Category Archives: authoritarian swine

A Mass Shooting Solution?

I ran across a peculiar column last week, but I held off commenting on it.

Mass Shootings: If No One Else Will Offer a Solution, I Will
While everyone is screaming to ban “weapons of war” or whatever the ridiculous phrase du jour is, nobody is offering any kind of solution. We keep saying we need to “have real conversations about mental health,” but we never do. So if we’re not going to ban firearms or have a kumbaya drum circle for mental health, and if no one else is going to offer a solution, I will.

That’s right, yours truly has a policy idea that might move us in the right direction. Because I am going out on a limb here, I’ll go ahead and say that I welcome other ideas, influences, and perspectives. All I ask is that we keep the disagreements civil when we comment down below. Lastly, I use the word “firearm” to cover any weapon that relies on a firing pin, as well as ammunition with a percussion primer. With this definition, make, model, or capacity does not matter.

The reason I held back is this proposal confused the heck out me. It appears at PJ Media, which is a fairly conservative outlet with — usually — a firm grounding in the Constitution and reality. Ashley McCully appears to be a regular contributor.

By McCully’s proposal is anything but Constitution- and reality-based. Before I tore her a figurative new one, I considered the possibiltiy that this is satire. The law she proposes reads like a far-left Dimocrat wishlist; it’s a thoroughly impractical, immoral, and unconstitutional rape of rights.

On the other hand we have the column’s URL: a-modest-proposal-to-prevent-mass-shootings-and-preserve-gun-rights-n1738194

That certainly hearkens back to the very model of literary satire. But was she writing satire, or did an editor pick that URL to poke fun at her “serious” proposal?

I attempted to contact her, but heard nothing for days. So I’m going assume that she meant what she said.

Here goes.

Regardless of how the firearm is purchased, gifted, bequeathed, or obtained, the individual taking receipt of the firearm must present a written statement from a licensed mental health professional endorsing the requesting individual as mentally stable and competent enough to possess a firearm.

That’s an interesting take on the Second Amendment, apparently now reading A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people who have been medically approved to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Up yours, Ashley. And you might want to run your idea past Clarence Thomas, because that requirement is a massive fail on the BRUEN test of “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

She’d be hard pressed to find and such law in our national tradition, seeing as how the very field of “psychology” didn’t exist until 1854, and didn’t get rolling in the United States until around 1875. And medical licensing? That wasn’t really a thing until the 1870s. And the first actually restrictive medical licensing law was passed in 1881, and only upheld by the Supreme Court in 1889.

In the event an individual is deemed mentally unstable and/or incompetent to possess a firearm by a licensed health professional, then it will also be deemed reasonable to search any and all property of the individual by law enforcement for the sole purpose of identifying and seizing deadly weapons, to include firearms. The written diagnosis by a licensed mental health professional will be declared suitable for probable cause for a warrant to be issued.

There are a couple of problems here. Begging permission to obtain a firearm, and failing to get that permission, is probable cause to ransack a home for the firearm he didn’t get?!

And currently, it would be a HIPAA violation for that licensed mental health professional to voluntarily forward that personal health information, the diagnosis, to the cops. You’ll need to amend 45 CFR 164.512(f)(1)(i)), too, Ashely.

But that’s moot; because no sane mental health pro is going to issue certification.

If the requesting individual commits any crime with a firearm, the license of the endorsing mental health professional will be suspended throughout the criminal investigation. If the requesting individual is found guilty of any crime with a firearm, then the endorsing mental health professional may lose their license permanently and may be subject to criminal charges.

Note the lack of specification of time frame or what firearm is used. If someone gets a gun, lives peacefully for 30 years, then sudden decides to unlawfully pull a trigger — maybe of a gun that some other doc signed off on — the original doc loses his license and goes to jail. Both, in fact. What doctor is going to assume that perpetual liability? Since it would effectively be impossible to get approval, this effectively bans private ownership of firearms.

Speaking of liability…

Regardless of relationship, if a firearm is used to commit any crime by any person, the registered owner of that firearm will be held criminally liable.

If I jump through McCully’s hoops and get a gun, I would be criminally liable if a burglar broke into my house, shot me, tore my gun safe out of the floor, ripped it open with a plasma cutter, took one of my guns, and used it to rob someone else. Ashley’s liability language makes no exception.

Up yours with a prickly pear, Ashley.

Oh, and did you notice that “registered owner” bit? Yep, her wanna-be law presupposes registration. Language in other parts make it clear that the registry she so blithely assumes would include currently owned firearms, not just those bought under her new police state process.

I’m going to guess, like Hollywood writers who have cops checking gun registrations in southern states, McCully lives in a state that does have registration and stupidly assumes everyone else does, too.

Hint, Ashley: most of the country does not register firearms and owners. And in some states, Georgia and Florida for example, creating a registry is serious felony.

I’m skipping some other — mostly liability — points, and going straight to the finale. Which either solidly establishes this as satire, or Ashley as bug-f##k nuts.

Anyone connected to an individual who has been deemed mentally unstable and/or incompetent enough to possess a firearm and has had at least one firearm or deadly weapon seized by the State under Title II, including but not limited to family, friends, colleagues, roommates, associates, or acquaintances, must provide a secondary verbal and written affirmation that they will be held criminally liable for any crime committed by anyone involving the firearms for which they are registered owners.

You may need to read that a couple of time to parse it out.

If you know someone in passing — a neighbor down the street with whom you exchange greetings — that is a prohibited person for mental reasons…

…even if you don’t know it…

you must swear verbally and in writing (redundant, that) that you will be held criminally liable if said acquaintance… well, see the earlier burglary/plasma cutter scenario.

Ashley’s proposal doesn’t include any mechanism for identifying and contacting the prohibited person’s family, friends, colleagues, roommates, associates, or acquaintances, or anyone “connected to” and sharing their personal legal and medical history. So I’ll be damned if I know how you’re supposed to know to make that “affirmation,” much less to whom.

I would really prefer that is satire, but the fact that McCully wouldn’t respond doesn’t look good.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Beginner’s Guide To Ghost Guns

Are you interested in building your own firearms at home, but aren’t really sure how to get started? Not to worry; we the New York State Police has your back.

In an effort to crack down on so-called “ghost guns,” the NYSP inadvertently put together the perfect beginner’s how-to manual:

Ghost Guns: Past, Present, and Future

It has all the info you need to start. Descriptions of the technologies available (80% receivers, CNC milling, 3D printing), along with suppliers for the various tools, and complete parts lists and suppliers.

It tells you what hand tools you’ll be wanting. It even tells which types of plastic filament are best suited for firearms and the model of 3D printer you choose. It shows you basic steps you’ll be following.

NYSP didn’t mean it this way; it was supposed to be an internal tyranny tool. But someone leaked it, and we aim to keep it leaked.

Download your COPY now.


Hat tip to David Codrea.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Lewiston, Maine Shooting

Nasty news to wake up to: At least 22 dead, and 50 injured.

Maine mass shooting live updates: Sheltered Maine resident ‘locked and loaded’ during manhunt for mass shooting person of interest
A gunman killed at least 22 people in separate shootings across Lewiston, Maine, Wednesday night, according to law enforcement sources and reports. Maine mass shooting live updates: Sheltered Maine resident ‘locked and loaded’ during manhunt for mass shooting person of interest

The person of interest behind the deadly mass shooting in Maine is reportedly a trained firearms instructor believed to be in the Army Reserve, according to law enforcement sources in the state.

Robert Card, 40, was stationed out of Saco, Maine and reported “hearing voices” and threatened to shoot up the National Guard Base where he was stationed, the sources said.

Ignorant loudmouth Shannon Watts of Mom’s Demand Bloodshed naturally blames Maine’s allegedly lax gun laws; specifically a lack of a 72 hour waiting period to purchase a firearm, and a lack of a “red flag” law.

I blame something else. Card himself, of course; but…

According to law enforcement, CARD recently reported mental health issues to include hearing voices and threats to shoot up the National Guard Base in Saco, ME. CARD was also reported to have been committed to mental health facility for two weeks during summer 2023 and subsequently released.

So… they have a crazy guy threatening to kill people. He gets committed to a psych ward…

And then let loose. Maybe that last part was a mistake.

Card was reportedly a firearms instructor; my guess is that he probably already had firearms, and a 72 hour waiting period would not have prevented this. Keeping the dangerous guy locked up would.

So what if Maine lacks a n-due process “red flag” law? Anyone who had been threatened by Card — that is, anyone and everyone assigned to that base — could have requested a perfectly normal protective order and requested any firearm be removed .

And why would they be removed, aside from the death threats? “[H]ave been committed to mental health facility.

That’s why; 18 U.S. Code § 922(g)(4). He was a prohibited person.

If he did have to buy his firearm for this slaughter, that would should have prevented him from buying one from licensed dealer. (And likely from people who knew him and knew he’d gone nuts.)

Someone was supposed to report Card’s committal to NICS. If the military committed him, well, we know the military has a major reporting problem.

Civil authorities aren’t much better.

It’s a little early to be blaming a lack of gun laws for this.

Something else that I hope to hear more about is Card’s auditory hallucinations. That’s common in schizophrenia. But as a retired nurse mentioned, 40 years old is an odd time for schizophrenia to pop up. It usually shows up much earlier in life.

Other things can cause hallucinations: Lewy Body Dementia, brain tumors. But something I ran across recently came to mind.

One of the adverse effects of the ChinCOVID pseudo-vaccine that’s been showing up is hallucinations. Doctor’s have noted it, and it shows up in studies. As a reservist apparently on active status (assigned to the base), there’s a good chance that Card received the ChinCOVID inoculations.

But that’s just speculation. Card is not yet in custody. But once caught (or his body found), maybe we’ll learn more about what caused his break.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

SCOTUS: Enforcement Or Irrelevance

Pigpen51 left a comment on an earlier column regarding the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals complicity in California’s brazen violations of the Constitution. He thinks the Supreme Court needs to make some rulings with absolutely no wiggle room to allow California — and like-minded oathbreakers — to continue enforcing bad laws.

I hope that they do so with, shall we say gusto, or extreme prejudice, or with a heavy gavel? Because if they leave even the smallest crack in the rebuke, no doubt the anti Constitution liberals will find a way to yet again hold things up

Crack? Taking advantage of a “crack” is what they did with the original Gun-Free School Zones” law. SCOTUS tossed it, so they passed a new bill virtually identical to the original, with “moved in interstate commerce” tacked on.

Mostly they don’t worry about cracks anymore. If a law gets tossed, they simply pass it again with the punctuation slightly altered, and declare that it’s new and SCOTUS hasn’t ruled on this one. That forces the pro-freedom types to waste time and money to fight what is essentially the exact same law. Blue state legislators and AGs don’t mind because it isn’t their money they’re wasting; it’s yours.

SCOTUS should have put a stop to that decades ago. Now, emboldened by SCOTUS’ failure to slap them down, they’re escalating. California just passed a couple more bills that clearly violate BRUEN. And they know it. Newsom said so, saying that they will not be bound by the “general, historical legal tradition” demanded by BRUEN.

“Newsom framed the move as a response to the “rights reduction” caused by gun laws that function under a “1790s framework,” a recording of the signing showed.”

And it wasn’t just Newscum saying it. It’s actually in the bill passed and signed. (It helps to read the “Whereas” rationalization preface to bills, and not just the hard action portions.)

No longer will they need to “keep kicking that can down the road.” If SCOTUS doesn’t start arresting these scumbags, they don’t need to “change the makeup of the court” that they’ll ignore anyway.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

More Victim Disarmament In California

Governor Newsom signed a couple of more bills yesterday, as if Commifornia didn’t have enough laws.

SB 2 raises the age to purchase any firearm to 21 years, and increases areas where firearm possession is banned.

within any state or local public building or at any meeting required to be open to the public

Governor’s Mansion, or any other residence of the Governor, the residence of any other constitutional officer, or the residence of any Member of the Legislature. (The governor’s mansion? Perhaps Newscum realizes how unpopular he’s becoming.)

the grounds of the Governor’s Mansion or any other residence of the Governor, the residence of any other constitutional officer, or the residence of any Member of the Legislature.

any building, real property, or parking area under the control of an airport

a public transit facility

an area in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of the public or private school.

They generously exempt “place of residence or place of business or on private property.” If you live in a school zone and want to take any firearm that could be concealed carried somewhere else, it must be unloaded and locked in a case and transported in a motor vehicle or locked in the trunk of the motor vehicle. That means if your sole means of transportation is foot or bike, you’re screwed. Same with public transit buses, unless the bus can pick you up directly on your private property, and drop you off on private property.

But just in case they might have missed an area, there’s 25850

A person is guilty of carrying a loaded firearm when the person carries a loaded firearm on the person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city, city and county, or in any public place or on any public street in a prohibited area of an unincorporated area of a county or city and county.

Streets, sidewalks, parks…

I’m sure all of California’s frustrated gangbangers are fretting over how this will impact their crime sprees.

But of you still want to buy a gun, and you’ve turned 21, prepare to shell out a lot more money. AB 28 adds a new 11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition. I expect ammo sellers in Nevada are pleased.

I’ll bet you’re thinking that these restrictions might run afoul of the BRUEN test of “general, historical legal tradition.” Newscum thought of that.

Newsom framed the move as a response to the “rights reduction” caused by gun laws that function under a “1790s framework,” a recording of the signing showed.

Yep, this was intended to out-right violate the BRUEN decision. Judge Benitez will have fun with this.


This column puts my personal contributions to The Zelman Partisans over 50% of all of our columns. I fear this makes TZP a little one-sided. Please, we welcome columns from other people. If you are interested in writing about 2A issues, particularly from a Jewish perspective, contact me.


Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Expect The Country To Be Flooded With Illegals

Illegal guns, that is. Dopey Gropin’ Joe Biden is creating a new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.

Tomorrow, President Biden will announce the establishment of the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention to reduce gun violence, which has ravaged communities across the country, and implement and expand upon key executive and legislative action which has been taken to save lives.

It’ll be headed by VP Kneepads Harris. Based on her performance as the border czar, and the ensuing flood of illegals and drugs, I suppose we can expect similar results.

Maybe I’ll finding some of those “guns on the street” that I keep hearing about.

The sad reality is that they may have finally found a job that Harris will actually do: push more victim-disarmament laws, regs, and rules.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Remember Grisham’s Excuse For Her NM Gun Ban?

Here’s an update on NM Dictator Grisham’s unconstitutional order banning public possession of firearms.

Recall that she cited three cases of children killed with guns as her excuse for raping the US and state constitutions. Two cases definitely were committed by people in unlawful possession of firearms, which made it unlikely that the perps would obey Gov. Stalin’s order; she later admitted that criminals wouldn’t obey.

More information on the third case is now available.

The suspects have been caught. The police say it was gang-related (duh), and a case of mistaken identity. The perps were after a man in a white truck, but shot the wrong white truck. One perp was already wanted on drug charges, so… prohibited person. The second perp was busted a week after the shooting when transporting 22 pounds of fentanyl. He had gang-type neck tats covered up with makeup; I’ll make a WAG that he was also already a prohibited person at the time of the shooting. Official charging docs should be available later today.

So every shooting that Gov. Stalin cited to rationalize her unconstitutional ban wouldn’t have been stopped by it. Because criminals don’t obey laws, much less tyrannical edicts.

The Biden administration is never going to charge Grisham for her 18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights and 18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law violations. But just maybe, if Trump or another Republican somehow gets elected next year, he can be pressured into making the DOJ do the right thing.

Probably not.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Hey! My “Engaged In The Business” NPRM Comment Finally Appeared.

It only took four tries, and a week, but they finally accepted one from me.

Regulations.gov claims…

Posted by the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau on Sep 15, 2023

…but I happened to check on the 15th, and it was not found.

Between my personal commenting and TZP’s, we only have a 42.9% success rate in getting the ATF to accept comments.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

ATF NPRM Commenting FUBAR As Usual

As I noted on September 8, the ATF is screwing up commenting on the “engaged in the business” Notice of Proposed Rule-Making.

In short, as dockets changed and vanished in a period of minutes, I found it desirable to comment six times; three times on behalf of TZP, and three times for myself personally.

Regulations.gov is now posting comments, so I checked the status of our comments. It ain’t pretty. I’m documenting the results so I have a public record of what is happening.

TZP Comment Tracking Numbers (in order submitted)

One lost, submitted after first that’s there, and before the other that’s there.

Personal Comment Tracking Numbers (in order submitted)

  • lma-m7xn-uqi0 (not found)
  • lma-nseu-zlmo (not found)
  • lma-p5qv-j9z4 (not found)

NONE of my personal comments can be found. Note that all were submitted after the first TZP comment appearing, and two before the third TZP comment that appears. My third comment was posted last. I see other people’s comment appearing that were submitted
days after mine. I have email confirmation that my comments were received (for two; I forgot to enter my email address for one).

I have now submitted a fourth attempt at commenting; Comment Tracking Number: lmg-ih6a-k2ww. I’m still waiting for the email confirmation.

Please let us know in comments below if you are also having difficulty commenting on the NPRM.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

NM: Governor Stalin Sending In The Thug Enforcers

Well, assuming she can find any State Police officers stupid enough to sign those citations and serve them.

Gov’s office promises State Police will enforce gun ban
Even without that physical presence, the governor’s office intends to act.

“The order is being enforced, and citations will be forthcoming from the State Police,” said Caroline Sweeny, a spokesperson for Lujan Grisham’s office. ”To ensure officer safety, we will not be providing additional details at this time.”

Multiple people were live streaming the event in Old Town which turned into an open-mic lasting several hours for anyone in attendance, mostly armed with at least one weapon, to share feelings, concerns and possible threats in reaction to the order.

It appears Grisham expects the Staties to identifying “offenders” from video, and cite them for violating her unconstitutional diktat. Reportedly the Albuquerque police did have a surveillance “device” set up for the even, as they seemingly often do. But given the police chief’s opposition to the ban order, it seems doubtful that he’d assist them by providing video or still shots.

But several people live-streamed the event, so the governor may just pull that off the Internet. It wouldn’t surprise me if she tries geofencing the protest; but that leaves her with proving that a particular cell phone was carried by an armed person.

Next, she has to find someone willing to put his name on the citations, and open himself up to the expected 18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights and 18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law.

Finally, she needs a bunch of Staties brave and stupid enough to serve the unconstitutional citations on armed citizens.18 U.S. Code § 241 and 18 U.S. Code § 242, again.

Will the State Police do this? While the Bernalillo sheriff, Albuquerque police chief, and district attorney were quick to weigh in negatively, I’ve seen nothing as yet from the State Police.

The State Police web site is notably devoid of any contact data other than a physical address and a post office box; no telephone numbers, email addresses, or contact form (other than a way to compliment them). I finally located a contact form for the Department of Public Safety, under which the SP falls.

I sent this a few minutes ago.

Good day,

I am a firearms policy and law analyst for The Zelman Partisans. I have a few questions regarding enforcement of Governor Grisham’s and Secretary Allen’s action in banning public possession of firearms.

Given that the Albuquerque police chief, Bernalillo County sheriff, and the Albuquerque district attorney have all announced that they will not enforce the unconstitutional edict, is the New Mexico State Police going to enforce it, as Grisham has claimed?

Has the State Police considered the Second Amendment implication in light of the BRUEN decision test of general, historical legal tradition?

Has the State Police consider the ramifications of the NM state constitution, Sections 4 and 6?

If the State Police choose to enforce this, what action will you take against any officers who refuse to participate and open themselves up to 18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights and 18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law charges?

Given that at least three groups have already filed lawsuits (NAGR, GOA, and FPC, I believe), are you willing to be added to the lawsuits?

Are individual State Police officers willing to be added to the lawsuits?

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your replies.

I’ll update if I receive a useful reply.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail