Tag: Minnesota

Support Your Local Neighborhood War Criminal

It’s almost certain that the next presidential race will involved a wishy washy Republican candidate going head to head with an honest to God war criminal, Hillary Clinton. There’s a political action committee (PAC) by the name of Ready for Hillary that is collecting money to encourage the wicked war monger who literally laughs about killing people to run for president. Best of all, this PAC is coming to town:

A group of DFL heavyweights including Gov. Mark Dayton, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, U.S. Reps. Rick Nolan and Betty McCollum and others are hosting a fundraiser for a super PAC aimed at helping Hillary Clinton’s potential run for president.

The fundraiser, held at the office of DFL donor Vance Opperman on June 18, will raise money for the Ready for Hillary PAC. The invitation obtained by MPR News also said it will launch the Minnesotans Ready for Hillary organization.

The invitation embedded at the link notes two levels of donating: $100.00 and $250.00. So if you have a minimum of $100 lying around and you really want to see a certified war criminal run for president (which is kind of rare because our presidents don’t usually become war criminals until they become president) here’s your chance. Or if you’d like to head over there and protest a war criminal’s fund raiser you can certainly do that.

Don’t Be This Guy

Most people realize that violence is a last resort option. But there are some who seem to believe that might makes right and will resort to violence or threats thereof alarmingly fast:

The father told Fox 9 News he’s still shaken by the encounter. He explained that when he and his daughter got down to the cul de sac, Drake began yelling from his porch. When the father responded to say, “I’ve got it,” Drake allegedly said, “If you don’t like my advice, get off the street.”

At that point, Drake appeared to get angrier — but as the father and daughter prepared to leave the area, Drake allegedly went inside his home, grabbed a Remington 870 shotgun, pointed it at the father and threatened to kill him.

Drake’s wife eventually came out and pulled the gun away, but police said he didn’t appear repentant when he was booked. In fact, he allegedly told officers, “Maybe next time. I should have shot him.”

Mr. Drake played a dangerous game and got off lucky. His threat certainly provided a reasonable belief of immediate great bodily harm or death to his neighbor. Under Minnesota law the neighbor would have almost certainly been legally justified in using deadly force. I doubt Mr. Drake understands how fortunate he is to be alive today because when you write a check in violence they will often be paid in blood.

I’m not sure what went through the neighbor’s head. Being threatened with a shotgun is a scary enough prospect but having his 7 year-old daughter with him at the time probably made for the worst situation he could imagine.

Judge Ensures Campaign Dollars Continue to Flow Unabated

In April the Supreme Court ruled that caps on campaign contributions were unconstitutional. This ruling was most conveniently timed as the political season is ramping up, which means both incumbents and would-be politicians can reap the maximum benefit from this unhindered cash flow. Here in Minnesota there was a separate law that determined how much politicians can accept and a federal judge just shot that down:

A federal court judge has ordered that a campaign finance law that limits how much money candidates can accept from wealthy donors be suspended.

The order marks the local legal impact of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that removed overall caps from how much money donors could give to federal candidates.

The Minnesota branch of the Institute for Justice and four plaintiffs, including two current and former Minnesota lawmakers, used the Supreme Court’s ruling in the McCutcheon case to argue that the state’s limits on ”special source” donations prevent free speech.

Here in Minnesota judges are elected. I wouldn’t go so far as to insinuate that this federal judge was looking out for his state level cohorts but, never mind, I am insinuating that.

It also wouldn’t surprise me if members of the Minnesota Congress and judiciary met and determined who would take the popular opinion hit to shoot down this restriction on campaign finances during this election cycle. Since the state Congress has take several major hits already it was probably determined that the judiciary should take one for the oligarchy this time around. Either way this ruling really changes very little. The wealthy have always been the ones to buy elections. Now they just have to pay more for them.

Wonderful Drama in the Gun Rights World

If there’s one thing I love it’s Internet drama. And boy do I have a heap of it for you guys. Dudley Brown, the main guy behind the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) rustled Alan Gottlieb, the founder of the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF), jimmies:

Dudley Brown and his “National Association for Gun Rights” (NAGR) have built a reputation by attacking every other major gun rights organization and even pro-gun politicians, to the detriment of the gun rights movement. His rhetoric has done more to marginalize Second Amendment activism than all of the slanders from gun prohibition lobbying groups combined.Now Dudley has spewed his venom toward Alan Gottlieb, a true champion of Second Amendment advocacy with a proven track record of accomplishment. Gottlieb is founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA).

In his latest effort to raise money for his own self-aggrandizement, Dudley Brown has launched a vicious canard against Alan Gottlieb, accusing the veteran gun rights advocate of “Leading the fight for national gun registration.”

Alan Gottlieb has never advocated for gun registration in his life. His legislative efforts have been to prevent that, and Dudley knows it.

Burn! Of course the SAF delivers an onslaught of just retribution:

The Second Amendment Foundation has championed gun rights legal actions and won in federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Remember, it was SAF that took McDonald v. City of Chicago [PDF] to the Supreme Court and won. Where was Dudley?

SAF and CCRKBA have conducted the annual Gun Rights Policy Conference for more than 25 years, bringing together major gun rights leaders with grassroots activists to unify and expand the gun rights movement. Where was Dudley?

When SAF and the National Rifle Association joined forces to stop the unconstitutional gun grab in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, where was Dudley?

When SAF and NRA joined forces to defeat the San Francisco gun ban, where was Dudley?

When SAF, NRA and CCRKBA joined forces to defeat the City of Seattle’s parks gun ban – thus strengthening state preemption in Washington state and providing a lesson for anyone who might challenge other states’ preemption laws, where was Dudley?

When the International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights (IAPCAR) was created, Alan Gottlieb was there to help bring together an organization that now has member groups from every continent and several nations. Where was Dudley?

When multi-national gun rights organizations gather in Europe to resist global gun control efforts, Alan Gottlieb is there, but where is Dudley?

I have been very critical of Mr. Gottlieb’s recent advocacy of universal background checks but there is one major difference between him and Mr. Brown. Mr. Gottlieb and the SAF actually gets shit down.

The NAGR is only well known for two things: whining about everybody else and taking people’s money. Scratch that, there’s a third thing they’re well known for: leaking the personal information of its members to random people. But as far as victories in the fight for gun rights? The NAGR has done all of jack shit. Sure they’ve cultivated some extremely zealous supporters, a couple of whom are friends of mine (more on that in a bit), but they can’t actually point to any of their victories.

What’s really annoying is that us Minnesotans have to deal with one of the NAGR’s dumb ass affiliate groups called Minnesota Gun Rights (MGR). MGR mimics the NAGR very well. It invests a lot of time bitching about the Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (GOCRA) and asking for money from people but it hasn’t actually done a damn thing as far as fighting for gun rights in Minnesota is concerned.

Now back to what I said about the NAGR having a track record of cultivating some very zealous supporters. As I mentioned a couple of these zealous supporters are my friends. One actually went so far as to block me on Facebook when he was praising MGR and I asked for a track record of what the organization has accomplished (by the way being blocked was my only answer). This rabid devotion from people who are generally cynical and skeptical of any political organization leads me to believe, although I have no proof, that they’re getting some money from either the NAGR or MGR. Either way they tout both organizations as the greatest thing since sliced bread (and denouncing every other gun rights organization as quislings) but cannot produce any information demonstrating either organization’s effectiveness. When your most devout supporters can’t provide any proof that you’ve actually done something then you’ve almost certainly done nothing.

It amuses me to no end that the individual who runs the NAGR, and presumably its affiliate organizations, is criticizing organizations like the SAF while his organization has absolutely nothing to show for itself. That would be like me criticizing Ludwig von Mises for failing to advance the cause of liberty while being unable to provide any evidence that I have advanced the cause of liberty (the only difference is that I’m pretty certain I have done more to advance gun rights and liberty than the NAGR has, and all I’ve done is help introduce people to the shooting sports and write this blog). As the saying goes, people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

I really hope this drama spreads (as you can see here I’m doing my part to fan the flames). Watching the NAGR shoot its mouth off is just fucking hilarious and I love watching it made a fool of in public.

Now I Don’t Want the Ability to Remotely Disable My Phone

I live in Minnesota, the state partially made famous for its oddball political atmosphere. This state is both the source of some pretty decent legislation (the legislation regulating our ability to carry a firearm is surprisingly good) and some absolutely atrocious legislation. This is an example of the latter:

A first-in-the nation measure would require smartphone manufacturers to install mandatory “kill switch” technology to deter thefts became law with Gov. Mark Dayton’s signature Wednesday.

“This is a very important step forward for protecting young people and protecting people of all ages,” Dayton said.

The law mandates that smartphone manufacturers equip their phones with the technology by July 1, 2015. The “kill switch” enables a smartphone owner to remotely disable a smartphone or tablet if it is lost or stolen, rendering the devices useless.

I carry an iPhone, which has the ability to be remotely disabled via my provisioning server. For me it’s a desired feature because I would like to render the device unusable should somebody steal it and, due to the fact that I have the feature tied to my provisioning server, the feature is entirely within my control. With that said, I do not want the inclusion of such a capability to be mandatory. There are a lot of legitimate reasons why an individual wouldn’t want such a capability.

First and foremost is that the capability will most commonly be in the hands of the phone manufacturer. Having somebody’s finger on your phone’s kill switch is generally a bad idea. Second if the ability to remotely kill a device exists in any form it’s possible that an unauthorized third-party will find a way to gain access to that feature. Political dissidents performing a protest probably don’t want devices that can be remotely disabled since there is always the possibility that the state they’re protesting against will pressure the manufacturer into disabling the dissidents’ devices.

And because this is a Minnesota bill it had to include an extra heap of stupidity:

The law also prohibits retailers from paying cash for used phones, rather than electronic transfer or check.

In other words if you sell your phone the government wants to know about it. This is just another step in the state’s desire to track all financial transactions. Like every previous step this one is being marketed as a method of help the people. But the first part of this legislation, the mandatory kill switch, renders the second part irrelevant because no retailer is going to buy a useless phone. So this part is entirely unnecessary in regards to protecting people against cell phone thefts.

The Level of Professionalism I Expect From the ATF

Yesterday morning people in Minneapolis who were traversing east on I-94 were in for delays. The police blocked off two lanes as it moved to arrest a man who reportedly brandished a firearm at another driver. As you can guess this headline got a few of the local gun control nuts riled up. This was exactly the event they were waiting for. One of those evil carry permit holders getting into a fit of road rage and threatening a fellow motorist with a firearm. Then the story was updated with information provided by the Minnesota State Patrol:

Police caught up to that driver on I-94 at Olson Hwy. and blocked two of the southbound lanes for a short time while making an arrest. That was enough to cause traffic to jam up back to West Broadway.

The State Patrol took the man with the gun into custody. He was questioned and released after officers learned he was an ATF agent who was carrying proper credentials.

Talk about a bummer. That update really killed the gun control nuts’ mojo (and I mean really killed it, as in the handful of comments I had collected to post here were tossed down the memory hole). But the update didn’t surprise me or any of my other gunnie friends. This is exactly the type of professionalism that we’ve come to expect from agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

But the real icing on the cake, in my opinion, was how quickly the situation was swept under the rug:

His name was not released per Minnesota State Statue 13.82, which states that data would reveal the identity of an undercover law enforcement officer can be kept private.

Had you or I been accused of the same thing we’d be rotting in a cage. But since the suspect is an agent of the ATF he was not only released but his name was kept private. Service to the state has its privileges.

Minnesota Legislature and Governor Dayton Strikes a Blow Against the Boys in Blue

The Minnesota legislature just struck a blow against our heroes in blue! With a swipe of his pen Governor Dayton has made it unlawful for police to keep confiscated property without a conviction:

In a big win for property rights and due process, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton signed a bill yesterday to curb an abusive—and little known—police practice called civil forfeiture. Unlike criminal forfeiture, under civil forfeiture someone does not have to be convicted of a crime, or even charged with one, to permanently lose his or her cash, car or home.

The newly signed legislation, SF 874, corrects that injustice. Now the government can only take property if it obtains a criminal conviction or its equivalent, like if a property owner pleads guilty to a crime or becomes an informant. The bill also shifts the burden of proof onto the government, where it rightfully belongs. Previously, if owners wanted to get their property back, they had to prove their property was not the instrument or proceeds of the charged drug crime. In other words, owners had to prove a negative in civil court. Being acquitted of the drug charge in criminal court did not matter to the forfeiture case in civil court.

Civil forfeiture is one of the best sources of police funding. By simply accusing an individual of wrongdoing the police could confiscate his or her property and sell it to fund their department. Now our boys in blue will be required to actually convict an accused individual in order to sell their property! It’s obvious what this will do to our fine state. Without profits from civil forfeiture the police departments won’t be able to afford as many guns, as much body armor, and an ever growing fleet of cruisers. How can we expect our heroes to keep up their record number of curb stompings, dog slayings, and no-knock raids at incorrect addresses if they can’t afford the equipment those jobs require? This is a travesty!

Sincerely,

Your friendly neighborhood statist.

The Statist Solution is Always More Government

Statists have to be some of the least creative individuals on the planet. For every problem that exists their only solution is more government. The current crusade being waged here in Minnesota is distracted drivers:

ST. PAUL, Minn. – It’s difficult for law enforcement to detect distracted drivers, but thanks to an effort that utilizes a school bus, a pair of Ramsey County Sheriff’s deputies lead a crackdown operation that started on Friday.

So we have men with badges and guns driving school buses in the hopes of finding a person looking at their phone so they can be issued a big fat citation. According to their logic:

Distracted driving is a growing problem in Minnesota.

No. The lack of self-driving automobiles is a growing problem in Minnesota (and everywhere else). With a little creativity we can solve the problem of people wanting to utilize their otherwise underutilized driving time by providing a technological solution. Self-driving automobiles would allow drivers to text, tweet, like things on Facebook, and search Craigslist for cheap furniture all while traveling to work, home, or somewhere else.

Instead of sinking resources into sending costume-clad men with guns to fine drivers why not invest those resources into developing more reliable systems for automating automobiles. Hell the damned things already exist and have performed phenomenally in trials. Why not pass legislation that legalizes the use of self-driving automobiles here in Minnesota? The quicker the technology is matured the quicker this problem ceases to be a problem.

Road Discrimination

One of the most common comebacks statists have when talking to anarchists is to ask who will build the roads. The thought being that only a violent gang could possibly manage to build and maintain transportation infrastructure. Whenever the idea of privatizing road construction or allowing local communities to handle the task statists say that such systems would mean the rich would enjoy good roads while the poor would have shitty roads. Apparently they believe that the state provides quality infrastructure to all. In other words statists have never looked at Minneapolis:

Minneapolis City Hall has one of two problems: Either it intentionally fixes the potholes of rich, white people faster than the potholes of poor, minority people, or the data-collection system it uses to perform basic functions is asleep on the job.

The background: Last week, the Star Tribune relied upon city data to conclude that City Hall responds more quickly to pothole complaints in wealthier, whiter areas of the city. The Department of Public Works rejects any claim of bias, and instead has tried to downplay the discrepancy as representing “strictly a paperwork process” (“Minneapolis fixes potholes citywide,” April 8).

It’s funny watching the state squirm when somebody actually looks at what it does. I just wish the Department of Public Works would be honest and explain why they give preference to wealthier neighborhoods. Wealthier people tend to make larger campaign contributions to politicians. That being the case the politicians are going to favor the wealthy. The wealthy purchased their government fair and square but the government doesn’t want to admit it because it wants to maintain the facade that it represents all people equally.

Minnesota Carry Permit Holders Almost Doubled in 2013 Compared to 2012

Carry permits appear to be getting more popular in this frozen tundra commonly referred to as Minnesota. Last year the number of permits issued was almost double of the number of permits issued in 2012:

Minnesota sheriffs’ offices issued almost double the number of permits to carry handguns in 2013 than they had the year before, according to figures released by the state Friday. It was the largest number since the state’s permit-to-carry law was enacted in 2003.

As of Friday, more than 165,000 people had valid permits to carry guns in Minnesota, according to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

So what does this mean for Minnesota? Contrary to what gun control advocates have been claiming for ages, the Mississippi isn’t running red with blood. For the most part nothing really appears to be changing in this state. It seems rational adults don’t turn into blood thirsty monsters after they receive legal permission to carry a firearm.

What this increase in issued permits likely means is a slow cultural shift. Firearms seem to be regaining their status in American culture. This is a good thing as it may also indicate a cultural shift, however small, towards decentralization. Instead of relying primarily on centralized police departments to provide defense many people are beginning to provide for their own defense. I would like to see this attitude spread into other areas as well. The less centralized our culture becomes the less apt to widespread failure it will be.