Tag: Politics

Department of Justice Officials a Bit Worried

It appears as though the administrators in the Department of Justice (DoJ) are a bit worried over the investigation into the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) smuggling guns into Mexico:

Officials at the Department of Justice are in “panic mode,” according to multiple sources, as word spreads that congressional testimony next week will paint a bleak and humiliating picture of Operation Fast and Furious, the botched undercover operation that left a trail of blood from Mexico to Washington, D.C.

I can understand why they’re in “panic mode.” The DoJ is a government organization that has been caught doing something illegal and trying to blame somebody else. Whenever government agencies get caught in such a situation they can look forward to a very stern talking to by our “representatives” and possible a threat involving not specific punishment if the department gets caught again.

Although I think the hearings will be interesting I doubt much will come of it. The government doesn’t exactly have a history of punishing departments that get caught doing illegal things. Honestly it appears as through the government’s job is to create a situation, blame somebody else for the situation, and then swoop in and claim they are the only means of fixing the situation. Considering this point it’s likely the DoJ will get a public talking to about how they shouldn’t have done this and an accommodation for a job well done behind the curtain. Yes I’m cynical but I think I have good reasons for being so.

Another Reason Florida’s Ban on Doctors Talking About Guns is Stupid

I’ve already stated that I think Florida’s law banning doctors from talking about guns is stupid. Not only does such a law crap all over the first amendment right to free speech but it also gags doctors who are gunnies like us. How are you and your doctor supposed to talk about last week’s shooting match you both attended if doing so will cause said doctor to lose his license to practice medicine?

Any law that prohibits free speech in any way is a bad law. The practice of speech goes both ways as you always have people both against and in favor of various things. By discriminating against a group of people two things have been accomplished; we have potentially alienated that group for supporting our side and we’ve made hypocrites of ourselves by claiming we support rights but then turning around and working against them. Florida’s law does nothing to help us (as no evidence was ever brought forth that doctors were conspiring to create a backdoor gun registry) and does a lot of make our movement look bad by making us appear as hypocrites.

Wisconsin Carry Plan B

Wisconsin remains one of only two states in the Union that doesn’t allow citizens some form of concealed carry. Although pro-rights activists have been trying to fix this a certain previous governor enjoyed the use of veto power to ensure the serfs remained unable to defend themselves. The hope this time around is that Governor Walker won’t be as big of a fucking idiot as former Governor Doyle and thus concealed carry legislation will finally pass in Wisconsin.

The first bill attempted was the best of all worlds and would allow people living in Wisconsin to carry as a right without any required government permission. It appears as though that bill can’t pass thus the backup plan is being enacted which is the same bill but would required people in Wisconsin to get a permit in order to carry. It sounds like this bill may have enough support to get through and by the sounds of it Governor Walker is in support of Wisconsin residences being able to defend themselves. Here’s hoping the people in Wisconsin soon have the same rights as people living in a majority of the other states in the Union.

Doctors Suing Over Florida Law Against Them Asking About Firearms

A short while back a Florida law was passed that barred doctors from asking patients whether or not they owned firearms. I posted about disagreement with this law on the grounds that it prohibits free speech. It appears as through some Florida doctors agree with me and are now suing on grounds that the law violates their right to free speech:

Physicians and the Florida Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics sued Florida Gov. Rick Scott, claiming the “Physician Gag Law” he signed last week unconstitutionally bars doctors from asking patients simple questions about guns and gun safety, and threatens them with loss of their medical licenses if they do so. More than 170 Florida children die each year from gunshots.

Three Florida doctors sued the governor and four other top Florida officials in Miami Federal Court. The plaintiff doctors are joined by the Florida Chapters of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Physicians.

Unfortunately I find myself in agreement with these doctors. Prohibiting somebody from asking another questions is a form of censorship. If a doctor wishes to ask me if I own firearms that’s their right and it’s my right to tell them where to stick their question. Should the doctor continue with his inquiry I can find another doctor to provide my medical needs. What I don’t agree with are some of the claims being made by the doctors:

The physicians say the dangers are elevated in Florida, which has a higher level of gun ownership than the national average: “Firearms pose particular risks in households with children. Every day in America 65 children and teens are shot with firearms, and eight of them die. One third of U.S. homes with children younger than eighteen have a firearm. More than 40 percent of gun-owning households with children store their guns unlocked and one quarter of those homes store them loaded.

Anti-gunners spout statistics like this often and then you find out that their definition of a child is a person between 0 and 25 years of age or some other absurd stretch. There is no justifiable reason why a physician needs to know whether or not I own firearms and they shouldn’t be making claims that such information is important to them. I will agree that they have the freedom to ask whether or not I own firearms but they certainly have no reason to know such information.

Herman Cain OK With Restricting Second Amendment Rights

I think Herman Cain just got caught in a typical neo-con mistake; he tried expressing a libertarian belief without understanding libertarian philosophy. In a recent interview with Wolf Blitzer Mr. Cain stated that he believes it’s OK for individual states to enact gun control regulations:

BLITZER: How about gun control?

CAIN: I support the 2nd amendment.

B: So what’s the answer on gun control?

C: The answer is I support, strongly support, the 2nd amendment. I don’t support onerous legislation that’s going to restrict people’s rights in order to be able to protect themselves as guaranteed by the 2nd amendment.

B: Should states or local government be allowed to control guns, the gun situation, or should…

C: Yes

B: Yes?

C: Yes.

B: So the answer is yes?

C: The answer is yes, that should be a state’s decision.

This is a typical neo-con maneuver. Neo-cons love to pander to the libertarians because they feel giving those of us subscribing to the philosophy are easy votes to get. The problem is most of us are used to those running as Republicans paying lip service to libertarian philosophy and then going full neo-con when they get elected.

Ignoring the recent Super Court ruling in McDonald vs. Chicago libertarian philosophy would prohibition any government entity from interfering with the right to own a consumer good. A firearm ultimately is a consumer good and my ownership of that good doesn’t cause harm to another therefore no regulation should exist that bars me from owning a firearm. Mr. Cain took a concept often discussed favorably by libertarians, stopping the federal government from executing any power not specifically granted in the Constitution, and tried to use it in an attempt to avoid stating concrete support of the second amendment.

I already refused to support Mr. Cain as he was involved with the Federal Reserve but hearing his position on the second amendment just put another nail in the coffin of my support. The position he stated shows that Mr. Cain is going to play the typical neo-con game where he’ll pay lip service to libertarian ideals but deep down inside is just another statist.

The United Nations Summed Up

I think Uncle summed up the problem with the United Nations perfectly:

The UN says internet access is a human right. Right to self-defense, nope. Right not to be raped, nope. But free ice cream, yup.

The United Nations is perfectly fine with saying things that must be provided to you by a third party are rights. This makes no sense because a right by definition is something that can’t be taken from you. People who subscribe to the libertarian philosophy believe in the natural right to self-ownership. This is because you own yourself and that ownership of yourself can not be taken away as you have free will even as a slave (you can attempt to escape for instance). In the United States the Constitution guarantees a set of rights but as they are rights for which the government is supposed to be prohibited from interfering with the government decided to go ahead and interfere with them. Either way a right is something that is exercisable withing interference.

The problem for many comes in when they claim something they can’t provide themselves is a right. For instance some people claim healthcare is a right but for that to be true access to healthcare can’t be interfered with. Those who support the idea of healthcare being a right demand government provided healthcare solutions because they hope it will remove any potential interference that could come between a person and their “right” to receiving healthcare. What these people don’t stop to realize is the fact that a right to healthcare also requires medical practitioners. Thus the only way to make healthcare a right is to force medial practitioners to provide healthcare which essentially makes those in the medical field slaves. If the government wishes to make healthcare a right they must force enough people to be doctors and then force those doctors to work on people.

This is the problem with the whole concept of positive rights, you must make slaves out of a portion of the population to guarantee those “rights.”

Yet Another Excuse By the Government to Stay in Afghanistan

The United States love to invade countries and then stick around even after the “mission” is completed. It seems that the government is now grasping at straws trying to find a reason to continue staying in Afghanistan even though the war there isn’t all that popular here at home. Fresh off of the press is the new excuse that Afghanistan could face an economic depression if the troops leave:

It calls for better use of the roughly $320m (£195m) in foreign aid the US spends every month in Afghanistan, with a focus on sustainability.

It concludes that misspent foreign aid can result in corruption.

First of all I don’t know why we send money taken from American citizens through force by the government to other countries. Since the government put a gun to our heads the least they could do is keep the money here. Second… foreign aid can result in corruption? No shit. In other news water is wet and most politicians are assholes.

It can also alter markets and undercut the ability of the Afghan government to control its resources.

“Afghanistan could suffer a severe economic depression when foreign troops leave in 2014 unless the proper planning begins now,” the report says.

Basically 2014 will roll around and our government will make some claim that we must keep our troops there a while longer in order to prevent economic disaster. It’s a poor excuse but the government doesn’t know how to make any other type of excuses.

Did Somebody Say Corruption

I have a love hate relationship going with Texas. On one hand the state is one of the few that is willing to stand up to the federal government, until they fold at least, but on the other hand they enact many authoritarian rules. Take for instance the latest executive order issued by Texas governor Rick Perry which will require all girls entering to sixth grade to get the Gardasil vaccination.

This is a major problem for three reasons; first the governor used his executive order powers to enact this and bypassed the legislation, second this occurred shortly after a doubling of lobbying efforts, and third Gardasil has been linked to paralysis. Let’s first talk about the lobbying effort that preceded this executive order:

Perry has ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company’s three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry’s former chief of staff. His current chief of staff’s mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.

The governor also received $6,000 from Merck’s political action committee during his re-election campaign.

The order is effective until Perry or a successor changes it, and the Legislature has no authority to repeal it, said Perry spokeswoman Krista Moody. Moody said the Texas Constitution permits the governor, as head of the executive branch, to order other members of the executive branch to adopt rules like this one.

So it seems governor Perry received a fair bit of money from Merck which causes this entire situation to reek of corruption. Fuck the whole idea of parents having a right to chose what is put into their childrens’ bodies and fuck the possibility that this drug could cause paralysis. If I lived in Texas I’d honestly consider this action an abuse of power and look into what is needed to perform a recall on the governor. The story claims the only means of overturning this executive order is if he successor removes it thus is seems pertinent to remove the current governor as soon as humanly possible. Of course if you can make a religious or philosophical reason against jacking your kids with this shit you could get an opt-out:

Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit objecting to the vaccine on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents’ rights to make medical decisions for their children.

I wonder if parents can opt-out because the drug is potentially dangerous? That’s not a religious or philosophical reason but just common-fucking-sense. Just remember that the nanny state knows what’s best for you and your children so shut up and take the damned vaccine. If the vaccine causes your child to be unable to move afterward well that’s your problem not the state’s.

California Trying to Push Out More Businesses

Seriously are the legislators in California retarded? Don’t answer that, I already know the answer is yet. It just seems that at some point in California’s recent history the lawmakers there would have learned something. Apparently not as California’s economy is going down the tubes faster than an unwanted pregnancy on prom night and that doesn’t seem to be fast enough for their government. With rising unemployment and businesses fleeing the state the politicians in the Assembly just passed a law that would tax online retailers:

The state of California could collect more than $1 billion a year by taxing Amazon and other online retailers if a bill approved by the Assembly becomes law.

Of course this won’t bring in $1 billion a year as companies would have to stay in California to pay which they’re not going to do. Amazon has already left states that have attempted to extract tax dollars from them.

In order for this law to make money California is going to have to go full socialist and ban anybody from leaving the state without government approval. If California wants to make money they’re going to have to create a business friendly environment where companies can flourish instead of being trampled by the boots of government interference.

If you live in that forsaken state it would be wise to get out now before the prevent you from doing so.

Another Reason You Can’t Rely On State Rescue Services

I get pissed at the actions of various state run entities periodically on this site but I think I’ve found a story that really takes the cake. You know how us gunnies say you can’t rely on the police? Well you can’t rely on any state run service, especially when you’re worth more to them dead than alive. It seems the Interim Alameda Fire Department was to let somebody die because they were pissy about budget cuts:

Fire crews and police could only watch after a man waded into San Francisco Bay, stood up to his neck and waited. They wanted to do something, but a policy tied to earlier budget cuts strictly forbade them from trying to save the 50-year-old, officials said.

A witness finally pulled the apparently suicidal man’s lifeless body from the 54-degree water.

It’s too bad the witness didn’t act sooner but alas at least that individuals eventually did something unlike the members of the Fire Department who supposedly are given the duty to help others. So why didn’t the firefighters do anything?

Interim Alameda Fire Chief Mike D’Orazi said that due to 2009 budget cuts his crews did not have the training or cold-water gear to go into the water.

“The incident yesterday was deeply regrettable,” he said Tuesday. “But I can also see it from our firefighters’ perspective. They’re standing there wanting to do something, but they are handcuffed by policy at that point.”

Bull. Fucking. Shit. A completely untrained witness with no equipment whatsoever was able to get the body out of the water so you fucks certainly could have done it. You don’t need much training or gear to wade into water, even cold water, and drag a man out. Hell people plunge into freezing cold water in my area for charity (Polar Bear Plunge) so you assholes certainly could jump into water that isn’t critically cold. Of course the local government caved to the Fire Department’s demands:

But Tuesday night, after hearing from angry residents at a City Council meeting, the city promised to spend up to $40,000 to certify 16 firefighters in land-based water rescues, KGO-TV reported.

I can’t even begin to tell you how pissed off I am that those members of the Fire Department allowed somebody to die just to make a point about funding. Fuck all of the firefighters who stood by and did nothing. I wouldn’t have given you $40,000, I have fired the whole lot of you and asked the witness who dragged the body out if he or she wanted a job in firefighting. Also let me give a big fuck you to the other witnesses who stood by and did nothing.

Instead the Fire Department received their money and now know they can gain more funding by simply letting people die. That’s not a good precedence to set ladies and gentlemen.