Quote of the day—Josh Horwitz

Today, we are standing up to our leaders to let them know that it is time to drain the swamp. It is time to dissolve the National Rifle Association.

Josh Horwitz
Executive Director of Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
May 17, 2019
Email with the subject “The NRA has got to go”.
[I find it very telling that Horwitz is eager to destroy the nations oldest civil rights organization.

It tells people everything they need to know about him and his organization. He is opposed to civil rights and should he succeed in this endeavor it will make it that much easier to attack and destroy other civil rights organizations and the rights they are attempting to protect.

It is his organization that “has got to go”. They are in violation of 18 USC 241 and should be prosecuted. I look forward to his trial and hope Horwitz enjoys his trial as much as I will.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Damon Root

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.

Damon Root
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]

Quote of the day—Los Angles Times Editorial Board

Of course, enforcement is an issue, and often law enforcement won’t know that a storage law has been violated until someone dies. But in adopting such laws society sends a message about what behavior we expect.

Los Angles Times Editorial Board
May 16, 2019
Gun storage laws save lives, so why don’t we have more of them?
[They openly admit it is about sending “a message” rather than actually accomplishing their stated goal. AKA “virtue signaling”.

Suppose we ignore the constitutional issues of requiring guns to be locked up at all times, why is it so difficult for people to understand that having unenforceable laws is a bad thing? It leads to contempt for the law in general. I suppose they write it off as a reasonable price to pay for their real goal.

I strongly suspect that in this case they are more interested in poking gun owners in the eye than they are in saving lives. Using “pointy sticks” against people you dislike “sends a message” too.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dstroyr (@Dstroyr_U2b)

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

Dstroyr (@Dstroyr_U2b)
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]

Quote of the day—Ed Goeas

More than half the likely electorate thinks we are more than 70% of the way to being at the edge of civil war.

Ed Goeas
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]

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.