I suppose when they are dealing with useful idiots this sort of thing works. But, still, it makes it extremely clear logic isn’t their strong suit.
I’m certainly disappointed in the vote today, and as soon as the mayor signs [the bills], we’ll be proceeding with the private criminal complaints [against] council members who voted for the measure and the mayor if and when he signs.
April 2, 2019
Pittsburgh approves gun-control bills; opponents threaten suit against city
[Pennsylvania has a preemption law. I hope they enjoy their trial and paying the lawyer bills of the gun rights groups who challenge the laws.—Joe]
Earlier today, I introduced a resolution that calls on numerous video streaming services to end their commercial affiliation and contractual partnership with the NRA and NRATV.
Anti-gun people don’t just want your guns. They want you silenced.
Maybe someone should tell him that he doesn’t need to silence us. We are buying silencers on our own.—Joe]
These leftists have to be destroyed because they aren’t going to stop, and they don’t face consequences for their anti-American actions. Simply pointing out how bad they are is not enough; they don’t care, they know what they are. It’s time to learn from the success of President Trump and hit back twice as hard. Liberals have to be made to take their own medicine, it’s their own fault it’s a suppository.
March 14, 2019
It’s Time For Conservatives To Choose: Fight Back Or Surrender
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Gun control advocacy on Twitter.
Day 2: Wonder why the people you just threatened don’t want to give up their guns just yet.
Rinse and repeat.
Virginia Kruta @VAKruta
Tweeted on March 31, 2019
[This is generally correct. It’s not limited to Twitter. It doesn’t take a day, it can be seconds, between the time they let you know that they want you dead and the time they call us paranoid for thinking we need a gun for protection.—Joe]
The world as we know it is changing:
Once Trump’s latest picks to the 9th Circuit, including Ken Lee and Dan Collins, are confirmed as expected and remaining vacancies are filled, 13 of the 29 active seats on the key appellate court will be filled with judges picked by Republican presidents. At this time last year, 16 judges on the 9th Circuit were appointed by Democrats, with only six chosen by Republicans.
And the democrats know it. From the same article:
… has led to repeated howls of protest from California’s two Democratic senators, Kamala Harris and Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein.
Combined with the changing character of the Supreme Court we have a decent chance of reversing some of the most oppressive gun control laws. We still need to vote against the politicians and fund the lawsuits (I’m donations thousands of dollars a year to SAF and FPC which is matched dollar for dollar by my employer). But the bottom line is we have a path to victory. It’s not certain, but it certainly looks possible, and it’s a lot better option than voting from the rooftops.
I can’t find where the California has definitely stated they are going to appeal but they have stated they want a stay of Judgement:
TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant Xavier Becerra, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the State of California (“Defendant”), hereby does apply to this Court for an order, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62, staying the Judgment entered in this action on March 29, 2019 (Dkt. No. 88) pending appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Specifically, Defendant requests that the Court stay the Judgment—which declares California Penal Code section 323101 unconstitutional and enjoined from enforcement—to preserve the status quo pending appeal as it existed prior to entry of the Judgment, whereby, during the pendency of the appeal, section 32310(a) and (b) will remain in effect and section 32310(c) and (d) will remain subject to the preliminary injunction issued on June 29, 2017 (Dkt. No. 28). Defendant respectfully requests that this Court rule on this stay application by April 5, 2019.
My expectation is that if they get the stay they will drag their feet to so to as infringe upon the rights of the people in the 9th Circuit for the longest possible period of time.
Lawyer for the plaintiffs, C.C. Michel, says:
Duncan v. Becerra lawsuit — California DOJ files a motion asking Court to stay its ruling allowing acquisition of 10+ round magazines in California. Opposition filing coming soon.
I look forward to Michel’s filing. I’m hoping it will be as entertaining as the ruling by judge Roger T. Benitez. It’s not going to happen, but for a day or two I’m going to fantasize him saying the California AG and anyone who enforces laws such unconstitutional laws should be prosecuted (http://bit.ly/EnjoyYourTrial2).
You can follow the court filings here.
It’s a matter of doing what’s right.
I’ve explained that time and time again. I’m not bluffing.
March 31, 2019
Colorado sheriff says he’s willing to go to jail rather than enforce proposed gun law
[Via email from Stephanie S.
Adults are taking charge. It’s about time.—Joe]
Via Batteries not included @BobPage43582244:
I’m willing to entertain the hypothesis the expressed theory is somewhat overstated.
We’re entering an era of cargo cult peer review. It now appears that even major scientific publishers are peddling products that have all the trappings of a scholarly journal but are fundamentally hollow at core. As it is, the majority of research published in the scientific literature could be wrong.
April 1, 2015
Science’s Big Scandal
Even legitimate publishers are faking peer review.
[This is particularly true in the “soft sciences” (I’m being generous by using the word “science” at all) such as “Culture Studies” and “Identity Studies”. See for example:
- A Massive Hoax Involving 20 Fake Culture Studies Papers Just Exploded in Academia
- Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship
I, an electrical and software engineer, have gone through climate change papers and found serious errors. For example, one paper had the total power delivered to a sphere in space (Earth) off by, exactly, a factor of two. They also called it energy, even though it was expressed in units of power. I would almost give them a pass on the second point since in this particular context you can easily convert from one to the other but they should have at least given a word in passing that they knew what they wrote was incongruous.
When we get to papers written about gun ownership, except those written by criminologists and some economists, it’s frequently so bad that you can close your eyes and point at a page and find something wrong with the paragraph.
I trust science as a process. I don’t trust the academics in our present day colleges and universities.—Joe[
A fucking southern California Latin American judge just cited fighting Communism as a valid reason for owning standard capacity magazines and has just struck down California’s magazine size limit ban.WHAT FUCKING DIMENSION DID I JUST ENTER INTO?
Tweeted on March 29, 2019
[That’s a valid question. I have no answer.—Joe]
I’ve been thinking about making this blog post for a week or so and reading VIRGINIA DUNCAN, et al., v. XAVIER BECERRA has inspired me to actually do it.
This is the critical section that makes my desired point on a specific issue:
Generalizations like these are no more than generalizations, and personal, not expert, opinions. Yet, for such an important context as the defense of self and loved ones, generalizations are dangerous. Relying on generalizations like these may lead to a thousand underreported tragedies for law-abiding citizen victims who were supposed to need only 2.2 rounds and no more than 10 rounds to scare off criminal assailants.
In the context of answering questions about double taps and the Mozambique Drill. Founder and Chief Instructor at Insights Training Center, Greg Hamilton frequently tells his students, “Statistics do not apply to individuals”. Hamilton’s conclusion is, that most of the time such a practice will work. But you should use something that works all of the time. If someone needs to be shot you shoot until they no longer a threat or you lose your sight picture.
Some large majority, say 90% for argument’s sake, of the population is predominately heterosexual. Traditional male/female marriage works for them. But for those individuals who are not predominately heterosexual a only male/female marriage societal custom is a big problem.
The following is a brief list of other examples with the details left for the reader which also illustrate this point:
- Insurance (health, life, car, property, etc.)
- Place of residence (apartment, condominium, house, boat, RV, etc.)
- Racial/gender/etc. inequality
- Transportation (buses, trains, bicycles, cars, SUVs, trucks, etc.)
- Wage rates
- Working hours
It is predominately the political left which wants to control people based on the statistics of groups. Our constitution is written to protect individuals and encourages individuality. Therefore, the political left finds the U.S. Constitution an obstacle.
I had one admitted Marxist, in all seriousness, tell me:
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
If true, then that means since he has kept his body in pretty good shape for the last 30 or 40 years and there a half dozen other people that lived life of poor eating, cigarettes, and alcohol who need organ transplants the statistic tell us it is perfectly acceptable that the guy with the good organs should be chopped up into parts for the others.
Such a social policy would result (and has resulted) in terrible atrocities.
Yet, it appears to me that this use of “statistics” and the good of the many over the good of the few is an inherent part of the belief system of the political left.
Since, with a little thought, it is clear than Hamilton’s claim that “Statistics do not apply to individuals” is an irrefutable truth one can deduct another irrefutable truth.
As long as the political left uses statistics to arrive at public policy directed at individuals they will necessarily infringe upon the rights of the individual.
It would be nice if it were possible you could rent a carry gun when you are traveling. Suppose you were going to do some domestic travel for a few days, then continue on to an international destination before returning. You want to be able to carry when you legally can but leave the gun behind when you visit your international destinations. Renting for a few days would be a good option.
Another option would be to have a small storage service that you could trust your gun with while you traveled.
Does anyone know of such thing in the Fort Lauderdale area?
This decision is a freedom calculus decided long ago by Colonists who cherished individual freedom more than the subservient security of a British ruler. The freedom they fought for was not free of cost then, and it is not free now.
Hon. Roger T. Benitez
United States District Judge
March 29, 2019
VIRGINIA DUNCAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. XAVIER BECERRA, in his official capacity as attorney General of the State of California, Defendant
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DECLARING CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE § 32310 UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ENJOINING ENFORCEMENT
[This is, by far, the most strongly worded ruling in favor of the 2nd Amendment I have ever read. It’s an awesome read.
He tears apart the state of California’s argument and uses their own evidence against them. He calls them out on their use of Mother Jones as a biased, as well as unusable source, for a court ruling. A magazine ban is such a burden on the rights of the people that it must pass strict scrutiny. It does not pass strict scrutiny. It doesn’t not pass intermediate scrutiny. It cannot even be considered rational in the face of all the evidence showing such bans do not increase public safety.
Many of the arguments and logic used can be easily translated to protecting modern sporting rifles.
Read the whole thing.—Joe]
This has been a bad couple of weeks for the political left and this is an awesome way to cap it off:
BREAKING: Glorious and Compelling District Court Ruling in the NRA / CRPA Duncan Case Strikes Down California’s Ban on Standard Capacity Magazines. This is a MUST READ. The… https://t.co/CV8yITdpdN
— C.D. Michel (@CRPAPresident) March 29, 2019
If they can do this with a piece of plastic, then they’ll be able to do it with another piece of plastic and another piece of metal, another piece of plastic. And it’s just systematically taking away Second Amendment rights.
March 28, 2019
Bump stocks are turned in or destroyed as ban takes effect
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Via Spaceballs the Gab Account @Skipjacks who adds:
Because I like women.
The grip is really messed up but the sentiment is great.
We stand with our members, sheriffs, and law-abiding citizens who oppose this legislation. We encourage our elected officials to continue the conversation and include all stakeholders as we strive to keep our communities safe.
I don’t know if it’s really true or not but it feels like more and more people with some authority and, potentially, real physical power are telling the tyrants, bullies, and useful idiots it’s time to behave.
Banks serve customers who are geographically and politically diverse, and it is wrong to use essential banking services as a way to choke off such services to lawful, creditworthy businesses.
I write to express my concern with recent news reports suggesting that large banks may withhold access to credit and services to customers and companies that are operating businesses that comply with federal and state law (and in some cases, are engaged in Constitutionally-protected activities), but are politically disfavored.
Senate Banking Committee Chairman
March 26, 2019
Mike Crapo warns big banks against caving to progressives on guns
[The last few days sort of feels like the adults have walked into the room where the bullies have been tormenting the other kids for days and getting away with it. I would like to see the bullies taken out to the woodshed and get their bare bottoms spanked until they couldn’t sit comfortably for a week. But I’d settle for them just leaving us alone in the future.—Joe]
His public admission that “gun safety” is just “gun control” with a fancy new dress is important. It’s vital to understanding the way anti-gunners try to use manipulative language to try and change the conversation on guns and the Second Amendment. They can claim to be morally superior, but it’s worth noting that we don’t rephrase what we stand for just to put people off-guard in discussions. We tend to admit outright that we’re pro-gun.
March 26, 2019
Anti-Gunner Explains Difference Between Gun Control and Gun Safety
[Lies and deception. It is an integral part of their nature. Give them all the respect and consideration you would any other liar.—Joe]