A few days ago, I ran across a column by a Terrence Cummings, “COMMENTARY: But for Rittenhouse doctrine.” It was the usual garbage you’d expect from victim disarmers. I didn’t — at the time — think it worth a response column, but I did write to Cummings.
“But for the Rittenhouse doctrine, you would think you would have a right to take your AR-15 to any grievance or protest near you and across state lines. Then, you could possibly “murder” (used loosely throughout this piece) two people, injure another and call it self-defense.”
Lessee…
1. Rittenhouse didn’t have an AR-15. It was a Smith & Wesson M&P rifle.
2. Rittenhouse didn’t take the rifle across state lines.
3. “Murder” is a specific term best not used “loosely,” unless you enjoyed being sued for libel/defamation. Murder is the deliberate, unjustified killing of a human being by another human being. The general term you are searching for (if you were being honest) is “homicide.”
3a. Rittenhouse fled his first attacker. He fired only when trapped and physically attacked. That is confirmed by video evidence and witness testimony.
3b. Rittenhouse again fled an attacking mod (video & witnesses). He fired again when, laying on the ground, he was again attacked with potential lethal force (the skateboard; if you doubt that’s potentially lethal, ask the family of the Santa Monica man killed by being struck in the head with a skateboard, or check with the California police officer who ended up in ICU when struck with a skateboard by an Antifa protester).
3c. Rittenhouse — still on the ground — fired again at a person who repeated aimed his own unlawfully possessed firearm at Rittenhouse. Video & witnesses.
4. Immediately after the shootings, Rittenhouse fled the pursuing crowd and attempted to turn himself in to the police.
I never made it much past that, since you’d already proved yourself ignorant of federal and state law and the events of the night, and that you are grossly biased.
Cummings’ reply was simple.
Thanks so much for your email and sharing your perspective. It is welcomed and appreciate.
I assumed that was the end of it, until this morning when I received another email from Mr. Cummings. He referred me to another, earlier column he wrote: “COMMENTARY: America worships guns.”
Reports indicate that Georgia Dim-ocrats are planning some interesting gun control bills for the next session. I have questions.
Spoiler: Rep Sandra Scott is a Dim-ocrat, from the Atlanta area (District 76). Yes, you can expect stupidity.
Georgia Democrats Plan Gun Control Push in Legislature’s Next Session
Lawmakers plan to introduce bills similar to House bills 962 and 971, which did not advance during this year’s session and would require owners to report lost or stolen firearms and require firearm dealers to furnish gun locks in all retail firearm sales.
Right off, I see a problem. The previous HB 971 (also sponsored by Scott), which this new legislation would seemingly mirror, was rather more than a requirement that firearms dealer provide locks. It was a “secure storage” requirement for gun owners. I’ve noted that other attempts at “safe storage” (i.e.- useless for defense) laws have been fairly carefully written since Heller (2008), which tossed the requirement that firearms be “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock.” The cleverer laws impose liability on a gun owner if an unauthorized person accesses and misuses a firearm. Scott’s 971 would have made “improper” storage a misdemeanor criminal offense whether or not a firearm is accessed, much less if it’s used.
This year’s Bruen ruling also comes into play with this unsafe storage requirement. In that case, the Supreme Court decided that gun control laws must be evaluated, not under intermediate scrutiny (“does it serve a perceived governmental need”) or strict scrutiny (“does it even work”), but under a general historical tradition test that begins with a presumption that Second Amendment rights must be protected.
How exactly does Scott justify so-called “secure storage” of firearms and mandatory reporting of lost or stolen firearms with BRUEN? A few quick searches don’t reveal any general historical tradition of requiring that firearms be stored in an unusable state.
From there, Scott descends into sheer stupidity, or lunacy; you decide.
State Rep. Sandra Scott, D-Rex, said lawmakers are also eying legislation that would prevent Glock owners from turning the guns into automatic weapons.
26 U.S. Code § 5861(a) and 18 U.S. Code § 922(a)(4)make it a felony for any unlicensed person to manufacture (or convert) a machinegun. The Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 prohibited virtually all manufacture or transfer of mew machineguns. Georgia Code § 16-11-122 and § 16-11-123 likewise already ban possession of machineguns not federally licensed and taxed. Thus, it is, and has been for decades, unlawful for Glock, or any other firearm, owners to covert their firearms into machineguns.
What is the purpose of a new, redundant law outlawing that which is already outlawed, eh, Scott?
She did know this, right? Perhaps her proposed bill will address the issue of criminals who are already ignoring Georgia and federal law.
Ready for more legislative dumbassery?
“We really need to be trying to come up with a way that will restrict kids from being able to go in and purchase weapons…”
“Go in and purchase” suggests that she is speaking of “kids” (minors) purchasing firearms in gun stores. Raise your hands if you see the issue here.
18 U.S. Code § 922 makes it unlawful, a felony, for those under 18 to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer (and makes it a crime for a dealer to make such a sale). How did Scott miss that? It isn’t something new.
Georgia Code § 16-11-132 makes it unlawful for minor to even possess handguns, with certain exceptions for specified sporting activities under supervision, another long standing restriction that seems to have escaped the Dim-wit’s notice.
I brought these issues to Rep. Scott’s attention. To her credit, and unlike most pols, she actually replied.
Thanks for the information. I will have the legislation reviewed because I am concerned..
It seems to me that the proper time to “review” proposed legislation is before it’s filed or publicly announced, not after people publicly ridicule her ignorance. So forgive me if I think she’s more “concerned” with being outed as a fool (too late!), rather than constitutionality and redundancy.
Sadly, Scott appears to be running unopposed in her solidly Dim district; so there’s no opponent to tip off as to her legislative incompetence.
If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in my tip jar. I could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
The United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1.
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
The President is primarily an executive. But…
Article II, Section 2.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
In a strictly and specifically military context, the President is the Commander in Chief of the United States armed forces. And only in that specific context.
Senior White advisor Keisha Lance Bottoms, after a stint of further ruining Atlanta, has clarified for those who missed the obvious militaristic elements of Biden’s Pennsylvania speech. He was speaking as the Commander in Chief, not merely as the executive.
“What the president has done as our commander in chief is he’s reminded us that democracies are fragile,” she said. “And if we are not intentional about preserving who we are as a country, if we are not intentional about reminding ourselves that there is a rule of law in this country, then we will be in danger.”
Which explains the presence of uniformed Marines, in a context where they otherwise seemed out of place.
When Biden made his threateningly partisan speech calling for the suppression of half the country, he was — according to Bottoms, senior White House advisor — speaking officially in a military context.
As Commander in Chief, Biden just authorized the use of military force against his political opposition. You, quite possibly.
I fear the American military is about to face a choice they haven’t seen since the dawn of the 19th century Civil War. It appears to be time for the armed forces to choose sides.
I hope this was merely more of Bottoms’ stupidity.
Added: I have reached out to Bottoms, asking if she would like to clarify her claim. As of this writing, all I have received is an automated response saying that she rarely checks her email. I’ve attempted an alternate address the auto-reply provided (no response to that one either).
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
New York is playing against a Supreme Court Ruling.
Specifically, they are playing again the very “specific” ruling in Bruen.
In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.
“Presumptively.” They don’t get to — legally — presume the conduct is unlawful. They — legally — must presume carry is lawful unless and until proven otherwise.
But what else would you expect of constitutionally and judicially ignorant scumbags who also ignored this part…
That said, respondents’ attempt to characterize New York’s proper-cause requirement as a “sensitive-place” law lacks merit because there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a “sensitive place” simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Police Department.
… to declare the city a “sensitive place” piecemeal.
It will soon be forbidden to carry a firearm, even concealed, in the famed Times Square district and other public places in the city and state of New York, authorities announced on Wednesday.
Can someone point me to a citation saying the Supreme Court cannot issue bench warrants for “supreme” contempt of court?
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
So there I was, peacefully running the vacuum cleaner and listening to a radio show from Daniel Horowitz called Conservative Review. It’s always good, and I can learn a lot. They’ve been covering the Stasi raid on Mar-A-Lago, current events, and he refers a lot to the Federalist papers and relates them to the topic. All in all, just a very good show.
Today was a good show as well, but depressing as all get out. I was appalled that the Demoncrats decided to add 87,000 more armed IRS goons, willing to use deadly force. In fact that seems to be more important that using a calculator, or even doing math or learning the forms.
IRS Thug jobs
But you see, the IRS is just the tip of the iceberg. Turns out there are 200,000 armed federal agents, not only are they armed, they can make arrests. Yes indeedy, more than the Marines. Semper Calculator and Glock.
Who else has armed agents that one might not expect? Well, Daniel stated that he had recently had John Whitehead from the Rutherford Institute as a guest on his show and they discussed this. So I headed on over there because I had to keep backing the radio show up to try to get all these figures and it was becoming way too time consuming. I guess maybe I really should have learned shorthand. Do they still do shorthand?
But back to John, this is the list I got from him, it starts out in the order presented by Daniel.
IRS— 4,500 guns, including 621 shotguns, 539 long barrel rifles, 15 submachine guns and 5 million rounds of ammunition.
Apparently the armed IRS training started a long time ago, under the Bush regime. It was to train college and high school students how to be armed thugs. Doubt me? Watch the video, the desire for power over people seems to come through from the students. “You’re going to jail buddy”. Um, isn’t there supposed to be like, oh I dunno, some kind of hearing or something? But now the IRS solves “crimes”.
Here’s another one making the rounds, it’s shorter.
But this actually isn’t new! No no, this goes back, back to well, gee 2006 it looks like.
The VA, yes, the Veteran’s Administration– They have 11 million rounds of ammo, camo clothing, riot gear including helmets and tactical lights and some other goodies.
The HHS Department of Health and Human Services– The NIH and CDC are included in this, have 1,300 guns, including 5 submachine guns and 189 automatic firearms and 4 million rounds of ammunition. Are you kidding me?? Guess they’re afraid people are going to find out that Covid was created by Fauxci, is very survivable but, according the actuarial tables, the jab, not so much. But they do get training from Army Special Forces, so there is that. I guess that’s so they know hand to hand for jab resistors?
The SSA, the Social Security Administration– They have guns, armor and 800,000 rounds of ammunition. Guess they don’t need to worry about citizens being angry when they start giving out social security to illegals huh?
The Smithsonian—They have 620 armed special agents. Isn’t that special?
Who else has goodies? This list might surprise you, well, maybe not you, but it did me.
The U.S. Mint
The FDA—No wonder they aren’t worried about people finding out Pfizer paid the largest criminal fine in history for fraud, and that they didn’t want to release the data on the WuFlu shot for 75 years.
The SBA, Small Business Administration —Those loans will be repaid on time.
NOA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—They’re gonna shoot Flipper?
The Department of Education— Pay attention you little buggers.
Energy Department—You will have a green car and clothes dryer, or else.
Bureau of Engraving and Printing— I don’t even know what to say about this one.
An assortment of public universities— And a guess off the top of my head is, they are all gun-free zones, so how does that work?
And you thought the Post Office going to green vehicles and spying on social media for the government was a big problem! HA. The Xiden crime junta will show you!
In addition to all this, a survey was sent out and several of the agencies have tactical units as well.
But you know what? If you have the right kind of politicians in your state, you may have a bit of protection. I just heard this Florida politicians name on the show, and I love him! Jimmy Patronis is Florida’s Chief Financial Officer, and boy does he have some good ideas!
“Even though the Free State of Florida cannot control the insanity of Washington we must do what we can to protect our small businesses,” Patronis told The Epoch Times on Aug. 18. “This massive super expansion of the IRS is concerning to me. I think Washington is totally disconnected from what real Americans and Main Street is feeling.”
The four pillars of protection Patronis is suggesting involve requiring state-chartered banks to generate a regular report on IRS engagement in order to identify if patterns of “targeting the middle class and small businesses are ongoing. Second, establishing a Civil Liability Trust Fund to help small businesses defend themselves–or sue the IRS–in cases of politically motivated audits or any federal overreach. Third, requiring new IRS agents coming into the state to have a Florida license. And last, establishing criminal penalties by enforcing laws based on viewpoint or political discrimination.
Now tell me you don’t love those ideas!! And that was part of the point of Daniel’s radio show. The Founding Fathers never thought the threats would come from the Federal Government because it wasn’t suppose to have that much power. But they figured the States and the Federal Government would keep each other in check. And that is what we need now, strong state sovereignty legislation. Like versions of a Second Amendment Protection Acts, where if the Federal Agents exceed their wheelhouse they can be reined in. Mind you, we’ll need good local law-enforcement, and the left has tried to destroy that. I wrote a long time ago that if you keep demonizing cops and deputies pretty soon the only people that would go into the field would be the jackboots that they were accusing good men and women of being at the time. But those are just rough ideas on my part, Mr. Patronis has his act together.
I just hope one of the things the kids are learning in IRS school is:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities…”
So the very confused FIB has put out a bulletin designating certain patriotic symbols and people as indications of “Domestic Terrorism”.
This is far from the first time law enforcement has decided normal patriotic sayings or symbols are a “threat to democracy”, a favorite phrase of the communist Demoncratic party. Anything that doesn’t advance the cause of Communism in their evaluation is a “threat to our democracy”. Apparently the leftist loons never learned in school that we are a Constitutional Republic. A rule of law, not mob rule, which is why they hate the Constitution, among other reasons.
On February 20, 2009, the State of Missouri, via its Department of Public Safety, issued what was called “MIAC Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement.” In this report, people who supported Presidential candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and yours truly were referenced as being connected to potentially dangerous “militia members.” But the inference did not stop there. People of conservative ideology were also identified in the State Police report as being potentially dangerous. People who held political opinions opposing abortion, illegal immigration, the New World Order, the North American Union, the Income Tax, the U.N., etc., were profiled in the MIAC report.
Interestingly enough, no left-leaning political ideologies were identified. No Islamic extremists. No environmental extremists. Only people holding “conservative” or “right-wing” philosophies were identified in the MIAC report.
The MIAC report was categorized as “Unclassified/Law Enforcement Sensitive,” meaning the report was intended for law enforcement personnel only. Fortunately, an unidentified (for obvious reasons) Missouri law enforcement officer, who was extremely disturbed by this report, sent a copy to nationally syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones. Of course, Jones immediately “blew the whistle” on the story. This was on March 11.
Now you know one of the reasons they hate Alex Jones so much. The difference now is while the media followed Jones and brought it out, now it would get the Hunter Xiden treatment. Shhhhhhh.
If we can continue to probe the details of the MIAC report, I am absolutely convinced we will find that this report actually originates with Morris Dees and his ultra-liberal Southern Poverty Law Center. And if my hunch (a very educated hunch, I might add) is correct, it means that the DHS and various State police agencies around the country are allowing a left-wing special interest group to use them to harass, intimidate, and profile people with conservative political opinions.
But now the left-wing special interest group going after conservatives is…the weaponized FIB.
These include such fringe thoughts as the Second Amendment, that shooting unarmed women by a cop who previously left his duty weapon in a bathroom on the toilet is a bad thing. Ashli Babbit. That shooting an unarmed woman holding her baby, Vickie Weaver, is a evil thing. That the flag Betsy Ross labored over is “extremist”. Threepers and Oathkeepers who have broken no laws and have yet to burn down a city are also vilified. As is the Gadsden flag, the Gonzales Battle flag, probably the modern American flag, dang with the FIB probably the only flag they don’t consider “extremist” is the Antifa flag or the Chinese Communist Party flag. While Antifa has burned down cities and decimated neighborhoods they aren’t a violent extremist group according to the FIB. Odd that, isn’t it?
Also considered threats are any mention of the Second Amendment, of course, and the Liberty Tree, and Revolutionary war soldier pictures. No word if the serfs will be allowed to watch “The Patriot” next Independence Day. No word if we’re allowed to use the phrase “Independence Day” yet either.
“Also on this list is the Gadsden flag as a symbol of violent extremism,” Cruz continued. “Now, the State of Virginia has a license plate with the Gadsden flag — as do many other states,” he said. “I think people would be astonished to find that having that license plate, the FBI indicates that you’re a violent extremist.”
“As a Texan, I was particularly struck,” Cruz added, “by the Gonzales Battle Flag — ‘Come and Take It’ — as indicative of being a violent extremist militia. Well, I will self-report right now that every day in the Senate I wear my boots that have the Gonzalez Battle Flag on the back,” Cruz declared, smacking his boot on the dais.
“Director Wray, what are y’all doing?” Cruz asked. “This makes no sense.”
Cruz ended his statement by asking Wray whether he agreed with the FBI guidance highlighting patriotic, historic American symbols with extremist violence, but the FBI Director could only offer that he wasn’t “familiar” with the document.
Truth be told Sen. Cruz probably should have thrown the boot at Wray, but considering what those boots probably cost I completely forgive him.
And just like Nixon and the head of the Missouri Highway Patrol, useless Wray said he wasn’t familiar with the document. Probably spending so much time looking for Hunter Xiden’s missing laptop no doubt.
And just like was pointed out in the column about the MIAC report:
But Cruz again took Wray to task, pointing out that the FBI chose not to “include things like Antifa… things like Black Lives Matter” and instead “identify patriotic Americans as suspect.”
I have two solutions to this predicament. Wray needs to be fired, at once and the FIB needs to be disbanded. The funds saved could be better used by local law enforcement to hire and train officers, and heaven knows the taxpayers could use the break. We have millions of illegal aliens to support that the FIB is not the least concerned about. But one thing is clear, the FIB is threatened by Patriotic Women, poor Betsy!
Orlando, Florida has a little problem with shootings lately. They have a bigger problem with the Constitution.
Checkpoints. Weapons screening. Metal detectors. On public streets.
Orlando to implement checkpoints downtown after 7 people injured in shooting
In light of the shooting, Dyer said the city will implement checkpoints on weekends. People who want to visit the area of Orange Avenue from Washington to Pine Streets will have to walk through one of six pedestrian checkpoints. This is an example of the city’s most recent controlled access map.
The city said people should expect to see more officers, K9s and metal detectors. There will also be a voluntary weapons screening at the checkpoints.
[…]
While the weapons screening is voluntary, Dyer said he thinks it will make a difference.
“I think if there are people that are carrying weapons and intending to come downtown, they will certainly think twice about that before they do so. I think it’s a deterrent for some people to have to go simply go through a checkpoint,” he said.
Mayor Buddy Dyer tries to rationalize these checkpoints as “voluntary,” but note that he repeatedly stresses that people “have to” go through them.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Or maybe we should look to the Florida constitution.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and against the unreasonable interception of private communications by any means, shall not be violated. No warrant shall be issued except upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, particularly describing the place or places to be searched, the person or persons, thing or things to be seized,
Possibly Dyer is confused enough to believe that public streets are some sort of sensitive area, rather like the secured portions of airports accessible through TSA checkpoints and metal detectors.
For example, courts can use analogies to “longstanding” “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings” to determine whether modern regulations are constitutionally permissible. Id., at 626. That said, respondents’ attempt to characterize New York’s proper-cause requirement as a “sensitive-place” law lacks merit because there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a “sensitive place” simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Police Department.
Mayor Dyer did not respond to a request for comment on the constitutional issues with his plan.
Anybody want to take a trip to Orlando to establish standing to sue?
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
It seems the Biden junta weaponized alphabet agencies are getting frisky. It seems they feel America is no longer a country ruled by laws but by dictatorial fiat, so they want to prove themselves as big a hero as Lila Morris the DC cop who beat an unconscious Roseanne Boyland to death and was then declared a “hero”. Hmph, must be handing that title out in crackerjacks now like they did Barry Sotero’s “Nobel Peace Prize”, snort, giggle, chuckle guffaw.
So if you ever wondered why states like Missouri passed a Second Amendment Preservation Act that prevents local law enforcement agencies from assisting federal agencies one only needs take a look at some recent activity. I can’t help it if a Senatorial candidate (Greitens) objects to the SAPA because it prevents local law enforcement being roped into the federal abuse of citizens. But hey, it took the guy five years to figure out being a Young Global leader in the WEF was a bad thing, so looking down the road may not be his strong suit.
For evidence I offer Delaware. Oh were you thinking the ATF didn’t have a firearm registry?
In Missouri, the useless biased hack known as Chris Wray decided he would “audit” the records of Missouri concealed carry holders. The Attorney General Eric Schmitt nicely told him to go pound sand. Delicious!! You’ll enjoy reading it.
A Washington state sheriff recently advised residents in his county that if agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) come to their homes without a search warrant asking to inspect their firearms, they can tell them to leave their property.
Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer said in a press statement on Friday that agents are “making surprise home visits of persons who have purchased two or more firearms at one time. To my knowledge, these ATF visits have not occurred in Washington State yet.”
Sheriff Songer told The Washington Times he became concerned about the Second Amendment rights of the residents of Klickitat County after viewing a doorbell video that showed a firearms owner who ATF agents coerced, without a warrant, to inspect his firearms.
Damned right it’s illegal. The “no registry/database” was the “compromise” that FOPA gave us when we lost new machine guns.
Here’s the thing, the alphabet agencies think they are above the law. The law doesn’t apply to them. They enjoy inflicting fear and pain on innocent citizens but when it comes to them…..well then. I found this very enlightening. The behavior of the agent is despicable, he was terrorizing an innocent woman at home with her children. I believe it was the landlord that came over and thanked the police.
The video is 15:38 long, and probably worth watching every bit of it. The comments under the video are pretty interesting as well. They do go talk to the scared woman who called the police in the first place.
In my humble opinion this is how all these interactions should be handled. Poor lady, poor kids. But rockin’ awesome police officers standing up for the scared innocent citizens.
The alphabets, they do love their power.
With the betrayal of Joe Manchin, again, friends don’t ever vote Demoncrat, there are going to be some changes. Even if they say they’re moderate, or support ________ they will have to tow the Demoncrat party line. Which these days is somewhere around Stalin on the scale. But back to the changes, people making under $200,000 a year are going to have a tiny little increase in their taxes despite the liar in chief’s promises.
The energy and health care deal from Sens. Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer would raise taxes on millions of Americans earning less than $400,000 annually, Senate Republicans say, citing nonpartisan data.
The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation found that taxes would jump by $16.7 billion on American taxpayers making less than $200,000 in 2023 and raise another $14.1 billion on taxpayers who make between $200,000 and $500,000.
During the 10-year window, the average tax rate would go up for most income categories, the Senate GOP said, citing the data from the joint committee. And by 2031, new energy credits and subsidies would have people earning less than $400,000 pay as much as two-thirds of the additional tax revenue collected that year, the release said.
WOWZA! That’s a lot of money! Now regular citizens when their household spending increase due to a fraudulent communist being placed in office who issues a lot of illegal executive orders, well they have to trim the budget somewhere else. Like, less eating out, no movies, maybe even cut off the cable #FakeNews to make ends meet. So since we are now supporting millions of illegal aliens, with more pouring across the boarder daily I think the federal government needs to trim their burden on the taxpayer…now where oh where I wonder could we trim. Would we miss the alphabets if the went away? Would it be so bad if parents could go to school board meeting unmolested? If law abiding citizens could feel secure in their homes? Wouldn’t it be nice if someone at the door who said they were Avon calling, really was Avon? If Hunter Biden knew there wasn’t anyone covering for him and “the big guy” any longer? Hmm, maybe just leave law-enforcement to the local professional officers that answer to their citizens? I dunno, but it’s a thought. Don’t like that one? Ok, hows about every single politician or un-elected bureaucrat (CDC I’m looking at you) that pushes gun control no longer has tax payer funded security? They get to live like the little people they are trying to deprive of their most effective self-defense tool? Certainly that should save some money! And with the Biden junta spending more money in Ukraine, who will send it back to corrupt politicians, we need to start these effective cost cutting measures at once! No time to waste! Like yesterday! Follow me for more simple, practical budgeting tips…
But the upshot, say no to tyranny. Very catchy tune by the way!
I ran across an opinion column advocating for a ban of semiautomatic weapons — all of them; not just “assault weapons” — that raised the usual bogus points: The Second Amendment is not an individual right, the National Guard is the militia, no defensive usefulness, and so on.
I could address so many points in that column, but one truly stands above the others.
Why all semi-automatic weapons must be banned on a national basis
“The Constitution expressly allows Congress the right and authority to dictate the jurisdiction of the federal courts. To make sure the will of a majority of U.S. citizens are implemented, Congress could remove from the jurisdiction of the federal courts the ability to rule on the constitutionality of a ban of semi-automatic weapons (similar to the removal of jurisdiction over habeas corpus during the Civil War).”
The author, Bob Reid, is, according to the mini-bio, an attorney who has practiced for 46 years, working on “both state and federal constitutional issues.” That makes his bizarre claim even more incomprehensible.
I have studied the Constitution for decades but that provision still eludes me.
Article III, Section 1. “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court…”
Section 2. “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution…” (emphasis added)
That would appear to assign jurisdiction over determinations of constitutionality to the courts. As for the suspension of habeas corpus as a pseudo-precedent for limiting the power of the Supreme Court, specifically delegated to the Courts by the Constitution…
Article I, Section 9 “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public Safety may require it.” (emphasis added)
Is Reid seriously proposing that Congress declare war (Article I, Section 8, Clause 11) on the people of the United States, as a means of suspending the Constitution?
And, frankly, citing Lincoln’s abuses of that suspension to imprison his judicial and press critics is bad enough; but the more recent suspension of habeas corpus used for the WW2 internment of thousands of Japanese-American families — including children — is hardly something I would use as justification for more constitutional abuses.
I wrote to Reid, to ask him to cite the constitutional provision which allows this proposed limitation on the Supreme Court. He surprised me by responding.
The Constitution lays out the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, but relegates to Congress the unrestricted right to create the judiciary under the Supreme Court, which it has done by creating District Courts and Courts of Appeal. Under this power, Congress can clearly dictate what kind of cases these lower courts can consider (and has exercised this power in the past). If the lower courts are not granted jurisdiction over certain subject matters, and the issue is not part of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, the matter could not make its way to the Supreme Court.
He completely ignores the Article III assignment of jurisdiction for all federal courts, Supreme and inferior, and pretends to find it in the power to institute lower courts. I believe Mr. Reid, apparently primarily a tax attorney, is confusing Article I Tribunals with Article III Courts, and forgetting that tribunals are still “inferior to the supreme Court, just as Article III courts are “such inferior Courts.”
Tribunals are specialized “courts” that Congress can — and has — created for special limited purposes, “administrative courts” such as “tax court.” They are limited in their scope and power compared to Article III Courts.
In theory, Congress could create an ATF “gun court” tribunal responsible for ruling on GCA and NFA charges. But that tribunal — once again — is still “inferior to the Supreme Court” and its rulings would still be subject to Supreme Court review. That means The Supreme Court can still determine whether the tribunal’s acts, and the laws it enforces, are constitutional.
I hope Reid is better at tax law than he is at constitutional law.
He did have one other innovation for his ban; one that avoids the need for a few million door-kicking confiscators (and body bags for them).
These prohibitions should be coupled with a national buy-back program of semi-automatic weapons, but the refusal to sell these weapons or magazines to the government would not itself be a crime. Rather, if a crime is committed using a prohibited weapon or magazine, the owner or immediate seller of such a weapon or magazine would be equally liable for any crime committed with such weapon or magazine, regardless of who pulled the trigger.
So it’s a not a ban. But the criminal use of a semiauto would be a crime.
Hint, Mr.Reid. It already is.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
