Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the day—Alexander Hamilton

Posted on by

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.

Alexander Hamilton
Federalist No. 28
[Via Walter E. Williams.

One could easily conclude Hamilton words were intended for this decade.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Stephen A. Elswick

Posted on by

Enforcing the constitution, it’s just not in words. Our commitment to this is engraved on the police memorial that you walked by when you came in here which has the names of the police officers and sheriff’s deputies who gave up their blood, their life in blood, to enforce the constitution of the United States and we don’t intend to not do that anymore. But furthermore, I tell you this board and every public safety officer that works for Chesterfield County takes an oath that they will uphold and follow the constitution of the United States. We’re doing what you want us to do, and we will continue to do that.

Stephen A. Elswick
Vice Chair, MATOACA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
December 20, 2019
Supervisors’ letter to lawmakers: Uphold the Constitution
[It was probably in the late 1990s when I asked Alan Gottlieb of SAF how can people deal with the unconstitutional gun laws when the Federal Courts didn’t seem to be supportive. His answer was that it really was the job of the states to respond and rein in the Federal government. I’m reminded of this by the sanctuary county/city stuff going on now. There is a similar activity at the state level but hasn’t received as much notice.

It’s all good stuff but as others have observed, it’s not going to be all that effective until politicians are being prosecuted.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tom Knighton

Posted on by

Ebbin and his fellow Democrats simply want to feel safe, and that means endangering the safety of everyone they happen to disagree with that will come for the protest in February. After all, it’s funny how only the side he disagrees with will be impacted, despite the complete lack of violence.

Then again, sticking it to your enemies is an age-old political tactic.

Tom Knighton
December 27, 2019
VA Democrats Want To Ban Carrying Gun In State Capitol Grounds
[Such activities must not go unanswered. Otherwise they will continue to encroach upon our rights.

The gun rights side of the political aisle need to have a good way of “sticking it to their enemies” and play a game of tit for tat. I’m inclined to suggest prosecution and imprisonment but we aren’t there yet.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Erik Simonsen

Posted on by

The same people who feel it’s necessary to give driver’s licenses to defiant law-breakers are the same ones trying to pass this nonsense. When did we become a state that put lawbreakers first, while attacking the rights of hard-working, law-abiding citizens?

Erik Simonsen
New Jersey Assemblymen-elect.
December 20, 2019
Proposed N.J. gun law would mandate $50k insurance policies for all gun owners
[Answering the rhetorical question, evidence would indicate it was shortly after getting a socialist/communist majority in the state.

If you read the article you also find this interesting bit:

Governor Murphy signed an executive order in September making it practically impossible for a legal gun owner to obtain a firearms insurance policy. Attacking gun insurance as a gun ownership “enabling” concept has become a popular trend in blue states as of late.

So, the governor, through executive action has essentially banned people from obtaining firearm liability insurance (the NRA Carry Guard insurance). And:

A-6003 sponsored by Patricia Egan Jones (D-5) mandates that each New Jersey gun owner obtain a minimum of $50,000 in liability insurance at the time of purchase.

New Jersey is the one state that I refuse to visit until their oppressive gun laws are repealed or I can get a varmint hunting license for the politicians who created and/or perpetuate this tyranny.

These people need to prosecuted. I look forward to their trials.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Rob Morse

Posted on by

Big-government politicians in both parties want more government so that political payoffs continue. These politicians have no use for limited government and free citizens.

Rob Morse
December 25, 2019
What We Learned from the Bloomberg Effect in Virginia
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Victor Joecks

Posted on by

Gun grabbers frequently talk about banning “assault weapons,” but that term doesn’t have an agreed-upon meaning. For instance, the since-expired 1994 Assault Weapons Ban defined the term as a semi-automatic rifle with two of the following features: a pistol grip, collapsible stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor or grenade launcher.

If you know anything about firearms, the assertion that these secondary characteristics make a firearm more deadly is laughable. Grenades are already illegal.

What the term has come to mean is “scary-looking rifles that mass shooters use.” But, as Sisolak now admits, “It’s not the look of a weapon that makes an assault rifle.” This puts gun grabbers in a double bind. They’re either banning secondary characteristics that won’t stop mass shootings — even if gun bans worked, which they don’t — or they’re banning every semi-automatic rifle in the America, which is politically unpalatable.

It’s much easier to say you want to ban assault rifles — and then trust the media won’t dig deep enough to find out if you know what you’re talking about.

Victor Joecks
December 21, 2019
VICTOR JOECKS: Sisolak promised to ban assault rifles, but he doesn’t know what that term means
[Sisolak is the Governor of Nevada.

As a friend in high school, Ken Franklin, once told me, “If you can’t define a word then you literally don’t know what you are talking about.” And here we have a politician becoming the governor of Nevada based, in part, on a promise of something he literally had no idea what he was talking about.

This is not to say he is stupid or even ignorant. It’s self evident that he didn’t need to know what he was talking about. He won the election, right? In this context “assault weapon” is political tool used to gain power. And not in the sense Mao Tse-tung used it.

I’m reminded of the quote attributed to Adolf Hitler:

If the Jews didn’t exist, we would have to invent them.

And our country’s political left, and Governor Sisolak in particular, has Josh Sugarmann to thank for recognizing the utility of the “assault weapon” boogie man. Sisolak successfully used it in his bid for the governorship. And, if this article is to be believed, he did that without even knowing that they didn’t exist.

Think about that. A concept of something which cannot be defined, and hence is largely imaginary, was instrumental in getting someone elected state governor. The concept is a real tool so powerful that even if you don’t know what it is you can use it to win elections.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Samuel Culper

Posted on by

Politicians know that the groundswell of peaceful pro-gun activism is backed up by something harder. That’s why in the near term they’re most likely to try and erode support for “assault weapons” and legislate them out of existence, as opposed to confiscate everyone’s AR-15s… for now.

Samuel Culper
December 23, 2019
Eyes on Virginia 2020 – Here’s what to expect
[Via email from Tony.

Scott Adams almost categorically dismisses slippery slope arguments in the general case, not just in the case of gun control. I mostly disagree with him. Here, and in the post this quote was taken from, Culper alludes to my disagreement with Adams.

Adams, in his most recent book, Loserthink: How untrained brains Are Ruining America, elaborates more on this. He says, if I recall correctly, that it’s a slippery slope only until something changes.and then it isn’t. In the case of gun control case he claims travel down the slope will continue only until gun owners stop it. Things that are not terribly unpopular will be enacted, perhaps background checks for retail sales, but that doesn’t affect the probability of gun confiscation. They are two different, unrelated things. Gun owners, and even many non-gunowners, will put up much stronger resistance to gun confiscation and the slide down the slope is stopped.

I don’t see it that way.

As Culper points out, the political response is to make it costly to be a gun owner. Not just in dollars and thing like requiring insurance and difficult licensing procedures but in risk and day to day hassle. I went to the range with a friend in Canada a while back. Each gun had to be unloaded, a trigger lock installed, then locked in a case, and put in the trunk of the car in order to transport it from his home to the range and back. If he were to have lost a trigger lock while at the range he could not have legally transported the gun back home without the risk of going to prison. The “gun-free zone” within 1000 feet of a school is another example of a cost imposed on gun ownership through increased risk of committing a victimless crime.

As these costs increase it decreases the number of people who are willing to pay the “price”. Each of these relatively small price increases is not sufficient to take a bunch of time off work or to donate a lot of money to help defeat it like you would if it were something like confiscation of America’s most popular rifle. Yet, because the increasing cost of gun ownership it means fewer gun owners which means there is less resistance to the next slide down the slope. Whereas in Adams view you get increased resistance as you slide down the slope.

We both see the slope as non-linear but he sees the slope as upturning and stopping further progress and I see it as downturning and increasing progress.

I claim we can see support for my view on two different slopes.

Look at the slippery slope the anti-gun people are on. For decades they fought the passage of concealed carry licensing laws as they slowly swept the nation. Now Constitutional Carry is slowly spreading. I remember people saying licensing our rights was actually a step in the wrong direction for us. It should be “Vermont Carry”, as what we now call Constitutional Carry was called 20 years ago, or nothing because once the right to carry was licensed we couldn’t get back to a principled claim of right to carry without a license. The anti-gun people have been sliding down this slope for something like 30 years now with no end in sight.

On the other side we can see the march of restrictions on “assault weapons” up and down the west and east costal states. Each year they come up with another type of restriction or cost to add to the burden of owning and using them. Had the anti-gun people gone for an outright ban and demand for confiscation, again about 30 years ago, few politicians would have given the ideas support. This year people hoping to become president seem to be competing on who can confiscate them in the shortest period of time. We have slid down a slippery slope. Those early restrictions enabled further restrictions as soon as the legislature reconvened the next year.

On the other hand Adam could say the 2nd Amendment Sanctuary movement proves his point.

Am I missing something? Adams is a smart guy and I may too close to this issue to see the issue clearly. Is there some special case situation that Adams would concede in my examples while being substantially correct in the more general case?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Gottlieb & Dave Workman

Posted on by

Nothing so vividly illustrates the delusional state of the gun prohibitionist’s mindset than the stubborn defense of the so called “gun-free school zone.”

Alan Gottlieb & Dave Workman
2019
Good Guys With Guns, page 105

[You would think they would give it up after being shown that 95+% of all mass shootings occur in “gun-free” areas. Or just pointing out that if “gun-free” areas worked making banks “gun-free zones” would eliminate bank robberies. Or making schools “drug-free zones” would cause recreational drug to cease.

But it is irrational to expect people to be rational. And those rational enough to know the truth but evil enough to further their agenda with the deaths of innocent children use this lack of rationality in the masses to their advantage.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Adam Kraut

Posted on by

Rule by executive fiat was rejected by the Thirteen American Colonies, including Pennsylvania, when they declared independence from England, and we reject such lawlessness today. The Attorney General’s revisionist legal opinion adds an entire class of inanimate objects to the definition of ‘firearm’ under Pennsylvania law that the General Assembly never considered, nor intended. As such, we are requesting the Commonwealth Court to enjoin Commissioner Evanchick and his Pennsylvania State Police from implementing and enforcing any policy or practice that would follow the Attorney General’s misguided definitional structure.

Adam Kraut
Director of Legal Policy
The Firearm Policy Coalition
December 20, 2019
BREAKING: Emergency Injunction Sought Against Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner Evanchick Following ‘Lawless’ Gun Ban Mandate, “Legal Opinion” by Attorney General Josh Shapiro
[See also: GUN-RIGHTS GROUP SUES PENNSYLVANIA OVER NEW ‘GHOST GUNS’ RULE

I donate money every month (matched by my employer) to the FPC.

It’s amazing what these politicians want to get away with. It’s almost as if they believe they are rulers instead of public servants.

The courts need to slap them down hard and soon!—Joe]

I could never have even imagined this

Posted on by

Via email from Chet we have Progressives Gone Wild:

… a growing trend in Seattle: municipal employees increasingly seeing their work as part of a broader agenda of radical social change. Over the past five years, the City of Seattle has rapidly added personnel under the auspices of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Christopher Peguero, for example, manager of the equity program at Seattle City Light, views his role as much more than providing reliable electricity to utility customers. As Peguero explained in a recent interview on the City of Seattle blog, public utilities can be instrumental in the fight against white supremacy. “Race is most central to addressing institutional oppression since it is central to historical inequity in the United States,” he says. “I feel that an inclusive model is the only way that we will ever reach collective liberation from institutional oppression.”

There are several more examples but I particularly like this one:

The Seattle Public Schools’ Ethnic Studies Task Force has launched a new math curriculum based on the idea that the “Western” model of instruction has “[disenfranchised] people and communities of color” and legitimized “systems that contribute to poverty and slave labor.” To fight this injustice, the task force argues, schools must transition “from individualistic to collectivist thinking” and implement a new math curriculum that will “liberate people and communities of color.”

This is like something out of Atlas Shrugged or “The Crazy Years” as described in some of Robert Heinlein’s books. Stuff that was just too crazy to actually ever be real. But as I’ve heard people say before, “Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense.”

I could never have even imagined this on my own for a fictional story. I think this is a sign I should move back to Idaho. I would rather they build their utopia without me and my tax contributions.

Quote of the day—Michael Z. Williamson

Posted on by

Keep calm. Spread the word.  Agitate against such outrages. Buy more guns.  Buy them legally. Buy them privately if you can.  Buy more, more, and yet more. There’s always the risk we’ll reach the point where America tips over. But that’s a chance we’ll have to take.

Because if it’s impossible for the government to seize 300 million weapons (the lowball estimate), it’s way more than four times as impossible for them to seize 1.2 billion.

Michael Z. Williamson
December 15, 2019
The Virginia Debacle, Summarized (And Why You Should Buy More Guns)
[There is more than a little truth to this. But a gun properly buried in the woods and practically impossible to confiscate might as well be in government hands or destroyed. Just one gun, and enough ammunition, in the hands of someone skilled, able, and willing to use it will be of far more use that a thousand guns hidden and unused.

Attend Boomershoot 2020 (sign up here). Learn what your gun can do at a distance, increase your skill, have the confidence to use it if you really need to, and have a whole lot of fun doing it.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Christopher Knight

Posted on by

“Resist!” is screamed by media personalities and celebrities and politicians who in a sane world would never win a race for city lieutenant sanitation commissioner.  They betray ignorance of what real dictatorship is, as they dare ascribe the gravitas of 1989’s righteous rebellions upon their own crusade.

When I consider Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, and Jerry Nadler maneuvering for impeachment of President Donald Trump, it is with some dark bewilderment.  They have no idea what disaster they are courting for themselves and their allies.  It will not end well for them.

…

Out of desperation Ceausescu promised higher salaries and student aid.  But Ceausescu had woefully mis-gauged the frustrations of the people amassed before him in Bucharest.  The moment his decades of control evaporated was chronicled on worldwide television.  Nicolai and Elena Ceausescu promptly fled the palace by helicopter and were soon captured.

December 25, 1989 was not a Merry Christmas for the Ceausescus. Found guilty by a drumhead trial of crimes against the Romanian people, Nicolai and Elena were immediately thrown against the wall – literally – and shot dead.  Images of their shattered bodies were broadcast around the globe.

So far as analogies go, the comforts and careers of the petty tyrants in Washington may soon be just as crumbled.  Our own would-be overlords would do well to be mindful of that.

Christopher Knight
December 10, 2019
The Fall of the Deep State and 1989’s Fall of Communism
[It’s easy to draw parallels to present day. And after Knight is done it’s simpler than painting by numbers.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Greta Thunberg

Posted on by

Unfortunately, we probably already know the outcome. World leaders are still trying to run away from their responsibilities but we have to make sure they cannot do that.

We will make sure that we put them against the wall and they will have to do their job to protect our futures.

Greta Thunberg
December 13, 2019
Greta Thunberg tells cheering crowd ‘we will make sure we put world leaders against the wall’ if they do not tackle global warming as she attends climate protest in Turin
[This is consistent with much of the political left throughout the 20th Century. But usually they do not publicly announce this until they have consolidated more political power than what this 16 year old has. I attribute the poor judgement to her youth.

It would appear that after saying this she received some coaching from someone wiser than her:

Yesterday I said we must hold our leaders accountable and unfortunately said “put them against the wall”. That’s Swenglish: “att ställa någon mot väggen” (to put someone against the wall) means to hold someone accountable. That’s what happens when you improvise speeches in a second language. But of course I apologise if anyone misunderstood this. I can not enough express the fact that I – as well as the entire school strike movement- are against any possible form of violence. It goes without saying but I say it anyway.

Any native Swedish speaker out there that can verify or refute this claim?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D.

Posted on by

The radical liberal mind is trapped in his bitter cynicism because he suffered certain kinds of neglect, deprivation and abuse at an early age and has had as a consequence to deny, as if they don’t exist, whole realms of human experience, because awareness of those realms is emotionally painful beyond his tolerance. He has not had as an infant and toddler the deeply formative benefits of engagement, love, tenderness, protection and empathy that would allow him to understand and participate happily in the human benevolence that is everywhere available to him as an adult.

To the radical liberal who is blind to an entire realm of interpersonal experience, and who distorts the realities of spontaneous cooperation in every community where freedom prevails, America and Trump are devils that must be stopped from destroying the world. The radical liberal and the Trump-deranged individual see only the projections onto others of their own inner badness, greed, predation, exclusion, prejudice, bigotry, envy, jealousy and exploitative impulses. They don’t see, beyond Trump’s personality faults, his goodwill for America, his generosity toward veterans and other Americans, his grandiose but effective identification with the greatness of America. The dysfunctional families which radical liberals and Trump-deranged sufferers come from are the source of their projections of badness onto our country. What they see in present-day America are transference versions of their own early traumas.

Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D.
September 30, 2019
Psychiatrist: Trump Derangement Syndrome is real – and serious
[As stated in SJWs Always Lie, They lie, they double down, and they project. This psychiatrist claims he know why they do this:

Perhaps. But I would like to see the raw data he used to arrive at his conclusions.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Libby Emmons and Barrett Wilson

Posted on by

This is what being unhinged looks like—being so sure of your correctness that you demand affirmation. The use of violence to revolt against lawful elections is only done by people who don’t care about free and fair elections. Britain is not a rogue state where sham elections are held. It’s a cornerstone democratic nation.

Libby Emmons and Barrett Wilson
December 13, 2019
Democracy Is Alive And Well Despite The Media’s Best Efforts
[The political left only consider the democratic process as valid as long as it is making progress in their direction. When “progress” slows or reverses they bring out the violence.

Respond appropriately.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeffrey Folks

Posted on by

The problem for the liberal is that most people do not want to be transformed.  They want life to be better but not qualitatively different.  It is only the liberal, or the “progressive,” as he prefers to be called today, who welcomes revolution and relishes the violent tactics necessary to bring it about.  For the progressive, it is an article of faith that the masses will resist change and must be forced to swallow it.

This is a crucial difficulty, and it gives rise to all sorts of persuasion, nudging, compulsion, and outright violence.  If the masses don’t know what’s good for them, they must be made to change.

Jeffrey Folks
February 24, 2018
Leftists versus the People
[As we are seeing both here and most recently and vividly in London. Voting is what they advocate for when they think they will win. Violence is always there as plan B.

Respond appropriately.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Fritz Edmunds

Posted on by

If plastic water bottles are okay, but plastic bags are banned, — you might live in a nation (state) that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots WE DO LIVE IN SUCH A DUMB COUNTRY!!

If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If you have to get your parents’ permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If, in the nation’s largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If an 80-year-old woman who is confined to a wheelchair or a three-year-old girl can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is “cute” but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more “safe” according to the government — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.

THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE IN ALL UPCOMING ELECTIONS. MOST OF THE IDIOTS RUNNING THIS COUNTRY SAY ONE THING AND DO THE OPPOSITE KNOWING THAT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED THEM IN DO NOT PAY ATTENTION

Fritz Edmunds
February 3, 2013
Channeling Jeff Foxworthy In a Country Founded by Geniuses and Run By Idiots (the link is dead as of December 12, 2019)
[This has been attributed to Jeff Foxworthy but that is probably incorrect.

It would appear this is just as true now as it was almost seven years ago.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dean Weingarten

Posted on by

Preventing a murder or suicide committed with a particular method is *not* a compelling governmental interest, because it is not clear if prohibiting one method will do anything to lower murders or suicides generally. It is arguable that prohibiting one method will lead to the rise of other methods. If preventing one method does not lower the overall rate, resources have been wasted and liberties narrowed to no effect. Thus, singling out one method becomes a matter of choice and preference.

Using the Orwellian phrases of Progressives is one of the easiest ways to lose an argument with them. If you cede to them the ability to define the words and terms of the language used, they win, mostly by default.

Dean Weingarten
December 8, 2019
”Preventing Gun Violence” is not a Compelling Governmental Interest
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Justin Anderson

Posted on by

Sales have definitely been brisk, especially of small, concealable handguns. We also saw a spike in sales of tactical rifles like AR-15s and AK-47s, for which I think we can confidently thank Beto O’Rourke.

Justin Anderson
Marketing director for Hyatt Guns in Charlotte, North Carolina
December 4, 2019
ATF: 423M guns in America, 1.2 per person, 8.1B rounds of ammunition a year
[If the anti-gun people want there to be fewer guns in circulation the best way for them to accomplish that is to stop trying to ban and/or restrict gun sales.

Using other information from the article, I’ll leave following as a exercises for the reader:

  • Calculate the percentage (worst case using reasonably valid assumptions) of the total number of guns used in a murder or violent crime each year.
  • Calculate the percentage (worst case using reasonably valid assumptions) of the total number of rounds of ammunition used in a murder or violent crime each year.

And more directly related to the Anderson quote, the anti-gun people should ask themselves, “Are all these people buying the guns that we plan to confiscate just really stupid? Or, are they planning to shoot the people advocating for confiscation?”—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ben Joseph Woods

Posted on by

The legal precedent we would set by allowing the legislature to selectively ignore enumerated rights at will is the same mindset that 150 years ago lead this country into a civil war.

Ben Joseph Woods
December 5, 2019
Pubic comment to Fairfax County Virginia on debate regarding becoming a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary county.


[The part quoted above starts at 5:38 in the video. The previous minutes are definitely worth listening to.—Joe]