Chronicling the depravities of the State.
A short but sweet letter to the Editor I found on Dvorak Uncensored:
To the Editor:
I object and take exception to everyone saying that Obama and Congress are spending money like a drunken sailor. As a former drunken sailor, I quit when I ran out of money.
Bruce L. Hargraves
USN Retired
Worland
I’ve mentioned Tom Emmers on this site before. He got the nod from the G.O.P. to be their endorsed candidate for Minnesota governor. I have mixed feelings because overall Emmers is a pro-liberty guy. Sadly he recently stated Arizona’s new illegal immigration law was a good first step. I’ve mentioned my issues with that law but alas it is what it is.
On Facebook I have several hardcore D.F.L. friends. I see they are starting the mud slinging already now that Emmers has the nomination. Well this is the one they all posted yesterday:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULalnzQ6M5A&feature=fvw]
If that’s the best they have they’re in trouble. Frankly I think it’s hilarious and it makes me want to vote for the man. I’ve been through countless meetings in my life that made no sense and were boring as Hell. I’d have given anything for a CD player and easily concealed ear buds.
It’s videos like this that make me like Emmers because it shows three things: he’s not a politician, he likes to play things his own way (in other words he has a backbone), and he’s human. Seriously D.F.L.ers you’re going to need better mud to sling than this if you want to dirty Emmers’ image.
Politicians in every country try to put on a good face. Well as Gordon Brown just learned if you’re going to bad mouth somebody when you get into your car you may want to remove that wireless microphone first. Credit goes to this week’s episode of No Agenda for this second a slight humor.
There has been a lot of hullabaloo over Arizona’s new law that has claimed to give police the right to ask for your papers so to speak. With all the hysteria surrounding the bill I decided to go read the bill for myself. I’m not a lawyer but I can generally derive laws from text to an extent. It didn’t take long for me to find the clause that’s causing all the uproar:
B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).
Talk about vague. I found nothing else in this bill that specifies what lawful contact means, what reasonable suspicion means (usually it’s a cheap cop out that gives officers the authority to make up any old reason for searching your person or vehicle), or what they mean by when practicable.
I believe there are always grounds for concern when vague laws are passed. With the wording present seems to make it perfectly legal for an officer to walk up to you and ask for your papers. As no guidelines are in the bill restricting what “reasonable suspicion” is the officer can pretty much make up any old excuse (the suspect was talking in Spanish, etc.). After carousing through the entire bill I can say that yes this is a horrible piece of legislation based on the above mentioned clause.
This law enacts a guilty until proven innocent clause. According the the Supreme Court case Coffin v. United States (and common sense):
The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law.
The entire text of the decision can be read here. It’s a good read as it does go over the history of presumption of innocence. And that is my major quarrel with Arizona’s new law. It violates the basic idea that a person is presumed innocent. Remember no proof of a crime needs to exist for an officer to ask for your papers, just reasonable suspicion (which could be anything really).
Whether you want stronger immigration laws and/or stricter laws against illegal aliens in this country I think you can agree that assuming guilt is no sane way to approach this topic in a free country (and if you think the idea of guilty until proven innocent is a good idea may I suggest moving to China). A person should never have to be assumed guilty without hard evidence collected tying them to the said crime. Having “reasonable suspicion” isn’t hard evidence nor does it constitute an investigation. It just means the officer had a hunch or gut feeling and was able to articulate it well enough to be considered “reasonable” (reasonable of course being different depending on the person you talk to).
Personally I think this is a horrible law that goes against the very ideas this country’s justice system is founded on.
I’m guessing most people reading this site don’t remember the ’80’s cyberpunk T.V. show Max Headroom. It was a great, although very short lived, show dealing with all sorts of technological issues. One thing that was prominent in the future were body banks. Body banks were where dead people were shipped to and their organs sold off for sale.
Well Uncle informs us that New York may be going that route. If Assemblyman Brodsky has his way you will become state property upon death and your organs will be dispersed.
Now I’m all for donating your organs upon death but this is outrageous. The state would be laying claim to your body making you property of the government. I’m sorry but if somebody doesn’t want to donate their organs when they die that’s their own damned business.
Governor Culver will be signing Senate File 2379 making Iowa a “shall issue” state. Welcome to the civilized world guys and gals of Iowa! The signing ceremony will be on April 29th at 9:00.
Then I might watch C-SPAN. From a political debate taking place in Ukraine:
The chamber’s speaker had to be shielded by umbrellas as he was pelted with eggs, while smoke bombs exploded and politicians brawled.
Enough said.
Snowflakes in Hell brings us an article that explains Super Douche Mayor Bloomberg’s “gun show loophole” bill he’s been pushing through a recent national campaign. You know what the most important detail is though? The bill goes well beyond gun show regulations:
Or consider a licensed firearms dealer who never sets foot inside a gun show. He conducts all his sales from his store. The Bloomberg bill hugely increases various prison terms that can be imposed on licensed dealers. This has nothing to do with gun shows.
And of course this bill has nothing to do with any loophole either but is in essence a bill meant to stop gun shows in this country all together:
For example, gun show promoters do not sell guns. The promoters just operate the shows, renting table space to the people who do sell guns. The Bloomberg bill would give the U.S. attorney general unlimited power to impose fees and regulations on gun show operators. An anti-gun attorney general could make the fees so exorbitant that no one could operate a gun show. Extremely complex and time-consuming registration forms that would have to be filled out every week could also drive gun shows out of business.
So that’s how he plans to fix the improperly named “loophole.” No gun show, no problem apparently. This is how anti-gunners have to do things. They claim there is a problem and then they make a law that doesn’t address the problem itself but attempts to completely ban everything related to their believed problem.
I’ve addressed the fact that there is no gun show loophole. What the anti-gunners are trying to eliminate are property rights. Under current United States law (which can be different from state to state, I’m talking federal here) if you want to sell one of your guns you can, no problem. What Super Douche Bloomberg and his posse want is to require all gun sales, including private ones, to go through the NICS. Of course they also know that only federally licensed dealers can access the NICS and hence this bill would eliminate your right to sell a firearm that you own unless you pay a third party (a federally licensed dealer) to perform a NICS check and transfer. How would you like it if you had to go to a third party and pay them a fee in order to get permission to sell your car, television, table, or home? It doesn’t sound like a good thing when put into that context does it?
Make no mistake, Super Douche doesn’t hate guns he hates your right to do day to day tasks without being dependent on the government. To put it nicely he’s a power hungry control freak.
I have three Glocks: a 30SF, a 21SF, and a 17. The 30SF came with a serrated trigger which I didn’t like (it cause discomfort for my trigger finger) so I replaced the trigger bar with a 21SF trigger bar which is smooth faced. Likewise the 17 trigger is smooth faced. I’ve been trying to figure out why some Glocks come with serrated triggers while others come with smooth triggers. It seemed rather random (being I only have three guns to obtain data from). Well I finally figured this out thanks to a thread on GlockTalk.
When a pistol gets important into the country it needs to get 75 points on the BATFE point system. One of the points is for having a target trigger. A target trigger is a fancy way of saying a serrated trigger apparently. Other points are awarded for things like size, caliber, action, etc.
Compact Glocks don’t have enough points to get important into the country due to their size. In order to make the required points Glock throws a target trigger into their compact guns (they also put adjustable sights on but those are swapped off for fixed ones when they arrive in America). The point system is also the reason for the thumb groves on the grip (that makes it a target grip apparently).
When the Brady Bunch and their minions claim the firearms industry is practically unregulated remember bullshit laws like this.
The NRA is reporting that you now have constitutional carry. Good job! Now just wait for the anti-gunners to proclaim that Arizona will be different than Vermont and Alaska in that blood will flow through the streets, etc., etc.