... is Miami, Florida police officer J. Mayorga, for assaulting local photojournalist Stretch Ledford for taping the investigation of a crime scene while standing on a public sidewalk outside the yellow taped police boundaries:
"You need to stop taping me, I'm undercover"
In full uniform and driving a marked police cruiser. Right.
You'd think being repeatedly exposed and embarrassed by journalists and photography-rights activists such as Ledford and Carlos Miller for their illegal behavior would be enough for that department to change its abusive departmental practices towards citizens engaged in lawful activities.
You'd think.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
It wasn't a suggestion, fellows
"A spokesman for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has confirmed that Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director Kenneth Melson did not produce documents and information related to the unfolding Project Gunrunner story that were requested 'as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 30, 2011' by Chairman Darrell Issa."
(Codrea)
We find it amazingly ironic that a thuggish government agency so historically eager to put average gun stores (most of which try their level best to comply with the Byzantine, arbitrary and ever-changing ATF rulebook) out of business over the most minor of paperwork errors has the unmitigated gall to completely stonewall a Congressional committee trying to answer the simple question of "Who in the ATF administration signed off on actively allowing thousands of known straw-purchased firearms to be smuggled into Mexico for the purpose of arming the drug cartels in that country, causing the deaths of untold Mexican citizens and at least two U.S. law-enforcement officers?"
The fact that the ATF brass, led by Acting Director Ken Melson, has blatantly ignored the lawful requests of both a House of Representatives committee chairman as well as the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee speaks volumes about the depth of their involvement in this ongoing scandal.
A personal question for Mr. Melson - is covering the rear ends of Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and possibly President Obama himself really worth losing your career (and now very possibly your freedom) over?
(Codrea)
We find it amazingly ironic that a thuggish government agency so historically eager to put average gun stores (most of which try their level best to comply with the Byzantine, arbitrary and ever-changing ATF rulebook) out of business over the most minor of paperwork errors has the unmitigated gall to completely stonewall a Congressional committee trying to answer the simple question of "Who in the ATF administration signed off on actively allowing thousands of known straw-purchased firearms to be smuggled into Mexico for the purpose of arming the drug cartels in that country, causing the deaths of untold Mexican citizens and at least two U.S. law-enforcement officers?"
The fact that the ATF brass, led by Acting Director Ken Melson, has blatantly ignored the lawful requests of both a House of Representatives committee chairman as well as the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee speaks volumes about the depth of their involvement in this ongoing scandal.
A personal question for Mr. Melson - is covering the rear ends of Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and possibly President Obama himself really worth losing your career (and now very possibly your freedom) over?
...Or maybe he didn't get it. Prove it.
"President Obama finally and quietly accepted his 'transparency' award from the open government community this week — in a closed, undisclosed meeting at the White House on Monday."
Woody Allen would be literally laughed out of his agent's office for suggesting the kinds of ludicrous situations to which our president is a regular party.
Oh, wait a minute - just like his undeserved Nobel Prize, this award was apparently given for the potential efforts at "transparency" that Dear Leader's devoted followers are fervently hoping will still occur at some later point in time, not for anything the president's (not) accomplished to date:
"'I don’t feel moved today to say 'thank you, Mr. President,'" said Steve Aftergood, the director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. But he said he understands the award to be 'aspirational,' in recognition of Obama’s potential to do more on the transparency front.
'And in that sense, one could say it resembles the award at the Nobel Peace Prize,' Aftergood said. 'It’s not because Obama brought peace to anyone but because people hoped he would be a force for good in the world, and maybe that’s the way to understand this award.'"
Sure it is, Mr. Aftergood, sure it is (sweet last name, by the way). Whatever helps you rationalize your decision to give an honor for openness to someone who didn't earn it and who ironically won't accept it in public.
Woody Allen would be literally laughed out of his agent's office for suggesting the kinds of ludicrous situations to which our president is a regular party.
Oh, wait a minute - just like his undeserved Nobel Prize, this award was apparently given for the potential efforts at "transparency" that Dear Leader's devoted followers are fervently hoping will still occur at some later point in time, not for anything the president's (not) accomplished to date:
"'I don’t feel moved today to say 'thank you, Mr. President,'" said Steve Aftergood, the director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. But he said he understands the award to be 'aspirational,' in recognition of Obama’s potential to do more on the transparency front.
'And in that sense, one could say it resembles the award at the Nobel Peace Prize,' Aftergood said. 'It’s not because Obama brought peace to anyone but because people hoped he would be a force for good in the world, and maybe that’s the way to understand this award.'"
Sure it is, Mr. Aftergood, sure it is (sweet last name, by the way). Whatever helps you rationalize your decision to give an honor for openness to someone who didn't earn it and who ironically won't accept it in public.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Someone has to say it
Ross Zimmerman, whose son Gabe was murdered in the recent Tucson tragedy, is now being heartlessly used as a poster boy by the execrable Michael Bloomberg's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" campaign to lobby for "reasonable" gun control measures. Unfortunately for him (and them), though, Zimmerman has no earthly idea about what exactly he's supposed to be advocating for:
"'I'm not educated on the details of the gun laws,' he told HuffPost on Monday, 'but there are some things that are pretty obvious, like background checks.'" (emphasis ours)
We are truly saddened by and sympathetic to that father's unimaginable loss, but once a person attempts to milk a personal tragedy for political reasons he or she becomes fair game for criticism.
Perhaps Mr. Zimmerman should get some knowledge on the subject before he begins agitating for yet more useless laws that would not have stopped his son's murderer that day. Otherwise he becomes just another Rep. Carolyn "The Shoulder Thing That Goes Up" McCarthy (D-NY), a person similarly (and regrettably, of course) affected by gun violence who somehow feels that sad fact gives her a free license to not bother to "educate" herself about items and products about which she knows nothing except that they somehow "look" evil to her, which then becomes her sole reason for trying to deny ownership of them to law-abiding individuals:
As everyone with a smidgen of factual knowledge about the incident knows, the cowardly shooter Loughner before his horrific act was an individual who had neither a criminal record nor a mental-health diagnosis that would have disqualified him from any sort of background check, including the very one he passed when purchasing his firearm. How would subjecting law-abiding individuals to yet another unnecessary government intrusion (a double-background check?) into their lives have prevented the massacre? One simply cannot prevent every bad thing in the world from happening. That's the price of living in a free society.
"[Zimmerman] said he hoped the rally would help address the need to create programs in Tucson that help gun sellers identify mentally unstable individuals."
He (and by extension the shills who are cynically using him) apparently believes that gun-store owners now have to be licensed as interventional psychiatrists before being allowed to open their doors. Isn't the federal government, by the way, the very entity that, through its cumbersome HIPAA law, made such health records so very hard for anyone to access without a direct doctor-patient relationship or a signed waiver from the patient? Unintended consequences, indeed.
"'It was a diverse group of people who got shot ... so families are grieving in diverse ways,' [Zimmerman] said."
We're extremely sorry, but we simply fail to see what such meaningless PC pap has to do with the debate at hand.
"'I'm not educated on the details of the gun laws,' he told HuffPost on Monday, 'but there are some things that are pretty obvious, like background checks.'" (emphasis ours)
We are truly saddened by and sympathetic to that father's unimaginable loss, but once a person attempts to milk a personal tragedy for political reasons he or she becomes fair game for criticism.
Perhaps Mr. Zimmerman should get some knowledge on the subject before he begins agitating for yet more useless laws that would not have stopped his son's murderer that day. Otherwise he becomes just another Rep. Carolyn "The Shoulder Thing That Goes Up" McCarthy (D-NY), a person similarly (and regrettably, of course) affected by gun violence who somehow feels that sad fact gives her a free license to not bother to "educate" herself about items and products about which she knows nothing except that they somehow "look" evil to her, which then becomes her sole reason for trying to deny ownership of them to law-abiding individuals:
As everyone with a smidgen of factual knowledge about the incident knows, the cowardly shooter Loughner before his horrific act was an individual who had neither a criminal record nor a mental-health diagnosis that would have disqualified him from any sort of background check, including the very one he passed when purchasing his firearm. How would subjecting law-abiding individuals to yet another unnecessary government intrusion (a double-background check?) into their lives have prevented the massacre? One simply cannot prevent every bad thing in the world from happening. That's the price of living in a free society.
"[Zimmerman] said he hoped the rally would help address the need to create programs in Tucson that help gun sellers identify mentally unstable individuals."
He (and by extension the shills who are cynically using him) apparently believes that gun-store owners now have to be licensed as interventional psychiatrists before being allowed to open their doors. Isn't the federal government, by the way, the very entity that, through its cumbersome HIPAA law, made such health records so very hard for anyone to access without a direct doctor-patient relationship or a signed waiver from the patient? Unintended consequences, indeed.
"'It was a diverse group of people who got shot ... so families are grieving in diverse ways,' [Zimmerman] said."
We're extremely sorry, but we simply fail to see what such meaningless PC pap has to do with the debate at hand.
Why I carry a handgun for protection, Vol. 48
So that if two career criminals (who are running around loose in public despite several outstanding felony warrants each) happen to smash their way through the front door of our house and assault us in our own kitchen, we'll have something a bit more effective than a baseball bat with which to defend ourselves, as a North Carolina woman successfully (and very luckily) managed to do last Thursday:
"After stopping the vehicle, deputies said Richard Guthrie Jr., 28, of Greensboro, and Jeffery Martin Moore, 42, of Burlington, were found bleeding from head injuries.
Deputies said they determined that the two kicked in a front glass door and began assaulting the woman.
That's when the woman used the bat to defend herself, striking both suspects in the head, deputies said."
The two assailants were subsequently charged with first-degree burglary, assault on a female (? It appears attacking a female is a different crime in N.C. than doing the same to a male, for some reason) and injury to personal property.
This woman was extremely fortunate to survive what was basically hand-to-hand combat with these brutal thugs. A firearm, and the training and mindset to use it, would have allowed her to defend herself much more safely and effectively by not forcing her to get within arm's reach of her attackers.
This incident is only the latest story of a random invasion of an innocent person's home in the type of unprovoked attack on a law-abiding citizen that groups such as the Brady Campaign and Violence Policy Center continue to disingenuously insist are as rare as hen's teeth, and thus argue that guns for personal defense are completely unnecessary in today's society.
If that is indeed the case then how have we managed to so rapidly arrive at Number 48 in this series?
"After stopping the vehicle, deputies said Richard Guthrie Jr., 28, of Greensboro, and Jeffery Martin Moore, 42, of Burlington, were found bleeding from head injuries.
Deputies said they determined that the two kicked in a front glass door and began assaulting the woman.
That's when the woman used the bat to defend herself, striking both suspects in the head, deputies said."
The two assailants were subsequently charged with first-degree burglary, assault on a female (? It appears attacking a female is a different crime in N.C. than doing the same to a male, for some reason) and injury to personal property.
This woman was extremely fortunate to survive what was basically hand-to-hand combat with these brutal thugs. A firearm, and the training and mindset to use it, would have allowed her to defend herself much more safely and effectively by not forcing her to get within arm's reach of her attackers.
This incident is only the latest story of a random invasion of an innocent person's home in the type of unprovoked attack on a law-abiding citizen that groups such as the Brady Campaign and Violence Policy Center continue to disingenuously insist are as rare as hen's teeth, and thus argue that guns for personal defense are completely unnecessary in today's society.
If that is indeed the case then how have we managed to so rapidly arrive at Number 48 in this series?
Monday, March 28, 2011
Catchup Monday
Clearing the desktop of a few wayward stories:
1. Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-NY, a fervent House champion of Dear Leader's "one size fits all" health care Ponzi scheme (including the very contentious public option), is now arguing that New York City is "more equal" than everyone else and thus deserving of a waiver from having to struggle under that onerous burden of a program:
"Weiner, who is likely to run for mayor of New York, said that because of the city’s special health care infrastructure, his office was looking into alternatives that might make more sense."
But nobody else in the country should be allowed to, of course, except for the various entities who wanted this execrable legislation in the first place:
"'The administration needs to make this argument more forcefully,' he said. 'A lot of people who got waivers were … people who are our friends.'"
No need, sir, we peasants have already received that message loud and clear.
2. Police in Birmingham, England have mistakenly raided the same wrong house an unbelievable 41 times over the past year and a half, making an innocent couple's lives a living hell:
"Matthew Jillard and Claire Hayes told last week how they have suffered 18 months of their home being mixed up with another 100 yards away."
This is a clear indicator of how beaten into submission the average English subject really is, because had the same circumstances happened to us our lawsuit against the idiots down at the local cop shop would have been filed after the second incident, much less allowing the apparent buffoons to rack up double-digit dangerous (not to mention illegal) invasions of our home.
Aren't some of these officers who participate in these multiple mistaken raids smart enough to think "Hey, we've been here, oh, thirty or so times before and it's always a mistake. Maybe we should double-check with HQ before stepping square on our dongs once again."
The couple, who have lived at the address for over 10 years, has now announced that they are moving to avoid further harassment. We don't see why they are the ones who have to leave:
"Last night West Midlands police said: 'Despite measures put in place to prevent such an occurrence, it appears human error has led to officers attending the incorrect address. We will be contacting them to apologise and discuss the matter further.'"
How about canning some of the idiot administrators who keep authorizing the continual abuse of these innocent people? We imagine that sort of needed action would bring these sorts of inexcusable "errors" to an abrupt halt.
1. Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-NY, a fervent House champion of Dear Leader's "one size fits all" health care Ponzi scheme (including the very contentious public option), is now arguing that New York City is "more equal" than everyone else and thus deserving of a waiver from having to struggle under that onerous burden of a program:
"Weiner, who is likely to run for mayor of New York, said that because of the city’s special health care infrastructure, his office was looking into alternatives that might make more sense."
But nobody else in the country should be allowed to, of course, except for the various entities who wanted this execrable legislation in the first place:
"'The administration needs to make this argument more forcefully,' he said. 'A lot of people who got waivers were … people who are our friends.'"
No need, sir, we peasants have already received that message loud and clear.
2. Police in Birmingham, England have mistakenly raided the same wrong house an unbelievable 41 times over the past year and a half, making an innocent couple's lives a living hell:
"Matthew Jillard and Claire Hayes told last week how they have suffered 18 months of their home being mixed up with another 100 yards away."
This is a clear indicator of how beaten into submission the average English subject really is, because had the same circumstances happened to us our lawsuit against the idiots down at the local cop shop would have been filed after the second incident, much less allowing the apparent buffoons to rack up double-digit dangerous (not to mention illegal) invasions of our home.
Aren't some of these officers who participate in these multiple mistaken raids smart enough to think "Hey, we've been here, oh, thirty or so times before and it's always a mistake. Maybe we should double-check with HQ before stepping square on our dongs once again."
The couple, who have lived at the address for over 10 years, has now announced that they are moving to avoid further harassment. We don't see why they are the ones who have to leave:
"Last night West Midlands police said: 'Despite measures put in place to prevent such an occurrence, it appears human error has led to officers attending the incorrect address. We will be contacting them to apologise and discuss the matter further.'"
How about canning some of the idiot administrators who keep authorizing the continual abuse of these innocent people? We imagine that sort of needed action would bring these sorts of inexcusable "errors" to an abrupt halt.
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Trapped in the closet
"Staffers with Vice President Joe Biden confined an Orlando Sentinel reporter in a closet this week to keep him from mingling with high-powered guests gathered for a Democratic fundraiser."
Scott Powers was supposed to be the media pool reporter for the event, but he apparently ended up being the "closet reporter" instead.
Why have the press there at all if that's how you're going to treat them?
"Transparency". Don't listen to what the Obama administration says about promoting it, watch instead what they do to stifle it.
The reporter's cushy digs. (Pic via Drudge)
Scott Powers was supposed to be the media pool reporter for the event, but he apparently ended up being the "closet reporter" instead.
Why have the press there at all if that's how you're going to treat them?
"Transparency". Don't listen to what the Obama administration says about promoting it, watch instead what they do to stifle it.
Friday, March 25, 2011
No "boots on the ground", eh?
"[General Carter Ham, Commander of U.S. Africa Command] reminded reporters that the US President, Barack Obama, has said that there would be no US troops on the ground in Libya."
Hmm.
We suppose nobody informed the 2,200 Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit who are right now on their way to Libya about Dear Leader's recent pronouncement on that subject.
The soldiers in question must be clad in Topsiders, will be suspended above the terrain by wires or are somehow otherwise not going to be technically counted as "boots on the ground", then, because they're definitely going to be momentarily arriving in-country.
More obfuscation, misdirection and outright fibbing on the part of our president. What a shocker. No wonder he declined to let Congress know about his intentions.
Hmm.
We suppose nobody informed the 2,200 Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit who are right now on their way to Libya about Dear Leader's recent pronouncement on that subject.
The soldiers in question must be clad in Topsiders, will be suspended above the terrain by wires or are somehow otherwise not going to be technically counted as "boots on the ground", then, because they're definitely going to be momentarily arriving in-country.
More obfuscation, misdirection and outright fibbing on the part of our president. What a shocker. No wonder he declined to let Congress know about his intentions.
The Jack-Booted Thug(s) of the Week...
... are the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania police officers who saw fit to treat local resident Mark Fiorino, a permit-holder who was innocently walking to a local auto-parts store with a lawfully openly-carried holstered firearm, in the following incredibly abusive manner (warning: foul language):
The other three parts of the encounter can be found at the above YouTube link. They're just as bad as this one.
In what reality is it perfectly acceptable for a police officer, with no reasonable suspicion whatsoever that a crime is being committed, to initiate an encounter with a law-abiding citizen with a disrespectful "Hey Junior", then go on to draw down on that person, curse him out multiple times and threaten to shoot him for moving the wrong way?
"Get on your Fucking knees or I’ll shoot you!"
What absolutely atrocious behavior on the part of the officer. Ademo Freeman of Cop Block is 100% right - listening to the recording of the encounter, one quickly realizes that Fiorino with his calm and reasonable manner was the true "professional" that day and not the hysterical, out-of-control cop.
Mr. Fiorino was unlawfully detained for over 45 minutes (handcuffed in a paddy wagon, no less) while the Keystone (State) Kops tried to puzzle out some sort of bogus charge with which to run him in. They finally had to kick him lose when someone with an ounce of common sense figured out that he wasn't doing anything wrong.
Fortunately for Fiorino, he apparently makes a habit of carrying an audio recorder when open carrying in case just such a massive overreaction occurs.
(But it's bad to tape the cops, you know, and such an odious practice should be outlawed because, you know, police officers never do anything wrong or abuse their authority, just like they did right here the other day in Philly.)
The "officer" who performed the initial stop in this incident needs to lose his job right this very second.
The other three parts of the encounter can be found at the above YouTube link. They're just as bad as this one.
In what reality is it perfectly acceptable for a police officer, with no reasonable suspicion whatsoever that a crime is being committed, to initiate an encounter with a law-abiding citizen with a disrespectful "Hey Junior", then go on to draw down on that person, curse him out multiple times and threaten to shoot him for moving the wrong way?
"Get on your Fucking knees or I’ll shoot you!"
What absolutely atrocious behavior on the part of the officer. Ademo Freeman of Cop Block is 100% right - listening to the recording of the encounter, one quickly realizes that Fiorino with his calm and reasonable manner was the true "professional" that day and not the hysterical, out-of-control cop.
Mr. Fiorino was unlawfully detained for over 45 minutes (handcuffed in a paddy wagon, no less) while the Keystone (State) Kops tried to puzzle out some sort of bogus charge with which to run him in. They finally had to kick him lose when someone with an ounce of common sense figured out that he wasn't doing anything wrong.
Fortunately for Fiorino, he apparently makes a habit of carrying an audio recorder when open carrying in case just such a massive overreaction occurs.
(But it's bad to tape the cops, you know, and such an odious practice should be outlawed because, you know, police officers never do anything wrong or abuse their authority, just like they did right here the other day in Philly.)
The "officer" who performed the initial stop in this incident needs to lose his job right this very second.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Off topic but interesting, at least to me
There is a special hell waiting for the GM automotive engineer who thought it would be an awesome idea to make the removal and replacement (at a book rate of $92) of a 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe's front bumper a necessary step to facilitating the replacement of a right front turn-signal bulb.
Fortunately for us, our service writer only charged half price for the job, as he also considers it criminally stupid to make such a simple maintenance chore so darn hard to accomplish.
Thanks, Government Motors, for helping to make our decision to end our almost three-decade association with you (because of the Obama Administration's takeover of your company) such an easy one.
Fortunately for us, our service writer only charged half price for the job, as he also considers it criminally stupid to make such a simple maintenance chore so darn hard to accomplish.
Thanks, Government Motors, for helping to make our decision to end our almost three-decade association with you (because of the Obama Administration's takeover of your company) such an easy one.
This blooper isn't getting as much attention, oddly enough
Remember back in 2005 when President George W. Bush, on a visit to China, attempted to exit a room only to find the doors locked?
The worldwide mainstream liberal press had a field day mocking Bush for his supposed stupidity, even though the then-president had no way of knowing those doors were secured.
Well, Dear Leader had the exact same thing happen to him yesterday, only this time it was the president's own Oval Office he was trying to enter.
We await the upcoming torrent of jokes at his expense.
The worldwide mainstream liberal press had a field day mocking Bush for his supposed stupidity, even though the then-president had no way of knowing those doors were secured.
Well, Dear Leader had the exact same thing happen to him yesterday, only this time it was the president's own Oval Office he was trying to enter.
We await the upcoming torrent of jokes at his expense.
An example of a "reasonable" gun law "fix"
Senator Chuck Schumer, D-NY, a reliable anti-gun legislator (at least for the peasants. This naked hypocrite at least at one time held an unrestricted New York City concealed carry permit, a document unobtainable to all but the rich, famous and politically-connected there), has introduced the "Fix Guns Check Act of 2011", which among other things would bar a person from owning and carrying a firearm merely for a single arrest (whether or not there was a subsequent conviction) for drug possession within a five-year period.
Any arrest. This means that a person given a misdemeanor ticket (which is technically an arrest) for possession of a small amount of marijuana, regardless of whether he or she was armed at the time, would automatically void that person's right to own and carry a firearm. The same would go for a person busted for a prescription drug violation that was later dropped because the matter was cleared up, or someone who unwittingly found themselves in the same room or vehicle with a person in possession. And certain abusive police officers of course never claim to have found drugs on someone on whom they want to inflict legal trouble, or plant drugs on a crime scene to get themselves out of a jam of their own making. Oh, no.
We won't even mention the conflict between federal laws regarding possession and states that permit the medicinal usage of marijuana this law would cause. Wouldn't a court have loads of fun sorting that out?
Actually, the proposed law doesn't require the person to be caught with a usable amount of drugs or even be arrested to become a prohibited person under its auspices:
"The bill’s definition of an 'unlawful user' also includes anyone arrested for drug paraphernalia within the past five years if the paraphernalia is found have traces of a drug, and those who make an 'admission' to using or possessing a controlled substance in the past five years. The meaning of 'admission,' however, is not defined."
Of course it isn't. This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to deny millions of people their Second Amendment rights in one fell swoop without even the hint of due process.
Nice try, Chuck. Our nation neither needs nor wants your unconstitutional "fixes". Thanks for playing anyway.
(link via Unc)
Any arrest. This means that a person given a misdemeanor ticket (which is technically an arrest) for possession of a small amount of marijuana, regardless of whether he or she was armed at the time, would automatically void that person's right to own and carry a firearm. The same would go for a person busted for a prescription drug violation that was later dropped because the matter was cleared up, or someone who unwittingly found themselves in the same room or vehicle with a person in possession. And certain abusive police officers of course never claim to have found drugs on someone on whom they want to inflict legal trouble, or plant drugs on a crime scene to get themselves out of a jam of their own making. Oh, no.
We won't even mention the conflict between federal laws regarding possession and states that permit the medicinal usage of marijuana this law would cause. Wouldn't a court have loads of fun sorting that out?
Actually, the proposed law doesn't require the person to be caught with a usable amount of drugs or even be arrested to become a prohibited person under its auspices:
"The bill’s definition of an 'unlawful user' also includes anyone arrested for drug paraphernalia within the past five years if the paraphernalia is found have traces of a drug, and those who make an 'admission' to using or possessing a controlled substance in the past five years. The meaning of 'admission,' however, is not defined."
Of course it isn't. This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to deny millions of people their Second Amendment rights in one fell swoop without even the hint of due process.
Nice try, Chuck. Our nation neither needs nor wants your unconstitutional "fixes". Thanks for playing anyway.
(link via Unc)
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
The fog has lifted, exposing the wreck for all to see
"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy"
- former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi on the House floor last March, as she attempted to justify cutting off debate over the health care Ponzi scheme that was ultimately forced down our collective throats.
Well, we're all now "finding out" what's in that absolute nightmare of a law and the news sure isn't getting any better, according to this editorial in yesterday's Cincinnati Enquirer. It's worth your time to check out.
- former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi on the House floor last March, as she attempted to justify cutting off debate over the health care Ponzi scheme that was ultimately forced down our collective throats.
Well, we're all now "finding out" what's in that absolute nightmare of a law and the news sure isn't getting any better, according to this editorial in yesterday's Cincinnati Enquirer. It's worth your time to check out.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
The dominoes are falling "faster and furiouser"
A second brave and conscientious ATF agent named Rene Jaquez has come forward and confirmed to CBS News that his agency indeed not only sat back and did nothing, but in fact actively enabled thousands of straw-purchased firearms to be smuggled across the border into Mexico as part of something named "Operation Fast and Furious" but which writer David Codrea, who along with blogger Mike Vanderboegh first broke the story, more accurately termed "Project Gunwalker". Some of those very weapons were later found at the murder scenes of both a U.S. Border Patrol officer as well as an ICE agent operating in that country.
This "operation" apparently was some sort of hare-brained scheme from incompetent government bureaucrats to track the weapons all the way to their supposed delivery to Mexican drug cartels, allegedly in order for the Obama Administration to have something to point at when agitating for more gun control for law-abiding Americans, who of course have nothing to do with such illegal acts.
The only problem with this crazy plan (besides getting their own colleagues killed by their utter negligence, of course) is that gunrunning, or being an accomplice to gunrunning, happens to be against the law, even for imperial Federal agencies. We won't even mention the fact that the the American people tend to frown on their "authorities" sparking an international diplomatic incident with a neighboring country, as Mexico is quite rightly hopping mad at not being informed of this Three Stooges operation, which has no doubt contributed to untold thousands of their citizens being killed and wounded because of the ATF's passive arming of the drug lords down there.
Agent Jaquez, who is based in El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico (a completely different ATF office from John Dodson, the other whistleblower in Phoenix, by the way, yet their stories are identical. This tends to lend credence to both their accounts), also links more government offices to the breaking scandal:
"But ATF wasn't working alone on the case known as "Fast and Furious." Documents show ATF had conference calls with "DHS" (Homeland Security). "USMS" (U.S. Marshals) and DEA. An "ICE," or Customs agent, was on ATF's Fast and Furious team. They were advised by an "AUSA," or Assistant U.S. Attorney under the Justice Department."
It would seem that Janet Napolitano and Eric "Neutral, leaning toward favorable" Holder have some serious 'splaining to do. Perhaps we should let Mexico extradite them in order for that nation to get to the bottom of the story?
This "operation" apparently was some sort of hare-brained scheme from incompetent government bureaucrats to track the weapons all the way to their supposed delivery to Mexican drug cartels, allegedly in order for the Obama Administration to have something to point at when agitating for more gun control for law-abiding Americans, who of course have nothing to do with such illegal acts.
The only problem with this crazy plan (besides getting their own colleagues killed by their utter negligence, of course) is that gunrunning, or being an accomplice to gunrunning, happens to be against the law, even for imperial Federal agencies. We won't even mention the fact that the the American people tend to frown on their "authorities" sparking an international diplomatic incident with a neighboring country, as Mexico is quite rightly hopping mad at not being informed of this Three Stooges operation, which has no doubt contributed to untold thousands of their citizens being killed and wounded because of the ATF's passive arming of the drug lords down there.
Agent Jaquez, who is based in El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico (a completely different ATF office from John Dodson, the other whistleblower in Phoenix, by the way, yet their stories are identical. This tends to lend credence to both their accounts), also links more government offices to the breaking scandal:
"But ATF wasn't working alone on the case known as "Fast and Furious." Documents show ATF had conference calls with "DHS" (Homeland Security). "USMS" (U.S. Marshals) and DEA. An "ICE," or Customs agent, was on ATF's Fast and Furious team. They were advised by an "AUSA," or Assistant U.S. Attorney under the Justice Department."
It would seem that Janet Napolitano and Eric "Neutral, leaning toward favorable" Holder have some serious 'splaining to do. Perhaps we should let Mexico extradite them in order for that nation to get to the bottom of the story?
Monday, March 21, 2011
Another presidential promise swirls down the drain
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation"
...
"As President, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law."
Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama, December 20, 2007, questioned in a Boston Globe interview about the possibility of his having to bomb Iran should he be elected.
Say what you will about President George W. Bush and the wisdom of invading Iraq (we didn't agree with the decision much either), but he at least sought and received Congressional approval before embarking on that course of action. Dear Leader simply took a few minutes out of his latest vacation in Rio to let us know about his "unilateral authorization" via a "presumptuous and flippant" radio announcement rather than a serious Oval Office address like President Bush chose to deliver in 2003.
Tim Carney of the Washington Examiner, who authored the above description of the president's quiet little weekend aside, further expounds on the president's pattern of shattering his campaign vows:
"This is a president who has repeatedly shredded the clear meaning of words in order to deny breaking promises he has clearly broken -- consider his continued blatant falsehoods on tax increases and his hiring of lobbyists."
It's nice to see that mainstream journalists are now finally beginning to notice that the Emperor is strutting around quite starkers. When will Dear Leader's legions of star-struck supporters (many of whom specifically voted for him because of his constant bashing of Bush on the war issue and his self-promotion as a person who wouldn't engage in the same sorts of acts) do the same?
...
"As President, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law."
Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama, December 20, 2007, questioned in a Boston Globe interview about the possibility of his having to bomb Iran should he be elected.
Say what you will about President George W. Bush and the wisdom of invading Iraq (we didn't agree with the decision much either), but he at least sought and received Congressional approval before embarking on that course of action. Dear Leader simply took a few minutes out of his latest vacation in Rio to let us know about his "unilateral authorization" via a "presumptuous and flippant" radio announcement rather than a serious Oval Office address like President Bush chose to deliver in 2003.
Tim Carney of the Washington Examiner, who authored the above description of the president's quiet little weekend aside, further expounds on the president's pattern of shattering his campaign vows:
"This is a president who has repeatedly shredded the clear meaning of words in order to deny breaking promises he has clearly broken -- consider his continued blatant falsehoods on tax increases and his hiring of lobbyists."
It's nice to see that mainstream journalists are now finally beginning to notice that the Emperor is strutting around quite starkers. When will Dear Leader's legions of star-struck supporters (many of whom specifically voted for him because of his constant bashing of Bush on the war issue and his self-promotion as a person who wouldn't engage in the same sorts of acts) do the same?
Why I carry a handgun for protection, Vol. 47
Because roving packs of hoodie-clad feral youths are prowling the streets randomly assaulting innocent pedestrians for no other reason than a person's perceived sexual orientation:
"Barie Shortell, 29, was walking down North Fourth Street in Williamsburg at around 10 p.m. on Feb. 22 when a group of teens started taunting him, according to The Brooklyn Paper.
Shortell told The Paper the teens started to mock him and began yelling anti-gay slurs so he decided to cross to Wyeth Avenue to be on the safe side.
That is when the hoodie-wearing gang of teens shoved him against a wall and started attacking him. Although he was not robbed, he suffered a fractured jaw, broken nose and eye sockets."
We note with no small amount of frustration that this brutal and unprovoked attack occurred in Brooklyn, which is part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's anti-gun paradise of New York City. Gee, a lawfully owned-and-carried handgun might have really come in handy here, eh, Mayor? We don't know if you realize this, sir, but not everyone in your town rates a 24-hour armed police guard like the one you are fortunate enough to have (and even bring on vacation with you to Bermuda, all at taxpayer expense, of course).
Gay people concerned about becoming victims of similar bias crimes and who desire to learn more about lawfully defending themselves with firearms should definitely check out the Pink Pistols, a stellar gun-rights organization that welcomes members of all sexual identities but which especially reaches out to gays. Their motto? "Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed".
Yep.
"Barie Shortell, 29, was walking down North Fourth Street in Williamsburg at around 10 p.m. on Feb. 22 when a group of teens started taunting him, according to The Brooklyn Paper.
Shortell told The Paper the teens started to mock him and began yelling anti-gay slurs so he decided to cross to Wyeth Avenue to be on the safe side.
That is when the hoodie-wearing gang of teens shoved him against a wall and started attacking him. Although he was not robbed, he suffered a fractured jaw, broken nose and eye sockets."
We note with no small amount of frustration that this brutal and unprovoked attack occurred in Brooklyn, which is part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's anti-gun paradise of New York City. Gee, a lawfully owned-and-carried handgun might have really come in handy here, eh, Mayor? We don't know if you realize this, sir, but not everyone in your town rates a 24-hour armed police guard like the one you are fortunate enough to have (and even bring on vacation with you to Bermuda, all at taxpayer expense, of course).
Gay people concerned about becoming victims of similar bias crimes and who desire to learn more about lawfully defending themselves with firearms should definitely check out the Pink Pistols, a stellar gun-rights organization that welcomes members of all sexual identities but which especially reaches out to gays. Their motto? "Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed".
Yep.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Don't waive your rights. Ever.
Ken, a defense attorney who posts over at Popehat, helpfully reminds us of the importance of keeping one's mouth shut when being detained and questioned (whether rightly or wrongly) by Federal law enforcement, lest your fumbling words be twisted around and used as the sole basis for a felony charge of lying to the FBI:
"When the authorities ask you questions, they are not out to 'clear this thing up so we can let you go.' They are not your friends. They do not want to help. They are very likely not trying to learn anything or discover anything."
You might be very personally charming, but you aren't going to talk your way out of serious trouble. Even if the circumstances driving your detainment are all based on a huge misunderstanding, you run a big risk of being indicted anyway because of an innocent comment on your part. Shut up and insist on contacting a lawyer.
Go read his entire post. It just might save you a lot of grief someday.
"When the authorities ask you questions, they are not out to 'clear this thing up so we can let you go.' They are not your friends. They do not want to help. They are very likely not trying to learn anything or discover anything."
You might be very personally charming, but you aren't going to talk your way out of serious trouble. Even if the circumstances driving your detainment are all based on a huge misunderstanding, you run a big risk of being indicted anyway because of an innocent comment on your part. Shut up and insist on contacting a lawyer.
Go read his entire post. It just might save you a lot of grief someday.
Every law infraction is now "terrorism", at least to certain Feds
A North Carolina man named Bernard von Nothaus was convicted in federal court this past week on charges of coining and distributing his own silver dollars, which violates both the Constitution as well as the U.S. Code.
While his unlawful actions were indeed deserving of punishment, they most certainly did not represent "a unique form of domestic terrorism", as U.S. Attorney Anne M. Tompkins amusingly crowed in her triumphant press release announcing the verdict.
We look forward to seeing what other fairly minor crimes (such as possessing a single found bald eagle feather, maybe?) will be the next dastardly deeds to be breathlessly (and incorrectly) described as "terrorist acts" by such masters of hyperbole as Ms. Tompkins.
While his unlawful actions were indeed deserving of punishment, they most certainly did not represent "a unique form of domestic terrorism", as U.S. Attorney Anne M. Tompkins amusingly crowed in her triumphant press release announcing the verdict.
We look forward to seeing what other fairly minor crimes (such as possessing a single found bald eagle feather, maybe?) will be the next dastardly deeds to be breathlessly (and incorrectly) described as "terrorist acts" by such masters of hyperbole as Ms. Tompkins.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
We won't be silenced
We received our first anonymous death threat the other day, courtesy of a cowardly supporter of Dear Leader:
"I like our president. I used to like you for good commentary on firearms rights. You do understand firearms rights, but you understand nothing else. I hope that ALL conservatives get killed soon. I have tried to reason with you before, and you were even open to discussion once, but now you are a pure, utter, nasty, cruel liar for the wingnuts who want to destroy the Constitution and American freedom.
I live in MN. Stay in AZ. If I find that you have come back up here, watch out; I have firearms too, I know how to use them, and you will not see me coming."
This rant is par for the course for the sorts of leftist thugs and bullies who loudly professed a desire for "civility" and "reasoned discourse" in the wake of the Tucson tragedy, at least until one politely disagrees with their views as well as their idol's political agenda. Then, as we see here, the gloves come off and their true tendencies in favor of censorship and intimidation once again bubble to the surface.
(By the way, thanks for ironically helping to make one of the anti-gun lobby's main arguments for them, numbnuts.)
This troll actually isn't as anonymous as he thinks he is. An alert friend of ours who works in IT has traced the IP address of the commenter, and it appears that our would-be silencer is a Minnesota state government worker (no big surprise there). Our attempt to further ID the person is ongoing.
We decided to do the responsible and prudent thing and report this matter to the Scottsdale Police Department, although we didn't think that action would do much good. Sure enough, Officer Johnson of that agency informs us that Zippy's rantings don't rise to the level of a "direct threat" (although it certainly seems that way to us), happens to be just "Internet talk" and thus we are completely on our own unless further specific statements or actions are made.
We do disagree with Officer Johnson's conclusion and will soon be escalating our criminal complaint to a higher pay grade at SPD, but in the meantime we are perfectly capable of self-protection and refuse to be cowed by this cheap threat. This behavior in our experience is typical of most Obama supporters, as they are intellectually incapable of defending their hero's socialist policies and so must resort to these types of thuggish behaviors out of infantile frustration.
Bullies such as this Obamanoid clown are the reason we fight so hard for the right of everyone in America to be able to lawfully carry firearms for self-defense purposes.
"I like our president. I used to like you for good commentary on firearms rights. You do understand firearms rights, but you understand nothing else. I hope that ALL conservatives get killed soon. I have tried to reason with you before, and you were even open to discussion once, but now you are a pure, utter, nasty, cruel liar for the wingnuts who want to destroy the Constitution and American freedom.
I live in MN. Stay in AZ. If I find that you have come back up here, watch out; I have firearms too, I know how to use them, and you will not see me coming."
This rant is par for the course for the sorts of leftist thugs and bullies who loudly professed a desire for "civility" and "reasoned discourse" in the wake of the Tucson tragedy, at least until one politely disagrees with their views as well as their idol's political agenda. Then, as we see here, the gloves come off and their true tendencies in favor of censorship and intimidation once again bubble to the surface.
(By the way, thanks for ironically helping to make one of the anti-gun lobby's main arguments for them, numbnuts.)
This troll actually isn't as anonymous as he thinks he is. An alert friend of ours who works in IT has traced the IP address of the commenter, and it appears that our would-be silencer is a Minnesota state government worker (no big surprise there). Our attempt to further ID the person is ongoing.
We decided to do the responsible and prudent thing and report this matter to the Scottsdale Police Department, although we didn't think that action would do much good. Sure enough, Officer Johnson of that agency informs us that Zippy's rantings don't rise to the level of a "direct threat" (although it certainly seems that way to us), happens to be just "Internet talk" and thus we are completely on our own unless further specific statements or actions are made.
We do disagree with Officer Johnson's conclusion and will soon be escalating our criminal complaint to a higher pay grade at SPD, but in the meantime we are perfectly capable of self-protection and refuse to be cowed by this cheap threat. This behavior in our experience is typical of most Obama supporters, as they are intellectually incapable of defending their hero's socialist policies and so must resort to these types of thuggish behaviors out of infantile frustration.
Bullies such as this Obamanoid clown are the reason we fight so hard for the right of everyone in America to be able to lawfully carry firearms for self-defense purposes.
Friday, March 18, 2011
No more flavor for you, smokers
An FDA advisory panel, in the very sort of administrative overreach that many people warned about when that department was granted the power to regulate tobacco products, has recommended unilaterally banning the menthol cigarettes that comprise 30% of all U.S. sales, apparently operating on the theory that limiting smokes to natural flavors "may" help curb teenage experimentation. They don't know for sure such a step would work, of course, but that ignorance isn't stopping them any.
Those government bureaucrats don't know the first thing about kids, do they?
This proposed move makes about as much sense as banning all flavored vodkas, leaving only the plain varieties, simply because a few misbehaving kids (just like millions of adults) might prefer a little taste with their chosen vice.
"Even the chairman of the panel that made the FDA recommendation expressed concern that a ban could push menthols into the black market."
But not enough of a concern to prevent the panelists from advocating one more stupid restriction on consenting American adults, though. At least right now those cigarettes are taxed and somewhat regulated. If such a ban goes through then all subsequent bets are off. Can anyone say "massive resurgence of organized crime"?
Look, if people wish to slowly kill themselves by regularly enjoying the smooth, rich taste of cigarettes (no matter what flavor they might choose) they should be free to do so, as it's not the government's business which rocket-sled to hell the citizens freely pick. And we say this as non-smokers who can't stand the smell and come from a health-care background, as well as have family members who are experiencing significant negative health effects from smoking.
Those government bureaucrats don't know the first thing about kids, do they?
This proposed move makes about as much sense as banning all flavored vodkas, leaving only the plain varieties, simply because a few misbehaving kids (just like millions of adults) might prefer a little taste with their chosen vice.
"Even the chairman of the panel that made the FDA recommendation expressed concern that a ban could push menthols into the black market."
But not enough of a concern to prevent the panelists from advocating one more stupid restriction on consenting American adults, though. At least right now those cigarettes are taxed and somewhat regulated. If such a ban goes through then all subsequent bets are off. Can anyone say "massive resurgence of organized crime"?
Look, if people wish to slowly kill themselves by regularly enjoying the smooth, rich taste of cigarettes (no matter what flavor they might choose) they should be free to do so, as it's not the government's business which rocket-sled to hell the citizens freely pick. And we say this as non-smokers who can't stand the smell and come from a health-care background, as well as have family members who are experiencing significant negative health effects from smoking.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Here we go again
Dear Leader and his minions are apparently exploring ways to once again blatantly ignore the codified system of lawmaking that has served this country quite adequately for well over 200 years now.
This time it appears that the administration will soon attempt to unilaterally impose new gun control laws by executive fiat, despite Congress and the peasants being on record as overwhelmingly against such actions:
"For gun control advocates, however, executive action remains a more promising -- albeit more limited -- vehicle for reform than Congress. On Monday, The Huffington Post first reported that the Justice Department was convening meetings with groups from across the ideological spectrum in an effort to chart potential policy changes to Second Amendment law."
That's funny - the NRA, toothless fossil that it is, has admirably declined to meet with Justice on the issue and no other prominent gun-rights groups appear to have been invited to the pow-wow, despite their politely asking to be included (so that they can discuss the ATF's naked complicity in allowing thousands of straw-purchased guns to be "walked" across the border to Mexico, among other things). How, then, are all points of view across the "ideological spectrum" being represented at these meetings?
Once again, just as we've seen on so many other occasions and issues, the Constitution appears to be nothing more than an inconvenient speed bump to whatever current agenda this president sees fit to implement, no matter the legality of his actions.
This time it appears that the administration will soon attempt to unilaterally impose new gun control laws by executive fiat, despite Congress and the peasants being on record as overwhelmingly against such actions:
"For gun control advocates, however, executive action remains a more promising -- albeit more limited -- vehicle for reform than Congress. On Monday, The Huffington Post first reported that the Justice Department was convening meetings with groups from across the ideological spectrum in an effort to chart potential policy changes to Second Amendment law."
That's funny - the NRA, toothless fossil that it is, has admirably declined to meet with Justice on the issue and no other prominent gun-rights groups appear to have been invited to the pow-wow, despite their politely asking to be included (so that they can discuss the ATF's naked complicity in allowing thousands of straw-purchased guns to be "walked" across the border to Mexico, among other things). How, then, are all points of view across the "ideological spectrum" being represented at these meetings?
Once again, just as we've seen on so many other occasions and issues, the Constitution appears to be nothing more than an inconvenient speed bump to whatever current agenda this president sees fit to implement, no matter the legality of his actions.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Fiddling while the world burns
"The Middle East is afire with rebellion, Japan is imploding from an earthquake, and the battle of the budget is on in the United States, but none of this seems to be deterring President Obama from a heavy schedule of childish distractions."
White House reporter Keith Koffler documents how Dear Leader graciously takes a breather here and there from his heavy schedule of diversions and amusements to devote a precious few minutes to actually, you know, doing his job.
Go read the whole piece if you're in a mood to become even more utterly disgusted with our president.
White House reporter Keith Koffler documents how Dear Leader graciously takes a breather here and there from his heavy schedule of diversions and amusements to devote a precious few minutes to actually, you know, doing his job.
Go read the whole piece if you're in a mood to become even more utterly disgusted with our president.
Nice try
Dear Leader wants to begin having a dialogue on "common-sense, reasonable gun reforms", which to his credit includes finally beginning to enforce the thousands of gun laws already on the books.
Unfortunately for him, the non-starter centerpiece of his proposal is criminalizing the private sale or transfer of legal firearms between law-abiding, non-prohibited individuals. This would mean that a person wouldn't be able to will a family heirloom to a grandchild, or sell an unneeded hunting rifle to a neighbor, or lend a domestic violence victim a pistol for their defense, without going to a licensed gun dealer, filling out paperwork and paying a transfer fee of $25 to $125 per firearm.
Even the Elmer Fudd-like capitulators at the NRA want no part of this obvious sham of a disingenuous effort:
'"Why should I or the N.R.A. go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States?' said Wayne LaPierre, the longtime chief executive of the National Rifle Association."
It's about darn time that organization finally grew a pair.
The ironic part of all this is that the mentally disturbed individuals who caused the Virginia Tech and Tucson tragedies bought their firearms from licensed gun dealers after passing all legally-mandated background checks currently in place. How would requiring all law-abiding individuals to submit to the same process have prevented these incidents from taking place? They wouldn't have, of course. Obama's proposal is nothing more than an attempt to impose further restrictions on peoples' civil liberties that would be completely ineffective at stopping the kind of unstoppable and extremely rare event that is the price of living in a free society.
"Obama called for "sound and effective" steps to prevent lawbreakers from obtaining guns. A system of criminal background checks must be better implemented and made more efficient, he said."
Once again, the individuals mentioned in his little talk had no disqualifying criminal records or mental-health holds (despite their well-documented histories of aberrant behavior. Perhaps the president should be instead arguing for stricter reporting requirements for school administrators and health professionals once such a person is identified.) Why, then, should we waste time, money and effort improving the "implementation and efficiency" of such useless checks?
Unfortunately for him, the non-starter centerpiece of his proposal is criminalizing the private sale or transfer of legal firearms between law-abiding, non-prohibited individuals. This would mean that a person wouldn't be able to will a family heirloom to a grandchild, or sell an unneeded hunting rifle to a neighbor, or lend a domestic violence victim a pistol for their defense, without going to a licensed gun dealer, filling out paperwork and paying a transfer fee of $25 to $125 per firearm.
Even the Elmer Fudd-like capitulators at the NRA want no part of this obvious sham of a disingenuous effort:
'"Why should I or the N.R.A. go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States?' said Wayne LaPierre, the longtime chief executive of the National Rifle Association."
It's about darn time that organization finally grew a pair.
The ironic part of all this is that the mentally disturbed individuals who caused the Virginia Tech and Tucson tragedies bought their firearms from licensed gun dealers after passing all legally-mandated background checks currently in place. How would requiring all law-abiding individuals to submit to the same process have prevented these incidents from taking place? They wouldn't have, of course. Obama's proposal is nothing more than an attempt to impose further restrictions on peoples' civil liberties that would be completely ineffective at stopping the kind of unstoppable and extremely rare event that is the price of living in a free society.
"Obama called for "sound and effective" steps to prevent lawbreakers from obtaining guns. A system of criminal background checks must be better implemented and made more efficient, he said."
Once again, the individuals mentioned in his little talk had no disqualifying criminal records or mental-health holds (despite their well-documented histories of aberrant behavior. Perhaps the president should be instead arguing for stricter reporting requirements for school administrators and health professionals once such a person is identified.) Why, then, should we waste time, money and effort improving the "implementation and efficiency" of such useless checks?
Today's TASER Travesty
"A police officer tasered a north Queensland [Australia] man up to 28 times because he believed the device, which emits a shock of 50,000 volts, did not cause pain, a coronial inquest has heard.
Senior Constable Craig Myles told the inquest into the death in custody of Antonio Galeano he used the Taser repeatedly because it was not having the desired effect on the 39-year-old."
"Constable" Myles apparently is also either an amnesiac or somehow has made it to adulthood without being able to make a reasonable estimate:
"The officer told the inquest he remembered using the Taser eight times against Mr Galeano but conceded it was possible he deployed it 28 times - as data recorded by the device suggested."
Maybe someone should TASER him 28 times in a row, as we imagine any lingering doubts about the device's ability to cause pain or the exact number of times he was shocked would be immediately removed from Myles's pea-sized brain.
Senior Constable Craig Myles told the inquest into the death in custody of Antonio Galeano he used the Taser repeatedly because it was not having the desired effect on the 39-year-old."
"Constable" Myles apparently is also either an amnesiac or somehow has made it to adulthood without being able to make a reasonable estimate:
"The officer told the inquest he remembered using the Taser eight times against Mr Galeano but conceded it was possible he deployed it 28 times - as data recorded by the device suggested."
Maybe someone should TASER him 28 times in a row, as we imagine any lingering doubts about the device's ability to cause pain or the exact number of times he was shocked would be immediately removed from Myles's pea-sized brain.
Monday, March 14, 2011
From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines
"Promises, Promises: Little transparency progress"
Two years into Dear Leader's term of office and the Associated Press isn't particularly impressed with his administration's oft-stated vow of "transparency", particularly when it comes to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Oddly enough, the AP reports that one of the hardest challenges is simply trying to take a gander at the very process of supposedly opening up the government to its own citizens:
"The Obama administration censored 194 pages of internal e-mails about its Open Government Directive that the AP requested more than one year ago. The December 2009 directive requires every agency to take immediate, specific steps to open their operations up to the public. But the White House Office of Management and Budget blacked-out entire pages of some e-mails between federal employees discussing how to apply the new openness rules, and it blacked-out one e-mail discussing how to respond to AP's request for information about the transparency directive."
The worst offender for invoking the "deliberative process" exemption was, naturally enough, the Homeland Security Department. That office accounted for over 80% of such uses government-wide, despite Obama ordering agencies to only use that excuse when absolutely necessary.
Just imagine how maddening the process must be for the information they don't want getting out in circulation.
Two years into Dear Leader's term of office and the Associated Press isn't particularly impressed with his administration's oft-stated vow of "transparency", particularly when it comes to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Oddly enough, the AP reports that one of the hardest challenges is simply trying to take a gander at the very process of supposedly opening up the government to its own citizens:
"The Obama administration censored 194 pages of internal e-mails about its Open Government Directive that the AP requested more than one year ago. The December 2009 directive requires every agency to take immediate, specific steps to open their operations up to the public. But the White House Office of Management and Budget blacked-out entire pages of some e-mails between federal employees discussing how to apply the new openness rules, and it blacked-out one e-mail discussing how to respond to AP's request for information about the transparency directive."
The worst offender for invoking the "deliberative process" exemption was, naturally enough, the Homeland Security Department. That office accounted for over 80% of such uses government-wide, despite Obama ordering agencies to only use that excuse when absolutely necessary.
Just imagine how maddening the process must be for the information they don't want getting out in circulation.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Idiocracy
Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder's Justice Department, already on record as showing overt racial bias by refusing to prosecute minorities who commit voter intimidation offenses, is apparently forcing the Dayton, Ohio Police Department to hire certain police recruits who failed the admissions test because "not enough African-Americans passed the exam".
Justice, seemingly based on criteria pulled straight out of their collective rear end, has arbitrarily imposed new passing scores of 58 and 63% on the department's two-part exam instead of 66% and 72%, respectively. We imagine those esoteric benchmarks were picked to allow the maximum number of minorities to be included in the new cutoff, but then again we're cynical like that.
Does anyone else besides us see a bit of a problem with giving firearms, TASERS, official arrest powers and other serious responsibilities to people, whatever skin tone they happen to be, who have officially proven themselves to be intellectually unfit for the job?
This particular situation is so ludicrous that even the Dayton police union and local NAACP branch, two organizations historically approving of such "affirmative action" measures, are speaking out against the overbearing pressure from the Feds:
"'It becomes a safety issue for the people of our community,' said Dayton Fraternal Order of Police President, Randy Beane. 'It becomes a safety issue to have an incompetent officer next to you in a life and death situation.'"
"'The NAACP does not support individuals failing a test and then having the opportunity to be gainfully employed,' agreed Dayton NAACP President Derrick Foward."
Well, the peasants who live in Dayton now have to worry about 258 such people who now because of Holder's meddling will soon be unleashed into their community, according to the article. It certainly will be interesting to see how many officer-misconduct lawsuits will be filed against that department in the next few years.
As we've noted in the past, police departments often seem to express an interest in recruiting officers who aren't particularly bright, as those people are presumably able to be easily led and talked out of thinking for themselves. Here's an agency that actually wants smart cops on their force and now they're told they have to hire a bunch of unqualified people in order to fulfill some sort of mandated quota?
By the way, since when is it the Imperial U.S. Government's (and by extension Eric Holder's) business who a local government entity decides to hire or not hire, especially in the absence of a legitimate complaint from someone claiming racial bias?
Justice, seemingly based on criteria pulled straight out of their collective rear end, has arbitrarily imposed new passing scores of 58 and 63% on the department's two-part exam instead of 66% and 72%, respectively. We imagine those esoteric benchmarks were picked to allow the maximum number of minorities to be included in the new cutoff, but then again we're cynical like that.
Does anyone else besides us see a bit of a problem with giving firearms, TASERS, official arrest powers and other serious responsibilities to people, whatever skin tone they happen to be, who have officially proven themselves to be intellectually unfit for the job?
This particular situation is so ludicrous that even the Dayton police union and local NAACP branch, two organizations historically approving of such "affirmative action" measures, are speaking out against the overbearing pressure from the Feds:
"'It becomes a safety issue for the people of our community,' said Dayton Fraternal Order of Police President, Randy Beane. 'It becomes a safety issue to have an incompetent officer next to you in a life and death situation.'"
"'The NAACP does not support individuals failing a test and then having the opportunity to be gainfully employed,' agreed Dayton NAACP President Derrick Foward."
Well, the peasants who live in Dayton now have to worry about 258 such people who now because of Holder's meddling will soon be unleashed into their community, according to the article. It certainly will be interesting to see how many officer-misconduct lawsuits will be filed against that department in the next few years.
As we've noted in the past, police departments often seem to express an interest in recruiting officers who aren't particularly bright, as those people are presumably able to be easily led and talked out of thinking for themselves. Here's an agency that actually wants smart cops on their force and now they're told they have to hire a bunch of unqualified people in order to fulfill some sort of mandated quota?
By the way, since when is it the Imperial U.S. Government's (and by extension Eric Holder's) business who a local government entity decides to hire or not hire, especially in the absence of a legitimate complaint from someone claiming racial bias?
Mentioning other peoples' websites is now a federal offense...
...along with seemingly just about every other innocuous activity these days.
Website owner Brian McCarthy's site has been seized by the feds, and he now faces charges that could result in five years in prison. The criminal mastermind's awful deed? Allegedly placing links on his page which pointed to other web locations that stream copyright-infringing sports programming:
"In a case against a New York website owner, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is claiming that merely linking to copyrighted material is a crime." (emphasis ours)
Why, then, isn't DHS shutting down Google or Bing, which of course have links to pretty much everything on the Internet? And, more importantly, just why is our "homeland security" department now involved with enforcing corporate copyright law? Is the world terrorist problem now solved and no one bothered to tell us?
It's important to note that McCarthy has never been accused of hosting copyrighted material on his own website. Theoretically, this means that anyone can now be similarly busted by the Thought Police merely for placing a link to a funny YouTube video on their blog, or for innocently pointing out a content programming site to others via Facebook.
Think of DHS Special Agent Daniel Brazier's Big Brother-ish and free speech-killing criminal complaint against McCarthy while you're having fun web-surfing today.
(link via Jenn Chou at CopBlock.org)
Website owner Brian McCarthy's site has been seized by the feds, and he now faces charges that could result in five years in prison. The criminal mastermind's awful deed? Allegedly placing links on his page which pointed to other web locations that stream copyright-infringing sports programming:
"In a case against a New York website owner, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is claiming that merely linking to copyrighted material is a crime." (emphasis ours)
Why, then, isn't DHS shutting down Google or Bing, which of course have links to pretty much everything on the Internet? And, more importantly, just why is our "homeland security" department now involved with enforcing corporate copyright law? Is the world terrorist problem now solved and no one bothered to tell us?
It's important to note that McCarthy has never been accused of hosting copyrighted material on his own website. Theoretically, this means that anyone can now be similarly busted by the Thought Police merely for placing a link to a funny YouTube video on their blog, or for innocently pointing out a content programming site to others via Facebook.
Think of DHS Special Agent Daniel Brazier's Big Brother-ish and free speech-killing criminal complaint against McCarthy while you're having fun web-surfing today.
(link via Jenn Chou at CopBlock.org)
Friday, March 11, 2011
Obama's true nature peeks through once again
"Mr. Obama has told people that it would be so much easier to be the president of China. As one official put it, 'No one is scrutinizing Hu Jintao’s words in Tahrir Square.'"
Heaven forbid someone should actually scrutinize our president's pronouncements.
Yes, we imagine it would seem better, at least through the eyes of a would-be dictator such as Dear Leader, to be the autocratic ruler of a repressed populace rather than have to "deal" with free people while being hamstrung by such inconvenient restrictions as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Heaven forbid someone should actually scrutinize our president's pronouncements.
Yes, we imagine it would seem better, at least through the eyes of a would-be dictator such as Dear Leader, to be the autocratic ruler of a repressed populace rather than have to "deal" with free people while being hamstrung by such inconvenient restrictions as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Crocodile tears
Minnesota Democratic Congressman Keith Ellison (also variously known by his earlier chosen aliases of Keith Hakim, Keith X. Ellison and Keith Ellison-Muhammad) apparently was a sad panda during Representative Peter King's House hearing yesterday on the disturbing recent increase in radical behavior among some Muslims:
"The congressman tried to hide his tears behind his papers and quickly left the room after his remarks."
Maybe it's us but we think Ellison's convenient photo-op weepfest was just a tad bit disingenuous, especially given his previous apparent self-identification as a Muslim-first individual, plus his promotion of the militant agenda of the Nation of Islam in published articles while in law school as well as being a spokesman for that group, plus his past vigorous defense of such various peace-seeking and bridge-building luminaries as Sharif Willis (convicted murderer and drug lord as well as Minneapolis Vice Lords gang leader), Kathleen Soliah (convicted Weather Underground terrorist) and Khalid Muhammad (virulent racist and anti-Semite NOI leader).
When one looks at his history in that light, it sure seems like Mr. Whoever-He-Is-Now had a significant hand in creating the very problem he now wants the government to overlook, mostly because some people consider it somehow racist to legitimately investigate how the more radical elements of Islam may have influenced such recent events as the attempted New York City car bombing, the Fort Hood massacre, the Saudi student nailed trying to build bombs in Texas and the murder of a soldier at a Little Rock, Arkansas recruiting station. If the Christian Coalition or B'nai B'rith were linked to a similar disturbing rise in violent activities we would want those groups investigated just as thoroughly.
We had the "pleasure" of observing Mr. Ellison in action back when he was a member of the Minnesota Legislature and can personally vouch for his being a rude, opportunistic jerk who isn't the least interested in a dialogue with anyone who disagrees with his narrow agenda.
Hey Keith - did you ever catch up with those years of back taxes and piles of unpaid traffic and parking tickets?
"The congressman tried to hide his tears behind his papers and quickly left the room after his remarks."
Maybe it's us but we think Ellison's convenient photo-op weepfest was just a tad bit disingenuous, especially given his previous apparent self-identification as a Muslim-first individual, plus his promotion of the militant agenda of the Nation of Islam in published articles while in law school as well as being a spokesman for that group, plus his past vigorous defense of such various peace-seeking and bridge-building luminaries as Sharif Willis (convicted murderer and drug lord as well as Minneapolis Vice Lords gang leader), Kathleen Soliah (convicted Weather Underground terrorist) and Khalid Muhammad (virulent racist and anti-Semite NOI leader).
When one looks at his history in that light, it sure seems like Mr. Whoever-He-Is-Now had a significant hand in creating the very problem he now wants the government to overlook, mostly because some people consider it somehow racist to legitimately investigate how the more radical elements of Islam may have influenced such recent events as the attempted New York City car bombing, the Fort Hood massacre, the Saudi student nailed trying to build bombs in Texas and the murder of a soldier at a Little Rock, Arkansas recruiting station. If the Christian Coalition or B'nai B'rith were linked to a similar disturbing rise in violent activities we would want those groups investigated just as thoroughly.
We had the "pleasure" of observing Mr. Ellison in action back when he was a member of the Minnesota Legislature and can personally vouch for his being a rude, opportunistic jerk who isn't the least interested in a dialogue with anyone who disagrees with his narrow agenda.
Hey Keith - did you ever catch up with those years of back taxes and piles of unpaid traffic and parking tickets?
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
The Bank Police? Sadly, yes
Why does seemingly every Federal agency need its own cops?
The latest department to be so equipped is the Special Inspector General of TARP. That's right, the bank bailout administrators apparently have a police force - complete with guns, badges and fully-outfitted prowl cars:
"It has 45 investigators who are empowered to carry guns and badges, and 27 vehicles with sirens and lights spread out in its branch offices across the country."
Because, you know, white-collar bank fraud cases generally rate a Code 1, red light-running response and all.
Old Washington hands, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of publicly engaging in bureaucratic turf wars, called the agency's cars and sirens 'ridiculous,' and 'ludicrous.'"
We agree, although we'd probably use slightly saltier language.
"As early as last summer, SIGTARP agents were participating in raids alongside other law enforcement agencies. They worked with FBI agents in a raid on Colonial Bank in Orlando, Florida in an investigation into possible TARP-related fraud."
Since the TARP fraud investigators work so closely with those other agencies, why can't they rely on them to make arrests without also having their own armed agents? This sure appears to be an unnecessary redundancy of resources. No matter, though, since the taxpayer's pockets are bottomless.
We won't even bother to mention the hypocritical fact that more and more federal employees every day seem to get to carry guns in public no matter how peripheral their law-enforcement role, all while the current administration is so hell-bent on denying law-abiding citizens their right to do the same.
The latest department to be so equipped is the Special Inspector General of TARP. That's right, the bank bailout administrators apparently have a police force - complete with guns, badges and fully-outfitted prowl cars:
"It has 45 investigators who are empowered to carry guns and badges, and 27 vehicles with sirens and lights spread out in its branch offices across the country."
Because, you know, white-collar bank fraud cases generally rate a Code 1, red light-running response and all.
Old Washington hands, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of publicly engaging in bureaucratic turf wars, called the agency's cars and sirens 'ridiculous,' and 'ludicrous.'"
We agree, although we'd probably use slightly saltier language.
"As early as last summer, SIGTARP agents were participating in raids alongside other law enforcement agencies. They worked with FBI agents in a raid on Colonial Bank in Orlando, Florida in an investigation into possible TARP-related fraud."
Since the TARP fraud investigators work so closely with those other agencies, why can't they rely on them to make arrests without also having their own armed agents? This sure appears to be an unnecessary redundancy of resources. No matter, though, since the taxpayer's pockets are bottomless.
We won't even bother to mention the hypocritical fact that more and more federal employees every day seem to get to carry guns in public no matter how peripheral their law-enforcement role, all while the current administration is so hell-bent on denying law-abiding citizens their right to do the same.
Events are moving quickly in the ATF scandal
The publishers of GUNS magazine have decided that David Codrea's upcoming June "Rights Watch" column on the ATF's "Project Gunwalker" debacle is too important and timely to wait for publication so they have posted it on their website for all to read right now for free.
Codrea, along with blogger and activist Mike Vanderboegh, has been on this story from the very beginning, and it's mostly due to their unrelenting efforts that the major media is now picking up the story.
The very worst part of this whole incident, at least in our eyes, is that several stand-up gun shops apparently alerted the ATF on many occasions to suspicious multiple transactions at the time they were made, and in every case the merchants were informed in no uncertain terms to let the sales go through. And gun shops are the scapegoats getting blamed for the flow of guns to Mexico?
Actually, if the facts check out, it looks like the BATFE (and, by extension, the Eric Holder-led Justice Department) was more responsible than anyone for the recent increased illicit trade in firearms.
The article is well worth your attention. Don't eat lunch beforehand.
Codrea, along with blogger and activist Mike Vanderboegh, has been on this story from the very beginning, and it's mostly due to their unrelenting efforts that the major media is now picking up the story.
The very worst part of this whole incident, at least in our eyes, is that several stand-up gun shops apparently alerted the ATF on many occasions to suspicious multiple transactions at the time they were made, and in every case the merchants were informed in no uncertain terms to let the sales go through. And gun shops are the scapegoats getting blamed for the flow of guns to Mexico?
Actually, if the facts check out, it looks like the BATFE (and, by extension, the Eric Holder-led Justice Department) was more responsible than anyone for the recent increased illicit trade in firearms.
The article is well worth your attention. Don't eat lunch beforehand.
Utter chaos
Prince George's County, Maryland (the place where we grew up but have zero desire to visit, let alone ever return for good) isn't even coming close to making a dent in apprehending the embarrassing number of criminals with outstanding warrants there, thus leaving the law-abiding residents nakedly exposed to predation:
"About 50,000 criminal warrants have not been served, Prince George's County Sheriff Melvin High said, a major concern as the county reels from a spree of homicides at the beginning of the year. (emphasis ours)
Maryland, we remind everyone once again, is a "may-issue" state for firearm carry permits, with the State Police denying just about all legitimate applications for a lack of good cause (at least in their biased opinion).
That strategy is really working out quite well for them, isn't it?
"About 50,000 criminal warrants have not been served, Prince George's County Sheriff Melvin High said, a major concern as the county reels from a spree of homicides at the beginning of the year. (emphasis ours)
Maryland, we remind everyone once again, is a "may-issue" state for firearm carry permits, with the State Police denying just about all legitimate applications for a lack of good cause (at least in their biased opinion).
That strategy is really working out quite well for them, isn't it?
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
A happy ending
If only every home-invasion story resolved itself so nicely:
"A man who broke into a house in Portland, Oregon, called police -- afraid the homeowner may have a gun.
The suspect, Timothy James Chapek, was in the bathroom taking a shower when the homeowner returned to the house Monday night, Portland police said in a statement."
Chapek was subsequently "rescued" by the cops and placed under arrest, according to CNN.
The important point to take away from this story - criminals are generally afraid of law-abiding citizens who carry firearms for self-protection, and the prospect of running into such a person is an effective deterrent for most nuisance crooks.
"A man who broke into a house in Portland, Oregon, called police -- afraid the homeowner may have a gun.
The suspect, Timothy James Chapek, was in the bathroom taking a shower when the homeowner returned to the house Monday night, Portland police said in a statement."
Chapek was subsequently "rescued" by the cops and placed under arrest, according to CNN.
The important point to take away from this story - criminals are generally afraid of law-abiding citizens who carry firearms for self-protection, and the prospect of running into such a person is an effective deterrent for most nuisance crooks.
Monday, March 07, 2011
Another campaign promise gets tossed into the circular file
"Obama to resume military commission trials for Guantanamo detainees"
The very "habeas corpus-suspending" trials that Dear Leader railed so stridently against when President Bush was in charge of national security, mind you:
Apparently these complete embarrassments to our world reputation are once again quite lawful, at least now that it's convenient for the Constitutional Professor to deem them so.
"But on Monday, Obama directed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to 'issue an order rescinding his prior suspension on the swearing and referring of new charges in the military commissions.'"
You almost have to feel sorry for the man. The job is obviously far too difficult for him so he simply defaults to the policies of his hated predecessor, even though he was elected on a specific platform of ending them as soon as possible.
Another promise broken. How many does that make now?
The very "habeas corpus-suspending" trials that Dear Leader railed so stridently against when President Bush was in charge of national security, mind you:
Apparently these complete embarrassments to our world reputation are once again quite lawful, at least now that it's convenient for the Constitutional Professor to deem them so.
"But on Monday, Obama directed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to 'issue an order rescinding his prior suspension on the swearing and referring of new charges in the military commissions.'"
You almost have to feel sorry for the man. The job is obviously far too difficult for him so he simply defaults to the policies of his hated predecessor, even though he was elected on a specific platform of ending them as soon as possible.
Another promise broken. How many does that make now?
Successfully dealing with a nest of snakes
At least one stand-up Federal law-enforcement administrator has finally had enough of the unconstitutional shenanigans being perpetrated in the name of our "security", as reported by TRAINS magazine:
"WASHINGTON — In late February, the Transportation Security Administration took over the Amtrak station in Savannah, Ga., and thoroughly searched every person who entered. None of the passengers got into trouble, but the TSA certainly did — big time."
The story actually has it slightly wrong - the facts are much worse than that. The goons not only searched everyone who entered the station, but also passengers who had already arrived on trains and were merely trying to exit and go about their business:
A complete farce. What were those screeners going to do if someone quite reasonably (and legally) refused to be searched, stick them back on a train?
"Amtrak Police Chief John O’Connor said he first thought a blog posting about the incident was a joke. When he discovered that the TSA’s VIPR team did at least some of what the blog said, he was livid. He ordered the VIPR teams off Amtrak property, at least until a firm agreement can be drawn up to prevent the TSA from taking actions that the chief said were illegal and clearly contrary to Amtrak policy."
"A posting in late February to the Transportation Security Administration’s blog, which serves as a public relations tool of the TSA, tried to explain why TSA agents took over the Amtrak station in Savannah. But O’Connor said the “facts” as posted on the TSA blog were incorrect. He said the blog indicated that Amtrak had approved of the operation, but it had not. He called the TSA’s posting on blog.tsa.gov 'inaccurate and insensitive.'"
In other words, the martinets who run the TSA are liars. Do tell.
Many thanks must go to Chief O'Connor for standing up for what's left of the rule of law in this country.
Sunday, March 06, 2011
Credit where it's due
“Well, the Second Amendment in this country is part of our Constitution, and the president of the United States is bound by our Constitution. So I believe in the Second Amendment. It does provide for Americans the right to bear arms for their protection, for their safety, for hunting, for a wide range of uses." (emphasis ours)
President Barack Obama, March 3, 2011.
Good to know that that President agrees with the great majority of law-abiding Americans on this issue and not with fringe anti-gun groups such as the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center, which ironically expended enormous amounts of effort and money to get him elected.
What must those organizations think of their golden boy now? Probably in the same way that the rest of the core supporters (gays, anti-war activists, illegal-immigration advocates, those desiring single-payer health care, racial minorities, etc.) Dear Leader has so cavalierly thrown under the bus lo these last two years rate him, we'd venture to guess.
President Barack Obama, March 3, 2011.
Good to know that that President agrees with the great majority of law-abiding Americans on this issue and not with fringe anti-gun groups such as the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center, which ironically expended enormous amounts of effort and money to get him elected.
What must those organizations think of their golden boy now? Probably in the same way that the rest of the core supporters (gays, anti-war activists, illegal-immigration advocates, those desiring single-payer health care, racial minorities, etc.) Dear Leader has so cavalierly thrown under the bus lo these last two years rate him, we'd venture to guess.
The Florida Department of Transportation is run by liars and lawbreakers
Via WTSP in Tampa, Florida comes a disturbing story by citizen journalist Joel Chandler about highway toll takers in that state regularly unlawfully detaining as well as demanding personal information from "certain" drivers (mostly horses of a different color, if you catch our drift) who have the audacity to pay with a $10 or larger bill. The workers then threaten to call the Highway Patrol when the motorists refuse to roll over and obey.
"Chandler says to the toll taker, 'So I'm being detained?' She says yes sir."
And, of course, the highway department compounds the abuse of their taxpayers by going right ahead and swearing up and down that they aren't doing any such thing, all the while frantically sending out the word to halt the scheme because they've been found out:
"When Chandler called and e-mailed the Florida Department of Transportation to complain about the policy, he was told there is no policy to detain people who give large bills... Chandler continued to complain and on July 21st at 7:19 p.m., he received an email from the assistant General Counsel of FDOT saying essentially the department didn't know what he was talking about and they don't have sufficient information to investigate. However, earlier that same day, there were a flurry of e-mails going back and forth in the department saying shut the program down, temporarily suspend it and who should call Chandler and what should they say."
We don't know what's worse - minor government functionaries ordering employees to exceed their legal authority or their blatantly lying to a complaining taxpayer's face about it. Either way, the coming class-action lawsuit should be quite enlightening. Too bad there's not a provision for the martinets who dreamed up this program to pay the damages out of their own pockets.
If nothing else, this story provides another clear example of why the American peasant should be free to record without fear of reprisal the public actions of the government workers whose salaries they pay.
UPDATE: Trigger bill denomination changed per the documents shown in the video.
"Chandler says to the toll taker, 'So I'm being detained?' She says yes sir."
And, of course, the highway department compounds the abuse of their taxpayers by going right ahead and swearing up and down that they aren't doing any such thing, all the while frantically sending out the word to halt the scheme because they've been found out:
"When Chandler called and e-mailed the Florida Department of Transportation to complain about the policy, he was told there is no policy to detain people who give large bills... Chandler continued to complain and on July 21st at 7:19 p.m., he received an email from the assistant General Counsel of FDOT saying essentially the department didn't know what he was talking about and they don't have sufficient information to investigate. However, earlier that same day, there were a flurry of e-mails going back and forth in the department saying shut the program down, temporarily suspend it and who should call Chandler and what should they say."
We don't know what's worse - minor government functionaries ordering employees to exceed their legal authority or their blatantly lying to a complaining taxpayer's face about it. Either way, the coming class-action lawsuit should be quite enlightening. Too bad there's not a provision for the martinets who dreamed up this program to pay the damages out of their own pockets.
If nothing else, this story provides another clear example of why the American peasant should be free to record without fear of reprisal the public actions of the government workers whose salaries they pay.
UPDATE: Trigger bill denomination changed per the documents shown in the video.
Saturday, March 05, 2011
The ongoing ATF scandal claims the life of yet another Federal officer
ICE agent Jaime Zapata, the unarmed officer ambushed and killed in Mexico while on duty in that country last month, was shot with a firearm purchased in Texas and allegedly smuggled across the border by three straw-purchasers whom the incompetent "Gunwalkers" at the BATFE apparently knew all about but curiously didn't bother to arrest until the murder weapon was directly connected to that agency's bungling:
"Robert Champion, special agent in charge of the local Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, acknowledged this week, though, that his agents did delay arresting three Lancaster men for three months after confiscating a load of guns the men intended to smuggle across the border to the Zeta cartel in November.
It was only after a gun used to kill Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata in Mexico last month was traced back to North Texas that local ATF agents moved quickly to arrest the Lancaster trio."
Law-abiding citizens routinely get harassed and threatened with arrest and imprisonment by the ATF because their rifle inconveniently malfunctions or they put "Y" or "N" instead of "Yes" and "No" on the paperwork required to legally transfer a firearm, but gunrunners caught red-handed get to freely roam the streets until their actions get a Federal law-enforcement officer killed? Yep, that sure sounds like a "professional" way to run an agency under the auspices of the "Justice" Department.
Zapata sadly joins Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry as dedicated, professional officers who were murdered with firearms that ATF bosses allegedly permitted to cross the border without interdiction, apparently as part of some kind of insane PR attempt to artificially inflate the numbers of U.S.-sold weapons recovered in Mexico. These numbers would then presumably be used to bolster ATF's political argument for imposing greater gun control in America.
The brass at ATF who knew about and sanctioned "Project Gunwalker" should be sitting in a jail cell right now instead of being ensconced at their comfy desks in Washington, no doubt frantically wondering how to get themselves out of this mess that's falling around their heads as we speak.
For those interested in following this scandal, all of the latest breaking info on this inexcusable dereliction of duty (and outright lawbreaking) by the original "jack-booted thugs" can be found here and here.
"Robert Champion, special agent in charge of the local Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, acknowledged this week, though, that his agents did delay arresting three Lancaster men for three months after confiscating a load of guns the men intended to smuggle across the border to the Zeta cartel in November.
It was only after a gun used to kill Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata in Mexico last month was traced back to North Texas that local ATF agents moved quickly to arrest the Lancaster trio."
Law-abiding citizens routinely get harassed and threatened with arrest and imprisonment by the ATF because their rifle inconveniently malfunctions or they put "Y" or "N" instead of "Yes" and "No" on the paperwork required to legally transfer a firearm, but gunrunners caught red-handed get to freely roam the streets until their actions get a Federal law-enforcement officer killed? Yep, that sure sounds like a "professional" way to run an agency under the auspices of the "Justice" Department.
Zapata sadly joins Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry as dedicated, professional officers who were murdered with firearms that ATF bosses allegedly permitted to cross the border without interdiction, apparently as part of some kind of insane PR attempt to artificially inflate the numbers of U.S.-sold weapons recovered in Mexico. These numbers would then presumably be used to bolster ATF's political argument for imposing greater gun control in America.
The brass at ATF who knew about and sanctioned "Project Gunwalker" should be sitting in a jail cell right now instead of being ensconced at their comfy desks in Washington, no doubt frantically wondering how to get themselves out of this mess that's falling around their heads as we speak.
For those interested in following this scandal, all of the latest breaking info on this inexcusable dereliction of duty (and outright lawbreaking) by the original "jack-booted thugs" can be found here and here.
Friday, March 04, 2011
Critical mass has now been reached
BATFE senior agent John Dodson is the first of probably many government employees to bravely come forward on a national news program and personally confirm the unbelievable story that writer/blogger David Codrea and blogger Mike Vanderboegh first broke last December 28 (full disclosure: we have worked in the past with both men on gun rights and police-abuse issues) - that the original jack-booted thug of an agency that is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (which regularly harasses and even prosecutes gun dealers and citizens over such things as minor paperwork errors) purposely allowed thousands of illegally straw-purchased firearms to cross the border into Mexico (without bothering to let the Mexicans themselves know about it), apparently in some kind of misguided scheme to pad the stats of U.S.-sold guns found in that country and thus make a stronger case for imposing further restrictions on the law-abiding public's ability to purchase and own such weapons:
"'I'm boots on the ground in Phoenix, telling you we've been doing it every day since I've been here,' [Dodson] said. 'Here I am. Tell me I didn't do the things that I did. Tell me you didn't order me to do the things I did. Tell me it didn't happen. Now you have a name on it. You have a face to put with it. Here I am. Someone now, tell me it didn't happen.'"
Two of the smuggled firearms subsequently turned up at the recent murder scene of Arizona U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, and one of those was allegedly the actual murder weapon used to kill him.
The entire story is quite involved, so go and read the entire timeline that was handily put together by Codrea for yourself and see if you don't get sick to your stomach as well.
Several U.S. Congressmen and Senators are now apparently preparing to launch investigations into that agency's egregiously negligent (and most likely criminal) conduct, and hopefully will come to the same conclusion that many others have drawn - that the BATFE is a rogue organization with zero control and accountability that directly caused the death of a hardworking border agent, and therefore it should immediately be shuttered and the top managers there who knew about this scheme indicted as accessories to homicide.
Codrea and Vanderboegh should also be joint Pulitzer nominees for their unrelenting efforts at exposing and chronicling this story, as far as we're concerned.
"'I'm boots on the ground in Phoenix, telling you we've been doing it every day since I've been here,' [Dodson] said. 'Here I am. Tell me I didn't do the things that I did. Tell me you didn't order me to do the things I did. Tell me it didn't happen. Now you have a name on it. You have a face to put with it. Here I am. Someone now, tell me it didn't happen.'"
Two of the smuggled firearms subsequently turned up at the recent murder scene of Arizona U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, and one of those was allegedly the actual murder weapon used to kill him.
The entire story is quite involved, so go and read the entire timeline that was handily put together by Codrea for yourself and see if you don't get sick to your stomach as well.
Several U.S. Congressmen and Senators are now apparently preparing to launch investigations into that agency's egregiously negligent (and most likely criminal) conduct, and hopefully will come to the same conclusion that many others have drawn - that the BATFE is a rogue organization with zero control and accountability that directly caused the death of a hardworking border agent, and therefore it should immediately be shuttered and the top managers there who knew about this scheme indicted as accessories to homicide.
Codrea and Vanderboegh should also be joint Pulitzer nominees for their unrelenting efforts at exposing and chronicling this story, as far as we're concerned.
Thursday, March 03, 2011
Welcome, Wyoming
Governor Matt Mead of Wyoming has signed a bill which makes that state the fourth (joining Vermont, Alaska and Arizona) to recognize the Constitutional right of a law-abiding person to carry a firearm for self-protection without first having to beg for permission in the form of a permit.
Other states such as Idaho, Tennessee and South Carolina are considering the same legislation, meaning that this exclusive club stands a good chance of gaining even more members in the near future.
The Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center must be ordering Tums by the case right about now, and that scenario couldn't happen to two more deserving organizations.
(link via Unc)
Other states such as Idaho, Tennessee and South Carolina are considering the same legislation, meaning that this exclusive club stands a good chance of gaining even more members in the near future.
The Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center must be ordering Tums by the case right about now, and that scenario couldn't happen to two more deserving organizations.
(link via Unc)
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
A win for the Constitution
"Supreme Court: anti-gay funeral picketers allowed"
The right decision, of course. Even homophobic jackasses enjoy the right of free speech in America. First Amendment protections generally aren't needed for polite talk that everyone loves listening to.
Here's an idea - maybe some of the many people on whom this bully church enjoys picking should go picket them for a change.
The right decision, of course. Even homophobic jackasses enjoy the right of free speech in America. First Amendment protections generally aren't needed for polite talk that everyone loves listening to.
Here's an idea - maybe some of the many people on whom this bully church enjoys picking should go picket them for a change.
Someone get him his blanky
U.S. Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder got his panties in a bunch yesterday while being grilled by Congress as to just why his Justice Department saw fit to dismiss slam-dunk cases against the New Black Panthers who were found to have engaged in blatant voter intimidation on Election Day 2008 at a polling place in Philadelphia:
"The Attorney General seemed to take personal offense at a comment [Texas Rep. John] Culberson read in which former Democratic activist Bartle Bull called the incident the most serious act of voter intimidation he had witnessed in his career.
'Think about that,' Holder said. 'When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia—which was inappropriate, certainly that…to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people,' said Holder, who is black." (emphasis ours)
Mr. Holder, to be perfectly frank, is an idiot. Here's just some of the considerable civil-rights bonafides of Mr. Bull, the eyewitness (he was a poll watcher at that very precinct on the day in question) to the Panther incident and the man whose opinion our oh-so-competent A.G. so cavalierly pooh-poohs:
"Bartle Bull was born in 1940 and graduated Harvard College in 1963, attended Oxford 1963-1964, and graduated Harvard Law School in 1967. He was admitted to practice in New York in 1967. In the 1960s Bull worked for the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law seeking to enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in Mississippi protecting both black voters and black political candidates from voter intimidation."
Mr. Bull put his life on the line as much as anyone else during that period to ensure the right of blacks to vote. And the folks he spent years fighting for weren't even "his people", as Mr. Holder so elegantly puts it, as Bull happens to be white. Yes, Mr. Holder, other racial groups besides blacks fought (and sometimes died) to advance the cause of civil rights in this country. Maybe you should have paid more attention in history class.
In short, if Bartle Bull (a lifelong liberal Democrat, by the way) says he saw voter intimidation you can take it to the bank. Yet all Holder can do is "take personal offense" when he's asked legitimate questions about why his department refused to connect with the hanging curveball of a default judgment against these petty thugs.
Well, no one cares about your precious self-esteem, Eric. Do your job by enforcing the law fairly and without racial bias and you won't have to worry about sniveling in front of Congress about how your feelings are so hurt.
"Rep. Chaka Fattah, a Democrat from Philadelphia, said the Black Panthers 'should not have been there.' But he said the GOP was making too much out of a fleeting incident involving a couple of people."
We wonder if Mr. Fattah would be holding that same milquetoast opinion if those "couple of people" had been white and wearing hoods and sheets instead of being black and wearing paramilitary gear while brandishing nightsticks.
No, we imagine he wouldn't.
"The Attorney General seemed to take personal offense at a comment [Texas Rep. John] Culberson read in which former Democratic activist Bartle Bull called the incident the most serious act of voter intimidation he had witnessed in his career.
'Think about that,' Holder said. 'When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia—which was inappropriate, certainly that…to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people,' said Holder, who is black." (emphasis ours)
Mr. Holder, to be perfectly frank, is an idiot. Here's just some of the considerable civil-rights bonafides of Mr. Bull, the eyewitness (he was a poll watcher at that very precinct on the day in question) to the Panther incident and the man whose opinion our oh-so-competent A.G. so cavalierly pooh-poohs:
"Bartle Bull was born in 1940 and graduated Harvard College in 1963, attended Oxford 1963-1964, and graduated Harvard Law School in 1967. He was admitted to practice in New York in 1967. In the 1960s Bull worked for the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law seeking to enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in Mississippi protecting both black voters and black political candidates from voter intimidation."
Mr. Bull put his life on the line as much as anyone else during that period to ensure the right of blacks to vote. And the folks he spent years fighting for weren't even "his people", as Mr. Holder so elegantly puts it, as Bull happens to be white. Yes, Mr. Holder, other racial groups besides blacks fought (and sometimes died) to advance the cause of civil rights in this country. Maybe you should have paid more attention in history class.
In short, if Bartle Bull (a lifelong liberal Democrat, by the way) says he saw voter intimidation you can take it to the bank. Yet all Holder can do is "take personal offense" when he's asked legitimate questions about why his department refused to connect with the hanging curveball of a default judgment against these petty thugs.
Well, no one cares about your precious self-esteem, Eric. Do your job by enforcing the law fairly and without racial bias and you won't have to worry about sniveling in front of Congress about how your feelings are so hurt.
"Rep. Chaka Fattah, a Democrat from Philadelphia, said the Black Panthers 'should not have been there.' But he said the GOP was making too much out of a fleeting incident involving a couple of people."
We wonder if Mr. Fattah would be holding that same milquetoast opinion if those "couple of people" had been white and wearing hoods and sheets instead of being black and wearing paramilitary gear while brandishing nightsticks.
No, we imagine he wouldn't.
Tuesday, March 01, 2011
From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines
"Chris Wallace to Obama on Libya: Stop saying 'unacceptable' if you're not going to do anything about it"
Looks like another member of the major media is becoming unafraid to point out that the emperor has no clothes.
"According to Wallace – without action, it paints the president in an unflattering light.
'It makes you look impotent,' Wallace said."
Ouch.
"Host Don Imus wondered if Obama’s reaction to Libya was 'measured' or, as some Fox News personalities have suggested, wimpy. Wallace explained it was measured, leaning toward wimpy"
Ladies and gentlemen, we have apparently just sat down for a screening of "The Carter Administration II - Return of the Wimp".
Looks like another member of the major media is becoming unafraid to point out that the emperor has no clothes.
"According to Wallace – without action, it paints the president in an unflattering light.
'It makes you look impotent,' Wallace said."
Ouch.
"Host Don Imus wondered if Obama’s reaction to Libya was 'measured' or, as some Fox News personalities have suggested, wimpy. Wallace explained it was measured, leaning toward wimpy"
Ladies and gentlemen, we have apparently just sat down for a screening of "The Carter Administration II - Return of the Wimp".
Today's TASER Travesty
Three Portland, Oregon police officers have been found to have violated department policy in two separate incidents because they TASERed misdemeanor suspects who had already surrendered.
Actually, it's much worse than that. Official investigations in both cases revealed that both men were on their knees with their hands on their head or interlaced behind their neck when the cops went ahead and zapped them anyway:
"As the Portland Police Bureau grapples with how to update its Taser policy, two federal lawsuits stemming from inappropriate Taser use suggest some city police aren't familiar with the current restrictions on their use."
"Suggest"? "Prove" would seem to be a much more appropriate term right here.
Both brutality victims were subsequently found not guilty by juries or had their charges (one was for interfering with police; nope, no unwarranted "you will respect my authoritah" beefs here) dropped, and they subsequently filed federal lawsuits against the city for damages.
Portland has agreed to settle those suits by paying out close to $140,000 of local taxpayers' hard-earned money, yet unbelievably (and sadly, not surprisingly) Officers Jennifer Thompson, John Hughes and Michelle Tafoya have not received any discipline whatsoever for their actions, despite the following evidence of their malfeasance:
"'Officer Thompson denies deploying her Taser against [Hung Minh] Tran while he was on his knees, facing away from her, but based upon the testimony of several witnesses, I find that she did,' arbitrator Alan Bonebrake wrote, adding she deployed probes into Tran's back.
'This was unnecessary, unreasonable and an excessive use of force,' he wrote. Tran proved he was deprived of his civil rights from the use of the Taser, assault and Thompson's negligence, the arbitrator found."
...
"At [Christopher] Clay's criminal trial, Hughes acknowledged Clay was passively resisting, not moving toward him, not reaching for anything. When questioned by Clay's criminal defense attorney Stephanie Engelsman, Hughes admitted he violated bureau policy.
'I don't think there was any dispute dramatically as to what Clay was doing at the moment he was Tasered,' said deputy city attorney Scott Moede, who represented the officers in the civil suit.
Clay said he sued Tafoya because she started the encounter 'yelling at me like a mad person,' without ever trying to talk, and Hughes for shooting him."
By way of comparison, in what private company would employees that were found to have blatantly violated policy, causing undue harm to people (and then apparently lying about it, at least in Thompson's case), and whose actions ended up costing their firm a six-figure settlement would be allowed to continue on in their positions without any punishment whatsoever?
Actually, it's much worse than that. Official investigations in both cases revealed that both men were on their knees with their hands on their head or interlaced behind their neck when the cops went ahead and zapped them anyway:
"As the Portland Police Bureau grapples with how to update its Taser policy, two federal lawsuits stemming from inappropriate Taser use suggest some city police aren't familiar with the current restrictions on their use."
"Suggest"? "Prove" would seem to be a much more appropriate term right here.
Both brutality victims were subsequently found not guilty by juries or had their charges (one was for interfering with police; nope, no unwarranted "you will respect my authoritah" beefs here) dropped, and they subsequently filed federal lawsuits against the city for damages.
Portland has agreed to settle those suits by paying out close to $140,000 of local taxpayers' hard-earned money, yet unbelievably (and sadly, not surprisingly) Officers Jennifer Thompson, John Hughes and Michelle Tafoya have not received any discipline whatsoever for their actions, despite the following evidence of their malfeasance:
"'Officer Thompson denies deploying her Taser against [Hung Minh] Tran while he was on his knees, facing away from her, but based upon the testimony of several witnesses, I find that she did,' arbitrator Alan Bonebrake wrote, adding she deployed probes into Tran's back.
'This was unnecessary, unreasonable and an excessive use of force,' he wrote. Tran proved he was deprived of his civil rights from the use of the Taser, assault and Thompson's negligence, the arbitrator found."
...
"At [Christopher] Clay's criminal trial, Hughes acknowledged Clay was passively resisting, not moving toward him, not reaching for anything. When questioned by Clay's criminal defense attorney Stephanie Engelsman, Hughes admitted he violated bureau policy.
'I don't think there was any dispute dramatically as to what Clay was doing at the moment he was Tasered,' said deputy city attorney Scott Moede, who represented the officers in the civil suit.
Clay said he sued Tafoya because she started the encounter 'yelling at me like a mad person,' without ever trying to talk, and Hughes for shooting him."
By way of comparison, in what private company would employees that were found to have blatantly violated policy, causing undue harm to people (and then apparently lying about it, at least in Thompson's case), and whose actions ended up costing their firm a six-figure settlement would be allowed to continue on in their positions without any punishment whatsoever?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
