So what happens next with the Alabama abortion ban? Planned Parenthood and other groups have already vowed to fight the law in court. Assuming such cases come before a federal district court judge who follows Supreme Court precedent (which those judges are supposed to do), the law will be ruled unconstitutional under the Roe/Casey precedents (which it is). The state, assuming it still wants to press the fight, would then appeal to the federal appellate court, which may not even take the case. But let’s say it does take it, and that those judges also follow precedent and strike down the law. At that point, having lost in the lower federal courts, and assuming the state is still under the same conservative leadership, Alabama would appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
But there’s no guarantee that SCOTUS will take the case either. Indeed, it is even possible that the Court might prefer to sit this one out. Why? Because even those conservative justices who might want to see Roe/Casey overturned might still prefer to see the precedents gradually weakened and narrowed over time, via a series of cases, rather than simply obliterated in one fell swoop.
May 17, 2019
The Supreme Court Probably Won’t Kill Roe Yet
[What I wonder about is the response of the political left to the new restrictions to abortion. Will this energize them and result in them taking control of the U.S. House, Senate, and White House in 2020? Or will early and decisive court defeats of the abortion restrictions result in them becoming complacent for the election next year?—Joe]
Unconstitutional to require training and tests for a right > Oregon v Mitchell
Unconstitutional to license a right > Murdock v Pennsylvania
Unconstitutional to ban #guns > DC v Heller
#gunsense is stupidity
#guncontrol is statist trash
#2a trumps your feelz
Tweeted on May 11, 2019
[Just because something is illegal or even unconstitutional doesn’t mean the politicians won’t do it anyway. Remember what Henry Kissinger said:
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a bit longer.
This is why we have the 2nd Amendment. It is to slow them down, stop them, and reverse directions when they will not abide by the restrictions placed upon them.—Joe]
More than half the likely electorate thinks we are more than 70% of the way to being at the edge of civil war.
April 29, 2019
Georgetown University poll: Nation at edge ‘of civil war,’ but voters reject compromise
[Some things must not be compromised. Some people must not negotiated with. Some things are worth fighting for. Some things are worth fighting against.
Evil must not be tolerated.—Joe]
I’ve always looked at the NRA as a buffer between politicians and gun owners. For the politicians protection.
Tweeted on May 11, 2019
[Interesting point of view. There is almost for certain more truth in this than what most politicians realize.—Joe]
Ban the manufacturers from producing them to begin with you ignorant bitch.
Daniel Williams @sheriff_shively
Tweeted on May 8, 2019
[This was in response to:
Ahh… the sweet voice of tolerance and reasoned discourse. Well, I suppose they have to make do with what they have–hate and violence. It’s comforting to know we can defend ourselves against people like this.—Joe]
I’m taking the sanctuary city status that’s been used by progressives and liberals around this country and turning it on its head. We’re thumbing our nose at the federal government. We’re no longer going to be used as a punching bag for the left, for the anti-gun movement.
Every spring, I have to put on my yellow vest and defend the rights that are afforded to me under the Constitution. I finally got tired of it. Maybe it’s time for the town to take a stand.
Donald A. Fox
City Councilman of Burrillville, Rhode Island
Burrillville declares itself ‘sanctuary town’ for gun owners
[See also Hopkinton joins Burrillville as a sanctuary for gun rights which is also in Rhode Island.
Rhode Island! Wow!
I remember when Rhode Island required you to take a state run class to get a concealed carry permit. It was only put on once a year with a limited number of students. It could take years to get your permit. You also had to get a passing score in the shooting part of the class using the supplied gun—which had a bent barrel.
Times are changing.—Joe]
One of the greatest weaknesses of conservatism is that we keep letting the Marxists get up from off the mat.
No. You don’t relax just because you intercepted the missiles aimed at your people. You find the launch sites and blow them to hell. You find the guys who built the missiles and kill them. You find the guys who voted to launch the missiles and kill them. You find the guys who opined it would be a good idea to launch and kill them.
November 30, 2018
Comment to The 2nd Amendment is Obsolete, Says Congressman Who Wants To Nuke Omaha
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
If a shooting starts and the marshal’s gun is in a locked box on the other side of school, it might as well not even be on campus. A firearm that is not employable has no value. You have no school marshal program if the gun is locked up in a safe.
May 7, 2019
Texas seeks more armed school personnel after mass shooting
[Anti-gun people are demanding that if gun is at a school that it be in a safe instead being carry in a holster. It’s easy to draw the conclusion that they do not want guns used to save lives. That would provide evidence their narrative is false and they are willing, perhaps even eager, to pay the price in children’s lives to further their narrative.
These people are evil and should be prosecuted.—Joe]
While some try to hide their intentions by saying that they are just wanting “common sense” gun regulation, the reality is that ALL gun laws are gun bans. ALL gun laws are threats of deadly violence against peaceful people. Inherently, men, women, and children will be executed for gun ownership as has been demonstrated time again throughout history, including instances within the U.S. like with the ATF and Ruby Ridge. If you support gun control by the state, you’re for gun violence; you’re for gun violence so long as the people perpetrating that violence wear fancy costumes and a badge. Stop the mass violence. Stop the violence of the state.
Posted December 2018
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
If recent policies have any indication on Democrats’ intentions, the candidates have stopped their consideration for the rights of gun owners. Here are six ways — big and small — that 2020 Democrats plan to strip gun owners of their access to firearms.
April 30, 2019
2020 Democrats Find Unity in Targeting the Second Amendment: 6 Ways They Plan to Limit Gun-Owner Rights
[Yeah, I think those are pretty good indicators. Politicians frequently lie but depend on them expanding the power of government.—Joe]
Their ultimate desire to take and confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens is where they have always wanted to go, but they know the public is not there, the country is not there, so they try to go in backdoor ways.
House Minority Whip
April 28, 2019
Steve Scalise: Far-Left Democrats Want Gun Confiscation
[It’s not the most coherent expression of someone’s thoughts but the essence of what he says is correct.
The question is, can he and other gun rights supporters in the house do something about the criminals attempting to infringe upon the rights of the people?—Joe]
They will not trust their fellow, gun-owning Americans to act responsibly with firearms, because they do not perceive their fellow American to be harnessed or dedicated to the common good. No republic is established or long stands on such a foundation.
Nation of Cowards, Who’s Under Assault in the Assault Weapon Ban? page 65.
[And here we are, 18 years later, talking about Civil War II.—Joe]
We should all know how this turns out:
Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot Announces He Won’t Prosecute ‘Low-Level’ Crimes
Former Dallas County Prosecutor, Judge Mike Snipes said, “I think it’s forward looking. I think it’s pioneering… People who have minor offenses have a better chance of rehabilitating their life and getting back on track.”
Creuzot said he’ll dismiss many criminal trespass cases as well, charges he says are most often brought against the mentally ill and homeless.
He also said his office will no longer prosecute theft cases involving personal items worth less than $750, unless evidence shows it was for economic gain.
But Andrew Arterburn, the owner of One Stop Express in Uptown said a shoplifter just stole $120 worth of laundry detergent on Thursday and he’s not happy to find out cases like this could be dismissed.
“It’s a slap on the wrist. They go to jail, get a meal, get let go. And they’re not going to be prosecuted at all for it,” said Arterburn.
The President of the National Black Police Association, Sgt. Sheldon Smith, said he worries it will lead to more crime.
“It opens the door for some people to think they can commit crimes,” Sgt. Smith said.
Yup. More crime will be the result. People will know they can steal small items and get away with it. For some people this will be their normal way of life. They will walk into a grocery store and walk out with lunch without paying for it. Prices will rise and other people will realize they are being suckers if they don’t get their “fair share” of the free stuff.
More and more people steal without guilty. Yeah, that’s really forward thinking there Mr. Creuzot. It’s easy to see this as the path to the destruction of society. It’s hard to imagine that isn’t his goal.
If they don’t have an impeachment process and utilize it tar and feathers should be the backup plan.
Law is . . . not simply a set of spoken, written or formalized rules that people blindly follow. Rather, law represents the formalization of behavioral rules, about which a high percentage of people agree, that reflect behavioral propensities and that offer potential benefits to those who follow them.
Law and the Mind: Biological Origins of Human Behavior
[I found this quote in the book The Mystery Of Capital Why Capitalism Succeeds In The West And Fails Everywhere Else in chapter 6. It is an interesting book in more than the domain it was intended.
There is a lot of discussion regarding the formulation of law in developing countries, former communist countries and how certain laws came to be the U.S. and some other western countries. In many cases the rulers set down some law and the common folk ignored it and created their own alternate law which served the people better. In the examples given the rulers frequently gave up even after, in some cases, the military was brought in, burned peoples houses down and drove them off. When the people, as a whole, disagree with a law the rulers frequently adopt, at least in part, the law of the people and give up on their own decrees.
I could not help but make the connection to the gun sanctuary movement in this country.—Joe]
Here is how the 4th Amendment is treated:
That bit of chalk left on your car’s tire by a parking officer is unconstitutional, a federal court ruled Monday.
A three-judge panel took up the case of Alison Taylor, a Michigan woman who received 15 parking tickets during a three-year feud with a single parking officer, Tabitha Hoskins of the City of Saginaw.
Taylor’s lawyer argued that the city’s physical marking with chalk, done to note how long a vehicle is parked, amounted to searching without a warrant — a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel unanimously agreed.
The city “commences its search on vehicles that are parked legally, without probable cause or even so much as ‘individualized suspicion of wrongdoing’ — the touchstone of the reasonableness standard,” the court’s opinion states.
The Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” And the city’s chalking of cars “to raise revenue” does not qualify as a public safety concern that could allow a search without a warrant, the court said.
The court’s decision affects Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.
“Trespassing upon a privately-owned vehicle parked on a public street to place a chalk mark to begin gathering information to ultimately impose a government sanction is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment,” Taylor’s lawyer, Philip Ellison, said in a court filing reported by NPR.
Ellison said that covertly marking a tire with chalk is not unlike police secretly putting a GPS on a car without a warrant, according to the Associated Press.
So what would it look like if the 2nd Amendment were treated like the 4th?
Certainly all the laws against owning a gun, knife, or pepper spray would go away. No licenses or registration could be required for any type of arm. For your 4th of July party you could rent an old M40 and purchase its ammo on Amazon. And Glock 17s would be in blister packs of six at Costco.
The entire U.S. military could not disarm 17,000 illiterate fanatics in Afghanistan, which has the square miles of one state, but Eric Swalwell is going to disarm tens of millions of wealthy, educated people who can now make guns with a click of a mouse. Good luck, Skippy.
Kirk Freeman @KirkFreemanLaw
Tweeted on April 10, 2019
[See also Boots on the ground.—Joe]
We’ve got to go straight to the heart of capitalism and overthrow it.
April 11, 2019
Tweeted by Novara Media @novaramedia
[Some of the most repressive nations ever, the Soviet Union and Communist China, were not able to completely exterminate capitalism no matter how many people they murdered. Free markets always find a way.
Yet, this loon wants to try yet again.
Just keep saying no until you run out of ammo.—Joe]
We did everything we could to work across the aisle. There just wasn’t any way to do it.
There is nothing to even talk about.
There are plenty of times where you cannot make a deal with the devil and other times where you have no business making a deal with the devil. This turned out to be both.
Former Colorado Senate President
April 14, 2019
Gun control case study: A mass shooting, major reforms, then a political backlash
[This is what they think of you. We are in league with the devil.
I find it interesting they couldn’t find anything to compromise on. It must have been the Republicans didn’t make an appropriate counter offer. Had it been me I would have been willing to at least discuss things. My initial offer would have been to suggest to the prosecuting attorney that the death penalty might be dropped if they all plead guilty and fully cooperated with prosecution of all the other conspirators.—Joe]
I shouldn’t be surprised. I’ve long said it is irrational to expect people to be rational. But yet, I’m still amazed at times. This is my current example:
Donald Trump’s proposal to move migrants into sanctuary cities raises logistical, legal issues
A myriad of logistical and legal obstacles await President Donald Trump if he follows through on his threat to place migrants arriving at the border into so-called sanctuary cities, a move apparently designed to punish Democrats for refusing to support his immigration policies.
Donald Trump’s use of government power to conduct corrupt, vindictive operations smells like Watergate,” said Becerra, a former congressman from California. “It’s a sobering reminder that our nation is only as strong as our democratic institutions and the rule of law.
And declaring your city a sanctuary for illegal aliens is legal? The last I heard aiding and abetting a criminal is illegal.
The politicians of “sanctuary cities” are only concerned with the rule of law when it is to their advantage. Either you have to conclude that liberalism is a mental disorder and/or they are knowingly committing criminal acts. It either case these politicians should be tried and sent to prison.
If multiculturalism was truly intended to engender harmony, they would shut the fuck up about white people. The fact that they don’t suggests a different motivation altogether.
Jim Goad @jimgoad
Tweeted on April 9, 2019
[Someone famous, a long time ago said, paraphrasing, “By their action you will know them.”
The same applies to “gun safety” people.—Joe]