Tag: Politics

Arizona Intrastate Commerce Act

Arizona is working diligently to piss off the federal government. Honestly anybody willing to piss of the federal government is OK in my book and this new bill introduced in Arizona should really do the trick if passed. Several states have passed Firearm Freedom Acts.

Congress uses their power to “regulate interstate commerce” (which means something completely different than “abuse the shit out of your power” but alas) to justify gun control legislation. Justification is made stating guns traveling across state lines are interstate commerce and therefore subject to federal laws. Firearm Freedom Acts state any firearm manufactured, sold, and used exclusively in a state are exempt from federal laws since no interstate commerce took place.

I’ve often asked why these laws are written exclusively for firearms. When I was caucusing last election cycle we had an opportunity to present new platform agendas. The agenda I suggested was basically Arizona’s Intrastate Commerce Act. Obviously it didn’t go anywhere since most people at the caucus are a bunch of authoritarian neo-cons who can’t conceive of a law that would effectively enforce constitutional limits to Congress’s authority. If passed Arizona’s law:

SB 1178 will amend the Arizona Revised Statutes in order to provide that all goods grown, manufactured or made in Arizona and all services performed in Arizona, when such goods or services are sold, maintained, or retained in Arizona, shall not be subject to the authority of the Congress of the United States under its constitutional power to regulate commerce.

So it’s the Firearms Freedom Act applied to all goods and services manufactured, sold, and exclusively used in Arizona. Sounds like a good idea to me. Frankly I’m really enjoying this small surge in states telling the federal government to sod off.

That’s Why Mubarak Stuck Around So Long

As those of you who read this site Friday know I was a little confused on why Mubarak was trying to cling to his power when so many people wanted him out. Well a potential reason could be he was trying to move all that money the United States government has been giving him before he left office:

Hosni Mubarak used the 18 days it took for protesters to topple him to shift his vast wealth into untraceable accounts overseas, Western intelligence sources have said.

How much money you ask? Quite a bit:

The former Egyptian president is accused of amassing a fortune of more than £3 billion – although some suggest it could be as much as £40 billion – during his 30 years in power. It is claimed his wealth was tied up in foreign banks, investments, bullion and properties in London, New York, Paris and Beverly Hills.

Much of that came from the American tax payers because our country likes to fund dictators and call it foreign aid. I think Ron Paul put it well when he said “Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of rich counties and giving it to the rich people of poor countries.”

Switzerland Votes to Keep Guns at Home

The anti-gunners in Switzerland have been pushing to bar those performing militia service from keeping their issued rifle at home. Somehow these anti-gun prats were able to get a referendum on the ballot which failed:

Neutral Switzerland is among the best-armed nations in the world, with more guns per capita than almost any other country except the U.S., Finland and Yemen.

At least 2.3 million weapons lie stashed in basements, cupboards and lofts in this country of less than 8 million people, according to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey.

On Sunday, Swiss voters made sure it stays that way, rejecting a proposal to tighten the peaceful Alpine nation’s relaxed firearms laws.

Unlike here Switzerland has mostly a homogeneous and wealthy population meaning their violent crime is quite a bit lower than ours. Due to this the anti-gunners there can’t make the claim that guns cause crime so they have to resort to a different tactic, claiming guns cause suicidal tenancies and trying to establish a connection between these guns and domestic abused:

Martine Brunschwig-Graf, a national lawmaker with the left-of-centre Social Democratic Party, blamed the defeat of the measure on women’s reluctance to vote on an issue she says affects them most.

Women are the main victims of domestic violence, and are also the ones left behind when their fathers, husbands or boyfriends commit suicide with an army weapon, she said.

About a quarter of Switzerland’s 1,300 suicides each year involve a gun, and those calling for tighter rules claim military weapons, such as the army-issued SG 550 assault rifle, are used in between 100 and 200 suicides a year.

Also apparently it’s the fault of Swiss women for not showing up and voting on this measure that caused it to fail. Of course only men perform mandatory service in the Swiss militia so it makes sense that a higher portion of men would show up to vote on this particular subject.

I’m glad to see the Swiss people are still willing to fight for their right to keep and bear arms. I love being able to point to at least one well armed European country. I like the fact that there exists a homogeneous and mostly wealthy population that’s well armed, it demonstrates that gun ownership rates do not have a correlation with violent crime.

Of course when I bring up Switzerland in an argument with an anti-gunner they always claim the country is a corner case just like Finland. I guess that’s what you have to resort to when your argument has no legs to stand upon.

An Interesting Conundrum

Wyoming’s House of Representatives just passed a law that would bar employers from firing employees for storing their carry piece in their car while it’s parked on their employer’s property. Many states already have similar laws in place.

This may come as a shock to some people but I really don’t like these laws. No I’m not all of the sudden going to spout bullshit that some forms of gun control are necessary, instead I’m going to proclaim my hatred for government telling property owners what they can and can’t do on their own property.

If this law had applied only to government entities I’d be all for it. The problem is it applies to private land owners. When I own a piece of property then I can make the rules, that’s what we call private property rights. The second somebody comes along as begins to tell me what I can and can’t do on my own property (so long as it doesn’t harm another person or damage their property) it is no longer my property.

Although I find the right to keep and bear arms absolute I also find the right of private property absolute. If somebody doesn’t want me to have a firearm on their property that’s their business and right as property owner. I’m sure this isn’t exactly a popular opinion to have with many of my readers but alas most of us who fight for the right to keep and bear arms also advocate for government leaving us alone. Once we allow and condone any government action of regulating private property we open the flood gates for them to do even more regulating.

Good Problems to Have

This whole “constitutional carry” movement seems to be picking up speed. Wyoming has a bill moving through their legislature, a Tennessee representative just introduced such legislation in his state, and now New Hampshire has not just one but two competing constitutional carry bills:

Competing bills have been filed to eliminate New Hampshire’s license requirement for carrying concealed weapons, dividing the pro gun community. Some are lining up behind state Rep. J.R. Hoell, a Dunbarton Republican, and others behind state Rep. Jennifer Coffey, a Republican from Andover.

Man I would love to have that problem here in Minnesota.

As a side note let me just raise a big middle finger to Seacoast Online whom is the source in the NRA-ILA article I linked to. Usually I try to link to both the source I obtained my information from as well as the original source of the information. I didn’t do that here because Seacoast Online are asses. When the page was loading I saw the article for a split second (long enough to read the first sentence) before it disappeared. Why did it disappear? So the page could display a message telling me to enable JavaScript.

I use NoScript to only allow sites I trust to run JavaScript. This saves a ton of headaches online including those stupid advertisements that appears over articles in some web pages (not separate pop-up windows but inside the windows the page is displayed in) among other malicious activity. Some pages need JavaScript because they are poorly made, I get that. But when a page can display the article without JavaScript and chooses to hide it after the page completely loads that’s just inexcusable. Serious dick move there guys.

Renewal of PATRIOT Act Provisions Fails in House Vote

Although nobody was paying attention anyways I thought I’d let you know that the attempt to fast-track renewals of certain provisions of the PATRIOT Act failed in a House vote last evening. If this were a landslide vote I’d have had a bit more confidence in our “representatives” but it narrowly failed to achieve the 290 votes by a mere 13.

The three clauses that are up for renewal are first the provision that allows the FBI to perform warrantless wiretaps, second the provision that allows the government access to any desired records on your person, and third the provision that allows the FBI to place people under surveillance who have no known ties to terrorist organizations.

This doesn’t mean the PATRIOT Act is dead. In fact the White House would prefer to have the three provisions extended until 2013:

The White House on Tuesday said in a statement that it “does not object” to extending the three Patriot Act provisions until December 2011 although it “would strongly prefer” an extension until December 2013, noting that the longer timeline “provides the necessary certainty and predictability” that law enforcement agencies require while at the same time ensuring congressional oversight by maintaining a sunset.

Hope and change ladies and gentlemen. The House and Senate both have competing bills for renewing these provisions of the PATRIOT Act. In face one of our all time favorite “representatives,” Feinstien, is on the case to rape your rights:

In addition to the House legislation, the Senate is considering three competing timelines, including proposals that would permanently extend the three provisions or extend them through 2013. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), both of whom have introduced competing proposals, said Monday that committee members continue to work toward an agreement but declined to speculate as to the end result.

Surprised? I didn’t think so.

Stay Classy Chrysler

You know what’s classy? Running a $9 million ad during the super bowl and then turning around and asking for more taxpayer dollars to continue bailing out your failed business:

“I am paying shyster rates,” Marchionne said, noting that Chrysler had no choice in 2009 but to pay the high interest rates the government set as part of its $15 billion Chrysler bailout. “We had no choice… I am going to pay the shyster loans.”

He called the loans “a thorn in my side.”

Chrysler’s also in talks with banks to refinance its debt and plans to have an “agreement in principle” by end of March, he said.

Marchionne spoke at an auto industry conference sponsored by JD Power at a hotel here ahead of the National Automobile Dealers Association three-day convention. He said he is hopeful that the company can win an agreement in principle for $3 billion in low-cost Energy Department retooling loan — a move that is necessary for Chrysler to win private financing, Marchionne said.

Emphasis mine. How about we just let Chrysler go bankrupt to some more competent company can buy up their assets and product cars that people of the world actually want to buy?

Why Minnesota’s Economy is in the Tank

I’m sure many of you have heard of Surly Brewing Corporation. They are a local Minnesota brewery who makes some might find beer. Yesterday they announced plans to for a $20 million expansion that would include a restaurant and beer garden. This sounded great to me as it would create some great private sector jobs in this state which are sorely needed.

Well it would be great except for the fact that Surly can’t start construction because of currently existing legislation. Once again the government is getting in the way of private enterprises. So what is this legislation? Well, in Minnesota, only small breweries are allowed to sell beer for on-site consumption. Once you get beyond an arbitrary size you are no longer allowed to run a restaurant and a brewery because that would just make too much sense (you know there was a special interest bar lobby that pushed this to avoid competition with local breweries).

Once again instead of just being able to go about legitimate business a private company has to hire a lobbying firm in the hopes of getting a stupid law repealed. If the law can be repealed then said the legitimate business can actually go about helping the local economy by creating new positions for the currently unemployed. No wonder Minnesota’s economy is in the tank, legitimate businesses aren’t allowed to actually do business.

More Red Star Stupidity

Yet another Letter to the Editor dealing with guns finds its way into the Red Star. This one was written by a Mark Weber of Minneapolis and thankfully it’s short:

Those who agree with the Feb. 4 letter writer who touted a safety record of 65 million gun owners not killing anyone must take great comfort in the fact that a very high percentage of people driving under the influence of alcohol make it to their destination without causing a traffic fatality.

I absolutely love this complete failure at attempting to use logic. He tries to compare owning a firearm with driving under the influence. This argument doesn’t make any sense for the simple reason that owning a firearm is perfectly legal for most people while driving under the influence is never legal. Comparing completely unrelated things doesn’t make for a good argument.

I’ll give it a try myself and you tell me if it makes sense. Those who touted a safety record of 65 million gun owners not killing anybody must take great comfort int he fact that unicorns are eaten by trolls. If I were to enter a debate with you and use that argument you’d probably just (rightfully) declare yourself the victor and walk away.

Driving under the influence would be akin to a felon purchasing a firearm which will remain illegal even if Minnesota repeals it’s ridiculous permit to purchase law. You know why? Because the federal background check will still be performed and thus known felons will be denied the ability to purchase said firearm. I can’t wrap my head around the whole idea that somebody would actually listen to some of these people and nod their head in agreement.

White House Delays Requirement of Reporting Near-Border Gun Purchases

It seems the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) didn’t get what they wanted from the White House. Word came down that the executive branch of our federal government has delayed the reporting requirement:

White House budget officials dealt federal firearms investigators a setback Friday when they rejected an emergency request for a rule meant to help catch gunrunners to Mexico.

There are two things that are interesting about this situation. First it seems this ruling would establish a restriction of your right to privacy depending on where you decided to live. That is to say people near the border of Mexico have less of a right to privacy than somebody living in Washington. Double standards are so much fun. The second thing of interest is the fact the ruling is asking for the impossible:

The decision delays for at least two months a proposed requirement that gun dealers along the Mexican border report anyone who buys two or more assault weapons in five days. White House officials said the delay will give the public more time – until Feb. 14 – to comment on the proposal.

How can you report on something that doesn’t exist? The term “assault weapon” isn’t an actual classification of any firearm type I’ve heard of.