Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise
As has become my custom I shall begin this one with a piece from
Mama Liberty, AKA Susan Callaway, NRA certified instructor for
firearms and self defense.
[Link]
Today's entry is one of her older treatises
on situational awareness and self defense. EVEN if you arev well
trained in self defense, a few minutes to review the material, and
compare it to your regular practices might be a good idea.... Yes,
Rob, they ARE hypocrites.
[Link]
Didn't you realize that
they've ALWAYS been more equal than the rest of us?
You have special rules and
special exemptions if you're a favored government employee. You're
exempt from the regulations limiting ammunition magazine capacity,
exempt from gun storage requirements, "smart gun" restrictions, and
buying handguns from California's approved roster. Those laws only
apply only to us, the everyday citizen. That smells like political
favoritism to me. It stinks.
Who is exempt? These laws apply to you and me, but not to
sheriff's deputies and police officers. Not to the highway patrol,
the department of fish and game, corrections officers or probation
officers. Oops, I almost forgot the auxiliary and honorary officers
and deputies. Then there are retired law enforcement officers who
get special rules just for them. These "life saving firearms
regulations" don't apply to the security staff at the state capital!
I see a pattern. Honest gun owners are told that California gun laws
are not punitive or inconvenient. We are told these laws are
essential to public safety.
Yet each time these public safety laws are written, public
safety officers are the first to receive exemptions.
Of course they do! They are more worthy of protection, and
protection requires the best. we, the little people aren't worth
protecting. Di Fi made that quite clear when she said "If I had the
votes, it would have been Mr and Mrs America, turn them in." while
having a CCW in her purse.
Gee, is this another Chinese attempt at population control?
[Link]
By denying their citizens the right to own guns, for ANY reason (Mao, after all,
said political power comes from the barrel of a gun—they obviously
don't want the Chinese people to have any power at all), 27 people
are dead and 100 +/- wounded by a gang of knife wielding thugs. Oh,
wait. Maybe I shouldn't print this—the Victim Disarmament Crowd
will start advocating banning all knives with blades longer than 1
inch.
A group of knife-wielding men
attacked a train station in southwestern China on Saturday, leaving
at least 27 dead and more than 100 injured, the official Xinhua News
Agency said.
Xinhua did not provide more details about the evening attack at
the Kunming Railway Station in Yunnan province, and the attackers
were not identified. Kunming city police said they did not have
immediate information to release.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The motive behind the attack was not immediately clear, but China
has seen a number of mass stabbings and other attacks carried out by
people bearing grudges against society.
Hmmmmm, Population control—either to lower the population or to
politically control it. You decide which.
Read this man's letter.
[Link]
The next Thomas Jefferson? There is so much about the Connecticut assault on the
Constitution, but this one seems to me to be among the best.
[Link]
Connecticut Carry, a (obviously) pro-2nd Amendment organization, told
the foisters of this piece of crap law where to get off.
"From Governor Malloy, to
Undersecretary Lawlor to DESPP, Commissioner Schriro, and Lieutenant
Cooke of the firearms unit, and including Lt. Paul Vance, the state
needs to shit, or get off the pot. The fact is, the state does not
have the balls to enforce these laws. The laws would not survive the
public outcry and resistance that would occur."—Connecticut Carry
Director Ed Peruta
-------------------------------------------------------------------
...State officials look down the barrel of the laws that they
created, and it is very probably that they now tremble as they
rethink the extremity of their folly. Connecticut Carry calls on
every State official, every Senator, and every Representative, to
make the singular decision: Either enforce the laws as they are
written and let us fight it out in court, or else repeal the 2013 Gun
Ban in its entirety.
As many media sources have pointed out, there is very little
compliance with the new edicts, and there is absolutely no way for
the State to know who is obeying the law or not. State officials have
made their bluff, and Undersecretary Lawlor has made his position
clear, that the State will enforce the laws. We say: Bring it on. The
officials of the State of Connecticut have threatened its citizens by
fiat. They have roared on paper, but they have violated Principle.
Now it's time for the State to man-up: either enforce its edicts or
else stand-down and return to the former laws that did not so
violently threaten the citizens of this state.
Of course, there's ALSO this one.
[Link]
Cinque rightly points out that
this is an unconstitutional law. He then goes down the list: "You
register your AR, you register your magazines and you say we can keep
everything we have, but it's not going to prevent the next
Sandy
Hook, correct? It's a simple 'Yes' or 'No.'"
"We don't know that definitively," Yaccarino said.
"You absolutely know that," Cinque retorted.
Then came Cinque's ultimate question, "What are you going to do
about those of us who will not comply with this law?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cinque responded, "So I'm a thirty year public servant, twenty
year fireman, OK?
United
States Navy veteran, upstanding citizen all
my life with three children, and with the stroke of a pen from the
ivory tower, with the gold top, you've decided to create me to be a
felon; a Class D felony, for doing absolutely nothing wrong."
Thunderous applause erupted from the crowd gathered in New Haven.
"It's wrong," Cinque continued.
Apparently the lawmaker couldn't understand how Cinque would
become a felon. However, Mr. Cinque said he would choose not to
comply with the law. "That's your right," responded the
representative.
And, as this woman found out, the CT officials, including the
police spokesman Lt. Vance, forgets who his masters really are.
[Link]
A woman known as "Ashley" called
and spoke to Lt. Vance regarding the possible repercussions of the
refusal
of many of the state's residents to either
register their firearms or turn them over, in compliance with the
state's ridiculous new law. Things are getting heated in the state as
tens
of thousands refuse to comply with the unconstitutional law, the
home
addresses of pro-gun control members of the state legislature
have been published, and a
well-armed
patriot group points out,
"We
are familiar with the finer points of marksmanship."
Vance said so many outrageous things during the taped call that
it's hard to limit ourselves to just a couple of quotes, but here are
the two that really tell the tale:
"Ma'am, it sounds like you're anti-American, it sounds like
you're anti-law.""I'm the master, ma'am. I'm the master."
Well, enough about Connecticut. Let's move on to other places the
next "Shot heard 'round the World" might occur. Maryland is moving
towards confiscation.
[Link]
No, registration doesn't lead to confiscation. And the check is in the mail. Okay....
ONE more Connecticut piece. A nice summation of events.
[Link]
Where we are today?
Connecticut has an unenforceable law on its books. So many gun owners
refused to follow the law that Connecticut does not have the physical
or fiscal means to enforce their law. The ranks of law enforcement,
the number of courts, and the number of prisons would have to grow
ten fold. The costs of court trials and prison incarcerations are
enough to bankrupt the state. There are other costs as well.
How could the situation get worse? Police have murdered
innocent civilians during no-knock raids. It is a sad fact, but it
has happened and is commonly known. Though the media will try
and cover for them, police and politicians will have blood on their
hands if they injure civilian gun owners during firearm confiscation.
Police violence will further heighten the fear felt by honest gun
owners in Connecticut. Connecticut gun owners could try and protect
themselves if people violently break into their homes. This could
lead to further bloodshed for all concerned. Police and politicians
would then be seen as murderous oppressors rather than defenders of a
fair and impartial justice system.
NOW I'm done with Connecticut.... for this rant, at least.
I want this headboard.
[Link] Though
mine would have a 1911 AND a shotgun.
If rumors be true, lads and lasses, even that dirty Russian
TulAmmo crap will be off the market quite soon.
[Link]
this is the first place I've heard this, so
take it as rumor, not fact. On a side note, I have found some VERY
nice Serbian ammo (in a bright blue box), 165 grain JHP for my .40
S&W Taurus Millenium PT140 that feeds great, shoots to point of aim
consistently, and ISN'T dirty crap that fouls up my guns like TulAmmo
does. AND it's reloadable brass-cased ammo, not steel cased
disposable Russian crap.
Will miracles never cease? AGAIN, the most liberal, usually
anti-2nd Amendment, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down an
unConstitutional Kahleefourneeeyah gun law. Or at least part of one.
[Link]
Just weeks after striking down
the San Diego County "good cause" requirement as burdensome to the
exercise of the Second Amendment, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals struck down Yolo County, CA's requirement that a concealed
carry applicant "prove they face a threat of violence or robbery"
before being allowed to carry a gun.
According
to The Sacramento Bee,
the ruling came via an "unpublished memorandum" on March 5. The
3-judge panel that issued the memorandum is the same as that which
issued the broader ruling against "good cause" on February 13.
As with the decision against "good cause," the Ninth Circuit ruled
that the Yolo County "policy impermissibly infringes on the Second
Amendment right to bear arms in lawful self-defense."
This ruling "effects only Yolo County directly" and "serves
notice" to Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto that his policy of requiring
concealed carry applicants to "prove they face a threat" is
unconstitutional.
Who'da thunk it? Judges, actually doing their jobs (sorta) and
upholding the Constitution (again, sorta). I'm waiting for a judge to
strike down the entire concept of CCW licenses/permits and ruling
that carry MUST be Vermont-style "Constitutional Carry", where no
licensev is required for concealed OR open carry. But I won't hold my
breath.
Remember Mike Vanderboegh from last week's rant? Well, he's been
warned that CT police and politicians "want you dead or in jail."
[Link]
No, I sincerely doubt that any of our fine, upstanding politicians would
ever resort to illegal activities against an American citizens
excercising his 1st and 2nd Amendment rights (he says with tongue
firmly in check and a sarcastic grin on his face), but if I were
Mike, I'd be avoiding Connecticut for a wee bit!
After Vanderboegh returned from
a trip, he was met with several messages making it clear that he had
rattled numerous lawmakers who voted for the law and were now seeking
personal protective details as a response to his letter. "They also
want you in jail,"
Vanderboegh
was told.
Vanderboegh said a source within the CT state police warned him,
"Mike, the upper echelons don't know whether to shit or go blind. You
really hit them with those last two letters. Much discussion—some
whispering and more than a little shouting. They realize that this is
a PR nightmare and they don't know what to do about it. I heard (a
supervisor) cussing Malloy and Lawlor and that (graphic expletive
deleted) Vance. All of a sudden they're starting to realize that we
are on the line to be shot at and not them. The higher ups (like
Vance) can afford to be in denial. We can't."
Again, I ask, will Connecticut become the location for the 2nd
"Shot heard 'round the world?" Remember, Bunker Hill was in response
to an attempt by "legal authority" to confiscate privately owned
firearms. though this time, I don't see the authority as being
military, but rather the foolish few cops willing to steal
guns er, confiscate unlawful firearms from their fellow citizens.
Do we need MORE proof that Facebook sucks, and is a liberal's
paradise?
[Link]
Zuckerberg COULD have said
(legitimately, I might add) that what consenting adults choose to
sell or trade on his site is not his responsibility. But no, he
claims he is going to ban "unregulated sales" of firearms through
FaceBook. Tell, Markie-boy, exactly HOW you intend to tell who is
"properly regulated" to sell firearms? ESPECIALLY since all
regulation of firearms sales is ridiculous AND unConstitutional.
Social media giant Facebook
on Wednesday announced new policies designed to tamp down on
unregulated firearm transactions over its network, earning praise
from groups who see the Internet as the world's largest gun store.
Under the new policy, Facebook and its subsidiary Instagram will
block minors from seeing posts about the sales of guns and other
regulated items, require pages used for that purpose to include
language reminding people of the applicable legal restrictions and
warn sellers that they are bound to comply with those laws.
Do you REALLY think a stern warning will stop us?
What ever happened to privacy and "Innocent until proven guilty in
a court of law"?
[Link]
Apparently, this Clackamas County Cop figures, "If I stop'em, I can
do whatever I wish, and post photos of them anywhere I want, because
they MUST be guilty."
The deputy said he pulled him
over for a lane change that left him following too close to the
vehicle in front, but gave him a ticket for window tint.
What is interesting about the video is that the deputy uses his
personal iPhone camera to take pictures of the vehicle, the plate,
the driver, and god knows what else.
With a little research, Zimmerman was able to find out that the
deputy has been photographing people he tickets and posting the
photographs online as a virtual "dart board" for his personal
friends—most of which are probably cops to make fun of.
Here's a cop who needs to find a new career, AND to be the subject
of a few civil rights lawsuits. This behavior is offensive AND
unConstitutional.
Methinks I must put this rant to rest, and start next week's rant
tonight.
Previous
Contents
Next