

Neither are you likely to hear or read that the vest-penetrating ammunition made for the FN Herstal Five-seven is available only to military and special police units.

The facts don’t matter. Reinstatement of the federal “assault weapon” ban that lapsed in 2004 matters, and is nothing short of a fetish among powerful supporters who will tell almost any untruth to achieve it.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she would pick the time and place to ram the ban through. The foundation work for her plan includes TV face time for renewal activists, and politicians and law enforcement organizations that will get larger budgets and more power if the ban is reinstated.

Journalists don’t always repeat these lies in bad faith. Often they publish untruths as a combination of journalistic ignorance of firearm features and laws, and anti-gun loathing common to the “metrosexual” class.

Canadian-born Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer admitted as much before the first “assault weapon” ban went into effect in 1994:

“The ‘assault weapons ban’ will have no effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. … Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of (all) weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.”

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

It appears I am not alone…

July 9, 2009

In criticizing the N.R.A. often I seem to be crying to the wilderness. At least as a member. All to often they pussy foot around, and the next thing you know we have lost some firearms freedom.

I urge my fellow members to do two things. First, send the N.R.A. leadership a message, as described in the Gun Owners of America alert below, and, also cut off any and all donations to them (NRA) until they really start to protect your rights. Then, send kudos or damnation to your state Attorney General as appropriate for their action or inaction in regard to the amicus brief covered in a post over at TexasFreds.

NRA's Past President Strikes Again!
-- Urges Senators "not to confirm Judge Sotomayor"

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Last week we told you how NRA's Past President Sandy Froman was
calling on all NRA members to vigorously oppose the nomination of
Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. She did this in response to
the "wait and see" approach that the NRA's upper management
has taken
in regard to the Sotomayor nomination -- an approach that may well
allow her to wiggle through and be confirmed.

Yesterday, Sandy Froman struck again. But this time she was joined
with another past president of the NRA and several current Board
members, as well.

"Judge Sotomayor's record on the Second Amendment causes us grave
concern over her treatment of this enumerated right [to keep and
bear arms]," the coalition stated.

"As Second Amendment leaders deeply concerned about preserving all
fundamental rights for current and future generations of Americans,
we strongly oppose this nominee, and urge the Senate not to confirm
Judge Sotomayor."

In related news, the NRA sent a letter yesterday to the Senate
Judiciary committee expressing "very serious concerns" over the
Sotomayor nomination, but said that the leadership "has not
announced an official position" out of respect for the confirmation
process. The letter indicated the NRA's management would be
watching the upcoming hearings very carefully.

One of the concerns about the hearing process, however, is that
Sotomayor will act exactly the same way Obama has. You will remember
that Obama tried to play himself off as a supporter of gun rights
during the presidential campaign, but then once he took office, began
showing his true colors.

Obama has nominated far-left gun banners to key positions of power --
including Attorney General Eric Holder, State Department counsel
Harold Koh and Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

It's not uncommon to see politicians tout the Bill of Rights when
trying to get elected or confirmed, but then act like a modern day
Benedict Arnold once they are safely entrenched.

If Judge Sotomayor is anything like the man who nominated her, she
will tell Senators what they want to hear during the Senate
proceedings, but then stab us in the back once she has secured a
lifetime appointment to the bench.

Folks, this is a huge battle. And that's why it's important to
have every single gun organization firing all of its political
ammunition. This is a battle that we can win. So even though we
already asked you to contact the NRA's management last week, it is
imperative that they hear from you again.

ACTION: Please urge the NRA's upper management to tell Senators
that a vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor is an anti-gun vote. You
can use the text message below -- addressed to NRA Executive Vice
President Wayne LaPierre and NRA Executive Director Chris Cox --
to help direct your comments to the NRA.

CONTACT INFO for the NRA:

Phone) (800) 392-8683
Webform) https://secure.nraila.org/Contact.aspx

----- Pre-written comments -----

Dear Mr. LaPierre and Mr. Cox:

I was so excited to see that past NRA President Sandy Froman -- in
coalition with several other past and present NRA leaders -- came
out in opposition the nomination of Judge Sotomayor.

In a letter dated July 7, the coalition stated that "we strongly
oppose this nominee, and urge the Senate not to confirm Judge
Sotomayor."

This is Froman's second communication in this regard, as she stepped
up to the plate on June 24 with a call to arms for all NRA members
to vigorously oppose the Sotomayor nomination.

"Gun owners, and especially the members of the National Rifle
Association," Froman said, "must aggressively oppose Judge
Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court."

I couldn't agree more with Mrs. Froman.

I hope that the NRA will officially tell Senators now -- and not wait
until after the hearings -- that a vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor
is an anti-gun vote. Please let me know what you intend to do.

Thank you.

Sincerely,


Wyoming Attorney General Signs Amicus Brief Supporting Second Amendment Incorporation
Please Thank Attorney General Bruce Salzburg!

Two-thirds of the nation’s attorneys general have filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in the case of NRA v. Chicago and hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This bi-partisan group of 33 attorneys general, along with the Attorney General of California in a separate filing, agrees with the NRA’s position that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms, disagreeing with the decision recently issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Attorney General Salzburg was one of the many who agrees that the Second Amendment is a fundamental individual right and signed the amicus brief. Please call Attorney General Salzburg at (307) 777-7841 and thank him for standing up in support of the Second Amendment. You may also e-mail him at agwebmaster@state.wy.us.

The State Attorneys General Amicus Brief can be found by clicking here.

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

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.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Domestic Violence, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 5 Comments »

California Politics, it’s not just the budget

July 4, 2009

More than thirty years ago I left my birth state because things like no work, huge taxes, and what I considered to be corruption in favor of special interest groups was destroying what once was a very decent place to live, and raise a family.

Those special interest groups played the race card, the union card, and the gender card most often, but there were other things as well. So now, what was once the sixth largest economy in the entire world (if memory serves me correctly) is broke financially. Not to mention morally, and no, I’m not talking about bikini clad women and Hollywood. I’m talking about a refusal to honor what had been one of the strongest individual rights state constitutions in the union. Look at the flag of California, it says California Republic. That concept has been denigrated by social “progressives” and the politically correct. What has happened to California will be coming to your state soon if that sort of thing is allowed to continue. This is something for any and all to be thinking about today, Independence Day 2009.

My good bloging buddy BZ unloads about all this:

Ever since I’ve lived here (23years) I’ve noticed a couple things that I always thought would ruin a great state.
1. An over abundance of Mexican Nationals. (OK I’ll wait for the gasp and the cries of Racist……Done yet?.. Ok lets move on)

The reason I say that is, when you get such a culture switch as California has endured over the past 30 years, you end up with an area that resembles what the immigrants left. Take a look at LA. Mayor Antonio Villiaragosa is as corrupt as any politician in Mexico. Look at the education system, the health care system of California is a clear cut case of a good idea entrapped by corruption. in 1986 Reagan granted Amnesty to the Illegal Immigrants that were here already with a promise to curb the flood of future illegals. That didn’t happen, so now we have the “Original Illegals” that have MULTIPLIED and destroyed what little infrastructure was left, including Education, and Health-Care. On top of that we have the next generation of illegal’s waiting for Obama to grant Amnesty,  so they can follow in the foot steps of their forefathers….Now; for the first time in my life I am very worried for our nation. I honestly believe we are headed down the road to ruin.

When the IOU’s quit being honored, possibly as soon as July 11th, there will be an explosion in California that will have consequences from coast to coast. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of nutjobs to go around in this state, and they are ALL NOT MEXICAN, but if you look at a few undeniable stats like “Welfare recipients” and “Prison racial breakdowns” as well as education statistics. Facts are facts. Look it up. Look at the hispanic UPTICK that corresponds with the state “Downturn”. Look at who raises the biggest stink when there is mention of school performance measures… They say it’s not fair, it’s because the classes are too big, or whatever….ITS THE EXPLOSION IN MEXICAN NATIONALS that has created that “Environment”…

I am not being racist because I notice the obvious, if you are offended it’s because you are in denial of the obvious.

So you ask how do you fix it? Let me tell you how easy it is. YOU QUIT MAKING IT EASY! Americans are people that overcome hardship, Americans are people that deal with things, find sollutions and get better, Americans USED to do that. NOW in California, if you don’t speak english, we make it easy for you, we make those that don’t speak spanish listen to a bi-lingual teacher re-read an assignment in spanish for you. We have signs in spanish we have everything for you so you really have no reason to learn english… Everyone suffers for that kindness. We have made an entire generation of immigrants into drooling zombies (Better known as Democrat voters) by allowing them the ability to remain MEXICANS first, rather than TRUE Americans, that believe in GOD, Family and Country. The new generation believes in “Gang, 40’s, and Ho’s” there is no “Patriotism” other than on Cinco De Mayo for the most part. Now there is one caveat.. ALL Mexican’s do not deserve this rant, if you are a hard working family, including your kids, you speak english, you don’t fly your Mexican flag and you consider yourself AMERICAN first… This rant is not about you or anyone like you. ITs about those that have sucked the life out of California by being what they left.

(/end rant)

2. Over Regulation. You look at the resources and possibility for employers to call California home, yet why do they leave? They leave because of Cal EPA, they leave because of Cal OSHA they leave because of the taxes levied on them they leave because of the HIGH cost of employing people. Our State Government is punishing the very folks it needs. They make really cute commercials showing how wonderful it is here…BUT they leave out the real reason we have the nations highest unemployment rate. REGULATIONS. The wonderful beaches, are HOMELESS encampments for the most part the mountains are great for “Green stuff” like Hiking and skiing but try to go hunting and fishing, or try to show your kids how to live off the land and see how much red tape you have to go through. Try to get a business license for something around here and you will see real quick why business are again EXITING STAGE RIGHT>

3. Crime rates, recividism, and the lack of public outrage when laws were passed regarding personal rights. When the Anti-Gun morons in California decided to pass these “Little” laws that didn’t really affect “ME” at the time were enacted, then there was a small outrage. It was the NRA that made their voces heard in Sacramento but they had little support in the form of public outrage. We simply kept working, kept enjoying the scenery and kept looking out for “Numero uno”….NOW we can’t buy much more than a pea shooter or we can buy it but only after CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL Government intrusion. We must submit to countless privacy invasion, now they are going to stamp ammo…any outrage yet?
So Sacramento has successfully restricted INNOCENT LAW ABIDING CALIFORNIA citizens in their right to self preservation, you then make laws and judgments that give the criminals advantages in courts. Oh and lets not forget their treatment behind bars, cable tv, weight rooms and “Networking Opportunities” that make the small time criminal come out stronger, more street smart and more well connected than when he went in. And then for shits and giggles lets take a few more cops off the streets when budgets need cutting….

4. When Arnie took office I HAD HOPE! That soon faded after I realized that he had NO HELP in the state house, he tried some good things and it was HAMMERED by the libtard elites, the very powerful unions and the ever present ACLU and LA-RAZA folks. they were able to stop a lot of plans Arnie had when he first took office that MAY have allowed CALIFORNIA to remain above this HISTORY MAKING DEBT! He had good ideas that would have stopped some of the illegal immigration SUCKING at the state teet. He had business friendly ideas he touted on his campaign to oust Davis, He had tried and true REAGAN type common sense sollutions to the problem of businesses leaving. WELL that didn’t last long, the Kennedy hand up his ass was obviously very strong and it took his nuts and turned them into small grapes…(Either that or steroids) So here we are— FUCT.

So for those of you not in California, stay tuned.. this will be interesting. Trust me, IF/When the shit does hit the fan, you will know I’m knee deep in the middle of it by the body count on roads headed South East.  First SOB tries to get in my way ends up on my bumper like a deer carcas….

// <![CDATA[// AddThisIf you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Posted in California, Democrats |
Tagged With: • •

4 Comments »

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Blogroll, Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Immigration, Law, Men's Issues, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 5 Comments »

The Sullivan Act: Some History about Gun Control

June 27, 2009

The history of gun control is riddled with racism and corruption as well as outright deception. Based in elitism of one sort or another it is a subject worthy of soap opera drama that stirs the imagination.

One of the earliest examples is New York’s  Sullivan Act. Often pointed to by various advocates of the destruction of unalienable rights as some sort of morbid example of what those that know better than you do what you and your loved ones so desperately need it too is founded in corruption. One has to believe that Chuck Schumer and Frank Lautenberg both wish that they had written this law, and that their constant never ending attacks on liberty reflect that desire.

Some years or decades ago I researched and reported on the Sullivan Act, one of America’s first gun control laws.

New York state senator Timothy Sullivan, a corrupt Tammany Hall politician, represented New York’s Red Hook district. Commercial travelers passing through the district would be relieved of their valuables by armed robbers. In order to protect themselves and their property, travelers armed themselves. This raised the risk of, and reduced the profit from, robbery. Sullivan’s outlaw constituents demanded that Sullivan introduce a law that would prohibit concealed carry of pistols, blackjacks, and daggers, thus reducing the risk to robbers from armed victims.

The criminals, of course, were already breaking the law and had no intention of being deterred by the Sullivan Act from their business activity of armed robbery. Thus, the effect of the Sullivan Act was precisely what the criminals intended. It made their life of crime easier.

As the first successful gun control advocates were criminals, I have often wondered what agenda lies behind the well-organized and propagandistic gun control organizations and their donors and sponsors in the US today. The propaganda issued by these organizations consists of transparent lies.

Consider the propagandistic term, “gun violence,” popularized by gun control advocates. This is a form of reification by which inanimate objects are imbued with the ability to act and to commit violence. Guns, of course, cannot be violent in themselves. Violence comes from people who use guns and a variety of other weapons, including fists, to commit violence.

Nevertheless, we hear incessantly the Orwellian Newspeak term, “gun violence.”

Very few children are killed by firearm accidents compared to other causes of child deaths. Yet, gun control advocates have created the false impression that there is a national epidemic in accidental firearm deaths of children. In fact, the National MCH Center for Child Death Review, an organization that monitors causes of child deaths, reports that seven times more children die from drowning and five times more from suffocation than from firearm accidents. Yet we don’t hear of “drowning violence,” “swimming pool violence,” “bathtub violence,” or “suffocation violence.”

The National MCH Center for Child Death Review reports that 174 children eighteen years old and under died from firearm accidents in 2000. The National Center for Injury Prevention and Control reports that 125 children eighteen years old and under died from firearm accidents in 2006. In 2006 there were 77,845,285 youths in that age bracket.

Full Story

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

Judicial Indiscretion; Dogs running wild

June 21, 2009

Human, and by extension their pets, sometimes come into conflict with wildlife. Recently coyote attacks have been in the news quite a bit. That, however is not what today’s living with wildlife post is about. It does however tie in directly with another post having to do with hierarchy in the law.

Most states have laws about domestic canines worrying cattle or wildlife. In most situations, lethal force is authorized. I have always been fortunate in that the few times that I’ve seen things like this hazing of some sort convinced the dog (s) to find another amusement to satisfy their instincts. That certainly is not always the case though. I have a friend that left E.M.S. and became a Sheriffs Deputy in Weld County. While on patrol he came across a dog that was attempting to chew on a claf that was being born. He tried to frighten it away with his lights and siren, then with a warning shot. All to no avail. He ended up shooting the dog. That’s a legal shoot folks.

So then where am I going with this? Well, it seems that Ron Wedow witnessed a dog attacking a doe after having just killed the doe’s fawn. This was in unincorporated Douglas County, Colorado. Both the Douglas County Sheriff’s Department and the Colorado Division of Wildlife responded and determined that the shoot was indeed legal. It is in fact authorized by state law. Some time later though, County Animal Control came along. They decided, as a matter of policy, to charge Mister Wedow. Now he has mounting legal fees, for doing his civic duty.

This is clearly Judicial indiscretion on the part of the Douglas County District Attorney’s office. They need to flat drop the charges and even reimburse Ron Wedow for his legal expenses.

Read about this miscarriage of justice HERE.

H/T to Charlie Meyers of The Denver Post.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, Local Politics Colorado, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

Second Amendment: GAO Blames U.S. for Mexican Gun Violence

June 20, 2009

Well, it seems that even after being totally debunked the administration just keeps on ramming falsehoods at we the people…

“A new study by the Government Accountability Office says most firearms recovered in drug violence in Mexico come from the U.S., a finding that will likely fuel the politically charged debate over the U.S. government’s efforts to stem gun trafficking across the border,” reports The Wall Street Journal. As we have pointed out before, however, the data is flawed right from the beginning. According to the Journal, in 2008, Mexican law enforcement seized 30,000 weapons, but only 7,200 were submitted to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for tracing. Rather than look at the complete facts, of course, anti-gun demagogues pounced on the report. “The availability of firearms illegally flowing from the United States into Mexico has armed and emboldened a dangerous criminal element in Mexico, and it has made the job of drug cartels easier,” said Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY). “It is simply unacceptable that the United States not only consumes the majority of the drugs flowing from Mexico, but also arms the very cartels that contribute to the daily violence that is devastating Mexico.”

Blaming law-abiding U.S. citizens for drug violence in Mexico makes little sense, other than as a justification for more gun control. In anticipation of a renewed effort by the Obama administration to reinstate the so-called “assault weapons” ban, 23 state attorneys general sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, saying, “We share the Obama Administration’s commitment to reducing illegal drugs and violent crime within the United States. We also share your deep concern about drug cartel violence in Mexico. However, we do not believe that restricting law-abiding Americans’ access to certain semi-automatic firearms will resolve any of these problems.”

SOURCE followed up by…

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report this week entitled, “Firearms Trafficking: U.S. Efforts to Combat Arms Trafficking to Mexico Face Planning and Coordination Challenges.”

Among other things, the report asserts that Mexican officials consider illicit firearms the number one crime problem affecting their country’s security; that about 87 percent of firearms seized in Mexico and traced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) in the last five years originated in the United States; and that these firearms are increasingly more powerful and lethal, including “high-caliber and high-powered” AK-47 and AR-15 type semi-automatic rifles. The report further contends that the country’s law enforcement agencies are insufficiently organized, and that Mexico has a history of corruption at the federal, state and local levels.

With regard to the “87 percent” statistic, the report’s figures make clear that BATFE only traces a fraction of the guns seized. Those firearms are not selected randomly, but are likely selected because they are the guns most likely to have come from the U.S.  Trace data reveals nothing about the large number of guns that are not traced.

The report also states “According to U.S. and Mexican government officials, these firearms have been increasingly more powerful and lethal in recent years. For example, many of these firearms are high-caliber and high-powered, such as AK and AR-15 type semiautomatic rifles.” The report, however, states that about 25 percent of firearms traced were of that type, which works out to only eight percent of all firearms seized. Also, the report does not indicate what percentage of murders is committed with various types of firearms, but it does note, “The majority of the casualties have been individuals involved in the drug trade in some way.”

The report further states that, “The U.S. government faces several significant challenges in combating illicit sales of firearms in the United States and stemming their flow into Mexico.” These include “restrictions on collecting and reporting information on firearms purchases, a lack of required background checks for private firearms sales, and limitations on reporting requirements for multiple sales” and even the fact that the U.S. government is prohibited by law from maintaining a national registry of firearms.

But as we know, the gun control measures indicated would not be effective against purchasers who can pass instant background checks. As the report noted, “Firearms [purchases] at gun shops and pawn shops for trafficking to Mexico are usually made by ‘straw purchasers,’ according to law enforcement officials. These straw purchasers are individuals with clean records who can be expected to pass the required background check and who are paid by drug cartel representatives or middlemen to purchase certain guns from gun shops.”

Finally, the report noted that, “Another significant challenge facing U.S. efforts to assist Mexico is corruption among some Mexican government entities. Government officials acknowledge fully implementing these reforms will take considerable time, and may take years to affect comprehensive change.” And, “According to Mexican government officials, corruption pervades all levels of Mexican law enforcement — federal, state, and local. For example, some high ranking members of federal law enforcement have been implicated in corruption investigations, and some high publicity kidnapping and murder cases have involved corrupt federal law enforcement officials.”

Obviously, Mexico has a huge problem with rampant corruption that clearly cannot be blamed on the U.S. At the same time, Mexico has extremely prohibitive gun laws, yet has far worse crime than the U.S.

More evidence of what is truly happening in Mexico was brought out in a series of hearings held earlier this year. During those hearings, three representatives of U.S. law enforcement, one each from BATFE, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), made it clear that the increase in violence in Mexico is being misinterpreted by the media and politicians. They testified that the increase in violence is a direct result of the actions taken by Mexican President Felipe Calderon to take on the cartels.  The cartels, they testified, are being pressured more than ever before and are fighting back in desperation, resulting in casualties. (If you wish to view the hearings, please use the following links: House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere: “Guns, Drugs and Violence: The Merida Initiative and the Challenge in Mexico” , and Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs: “Law Enforcement Responses to Mexican Drug Cartels”)

For American gun owners, the battle will be to make sure that politicians who see an opportunity to advance their gun ban agenda do not use Mexico as an excuse to sacrifice our Second Amendment rights.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Immigration, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 4 Comments »

Rogue Agency at it again!

June 19, 2009

After all these years, they are still just a rogue agency.

NRA-ILA has recently received several calls from NRA members in border states who have been visited or called by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In some cases, agents have asked to enter these people’s homes, and requested serial numbers of all firearms the members possess.

In each case, the agents were making inquiries based on the number of firearms these NRA members had recently bought, and in some cases the agents said they were asking because the members had bought types of guns that are frequently recovered in Mexico.

This kind of questioning may or may not be part of a legitimate criminal investigation. For example, when BATFE traces a gun seized after use in a crime, manufacturers’ and dealers’ records will normally lead to the first retail buyer of that gun, and investigators will have to interview the buyer to find out how the gun ended up in criminal hands. But in other cases, the questioning may simply be based on information in dealers’ records, with agents trying to “profile” potentially suspicious purchases.

On the other hand, some of the agents have used heavy-handed tactics. One reportedly demanded that a gun owner return home early from a business trip, while another threatened to “report” an NRA member as “refusing to cooperate.” That kind of behavior is outrageous and unprofessional.

Whether agents act appropriately or not, concerned gun owners should remember that all constitutional protections apply. Answering questions in this type of investigation is generally an individual choice. Most importantly, there are only a few relatively rare exceptions to the general Fourth Amendment requirement that law enforcement officials need a warrant to enter a home without the residents’ consent. There is nothing wrong with politely, but firmly, asserting your rights.

If BATFE contacts you and you have any question about how to respond, you may want to consult a local attorney. NRA members may also call NRA-ILA’s Office of Legislative Counsel at (703) 267-1161 for further information. Whether contacting a local attorney or NRA, be sure to provide as many details as possible, including the date, time, and location, agent’s name, and specific questions asked.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

When pocket knives are outlawed…

June 13, 2009

In the seemingly never ending quest for control over you and yours we are now dealing with yet another attack on your natural unalienable right to defend yourself as well as your loved ones. The Second Amendment is most often thought to be only about guns. It’s not though…

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Incrementalism, the strategy also known as the death of a thousand cuts, is but one of the many tools used by the totalitarians to bleed your rights dry. One tiny cut at a time. You can’t say this, but you will be allowed to say that in exchange. Or, you can’t have that firearm, but we will allow you to have this one in exchange for not being allowed to have that one. You can’t have this knife, but we will allow you to have that one … And so it goes on, forever.

(CNSNews.com) – Second Amendment supporters are warning Americans about what they call an “unwarranted knife grab by Customs agents.”

On May 21, the Customs and Border Protection Agency proposed revoking earlier rulings that said “assisted-opening knives” – including pocket knives – are not switchblades.

The proposed new rule would expand the definition of “switchblade” to include knives that are opened with one hand as well as old-fashioned slip-joint knives, even the type of folding knives that Boy Scouts typically carry.

Under the proposed rule, most knives would be prohibited from entering the United States, critics warn.

The Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) are joining forces with a group called Knife Rights to support Americans’ right to own and carry the knives of their choice.”

“The Second Amendment doesn’t say ‘Firearms,’ it says ‘Arms,’ and knives are clearly covered,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.

CCRKBA says one-hand-opening and assisted-opening knives represent the majority of most knife-makers’ product lines. “These are the knives Americans take with them to work and to play everyday,” CCRKBA said in a news release.

The group says Customs’ new interpretation of the Federal Switchblade Act will affect virtually everyone who carries a pocket knife, no matter what type.

“CBP came up with this absurd proposal and then tried slipping it into their regular notices, apparently hoping nobody would become aware of until too late. They provided for only the minimum 30-day comment period, and there’s no email comments allowed,” CCRKBA said.

The CBP’s “Proposed Revocation Of Ruling Letters And Revocation Of Treatment Relating To The Admissibilty (sic) Of Certain Knives With Spring-Assisted Opening Mechanisms” could make it illegal for the estimated 40 million law-abiding Americans who own and carry pocket knives to do so, CCRKBA said, not to mention the jobs lost.

The definition of a switchblade is found in the 1958 Federal Switchblade Act and has been reaffirmed by many years of legal decisions, CCRKBA said. “The Act is very clear that a switchblade must have an activating button on the handle. Without a button, it is not a switchblade and this has been upheld by numerous cases on many levels over the years.”

Second Amendment supporters accuse Customs of using “convoluted reasoning” to reach back beyond the 1958 law to expand their regulatory purview.

Knife Rights is leading a grassroots effort to stop Customs’ “pocket knife grab.” The group has posted model letters on its Web site for concerned citizens to send to Congress.

SOURCE

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »