Massive non-compliance?

It seems so. I just wonder why anyone assumed it would be any different– They’re either liars or they’re as ignorant as a rock, or both. I suppose they never bothered to look at Canada’s idiotic long gun registry. They certainly never looked at our constitution, or don’t give a flying crap about it.

In fact, this is an example of the willful creation of new “criminals” so they can have some form of legal justification to harass innocent people, and nothing else. It’s a class D “felony”, they claim (oooh! scary!) if you don’t roll over and act like a Soviet citizen/sheep, standing in line to have your name put on a list.

What kind of felony is it when you willfully and wantonly violate your Oath of Office, acting in flagrant opposition to the United States constitution and to the basic human rights of American citizens?

I’m in favor of giving the politicians a fair trial, and then taking away their pensions and sending them all to prison, and banning them from any public position for life. That would be kind. We can make plenty of room in the prisons by pardoning all non-violent drug “offenders” and gun law paperwork “violators”.

19 thoughts on “Massive non-compliance?

  1. “officials and some lawmakers are stunned.”

    Really? They never, ever, heard any testimony to that effect. And they never, ever got any email, phone calls, or faxes to that effect. And none of their fellow legislators told them this would happen.

    This should constitute proof that they are out of touch with reality as we know it. They must live in some sort of utopian dream world where intentions are indistinguishable from results.

    • It’s far worse than that. They knew full well this would happen, and they don’t care. In their lust for unbridled power they have that little disregard for law and order and for human rights. They’re that smug, and that confident that they’ll never be prosecuted for it.

      That much we have going for us– Where they do fail to see reality is in their miscalculattions, and so they openly mark themselves.

      • They have great regard for law and order, as long as they write the laws, and give the orders, and can enforce them as selectively as they choose. They are quite certain that they are smarter than everyone else, and if we just do what they say, everything will be just swell.

    • Interesting that I happen to be in the middle of Bracken’s “Enemies foreign and domestic”. Life imitating art. At least to an extent — so far.

      • I just finished the sequel to that book a couple days ago.

        I was impressed more with the first one because of some of the ideas presented. Examples include the blood from the “scope eye” being a potential issue and water transportation versus land transportation in a police state.

  2. “What kind of felony is it when you willfully and wantonly violate your Oath of Office, acting in flagrant opposition to the United States constitution and to the basic human rights of American citizens?”

    Joe covers that one quite often: 18 USC 241 Conspiracy Against Rights.

    Federal ‘pound-me-in-the-ass prison’ FELONY.

    • Yes, Joe, and I and several others have been pounding out examples of 18 USC 242 violations (that one is for politicians, judges and cops – 241 is for everyone else) for years.

      Now I’m leaning more toward the position that says “ignorance of the law is no excuse” when it comes to right violations by politicians, many of whom are lawyers. It may help to remind them that 242 carries a possible death penalty, but I’ll assume they know that and so that is why they want us all disarmed and are purging the military.

      Yes; it is that bad. Better to see it now than later.

      • Point of order: In a ‘plain language’ reading of both 241 and 242 neither one specifies any limitation on liable parties (politicians v plebes). 241 and 242 are two separate and distinct violations.

        242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (the actual *act*) is a base misdemeanor ( going by the ‘less than one year in jail’ standard), unless death or injury occur.

        241 Conspiracy Against Rights (simply PLANNING the act) is an actual base felony (more than one year possible jail time).

        For those who don’t know what we’re discussing:

        http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
        http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

        • Fair enough.

          So how many people have died in “gun free” zones or highly gun restrictive cities, or experienced death while disarmed, something like Suzanna Hupp did in Killeen, Texas? All told, that has to amount to tens of thousands of individual, possible death penalty-worthy 241 and 242 cases against thousand of politicians, bureaucrats (everyone in the BATFE), police, judges and members of anti human rights political activist groups and their donors. That’s a hell of a lot of conspiracy against rights and a LOT of court cases. I’m game.

  3. I’m even willing to allow a somewhat morbid plea bargain: their spouse can keep the pension, in return for no reduction in jail time and/or death penalty candidates.

    They can arrange an income for their spouse by serving the full term or agreeing to the death penalty, or they can get a reduced sentence but come out penniless (after all the fines, lawyers’ fees, and court costs).

    I’m expecting most will take the (cowardly) first option, so it’ll largely be a non-issue.

  4. Jill Gill is an academic at Boise State University. She just published one of a few articles on the history of racism in Idaho. But I smelled a rat and an agenda that is more LGBT than about racism. My email conversation with Jill is below in this email. I would like you to print it in your publication / on your site so that rural, conservative Idahoans can get to the bottom of what’s wrong with Idaho today: And it’s not our past. It’s the people running this state who are so out of touch with the rural people of Idaho that they disregard our strengths and tell us how racist we are and how we should just fade off into history.

    Jill Gill:
    https://sspa.boisestate.edu/history/faculty-staff/jill-gill/

    Jill’s involvement with LGBT in Idaho in this interview:
    http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/dr-jill-gill/Content?oid=3055298

    Jill and other writers bash Idahoans for being racist in BSU’s new publication, “The Blue Review.” It’s published by the Social Sciences department at BSU:
    http://thebluereview.org/tag/race/

    Jill promotes “liberal” Christianity:
    http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/atheologies/6196/future_of_liberal_religion%3A_a_counterculture_blooms/

    —– Forwarded message from idaho900@nym.hush.com —–
    Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 07:10:50 +0000
    Subject: Re: TBR: Stunningly Dishonest?
    To: “Jill Gill”

    Jill:

    I claim that racism in Idaho started with the federal Buffalo Soldiers and their role in policing matters that were local problems.

    How dare you not include that in your article? You have written a veiled screed paid for by BSU and distributed as a “historical gospel” to all parts of the Boise area. Racism in Idaho did not start in the 20th century, it started in the late 19th century.

    I have emailed people you work with, complaining about how you have excluded THE MOST IMPORTANT reasons why Idaho became a racist place. You have an event coming up in Boise with IPTV, and you won’t even talk about the Buffalo Soldiers? How dare you.

    I am also concerned that you are too involved in LGBT “human rights” issues in this state to clearly understand that racism in Idaho was caused by experiences of oppression at the hands of the state and federal governments. Those entities still disregard Idaho’s freedom-loving population by ignoring the needs and the goals of rural people. Your LGBT protester-friends want to cast their sexuality into the political arena as an example of Idaho’s long-standing discrimination against “minorities.” Baloney! Idaho’s racism and homosexuality have nothing to do with each other. Your agenda is in plain view: Call Idahoans racists and try to manipulate others to include LGBT people in with racial minorities. What crap! Keep your sexuality to yourself and no one cares. Pull it out of your pants for the world to see and you’re going to be scorned. Sexuality is not a human rights issue in Boise, it is a private choice for individuals and has nothing to do with politics.

    Rural people built this state and we don’t like what you urbanites in Boise are up to: Spreading liberal values in our schools and teaching kids to feel guilty about being white Idahoans. Academics like yourself and Boise politicians have grown callous to the needs and the human rights of rural people. How about them apples? You don’t want to acknowledge that ever since the state’s charter was stolen from Lewiston, Boise has tried to assert its military and urban authority over the rest of the state. It has never worked, and it never will work. One way or another, the rural people of this state are going to run this state in the future. Boise’s urban technology and real estate development focus is unsustainable and harmful to the future of Idahoans who believe that there is a true city-country conflict that urbanites and city politicians don’t want to address. That’s because y’all think more about yourselves and your little business deals than you do about the rural people who are the moral support of Idaho and always will be.

    What is sad is how Democrats like yourself in Idaho are forcing conservatives like myself to support dingbats like Butch Otter and libertarians like Russ Fulcher. Can’t the Democrats come up with a candidate who won’t shove an unwanted social agenda of gay parades down the throats of nature-loving, conservative Idahoans? Your article about racism in Idaho intends to be divisive, not uniting. How could you? You polarize the debate by not even talking to conservatives about their perspectives on race in Idaho. Race has nothing to do with being a Democrat or a Republican. Race has to do with differences at a very basic level. And those differences are being exploited by you and other urban liberals who want to make an emotional mess of Idaho’s educational system and current political dialogue.

    This state is screwed, because the self-proclaimed intellectual elite of Boise (academics, NPR, IPTV) take it upon themselves to be the “defenders of freedom” and the “champions of Idaho’s future.” Baloney. You don’t know rural people. You’re just a lowly urbanite who deserves to have your opinions dismissed just because you prize Gotham over Sherwood. This state is all about the Sherwood Forest, haven’t you looked at a map lately? Boise urbanites are out of touch and will one day be out of power. That includes academics like yourself who rely on Idaho’s racist past to even have a job at BSU! You NEED Idaho to be racist, don’t you? That way you can get paid and spread your LGBT, guilt-driven agenda. It’s dishonest and morally wrong.

    Now do the right thing and amend your Boise Weekly article to include a proper discussion of the Buffalo Soldiers. And do the right thing by bringing up the same topic at the public forum hosted by IPTV.

    You are intellectually dishonest, and your goal is to shame Idahoans for being racist when the citizens of this God-blessed state were intentionally provoked in the 19th century because of their “backwardness” and their homogeneity. Shame on you for baiting white Idahoans once again. Your motives are murky, but I see them very clearly.

    Diversity that has to be learned at universities like BSU is not true diversity. You need to wake up to the fact that the legacy of racism in this state will not go away until the children of this state are properly taught the TRUE history of 19th century government interference and race-baiting. And that includes teaching them about the strikes in North Idaho and how the state called on the federal government to race-bait their ancestors.

    I encourage you to share this email with others who agree with your understanding of Idaho’s racist history. I’m sure that those who think like I do will not be represented at the IPTV forum. The only forum I have is to email people like yourself and express my displeasure. And if I had $50 million, I would demonstrate the kind of compassion only Jesus Christ has in His heart.

    I recommend that you find Jesus soon. And come to grips with your biases. They could be perceived as hateful.

    God bless. I pray for you to see the light and the errors of your wayward approach to historical writing and social change.

    On Thursday, February 13, 2014 at 11:35 PM, “Jill Gill” wrote:

    Dear unsigned mystery person,

    The use of buffalo soldiers to quell strikes in northern Idaho is actually a story I tell quite often. It will be included in my book as well as in my upcoming talk at Osher on Feb. 27th, where I’ll be bringing in several photos of that exact thing. I have pictures of the bull pens, the miners, and the 24th and 25th infantries for slide shows that I purchased from the University of Idaho’s archives. I teach that story in my classes, too. In fact, it was in the textbook that I used last semester by Quintard Taylor. It does indeed explain some of the racial tensions in northern Idaho. Taylor argues in his book that political leaders specifically wanted black soldiers to guard the miners because those politicians were hoping that racial tensions between poor white miners and poor black soldiers would prevent them from empathizing with one another. If that was the governor’s plan, it worked pretty well. Then there’s the sequel story: the use of Buffalo soldiers to save the people of Wallace and Avery during the huge 1910 forest fires. That one is in Tim Egan’s book The Big Burn on the 1910 fires. Whites in those towns who disliked blacks were suddenly praising their courage. Check it out if you haven’t yet. He tells about the miners strikes as well.

    Neither of those stories were in this particular article because this article was focused on the 1964 civil rights act and the political states rights alliance between Idaho and the south on federal civil rights legislation. BW articles are so short, they aren’t even as long as a single book chapter. One can’t throw the entire kitchen sink of stories into a 2000 word article. That’s why I’m writing a book.

    I do have a sincere question for you. And I’m asking as one who is researching this subject. Where did you first hear of the buffalo soldiers story, how was it presented to you, and what does it reveal to you? Did you hear it up in northern Idaho? Is it a popular story that lots of folks tell?

    I’m very interested understanding in the roots of anti-federal government sentiment in Idaho. In fact, that is crucial to my research; I’ll need to get into that deeply in the book. What are your theories there? Seems to have been there from the get-go.

    Jill Gill
    history dept.

    On Feb 13, 2014, at 8:28 PM, idaho900@nym.hush.com wrote:

    Jill:

    In your recent article on racism in Idaho, you left out how Buffalo Soldiers were sent by the federal government to break up strikes in North Idaho.

    Why did you leave out one of the most important historical reasons for racism in North Idaho?

    Why did you leave out the connection between government interference in local affairs and anti-government sentiment in the state?

    We smell a rat…and an agenda. BSU has a whole lot of BS coming out of it at the moment.

    When you purport to tell the truth, tell the WHOLE truth.

    Thank you.

    • Dear Idaho Historian with a fake email address and an IP address hundreds of miles from Idaho,

      I approved the publication of your comment but that doesn’t mean I approve of your content.

      I’m not sure what to make of the content but it’s outside the normal domain of what this blog is about. It won’t be published as a post.

      In the future please send me content for possible publication via email at blog@joehuffman.org. Off topic content will probably be rejected.

  5. In my lovely state of New York, the deadline is mid-April. The cries of “we will not comply” have been echoing for over a year, but it will be interesting in eight weeks to take out a tape measure and see if the registration lines will be counted in feet, inches, or zeroes.

  6. Joe;

    WRT your final question in the post. You may remember I often hit on this.

    Given that it is considered justifiable, sometimes praiseworthy, upon occasion mandatory, to use force — even lethal force — in the prevention of a felony in progress… What level of force may be considered justifiable, praiseworthy, or mandatory to prevent a violation of civil rights (or some other constitutional provision) in progress?

    I have yet to hear an answer from a qualified attorney. Would an Alan Gura, perhaps, be listening?

    M

  7. My vote is for the noose, even though hanging is too good for them. Torturing them to death would be justified, except for the fact that we are decent humans and we will extend them that courtesy.

Comments are closed.