Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Let us reinstate the draft ... this time, for politicians

In time of war, we drafted "warriors".

In time of peace, why don't we draft politicians?

Anyone who actively seeks political office is suspect: they (often) want it too much to be trusted with the honor.

Witness: Hillary Clinton.  

She thinks that, by throwing a crumb toward the Gun Owners of America, she can coerce a few more votes toward her campaign.  As if we believe The  Wanna-Be Next Liar In Chief.

(As if we hadn't already learned from our Obama-Lesson!)

How clue-less can she be?

Hillary Clinton's Second Amendment -
"I know how important gun ownership, and particularly hunting, is here in northeastern Pennsylvania," Clinton told supporters in Dunmore last month. Regarding her gun control agenda, she said, "responsible gun owners have to stand up and say, 'This has nothing to do with my guns, my hunting, my sport shooting, my collecting.'" Self-defense is conspicuously absent from Clinton's list of legitimate things people do with guns. The Australian government, whose mass confiscations of firearms Clinton admires, takes a similar view. Australians must demonstrate a "genuine reason" for owning a gun, and personal protection does not count. But Australia has no Second Amendment. 
No, Hillary doesn't know anything at all about the importance of the Second Amendment.

Actually, Hillary is 'running' on the platform of "Let Bill Do It; He Knows What To Do!"

Are we suppose to cater to Hillary's attempt at an end-run on term limits for the Presidency?  Are we suppose to re-elect BILLARY?

Hillary Clinton plans to put her husband in charge of rebooting the American economy – the top issue of her presidential campaign. 'My husband ... I'm going to put in charge of revitalizing the economy because you know, he knows how to do it,' Clinton told a crowd in Kentucky Sunday. 'And especially in places like coal country and inner cities and other parts of our country that have been really left out,' she added, the Washington Post reported.The comment is a reminder that Clinton's election could amount just as much to a 'third term' for her husband than it would for President Obama, who already started campaigning for Clinton in effect with a slashing attack on Donald Trump during a commencement speech at Rutgers University Sunday. 
Frankly, I'm against putting Bill Clinton in charge of the economy ANYTHING!.  I don't think he knows how to do it ... and I never trusted the sleeze-bag-in-chief anyway.

Bill Clinton is "4F" in my book.  Him, and the horse he rode in on.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Knock-Knock, Kick-Kick, Bang-Bang

Elderly Homeowner Shoots Through Door, Kills Suspected Intruder - Breitbart:
According to WRAL [link], 71-year-old homeowner Paul Morgan said he and his wife were asleep when they heard the sound of someone kicking their front door. He grabbed the gun he keeps by the bed and went to the door, where his wife believes multiple suspects were allegedly trying to kick the door down. Morgan said he yelled for the alleged intruders to stop, but they allegedly continued trying to break the door open, so he opened fire. Police arrived to find one suspect lying dead on the sidewalk.
Channeling Paul Harvey for "The Rest Of The Story".

I absolutely do NOT condone shooting through a door.    Yes, it sounds like a home invasion, but it also sounds like a drunk at the wrong door, and several other possible scenarios.

We don't know how violent this 'attack' was, we have only one side of the story and that's all we ever will have.

Assuming the validity of the home-owner statements, four things seem evident from this account:
  1. somebody beat the heck out of the door trying to get in
  2. somebody didn't stop the assault when warned by the home-owner 
  3. somebody is dead
  4. The home-owner and his family are alive.
It will be interesting to follow this story, assuming we can.  I'm sure there is more to it than what we have already been told.

Monday, May 23, 2016

Farnam: "And you thought the 20th Century was bad!"

A friend of mine subscribes to John Farnam's  DTIQUIPS email list and forwards his daily notes to me.   It's a way to get the word out, which is important to many of us.

The topics vary, but in the context of the NRA Annual Meeting  the latest issue provided some content which I felt to be especially pertinent:

This afternoon, it was my honor to attend a sage and fiery lecture from my  long-time friend and colleague, Lt Col Dave Grossman.  Lecture hall was  jammed.  Standing-room only.  Dave’s uncanny ability to capture the attention of an audience is something the rest of us only dream about! Dave talked passionately, and with eminent authority, about the current  world situation, and the news is not good, as you might imagine.  Dave  encouraged us all to go armed, as armed teachers, parents, cops, and other good guys is the only proven deterrent to terrorist attacks.  Terrorists are  coming after our children, just as they do in Israel, and someone has to be  constantly in a position to skillfully and unconditionally protect them, with gunfire when necessary.  Welcome to the 21st Century. And, you thought the 20 Century was bad! Conversely, HRCs recent pseudo-sanctimonious pronouncement that “... no  problem was ever solved with a gun” are the words of a naive clown, and an  arrogant, self-serving twit.  

(Grossman link added)


And adding, in the words of The Colonel:
"There aren't many problems that you can't fix,
with seven-hundred dollars and a thirty-ought six."

"Not on MY Watch!" She Said

They don't seem to be very progressive in the DC Giant Grocery Store.   I wonder how many of them were Democrats.

Woman Removed Man From Bathroom, Arrested | The Daily Caller:
(May 19, 2016)
A female security guard working at a Washington, D.C. grocery store was arrested Monday afternoon for physically escorting a man out of the women’s restroom after he refused to leave because he identifies as a woman. The shopper — a young, African-American male who identified himself as Ebony Belcher to local news outlets — reportedly passed the security guard on his way into the women’s restroom at a Giant grocery store in Northeast D.C. After seeing Belcher walk into the women’s restroom, the security guard followed him in and ordered the man to leave. When he refused, the security guard had to physically escort him out of the women’s restroom.
The evicted 'person' ("Ebony Belcher"?) called police, who arrested the guard.  

Belcher said he was "hurt":

... “the woman had no reason to put her hands on me,” adding that he was emotionally traumatized by the incident. “I’m hurt by this. It’s terrible… I’m distraught,” 

The genetic ladies in the ladies room were grateful to the guard.
 “If you was born a man go to the men’s bathroom. You got a penis go to the men’s bathroom. If you are born a woman go to the woman’s bathroom. Period!”

Labels:  "Fast and Furious"; "Good Cop/Bad Cop"; "Government"; "Liberal Wet Dreams"

Larry Elder Observations

36 Reasons to Stop Me Before I Tweet Again - Larry Elder:
1) "Political correctness" is just a fancy term for not telling the truth.
 2) Obama says he wants "mandatory" voting, as it is in Australia. Voter ID is "unduly burdensome" -- but forcing people to vote is not?!
 3) Obama says with "mandatory" voting, "You start getting 70-80 percent voting rates." Still not as high as the voting rates for dead people in Chicago!
 4) Democrats, the "party of freedom," want mandatory health insurance, mandatory employer-paid leave, mandatory minimum wage and mandatory voting.
 5) If illegals-turned-new-citizens would likely vote 80 percent GOP, instead of 80 percent Democrat, government would've sealed the borders tighter than a clam's behind.
 6) Government freebies eventually anger both those who pay and those who demand, "Where's mine?"
There are more Conservative Comments, follow the link.

I use to listen to Larry Elder on the radio, but radio in Oregon is "iffy" at best and not terribly conservative at worse.  Besides, I didn't like his debate style ... he wasn't as good "off the cuff" as he is when he has had time to think it through.   (Which is why I offered the contents of this think piece.)

Kentucky church group considers NRA members "enemies"

Gun safety advocates pray for NRA members holding annual meeting in Louisville:

 Cecil-Hinds, interim executive director of the Kentucky Council of Churches, said many NRA members “are Christian people who believe that what they are doing is right”. “If we speak out against them without praying for them, then we do an injustice to God’s work in the world,” she said. “God calls us to be one body and love one another. Jesus said, ‘Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.’ That’s why I do it.”
Hmmm ... so, NRA members are their "enemies"?  Legal, law-abiding firearms owners are their "enemies"?   People who are responsible gun owners are their "enemies" simply because they possess firearms?

I can't quite get my mind around this concept.

Isn't there a biblical injunction involved here?

Something like "Judge Not, Lest Thee Be Judged"?

If this group had been referring to criminals who use firearms for nefarious purposes, I would have understood.  But they are specifically targeting NRA members.

It hurts my feelings.  I may weep.

Please, spare me your sanctimonious self-righteous hypocrisy.   Whatever God you are praying to, it's not the father of He who said, in Luke 22:36: ''
"... the one without a sword should sell his cloak and buy one".
If y'all are that religious that you think you ought to pray for armed total strangers, maybe you ought to consider buying a gun; because "Don't Bring A Sword To A Gun Fight".

(Yeah, I made that one up.)

Saturday, May 21, 2016

Wisconsin AG: "Lock Them Up!"

Morning Minute: AG Schimel on Solving Gun Violence | |
"We are not going to give in to those demands to make it harder for law abiding gun owners to exercise their second amendment rights...we're gonna find the people that are using guns to commit crimes and lock them up. That's how you solve the gun violence problem," 
(Attorney General Brad Schimel said last weekend at the Republican Party of Wisconsin state convention.)

Funny, I knew that Wisconsin had men, but I didn't realize they clanged when they walked.

California Metros Re-envision State

California Senate approves sweeping gun-control measures | Fox News: SACRAMENTO, Calif. –

Democrats in the California Senate approved a wide-ranging series of gun control bills Thursday, reviving an effort to significantly tighten California's already strict gun laws in the wake of last year's terrorist attack in San Bernardino. Lawmakers voted to outlaw the sale of assault weapons with easily detachable magazines and to require that people turn in magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. They also backed a variety of other measures aimed at restricting access to guns and ammunition or limiting the carnage they can inflict.
OLD California State Flag:

NEW California State Flag:

Friday, May 20, 2016

Doubleplus Ungood Badspeak

US Attorney General: 'We May Prosecute Climate Change Deniers'.:
(March 10, 2016)
The US Department of Justice has been considering whether people should be prosecuted for the offense of climate change denial. “This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” said Attorney General Loretta Lynch, responding to a question from green activist Sen Sheldon Whitehouse at a Senate Judiciary Hearing.
 [emphasis added]

In George Orwell's tortured masterpiece "1984", citizens of Oceania could be prosecuted for thinking 'wrong thoughts'.  T

Today, in the era and the country where the First Amendment is first among our most treasured freedoms,, our government has been considering whether there are certain opinions which cannot be expressed.  It's not a matter of grammar; it's a matter of Thought Crime.

It appears that Orwell's premonition is now verified. It just took a little longer (32 years) for it to come about in America.

Let's call the crime  "BadSpeak", and make it a law.  Which will require a Constitutional Amendment .. eventually.
(But no hurry, as long as another Democrat is elected to hold the highest office in the land.)

Judging by the words and threats of the Attorney General of the United States of America ... we have finally caught up with George Orwell.

Aren't we so proud of ourselves today?

(H/T: Correa)

(PS: Yes, I did steal the title from a current internet blog.  It was too rich to resist.)

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

It's an "AMERICAN" thing; you wouldn't understand

The BBC article of October 4, 2015 *see below*, wonders why President Obama cannot, with a stroke of the pen and the support of Liberal congress-critters, impose "Common-Sense Gun Laws" to curb what they (the Brits and the American Liberals) assume would resolve all of the "Gun Violence" issues in America.

There are two reasons:

First: America is not a "Democracy"; it's a Republic

Second: The Constitution of the United States acknowledges (and guarantees) the right of Americans to "Keep and Bear Arms".

Why Obama is powerless to reform gun laws - BBC News:
 October 04, 2015: Can't the states do their own thing? In the Senate - which currently has 54 Republicans and 46 Democrats (or Democratic-supporting independents) - the individual state populations are the key. The votes of Senators John Barrasso and Mike Enzi in pro-gun Wyoming (population 584,153) have the same weight as gun-control-backing Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer in California (population 38.8 million).
Yeah, that's the "Republic" thingie.

As Thomas Jefferson said, "Democracy is nothing more than Rule By Mob"; and today Liberals Americans are 'the mob'.

Our "Democratic" president would dearly love to impose his bias upon free Americans.  It's a source of irritation to our Dear Leader that he cannot arbitrarily impose draconian restrictions on our freedoms.

Don't think that a lot of Congressmen wouldn't back him in this raid on Constitutional Rights, but the folks who started this experiment in liberty were smarter than the Brits, and Obama combined.  Which wasn't much of a challenge, as it turns out.

(Curious, that the "Constitutional Law Professor" who rules America today doesn't seem to 'get it'.)

(Go here for a discussion about the Electoral College)
If you're not confused, you were not paying attention.  The "Electoral College" concept is confusing to 99.9% of Americans (including me).  But one would be surprised if an American President who is also self-identifying himself as a "Constitutional Professor" didn't understand it.
Obama cannot impose arbitrary restrictions on Firearms Ownership (or in other words " .. is powerless to reform gun laws ...") because he's not a King.  He cannot rule by fiat.  He needs the support of BOTH houses of legislature, and he can't get it because those senators and representatives are dependent upon the good will of their electorate to get themselves re-elected next year.  Without the firm support of the Electorate (you and I),

And as Al Gore learned a few years ago, one of the EASIEST ways to lose an election is to infringe on the Constitutional Rights of the American Citizen.

Even if you're a Rabid Anti-gun Liberal, you don't want to seriously propose a Constitutional Amendment unless there is first a Constitutional Convention to support your ever-so-popular view.  And even then, it's still not a good idea because then there are "other issues" which might come arise, and you are likely to lose more than you might have gained.


We understand why Americans would want to ask this question.

But why is the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) involving themselves in this "purely American" issue?

It may be a matter of Schadenfreude;
They're so gleeful about their firearms-ban that they cannot bear to let American Freedoms demonstrate that their 'Violence" issues haven't been resolved by their draconian Gun Control measures (which are, by the way, not working!).

So they are violently (excuse the expression, NSFW in Britain) opposed to any other country which might be willing to accept a degree of 'gun violence' in protection of "Personal Freedoms" ..  thus allowing private citizens to defend themselves in their homes and in their persons.  Because if they let THAT example go without criticism, they might find themselves defending the logic in exposing their citizens to violence without allowing' them the means to defend themselves, their property, and their family.

That would be embarrassing.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

People Still Being Shot In The People's Republic of Canada?

Toronto gun violence must be addressed by entire city, Rexdale pastor says - | Metro Morning:
A Toronto-area pastor says there's a feeling of hopelessness and helplessness in the city's Rexdale neighbourhood and it's a problem for the entire city to fix. On Sunday, a 35-year-old pregnant woman was shot and killed in a drive-by shooting while riding in the back seat of a vehicle in the area. 
What's this?   People are still being shot in Canada?
That's impossible!   Canada has many of the gun laws which American anti-gun groups have been trying to establish for years, and for the specific purpose of eliminating exactly the kind of tragedies described above!
Canada  (see link here)
(Cliff Notes Version: strict compared to U.S. laws. Ottawa sets gun control laws that may be supplemented locally.)

  • 18 years or older to own a gun, licensed only, background check and public safety course
  • 1995 Firearms Act: owner licensing
  • Licensing of all long guns (since abandoned due to billions of dollars expense to enforce)

The online newsletter BUSINESS INSIDER announced the success of the same Gun Control Safety measures that Canada (and other United Kingdom countries, for example) in an article titled:
"How Australia and Other Developed Countries Have Put A Stop To Gun Violence" by Walter Hinkley (January 15, 2013)

Perhaps this announcement was premature.   Gun Violence continues in Canada. Non-gun violence has peaked in countries where private citizens are not allowed to defend themselves with firearms against thug.  See "yobs", below.


The National Observer, in a December 04, 2015 article, observed that:
According to a StatsCan report from 2012 – the most recent year available – the U.S. suffered a total of 8,813 murders involving the use of firearms that year. Canada, in the same year, recorded just 172 firearms-related homicides.“When looking at firearm-related homicide rates in comparable countries, Canada’s rate is about seven times lower than that of the United States (3.5 per 100,000 population), although it is higher than several other peer countries. While Canada’s firearm-related homicide rate is similar to those in Ireland and Switzerland, it is significantly higher than the rates in Japan (0.01 per 100,000 population) and the United Kingdom (0.06 per 100,000 population),” states StatsCan’s findings, which do not include Quebec figures.
Note that Japan has the highest suicide rate in the world, even though guns are absolutely forbidden there.  UK has even more draconian firearms-ownership regulations ... but the rate of non-gun violence is higher there than both Canada and America combined, because Brits are not allowed to arm themselves in protection against assault by YOBS.


Yes, it's possible to dramatically decrease the number of gun-related murders by highly restricting or even eliminating the private ownership of firearms.

That just means that the criminals do not fear lethal resistance from their victims.
The odd thing is, when anti-gun folks laud the 'improvements' in a society where guns are highly restricted, or totally banned, they see higher rates of robberies and burgularies (including 'occupied dwelling' incidents, muggings, other assaults and murders by knives, bludgeons, and fist-and-feet.

The quality of life dramatically decreases when the public is not allowed the tools to defend themselves against even casual assault and robbery.

Ask any Brit, for example, or Australian who feels defenseless against young hoodlums who feel confident that they will not be met with an effective defense in a home invasion.

(2) The Failure of Canadian Gun Control (Dave Kopel)

Published on May 15, 2013
The Gun Ban In Australia Caused Increase In Crime And Home Invasions
Two thousand angry Australians gather to demand their gun rights and justice. Ginny Simone reports that the people of Australia gathered at the feet of Parliament with signs and outraged chanting in protest of the country's gun bans. Interviewees from the crowd discuss the gun buyback that required citizens to surrender their weapons with the threat of jail, an event that resulted in the confiscation of over 6,000 guns. With millions of dollars spent and no reduction in crime and actual increases in crime including home invasions, from the gun bans, Australians demand the right to defend themselves and to feel safe in their homes.

You Get The Police Force You Deserve

British police reluctant to carry guns because of prosecution fears: Home News
 Police chiefs are struggling to recruit enough officers willing to carry a gun to tackle a Paris-style terror attack, because they fear they will be treated as criminal suspects if they use their weapon in the line of duty ... potential recruits were being deterred because of fears they could spend years under investigation after a decision to fire on a suspect ...
THIS is what you get when your "litigious society" is more focused on criticizing the cops than stopping the bad guys.

Curiously, the Brits are quick to criticize America for being a "Litigious Society":   and if you read both the lead article, and the article linked to in the preceding line ...  ^  ...

... then you have just learned the meaning of 'IRONY'.