Category Archives: Rights

"News Media", Academics, Culture, genocide, hatred of Jews, Israel, Jewish history, Law, mindset, Politics, Rights, Schools and campuses, Terrorism

Sing Louder Gladys

3 Comments

I was going to call this column “Knuckle dragging, poo slinging monkey”. A girlfriend of mine uses this description of her in-laws. Knowing the situation, I gently pointed out that in reality, the monkeys in the zoo have more dignity and behave better than her in-laws. Sad, but still true. She and I were visiting today, and she was talking about Germany during the Holocaust when the Christians in the church just sang louder as the cattle cars passed by their churches with people screaming for help, to avoid hearing their cries you see. I told her about a radio show I had listened to this morning when the host was recounting his father telling him about American and European history. He said they Holocaust and the times of Rome when Christians were fed to lions couldn’t happen again, not today, people were much better informed and had better access to information.

1938 Germany

Columbia Switches To Online Classes So Jewish Students Can Participate From The Attics Where They Are Hiding <satire>

….

Though anti-Israel protestors were disappointed that they would have fewer opportunities to threaten and berate people on campus, Jewish students were relieved. “Online classes make it really convenient,” said another Jewish student. “Whether I’m out of town, sick in bed, or hiding in an attic to avoid being assaulted by an angry mob who want me and everyone else of my ethnicity wiped off the face of the earth, I don’t have to worry about missing any assignments.”

At publishing time, the Columbia administration had put forth plans to load Jewish students onto train cars and transport them to special camps to help them concentrate.

Pro-Israel Columbia Professor Claims He Was Denied Entry To Anti-Israel Protest Site

A pro-Israel assistant professor from Columbia University claims that he was blocked from entering the campus Monday.

Tensions rose at Columbia University as Shai Davidai, a pro-Israel assistant professor at Columbia Business School, was allegedly denied campus entry where anti-Israel protests were underway. The assistant professor took to X, previously known as Twitter, to express his dismay over what happened.

Earlier today, @Columbia University refused to let me onto campus.

Why? Because they cannot protect my safety as a Jewish professor.

This is 1938.

— Shai Davidai (@ShaiDavidai) April 22, 2024

I beg to differ.

In a scene reminiscent of Kristallnacht, Flames Consume Chabad Synagogue in Pomona, NY; Sifrei Torah Destroyed on April 17th.

You’ve probably heard about the Obiden crime junta’s plan to redistribute income. Where they take the wages of responsible working people and give it to the entitled kids working on gender studies degrees, or underwater basket weaving. Something no doubt of incredible societal enrichment.

So what has the Obiden junta’s redistribution of wealth bought U.S.? This.

At Columbia University, the peaceful students called for Jews to go back to Poland. I wonder if that’s because Auschwitz was in Poland, or if they are just that stupid.

At MIT the students are very openly telling administration, they run the campus, not administration.

At Yale they blocked Jewish students.

 

And then we have this peaceful protester calling for students to become martyrs at Columbia, and the brain dead lemmings are all set. Sorry Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Ralphie blew himself in the student lounge yesterday. No, we have no idea why.

So for those fools who really think a two state solution is the answer, must I remind you, they had one, it was called Jew free Gaza right up until October 7, 2023. But the mask is off now, the arabs have turned down a “two-state/final” solution many times. Now they aren’t even pretending. And again the Babylon Bee flies too close to the truth. Columbia University Students Reject A Two-Campus Solution

And in case you’ve forgotten what these terrorists in training aspire to be, these are the “innocent denizens of Gaza” they are supporting.

But I’m sure you’re curious why I was going to call this “Knuckle dragging poop flingers”.

I rest my case. I’m sure it’s parents are proud! Isn’t it interesting most of these aspiring terrorists cover their faces one way or another?

From Daniel, Chapter 4, G-d decides who he wants in the land, and there is only G-d. If these Obiden sponsored terrorists choose terror, this is a good description.

25 All this befell King Nebuchadnezzar.

26 At the end of twelve months, he was walking upon the royal palace of Babylon.

27 The king raised his voice and said, “Is this not the great Babylon, which I built for a royal palace with the strength of my power and for the honor of my glory?”

28 The word was still in the king’s mouth, [when] a voice fell from heaven, [which said] “To you they said ‘O King Nebuchadnezzar, your kingdom has turned away from you.

29 From man they will banish you, and your dwelling will be with the beasts of the field; like cattle, they will feed you grass, and seven periods will pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules over the kingdom of man, and to whom He wishes, He gives it.”‘

30 At that time, the matter was fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar, and he was banished from man, he ate grass like cattle, and his body was drenched with the dew of the heavens, until his hair grew like [the feathers of] eagles and his nails like [the claws of] birds.

31 And at the end of the days, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven, and my understanding was restored to me, and I blessed the Most High, and I praised and glorified Him Who lives to Eternity, Whose dominion is an eternal dominion, and Whose kingdom is with every generation.

32 And all the inhabitants of the Earth are reckoned as nothing, and according to His will, He foes with the host of heaven and the inhabitants of the Earth, and no one can stop His hand or say to Him, “What have You done?”

But there are solutions. My first solution is send in the cops and the national guard, round up everything calling for the murder of Jews and they have within two hours won themselves a one way ticket to Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, or Egypt. Their choice. I’m pushing for them to choose Iran, as that’s the best way to join hamass.

The other recognizes the Obiden junta has imported the middle east into the mid-west and both coasts. The illegal invaders that are being supported by U.S. and are living their terrorist dreams with assisted financing by Soros, no doubt. The answer was given by Rabbi Meir Kahane HY’’D in a speech some time ago. But his words and his thoughts are timeless I feel.

The Obiden junta is absolutely sponsoring terrorism, he’s stealing our money to do it. A vote for a Demoncrat is a vote for antisemitism and terrorism. These aspiring terrorists have the time and money to do this, in part because the Obiden junta enables it.

Death to America, after
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, Constitution, gun grabbers, Law, mindset, Politics, Rights, Sellouts and traitors, Terrorism

The Most Beautiful Lily

2 Comments

You know, it’s been my observation that the ones that hate communism the most, are the ones that actually know what it is. Not the pig ignorant college students that are running around the streets acting like moneys flinging poop at the zoo. The Russians and Ukrainians I’ve met have a very strong conservative streak, all were supporters of President Trump, and most were strong Second Amendment supporters. Years ago there was a Demoncrat member of the House of Reps in my state, he spoke every year at the Second Amendment rally held in the spring. He had a very compelling presentation. He and his family had come here from Germany and shortly after arriving here had some untoward experiences. One of the first things he did as soon as he was legally able was to purchase a gun. He was a free citizen now you see, he was a free citizen and he was entitled to defend his life and that of his family. Of course that was years ago, when common sense, values, principles and decency were on both sides of the aisle. When Demoncrats waved American, not Ukrainian flags, when they were concerned about, not even more concerned, just concerned, about America’s borders more than another country’s. A country we’ve sent billions to that has shut down elections, shut down church services and seized land from religious organizations, all in the name of “democracy” which gives you and idea of their idea of “democracy”. Don’t exhale yet Republicans, I’m coming for you next.

Recently there have been quite the votes going on in the swamp. The uni-party is spending more to defend another country’s border and civilization than they are ours. They’ve sent more to help Ukrainian citizens and oligarchs than they have the victims of disasters in East Palestine, OH and Lahaina, HI., citizens under attack from an illegal invaders in every state of the union. Joe’s handlers have been shipping them in since he assumed control. Of course after the massive spending bills passed, the Demoncrats waved little Ukrainian flags. Well, they’re honest about that I guess. It’s who they represent. Sadly it’s Americans paying their salary. It’s not just what is coming across the border. Who other than demoncrat politicians benefits from this? Those paying more in taxes? Those losing their jobs to an illegal, those who had their retirement home taken over by illegals? Who? I can not believe the majority of Americans want this. Well, maybe the elites living in their bubble, but real Americans? No. Nor are they going to sign on to this and continue to vote for it. I’ve seen many videos of people in Chicago and NY expressing strong support for President Trump and the America First agenda, though the Mainstream media can’t and won’t believe it, it’s true. Many Americans are not as stupid as the press gambles they are as they continue to lie to them. And one would think the Demoncrat party would quickly begin to re-evaluate their policies, and yet, they aren’t. In fact, they’re doubling down, almost as though they don’t have to answer to voters. What kind of political system is that?

On of the recently passed pieces of tyranny allows spying on American citizens without a warrant. Something that has been violated by the FIB in ways that most wouldn’t believe. There are actually 3 different categories or titles in the FISA warrant program. Title 1 Title III and Title VII. Title VII is where the much abused section 702 comes in.

I found this little primer on FISA abuses very very helpful. Sadly it won’t let me embed the video. But it’s well worth watching. https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/the-little-known-problems-with-fisa-revealed-truth-over-news-5632987?utm_source=ref_share&utm_campaign=copy

It explains the three categories and has testimony about how much and how many FIB people abuse it. It is absolutely a humongous problem.

A problem politicians that respect civil liberties and their constituents would put a stop to, at once. But Noooooooo.

Here Are the Senators Who Voted For and Against Reauthorizing Spy Powers

In a late-night ballot on April 20, the U.S. Senate voted to reauthorize a controversial spying authority. President Joe Biden signed it into law the following day.

The authority in question, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), has come under increased scrutiny in recent years by privacy and civil liberty advocates in the wake of a series of abuses.

After rejecting a series of amendments designed to strengthen civil liberty protections—including an amendment by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) to require a warrant to search Americans’ Section 702 data and another by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to prohibit federal law enforcement from purchasing Americans’ data from third-party brokers—the Senate reauthorized the program 45 minutes after it lapsed.

But the House?

GOP Rep. Andy Biggs: “Utter Capitulation on His Part” – House Speaker Mike Johnson Pulls Judiciary Committee’s FISA 702 Overhaul and Intel Committee’s 702 Reauthorization Bills, Will Not Consider Either Until After The New Year

House Speaker Mike Johnson has delayed a vote on two bills relating to FISA Section 702 extension and reform, making it likely that the unconstitutional Section 702 will be renewed without change until April 2024.

Johnson has reportedly refused to take a side on this issue and continues to change his stance. Johnson previously said he would bring both bills to the floor.

But he lied, he did take sides.

And in the House, BREAKING: RINOS WIN – AMERICANS LOSE: FISA 702 Again Passes House by Vote of 259-128 – Here are The 117 RINOs Who Voted for Warrantless Spying on Americans

The House of Representatives on Monday passed a Motion to Table the Motion to Reconsider H.B. 7888, which passed on Friday to renew FISA 702 and allow warrantless surveillance of innocent Americans.

This was a betrayal of Americans.

Shortly before the final passage of H.B. 7888 on Friday, the House rejected a commonsense amendment from Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), which would have required a warrant to spy on Americans. However, 86 Republicans voted for authoritarianism, with Speaker Mike Johnson casting the decisive vote.

Johnson Defends Vote to Kill FISA Warrant Requirement

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on April 14 defended his crucial vote against an amendment that would have required intelligence agencies to get a warrant to search Americans’ data under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

….

That final passage came after an amendment by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) to require a warrant to query Americans’ communications and other data failed in a rare tie vote. Mr. Johnson, who, as speaker, doesn’t always vote, cast the decisive vote that killed the proposal, prompting outrage and condemnation from some conservatives.

….

During an April 14 appearance on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures,” Mr. Johnson defended that vote, saying that a warrant requirement is “not helpful.”

He insisted that Section 702 is an important tool that has stopped other terrorist attacks like 9/11.

“Remember, that’s how we killed terrorists. That’s how we stopped terrorist plots on US soil,” Mr. Johnson said. “That’s why we haven’t had another 9/11 since that terrible tragedy.”

Does he not understand who, exactly the current junta considers “terrorists”?? Is he totally clueless about parents being dragged out of school board meetings? Is he as dumb as Kamala “Kneepads” Harris? Or is it something else?

NEVER FORGET: Chris Wray’s FBI Illegally Used FISA to Spy on Americans 278,000 Times without Warrant – Including Trump, J6 Families and Trump Donors

Former Trump official Kash Patel reminded Americans of the hundreds of thousands of times the DOJ-FBI used FISA to spy on Americans.

According to an official intelligence document the FBI illegally used FISA 278,000 times to spy on Americans including their political enemies like President Trump, Trump donors, and January 6 families.

This comes from the 2022 memorandum on FISA abuses.

On page 29 of the report: 23,132 separate queries on J6 protesters to find evidence of possible foreign influence despite having no indication of foreign influence related to the query terms used.

On page 31 of the report the analysts admitted to 278,000 non-compliant FBI queries of raw FISA-acquired information.

The FIB is far from the only government agency that isn’t following it’s own rules.

Arkansas senators say Clinton airport executive killed by ATF with no bodycam: ‘Violation of its own policy’

“The Department of Justice confirmed to us last night that the ATF agents involved in the execution of a search warrant of the home of Bryan Malinowski weren’t wearing body cameras,” Cotton and Boozman said in a joint statement. “We will continue to press the Department to explain how this violation of its own policy could’ve happened and to disclose the full circumstances of this tragedy.”

“Mr. Malinowski’s family and the public have a right to a full accounting of the facts,” the Republican lawmakers added.

So the alphabets have gone rogue, no one is holding them accountable and neither party is standing up for U.S. and our new “conservative” speaker of the house has already sold us out.

New Speaker same as the old speaker

So, what if it is something else? What kind of system are we living under where the fruit of our labor is taken from us and given to illegal invaders, to people who chose not to work and play the system, to foreign countries? What is that system called?

If you go back to the opening of this column, a cup or two of coffee ago, I was speaking about people that hate communism because they’ve lived under it, I’ll tie this up, or Hogg tie it, if you will.

Meet Lily Tang Williams, she spoke to David Hogg aka #MoneyHogg who is desperately trying to remain relevant.

Pesach starts tonight, when we celebrate the miracle of freedom, when G-d took us out of slavery into freedom and living with laws, morals and a relationship with him. Choose that, choose good, do good, pray often.

חג פסח שמח

Happy Pesach/Passover

Next year in Jerusalem!

And be a beautiful Lily.

Lily Tang Williams
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, Constitution, gun control, Law, resistance, Rights

Engaged In The Business: The Shoe Drops

1 Comment

The ATF’s rule redefining “engaged in the business,” and who must have a Federal Firearms License, has been released, but not yet formally published in the Federal Register. The Zelman Partisans has been warning you about this since 2022.

The rule document is 466 pages. Most of that is hundreds of pages of “responses” to public comment that amount to “We disagree,” and “tough shit.” The part where they claim that requiring everyone to have an FFL is BRUEN-compliant, because the feds briefly banned the export of cannons and gunpowder in 1794 is a classic.

Well, except for responses to the 250,000 identical form letter comments in favor of the rule. Those responses tend towards, “You’re absolutely right, and it’s a shame those stupid constitutionalists can’t see that.”

The actual final rule begins on page 452, and it’s even worse than the original proposed rule.

“Selling” a firearm includes swaps and barter, not just money.

A single transaction can make you a dealer, as I warned.

No firearm actually even needs to be sold. Whether the ATF thinks you intend to sell a firearm counts.

Buying a single firearm can make you a dealer, if the omniscient ATF magically foresees that you intend to resell it later.

It includes a presumption of guilt. If they accuse you, it’s up to you to prove — somehow — that, “No, I bought that for my own use; I’m not planning to sell it years down the road.” Good luck with that; if you win, you’ll still be bankrupted by legal expenses.

VP “Kneepads” Harris weighed in on the new rule. Sorta. With her usual display of her monumental intellect:

As the head of the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, I am proud to announce that all gun dealers must conduct background checks no matter where or how they sell.

This will save lives and keep our communities safe.

Poor confused moron. Dealers have been required to conduct background checks “no matter where or how they sell” for decades.

This rule simply forces universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence background checks by making everyone a dealer.

Almost universal, that is.

And while this unconstitutional action was directed by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, it would do nothing to make safer communities. Those dealing in black market and stolen firearms will simply ignore this rule; just as they have ignored the FFA for 85 years, and the Gun Control Act of 1968 for 55 years.

The only people who will be affected by this proposed rule are the honest folk, who would have to decide between following the criminals’ highly successful 85 year old example, or being compliant chumps.

Time to decide.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
Constitution, Culture, defense of others, gun control, Law, Politics, Rights, Violence-Enabling Victim Disarmers

Georgia Has A Great Bill In The House

I saw a video recently that just made me salivate. Nope, not a new recipe to try, but it is something sweet and yummy.

I myself try to avoid places that are posted No Concealed Weapons. Yes, I realize the point of carrying concealed is that people can’t tell, but I figure if you don’t want “my kind” there, well then I certainly won’t offend you with my money either. The other reason I try to avoid them is it seems to me that most of the mass attacks are in gun free zones. It seems those pesky criminals don’t obey the sign clearly posted against having a weapon in their “Gun Free Zone”.

or, if you prefer a musical version (what the heck, I’m in a whimsical mood)

I’ve never quite really understood why businesses are responsible for slips, trips and falls, too hot coffee or a burgler breaking in and being injured. Yes, businesses have been sued for all those things. I would stay those are things the business really couldn’t prevent in large. Yes, if the sidewalk or walkway in front of the store is icy and they stay open for business they should clear it. And probably most business owners would do that without being told as they know if a customer falls on their icy walkway they risk a lawsuit.

But when it comes to allowing concealed carry on premises they shrink back and clutch their pearls. I’ve asked a few business owners about that and they’ve said their insurance company insists on it, but they don’t agree with it. I had one jewelry store owner tell me he had no problem with me carrying in his store and he wished I would that way if something happened there would be two of us. I guess nobody wants to be hauled to the back of a store and shot huh?

So back to Georgia’s HB 1364, it doesn’t infringe on the property owners rights, all it says if you deprive someone of the right to defend themselves with the most effective tool, then you bear the responsibility for their safety as you’ve chosen to remove their right to defend themselves should something untoward happens. This would also include parking lots.

Here’s a snippet

(1) ‘Lawful weapons carrier’ shall have the same meaning as provided for in Code

Section 16-11-125.1.

‘Weapon’ shall have the same meaning as provided for in Code Section 16-11-125.1.

A person, business, or other entity that owns or legally controls a property and has the authority to prohibit weapons on such property, including, but not limited to, such authority provided by Code Section 16-11-127, assumes absolute custodial responsibility for the safety and defense of a lawful weapons carrier who is prohibited from carrying his or her weapon, including a concealed weapon, while on such property and any other property such lawful weapons carrier is required to traverse in order to store or retrieve such weapon.

The absolute custodial responsibility imposed upon the person, business, or other entity provided for in paragraph (1) of this subsection extends to the conduct of other invitees, trespassers, and employees of such person, business, or other entity.

Any public notice posted on a property that includes language which provides that weapons are prohibited on such property shall also contain language citing this Code section and providing that any lawful weapons carrier who is prohibited from carrying his or her weapon, including a concealed weapon, while on such property shall be under the absolute custodial care of the person, business, or other entity that owns or legally controls such property.

Any lawful weapons carrier who is prohibited from carrying his or her weapon,including a concealed weapon, and who is injured, suffers bodily injury or death, or incurs economic loss or expense, property damage, or any other compensable loss as the result of conduct of another person occurring on property where the lawful possession of weapons is prohibited, shall have a cause of action against the person, business, or other entity that owns or legally controls such property and causes such prohibition to occur.

In addition to damages, the lawful weapons carrier shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees, expert witness costs, and other costs necessary to bring the cause of action.

To prevail in an action brought under this subsection, the plaintiff shall show by a preponderance of the evidence that:

(A) The plaintiff was a lawful weapons carrier at the time of the incident giving rise to the action;

The plaintiff was prohibited from carrying a weapon, including a concealed weapon, on the property where the incident occurred by the person, business, or other entity that owns or legally controls such property; and

You may read the whole thing here

Every time I think about gun free zones, I think about Suzanna Gratia Hupp’s poignant testimony before congress.

This is a bill I’ve wanted to see in my state for a long time. If it’s the insurance companies pulling the strings, then shop owners really aren’t making their own choice anyway are they?

This one is on my wish list, along with a Firearms Freedom Act. There was a push for that back after Montana passed theirs.

This map is from 2019, so it is quite dated but that’s because I could only find this map web site in the web archive.

With what we’ve seen lately? I think it’s time to renew the push for this legislation.

Well, I figure everything started out on someone’s wish list, right? Ah I am in a whimsical mood indeed!!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
"News Media", Academics, authoritarian swine, Constitution, gun grabbers, hatred of Jews, Law, Media, Politics, Rights, Sellouts and traitors, Voting

“Christian Nationalists” vs “The Lamestream Media”

Imagine my shock to find out according to Heidi Przybyla on MSNBC, of course, the only people reading news and spewing opinions dumber and less informed than CNN, also #FakeNews, that I, and in fact many of you are “CHRISTIAN NATIONALIST!!” GASP! Heidi works for a bastion of truth known as “Politico”. And oh the shock, the horror, the NERVE!!! What has set little Heidi off? Is she off her meds? Someone said something she didn’t like? She saw a picture of someone she disapproves of? Closer to the first actually. I’m very sure Heidi went to college. Not to be confused with the institutions of higher learning in the past, no today’s “colleges” are institutions of higher indoctrination. And they turn out very ignorant people like Heidi.

Heidi’s shock and horror comes from a lack of understanding in an ancient, archaic document known to many of us as “The Declaration of Independence”. To make this even richer, Heidi is Politico’s “investigative correspondent”. I’m saying she’s overpaid.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–

I’m pretty sure Haym Solomon would be as shocked as I and many others are to find out we are “Christian Nationalists”. Haym Solomon is in large part responsible for the decisive victory of the War for Independence. Haym was Jewish.

Heidi says that regular Christians aren’t those nasty “CHRISTIAN NATIONALISTS”, I’m guessing a few Christians are baffled and a few insulted that she thinks “regular Christians” don’t observe the Ten Commandments. It’s number two on the list, so it’s pretty high up there.

You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, nor any manner of likeness of anything that is in heaven above, that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them, nor serve them. For I the L‑rd your G‑d am a jealous G‑d, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children of the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; and showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love Me and keep My commandments.

But this is just the latest in the media’s long train of lies. In fact, if you read this part

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Media,

and substitute the word “media” for government, you get at the real crux of it. How long do we continue to give the media a scrap of credibility?

The media lies, almost always. A nice summation from Tim Pool, with a video from Prager University.

https://www.prageru.com/video/lying-liars

More misguidance from the legacy media, but independent sources, like Tim Pool of Timcast that are becoming well known and are giving the other side of the story with suppressed information.

Voices like Tucker Carlson have an even bigger audience now that he is free from FOX and is far more open. The gloves and the filters are indeed off.

You’ll note most of these clips come from Rumble, as YouTube is part of the racist Google empire and they are big into the censorship game. Racist? You’ve heard about their Gemini chatbot, right?

The MSM, #FakeNews keeps telling everyone, keeps telling U.S. that Donald Trump is a fascist, and all his deplorable supporters are fascist and evil Christian Nationalist while they pump up Beijing Biden and the Biden crime family and the junta more than likely being run by Barry Sotero. So when they switch out Biden for Moochelle Obama later, it will really be Barry’s fourth term. But who is using lawfare to go after their leading political opponent? Who has political protesters being held in prison in conditions so bad some of the asked to be transferred to Gitmo? Who has the FIB going after parents at school board meetings and rounding up Grandmas who went to a protest? Not Donald Trump. But this isn’t about Trump, as Tim said. It’s about what the media peddles as purveyors of truth.

This is about a media that covered for child and puppy torturer and killer Anthony Fauxci, they hid the truth about an experimental injection that can and does change DNA. An injection that was always part of a DOD project, a DOD that has biolabs in Ukraine.

Why would anyone ever believe the media about a gun related story?

Who are the fascists?

This last one? This last one is a bonus, he’s from Scotland and there is so much truth I pray in this video. I pray it’s true. The voice of truth is like a balm of healing.

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, Courts, gun control, Law, Rights, SCOTUS, So Much Stupid!, You can't fix stupid

This Is Why My Confidence In The Courts Is Bottoming Out

1 Comment

The Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in Cargill v. Garland, the challenge to Trump’s (yeah, he still owns it) bump-stock ban.

Now, it’s true that we still have Clarence Thomas, who is intelligent and willing to study facts at issue. But we also have Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

“And when, you know, ‘function’ is defined, it’s really not about the operation of the thing. It’s about what it can achieve, what it’s being used for. So I see Congress as putting function in this. The function of this trigger is to cause this kind of damage, 800 rounds a second or whatever.”

That was after the government claimed that a semiauto rifle with a bump-stock can fire 600 rounds per minute. But Brown, with firearm knowledge exceeding that of John Moses Browning, knows better: 800 rounds per second.

Probably theoretically, higher, once you account for those magazine changes in that one second.

Just for comparison, the GAU-8/A Avenger seven-barreled, Gatling-style autocannon in the A-10 attack aircraft — the beloved “Warthog” — has a measly rate of fire of just 3,900 rounds per minute; twelve times slower that Jackson’s magical bump-stocked gun.

No wonder the Air Force wants to retire the A-10.

But back to bitter reality. We’re stuck with ignorant high court judges, who when even the banners inflated claims fall short, simply make up their own “facts” to rationalize the infringement of allegedly protected rights.

Oh, well; however SCOTUS rules, Thomas’ takedown of Jackson’s idiocy should be amusing.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
"News Media", authoritarian swine, Constitution, Courts, Law, Media, Political philosophy, Politics, Rights, Sellouts and traitors, spirit of rebellion, Voting

Dictatorship

Dictatorship, form of government in which one person or a small group possesses absolute power without effective constitutional limitations. The term dictatorship comes from the Latin title dictator, which in the Roman Republic designated a temporary magistrate who was granted extraordinary powers in order to deal with state crises. Modern dictators, however, resemble ancient tyrants rather than ancient dictators. Ancient philosophers’ descriptions of the tyrannies of Greece and Sicily go far toward characterizing modern dictatorships. Dictators usually resort to force or fraud to gain despotic political power, which they maintain through the use of intimidation, terror, and the suppression of basic civil liberties. They may also employ techniques of mass propaganda in order to sustain their public support.

I look at today’s political climate and I can’t escape the idea that this is where we are. Small group? Politicians and activist judges are trying to keep former President Trump off the ballot. Whether or not you love or hate him, people should have the chance to vote for the candidate they want to lead the country. That’s how it is suppose to work in a Constitutional Republic. Demoncratic policies are yielding the results one would expect from policies created and implemented by a bunch of college educated/indoctrinated marxists. Lower standards of living, shortages, poverty and crime are common in those sorts of 3rd world countries run by the left. The left is the left is the left, the world over. Now I think many people suspected on day one that Biden wasn’t really the President when he was signing all those executive orders and he said he didn’t even know what he was signing and an aide snapped at him “Just sign it”. Really? That’s how you talk to the President of the United States of America? No, this is Obama’s third term.

Extraordinary powers, like the power to force people into dangerous medical experiments. Like the power to shut down business. Except for the demoncratic politicians of course. Like the power to shut down free speech of those who tried to warn about the danger. Like the power to persecute those who question anything the government doesn’t want to answer for. Say, for example the validity of an election. Now demoncrats have been contesting elections for years. Stacy Abrams still claims she’s governor. A gaggle of them object every time a Republican wins the Presidency. Nothing ever happens to them, but they do deny the election.

Uses force or fraud to gain power? Goodness knows there was plenty of evidence that the elections of 2020 were not clean, and people attempted to make that knowledge known at the time it was happening the media #FakeNews either ignored it or lied about it. Then came the Georgia runoff election for two senators. As nothing had been done to fix the voting problem in Georgia, predictably the communists won. The group that documented multiple cases of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election even made a documentary. True The Vote recently won their case in Georgia about the senatorial runoff race against Stacy Abrams, video about 8 minutes https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/judge-issues-2020-election-challenge-ruling-facts-matter-5558563

Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote and Greg Phillips were the leads in the documentary 2000 Mules that did extensive documentation on the voter fraud of the 2020 election. It’s well worth watching, they explain their search techniques and have mountains of video proving their point. And they have been persecuted by the government for doing that. We’ll revisit this in a minutes.

But onto the propaganda aspect. The marxist talking heads called the “media” are having kittens by the batch about how if President Trump wins the election he will shoot demoncrats that don’t clap at his inaugural speech. Why democracy (rule of mob) won’t be safe! The only way to save democracy is by demoncrats destroying it. At least according to them. They can only save democracy by preventing a large swath of the public from voting for the candidate of their choice. They have equally pearl clutching guests on who solemnly intone that former President Trump can’t possibly hold office because of the 14th Amendment. An Amendment created to keep the members of the former confederacy from holding office after the civil war ended. But I don’t believe it was ever actually enforced. Since the mass formation psychosis operation known as “covid” the media has a successful playbook and they are sticking to it. But the establishment media has possibly overplayed their hand this time as they cover for the Obiden crime junta. People see that the costs of living are soaring, the Obiden junta is redistributing money from Americans to illegal invaders, crime is going up and the ever present attempts to disarm law-abiding Americans has not abated one whit. Many of “We the people” don’t like living under a marxist regime. Not one bit. But perhaps the lame-stream media is losing it’s credibility. People, I don’t think, believe them much anymore. Although msnbc’s loyal 7 listeners still tune in and hang on every word, and cnn’s 12 are still showing up to hear whoever hasn’t been arrested for some indecent act yet.

So what to do to win an election with an unpopular, corrupt, incompetent, demented candidate?

Going to the part of a dictatorship about terror, intimidation and removal of civil right, that brings us back to January 6th. A day the left loves, loves to talk about, loves to celebrate, a day made just for them. And it was.

Representative Clay Higgins, I just love this guy. Former military, former law-enforcement officer he has a no nonsense style and doesn’t let up. He’s sort of like a pitbull with glasses. Plus I like to listen to him talk.

I’ve mentioned before the documentary done by the Epoch Times that extensively covered the day with film obtained from people who were there as well as independent journalists. They interview people that were there and tell their stories, they have video of the murder of Ashli Babbitt and Roseann Boyland, killed in cold blood by Michael Boyd and Lila Harris. Things demented Joe Biden still lies about. I don’t know if it’s free to watch or not. After all this time it may be. https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/the-real-story-of-jan-6-documentary-4596670

There is now a part 2, https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/therealstoryofjan6part2-5548012

It’s pretty recently released so it may or not be free to watch.

The FIB is ramping up the terror and intimidation as they’ve said now they are going to go after people that weren’t even in the Capitol, but were just there. They’re being very public about it. They want the terror and intimidation, they want U.S. afraid to speak out, to donate to, work for or attend a rally. Their message is don’t even think about it.

Which brings me to this. Greg Phillips and Catherine Engelbrecht are not only fighters for truth, justice and the American way of life, they are also trying to help the January 6th political prisoners held by the Obiden crime junta. The January 6th political prisoners put together a video, it’s a time line of events that happened that day. Greg says it’s a little rough, but considering they made the video mostly by themselves, it’s amazing. It’s being hosted by open.ink set up by Greg. There is a huge collection of material there, not just this video and it’s well worth checking out. It’s a bit over 1 hour and is free to watch. From open.ink

J6: A True Timeline gives the audience a never-before-seen timestamped blueprint for the events of January 6, 2021, as they unfolded in real time. No other film to date fills the gaps or tells the story chronologically the way this film does. The film is also different from anything produced to date because a small group of protestors, some who are J6 defendants, have been the ones to collect hours of footage to help contextualize the events of the day. The film was funded and produced entirely through small donations and tens of thousands of volunteer man hours. The hope is that the film will provoke all Americans to be more curious about the true timeline of January 6.

I think we can see who is behaving like a dictator and who isn’t. Please pray for America, for many reasons and please pray for our January 6th political prisoners and their families.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, Constitution, Courts, Law, Rights, SCOTUS, Terrorism

Precedent Can Be Dangerous

6 Comments

Or even really dangerous, in the wrong hands.

For years, I’ve warned about the dangers of precedents; in laws, bureaucratic regulation, and judicial. My personal ball got rolling back inthe 1990s with the passage of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act. CALEA was passed to “help” LE catch criminals, by making it easier to tap phone calls.

The Communications Assistance for law Enforcement Act (CALEA) is a statute enacted by Congress in 1994 to require that telecommunications carriers and manufacturers of telecommunications equipment design their equipment, facilities, and services to ensure that they have the necessary surveillance capabilities to comply with legal requests for information. CALEA is intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement agencies to conduct electronic surveillance while protecting the privacy of information outside the scope of the investigation.

Sure. But it morphed into requiring the capability to monitor 10% of switch traffic at the same time; ten percent of all phones in the country. And remotely, so LE doesn’t even have to come to the switch office and physically tap a single line. It was expanded to include Internet traffic.

Then the PATRIOT Act to help catch terrorists.

What could possibly go wrong? Who could have foreseen that someone later would use those tools to monitor thousands of innocent Americans, or even spy on the opposition’s election campaign?

Well… “Who,” other than myself and thousands of other privacy advocates.

The Colorado Supreme Court just gave us a real doozy of a precedent: it just declared Donald Trump to be an “insurrectionist” ineligible to appear on the state primary ballot.

Love Trump or hate him (and I’m no great fan), the “reasoning” and “process” behind this decision is frightening; enough so that I’ll never travel to or through Colorado again.

The CO supreme court majority (there are three dissenters with some self-awareness) simply declared Trump to be guilty of insurrection. They deliberately and specifically denied the need for an actual charge of 18 U.S.C. § 2383 insurrection, a trial, evidence, or conviction. They specifically denied any requirement for Fifth Amendment due process. The accusation — in a civil case that Trump was not a party to — is all it takes for a life sentence of ineligibility to hold office or appear on a ballot.

Because Amendment 14, Section 3 is magically “self-executing.”

There is no Fifth Amendment in Colorado.

If this were to go to the US Supreme Court (and Trump says he’ll appeal), we might well learn there is no Fifth Amendment in the country.

But let’s look at the flip side of this insane precedent, under the almost-worst case scenario*:

Imagine down the road we end up with a hard-core right-wing administration; a Republican president perhaps, with as little respect for the whole Constitution as many current Republicans (don’t forget who saddled us with CALEA, PATRIOT, and bump-stock bans in the first place). Let’s say President Smith ran on a platform plank of doing something about the ATF, winning hearts and minds of American gun owners.

On the one hand, we have an agency whose specific job is to infringe on Second Amendment rights.

On the other hand, we have a precedent that says Constitutional amendments are automatically “self-executing,” and punishments for violation of the 2A don’t require indictment, trial, evidence, facing accusers, or defense. And one day, President Smith Tyrant simply send US Marshals to every ATF office in the country to round up every agent and employee, and drag their sorry asses off to the gulags, never to be heard from again.

Or… Federal Election Commission, meet the self-executing First Amendment.

You can probably think of one or two others that could use a dose of Constitutional self-execution.

So to speak.

* The worst case scenario would be SCOTUS making this a national precedent with the current administration, which proceed to rape the country faster and harder than it already is.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, gun control, gun grabbers, Law, Politics, Rights

Commenting on ATF proposed Diktat, before Dec 7th

2 Comments

Ah yes, another day which will live in infamy. Goodness know people who love citizen control seem to be drawn to it.  I’m passing this along from a list I’m on, those that can drop a note, please do so.

The Department of Justice has put forth a proposal amending ATF regulations to implement the provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that broaden the definition of when a person is considered “engaged in the business” as a dealer in firearms which would require that individual to acquire a Federal Firearms License (FFL).

This proposal defines, among other things, the following to be dealers:

Anyone who sells or offers for sale a firearm within 30 days of purchase.
Anyone who sells or offers for sale firearms that are new or like new in their original packaging.
Anyone who makes or maintains records in any form to document firearms purchases.

Any violation of this regulation would result in asset forfeiture, fines, and/or imprisonment. This proposed regulation is essentially a back door attempt to establish a national gun registry, which is illegal. A national registry is the first step for gun confiscation.

Before this proposal can go into effect there must be an opportunity for citizens to make comments for and against it. The Comment Period ends December 7th.

I am asking each of you to submit your comments objecting to this egregious proposal. You can do this by going online to Regulations.gov and referencing Docket Number ATF 2022R-17 or by mailing a letter (postmarked December 7th or before) to:

Helen Koppe

Mail Stop 6N-518

ATF Office of Regulatory Affairs

99 New York Avenue NE

Washington, DC 20226

Attached is a sample form letter containing objections you could put forth. Please read and select certain portions to state your objections. Do not copy anything verbatim, put it in your own words. There is a lot in there to pick from. 

Remember to be polite and respectful.

The only rights you have are the ones you are willing to defend.

RE: ATF 2022R-17
To whom it concern:
On behalf of __________, a _____ of __ (members, participants pick one), we are writing to
object to several provisions of the proposed 27 CFR Part 478. We operate what you would consider
to be a gun show. The proposed regulation goes far beyond the language and intent of the new
provisions of law set forth in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (“BSCA”). In particular the
proposed rulemaking is looking to 18 U.S.C. §921(a)(21)(C) and (22) for support for the definitional
provisions being supplied for presumptions as to those “engaged in the business” of selling firearms
and selling fire arms with an intent “to earn a profit” as set forth in the proposed regulation.
18 U.S.C. §921 (a)(21)(C) provides:
The term “engaged in the business” means–

(C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who
devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or
business to predominantly earn a profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of
firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales,
exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for
a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms;
(emphasis added)
Please note this provision states to predominantly earn a profit. The presumptions put
forth in the proposed regulations presume that the sale of one firearm for a sum more than the
person paid for it constitutes a sale for a profit and requires the person to be a licensed firearms
dealer. We submit that this interpretation is beyond the statutory language to “predominately
earn a profit”. We also submit that it fails to take into account any other expense or time value
of money associated with the sale of the firearm, which is a part of any normal calculation of
“profit” and hence is beyond the proper basis of an interpretive regulation. Many of our
________ (members, participants) expend substantial sums to attend our events. These costs
would be factored into any reasonable definition of “profit”. But more importantly the
presumptions put forward are contrary to the statutory exceptions as to who is a dealer “but
such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of
firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of
his personal collection of firearms”. (see above) Many of our table holders are engaged in sales
for their personal collections. But the proposed presumptions do not recognize this exception.
Further, the proposed regulations conflate together “sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms
for the enhancement of a personal collection” and “for a hobby”. The two provisions are
separate. The “for a hobby” provision allows a person to sell, exchange or purchase firearms
on an occasional basis for a hobby, without being required to obtain a license. The “for a hobby
provision” and the “for a personal collection” provision are two separate and distinct items.
These provisions relate back as well to the provision of “to predominately earn a profit”.

Therefore, the person who purchases or sells firearms occasionally as a collector or for a hobby
is not a firearms dealer, and not required to be licensed. The proposed regulations do not
account for this and go beyond the statutory mandate.
The proposed regulations provide:
Section 478.11 provides in part:

Dealer. Any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or
retail; any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making or fitting
special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms; or any person who is a
pawnbroker. The term shall include any person who engages in such business or occupation
on a part-time basis. The term shall include such activities wherever, or through whatever
medium, they may be conducted, such as at a gun show or event, flea market, auction house,
or gun range or club; at one’s home; by mail order; over the Internet; through the use of other
electronic means (e.g., an online broker, online auction, text messaging service, social media
raffle, or website); or at any other domestic or international public or private marketplace or
premises.
* * * * *
Engaged in the business—
* * * * *
(c) Dealer in firearms other than a gunsmith or a pawnbroker. (1) A person who
devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or
business to predominantly earn a profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of
firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales,
exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a
hobby, or who sells all or part of the person’s personal collection of firearms.

* * *

Whether a person is engaged in the business of dealing in firearms requiring a license is
a fact-specific inquiry. Selling large numbers of firearms or engaging or
offering to engage in frequent transactions may be highly indicative of business activity.
However, there is no minimum threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that
triggers the licensing requirement. Similarly, there is no minimum number of
transactions that determines whether a person is “engaged in the business” of dealing in
firearms. For example, even a single firearm transaction or offer to engage in a
transaction, when combined with other evidence (e.g., where a person represents to others
a willingness to acquire more firearms for resale or offers more firearms for sale), may
require a license. A person shall be presumed to be engaged in the business of dealing in

firearms in civil and administrative proceedings, absent reliable evidence to the contrary,
when the person—
a. Sells or offers for sale firearms, and also represents to potential buyers or
otherwise demonstrates a willingness and ability to purchase and sell additional firearms;
b.
c. Spends more money or its equivalent on purchases of firearms for the purpose
of resale than the person’s reported gross taxable income during the applicable period of
time;

* * *

(iv) Repetitively sells or offers for sale firearms—

i. That are new, or like new in their original packaging; or
ii. Of the same or similar kind (i.e., make/manufacturer, model,
caliber/gauge, and action) and type (i.e., rifle, shotgun, revolver, pistol,
frame, receiver, machinegun, silencer, destructive device, or ‘other’
firearm);

* * *

(4) Where a person’s conduct does not otherwise demonstrate a predominant intent to earn
a profit, the person shall not be presumed to be engaged in the business of dealing in
firearms when the person transfers firearms only as bona fide gifts, or
occasionally sells firearms only to obtain more valuable, desirable, or useful firearms
for the person’s personal collection or hobby.
The underlined language deviates substantially for the statutory provision of selling
firearms to “predominately earn a profit”. Selling or offering to sell firearms and being willing
to buy does not in and of itself evidence that this is being done to “predominately earn a
profit”. Most who collect firearms or engage in the sale of firearms for a hobby are willing to
buy or willing to sell, but this in and of itself is not establish by a preponderance that they are
doing so to “predominately earn a profit”. The provision that a person who spends more money

than their reported gross taxable income on purchasing firearms for resale, has no basis what-
so-ever in “profit”. Profit is based on a sum in excess of all costs. Not gross income. Further,

many retired people have a small gross taxable income compared to their assets. This provision
is not in conformance with the law.

The provision prohibiting sales of firearms that are like new in their original packing or
of a similar kind by manufacturer, model, caliber and type of gun is ludicrous. Virtually every
collector or hobbyist focuses their efforts on specific manufactures and types of firearms. They
are for the most part devoted to something. Further, like new in original packing firearms are
what is the most sought after of collectible firearms. These provisions do not constitute
reasonable presumptions by themselves of being engaged in the sale of firearms.
Several of the provisions relating to an “intent to predominately earn a profit presumption” are
erroneous. The provisions provide in part:

Predominantly earn a profit. (a) The intent underlying the sale or disposition of
firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents,
such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms collection. * * *
(b) The intent to predominantly earn a profit is a fact-specific inquiry. A person
shall be presumed to have the intent to predominantly earn a profit from the sale or
disposition of firearms in civil and administrative proceedings, absent reliable evidence to
the contrary, when the person—
(1) Advertises, markets, or otherwise promotes a firearms business (e.g., advertises or
posts firearms for sale, including on any website, establishes a website for offering
their firearms for sale, makes available business cards, or tags firearms with sales
prices), regardless of whether the person incurs expenses or only promotes the
business informally;
(2) Purchases, rents, or otherwise secures or sets aside permanent or temporary
physical space to display or store firearms they offer for sale, including part or all of a
business premises, o r table space at a gun show, or display case;
(3) Makes or maintains records, in any form, to document, track, or calculate
profits and losses from firearms purchases and sales;
The provisions presume intent to profit without any proof of profit, and shift the burden to the
seller of the firearms to prove otherwise and subject the seller to civil forfeiture of their firearms as
well 18 U.S.C. 924(d)(1). The changes in the law did not provide that a person could not advertise a
firearm for sale, put a price tag on it, place it for sale on the internet, or rent a table at a gun show. The
law specifically provides for occasional sales for gun collectors and hobbyist. The proposed

presumptions prohibit all such sales except maybe by word of mouth. These provisions are not in
conformance with the law.
Gun shows and collector club meetings with sales and purchases by non-dealers were not
prohibited by the BSCA. Had that been the intent of the BSCA it would have so stated. Had it stated
such, much opposition would have come forth. It is not proper to take actions by regulation that go far
beyond what Congress provided in law.
We respectfully submit that the provisions in paragraph (c) setting forth presumptions of
“engaged in business” and the revisions setting forth presumptions of “intent to earn a profit” are not
supported by the language of BSCA, and should not be adopted.
Sincerely,

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail
authoritarian swine, Constitution, gun control, gun grabbers, Law, Rights, SCOTUS

A Mass Shooting Solution?

1 Comment

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