Quote of the day—Donald A. Fox

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]

Quote of the day—Fen

No gulags.

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.

Fen
November 30, 2018
Comment to The 2nd Amendment is Obsolete, Says Congressman Who Wants To Nuke Omaha
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—The Pholosopher

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.

The Pholosopher
Posted December 2018
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeff Snyder

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.

Jeff Snyder
2001
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]

Quote of the day—Margaret Gruter

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.

Margaret Gruter
1991
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]

Quote of the day—David Hluchy @davehluchy

Of course we will get strict nationwide gun regulations. We will subjugate Insurrectionist Gunloving maniacs like you.

David Hluchy @davehluchy
Tweeted on April 20, 2019
[It’s good to have such people finally come out and admit what we always knew. It will be useful at their trial.

Enjoy your trial David Hluchy.—Joe]

Sanctuary movement is growing

This is amazing stuff:

More than 200 counties across nine states have vowed not to enforce new state measures that restrict gun access, and 132  have voted to become gun sanctuaries.

Except for 52 counties in New York and three in Maryland, which acted in 2013 after their states passed new legislation following the Sandy Hook mass shooting, all of the counties have made their declarations since the Parkland shooting just over a year ago.

In New Mexico, the Democratic-controlled state government enacted a new law in March requiring background checks for firearm purchases.
But the month before, as state leaders considered the measure, 29 of 33 county sheriffs signed a letter declaring they would oppose any new state laws that “restrict the rights” of New Mexicans to own firearms.

nation and around the world, The Polk County resolution includes  a clause to the pro-resolution stance.

It says, “The criminal misuse of firearms is due to the fact that criminals do not obey laws, and this is not a reason to abrogate or abridge the unalienable, constitutionally guaranteed rights of law-abiding citizens.”

This doesn’t get much mention by anti-gun activists and politicians. I wonder if they are aware they are reaching the end of their rope (pun intended).

Numerous parallels can be drawn between the slave states and free states of 160 years ago. I’m wondering when it will happen that present day “free state” will refuse to extradite a firearm “criminal” to a “slave state”. Also, when will a “free state” arrest and prosecute a “slave hunter”.

We live in interesting times.

What if the 2nd Amendment was treated like the 4th?

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.

Quote of the day—George Monbiot

We’ve got to go straight to the heart of capitalism and overthrow it.

George Monbiot
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]

Quote of the day—Mitch O’Farrell @MitchOFarrell

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.

Mitch O’Farrell @MitchOFarrell
Tweeted on April 3, 2019
[Read more here.

Anti-gun people don’t just want your guns. They want you silenced.

I already told him to http://bit.ly/EnjoyYourTrial2.

Maybe someone should tell him that he doesn’t need to silence us. We are buying silencers on our own.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Derek Hunter

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.

Derek Hunter
March 14, 2019
It’s Time For Conservatives To Choose: Fight Back Or Surrender
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—satexaskommando‏ @DogalRorn

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?

satexaskommando‏ @DogalRorn
Tweeted on March 29, 2019
[That’s a valid question. I have no answer.—Joe]

Statistics do not apply to individuals

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.

Quote of the day–Hon. Roger T. Benitez

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]

More adults are making themselves heard

Denver police union joins opposition to ‘red flag’ bill

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.

Quote of the day—Clémence Michallon

One election after the next, we have seen how much the results of the US presidential vote impact not just the 50 states, but the rest of the planet too. And if the future of foreign countries is shaped to a significant extent by what goes on on US Election Day, shouldn’t they get a say in who gets to lead the most powerful nation in the world for the next four years?

In other words: shouldn’t foreign countries have a right to vote in the US presidential election?

Clémence Michallon
March 23, 2019
America should allow other countries to vote in the 2020 election
[No and no.

Next question.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle

We’re dealing with enemies. They are not rivals. Rivals agree, but want the power. They wish to do their authoritarian thing, AND they wish to never ever again see anyone live free. The authoritarian mind cannot abide seeing one man free, no matter how good or harmless that one man may be. The authoritarian mind hates that free man specifically because he is good and harmless.

Today’s leftist agitators speak of being “Woke” and suchlike, but one man’s state of being “Woke” is, in another man’s assessment, blatant and utter cluelessness.

Lyle
March 22, 2019
Comment to Quote of the day—James Howard Kunstler
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Chuck Baldwin

Do you legislators, judges, county sheriffs, chiefs of police, sheriff’s deputies and city policemen not realize that “red flag” laws are tantamount to a declaration of war against the American people? Are you so far removed from “the laws of Nature and Nature’s God” that you cannot see this? Do you not realize that in spite of all of Great Britain’s abuses of power, our colonist forebears did not openly rebel against the Crown until King George sent troops to Lexington and Concord to confiscate the colonists’ firearms? You do understand that, right? And you do understand, do you not, that the blood of the colonists flows in the veins of we Americans?

Chuck Baldwin
March 21, 2019
My Open Letter To Senators Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, Et. Al
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—James Howard Kunstler

The Left had better sober up and join an intelligible good faith debate about US immigration policy and the enforcement of existing laws or this will lead to exactly what Brent Tarrant laid out and what Mr. Trump maladroitly hinted at. Instead, of course, we will more likely commence another bootless campaign over guns. Here are some plain facts about that. There are already enough firearms of every sort loose in this land to commence hot civil warfare and they will not be surrendered by their owners. The horses are out of the barn on that one, even if sales of military-style weapons are outlawed. Any effort to confiscate them from people already possessing them will only provoke more overt antagonism between the two poles of American politics — and would probably lead to exactly the sort of violence that sober observers discern on the horizon.

James Howard Kunstler
March 18, 2019
Deadly Serious
[H/T to Chet M.

I don’t think the political left, especially some of the more recent elected representatives, is capable of “an intelligible good faith debate”. Their connection with reality is so tenuous that it will take a very serious application of a figurative “clue-by-four” for them to even see a ghostly outline of want we see as real.

Immigration is an important issue. But I think the gun issue is more likely to initiate their reality check. The widespread refusal of the police to enforce their oppressive laws is a gentle wakeup call. They won’t have to go down the path into Delusion Land much further before the gentle wakeup call becomes an air-raid siren.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeff Snyder

Now we must say goodbye to this fair country whose government toiled tirelessly to create the safety, fairness  and luxury that all demanded, and that everyone knew could be created by passing just the right laws. Through it all, the people vigorously safe-guarded their tradition of firearms ownership. But they never knew – and never learned – that preserving a tradition and a way of life is not the same as preserving liberty. And they never knew – and never learned – that it’s not about guns.

Jeff Snyder
2001
Nation of Cowards, Walter Mitty’s Second Amendment, page 150.
[Further insight, extrapolation, and consequences made possible by this observation is left as an exercise for the reader.—Joe]