Category Archives: rights

Gun Control Fools are Everywhere

Posted on by
Reply

Todd Starnes, writing for Fox News tells has this example, a dark of night (literally) raid on the home of a gun owner.

New Jersey police and Dept of Children and Families officials raided the home of a firearms instructor and demanded to see his guns after he posted a Facebook photo of his 11-year-old son holding a rifle.

The father’s lawyer, Evan Nappen, said,

Someone called family services about the photo. …  They wanted to see his gun safe, his guns and search his house.  They even threatened to take his kids.

DCF naturally had excuses. A “spokesperson,” while ducking comment on the specific raid assured us all that

The department has a child abuse hotline for the state of New Jersey and anybody can make a call to that hotline.  We are required to follow up on every single allegation that comes into the central registry.

Of course they are.  With police raids, and not with an individual representative of the department.  Because all gun owners are crazies.

It gets better: the father was told [by the raiding police]

I was being unreasonable and that I was acting suspicious because I wouldn’t open my safe[.]

It’s suspicious behavior to insist that Constitutionally acknowledged individual rights be honored.  It’s suspicious behavior to object to a warrantless search.  It’s suspicious behavior to object to legally owned weapons being inventoried by a government.

This is one of the reasons we have the 4th Amendment: to protect us against exactly this sort of governmental arrogance.  These government men knew they were the ones being…unreasonable and suspicious.  After threatening to get a search warrant so they could conduct their search, they never did.

This is the offending image:

Notice another example of the stupidity of gun control, especially proposals wanting to ban particular weapons.  That’s a .22 rifle, not a “semi-automatic assault weapon.”

Oh, and the boy has a New Jersey hunting license, and he’s passed the state’s hunter safety course.

Of course, nothing wrong having been done (by the victims, anyway), no charges were filed.

Gun Control Hypocrisy

Posted on by
Reply

Colorado has passed its gun control bills into law.  Included in that set is a limit on the size of semi-automatic rifle ammunition magazines to a maximum of 15 rounds.  In response to Magpul Industries’ statement that they would leave Colorado if the bills were passed, those good Democrats passed an amendment:  Magpul could make any size magazine they wished so long as the larger ones were not sold in Colorado.

State Congressman Mark Waller (R) has the right of it, noting the Democrats’ monumental hypocrisy.

[Y]ou can sell [magazines] at any other place where any of these tragic shootings have happened.  …a monumental inconsistency in their thought process.

Yeah.  Can’t sell normal magazines in Colorado, but feel free to sell them in, oh, say, Newtown, CT.

That’s the problem with interfering with freedom.  The damage is far-reaching, and it’s tough to do without the dishonesty of hypocrisy.

Why Not Just Take It All?

Posted on by
Reply

Spiegel International Online notes that the Cypriot government may be figuring out some of the foolishness of the troika’s (ECB, EC, and IMF) demand concerning the latter’s “offered” bailout as well as some of the variants under discussion.  Some of those variants include reallocating the confiscationtax according to more deposit account sizes than just two, and hitting the highest—still those over €100,000 with a 15.6% claim.

[C]oncerns have emerged that a large number of foreign investors and depositors will withdraw their money from the country en masse.  Critics warn this would devastate Cyprus as a financial center and also threaten the country’s entire economy.

Well, yeah.

Still, even the current proposal has central bankers nervous.  Officials at the Cypriot central bank are still fearing a massive capital flight.  Central bank head Panicos Demetriades said he expects that at least 10 percent of deposits will be transferred abroad during the first few days after the banks reopen, according to lawmaker Roula Mavronikola who attended the session.

Demetriades is optimistic.  The Cypriot banking system would be fortunate to retain a single euro, were this institutionalized theft to go through.  The only way to stop the capital flight would be for the government to steal it all.

In the event, though, the Cypriot Parliament rejected any sort of levy, rather resoundingly.

More Obama Sequester in Action

Posted on by
Reply

A few of items.

Congressman Ted Poe (R, TX) is wondering about sequester cuts to tuition aid for our military veterans while we continue to send education aid to Pakistan.  The Marines, for instance, had spent $47 million tuition aid in 2012, while nearly $13 million went to Pakistan for “higher education.”  And then, post-sequester, the Obama administration committed another $37 million to the Pakistan program.

Hmm….

And there’s this example of Obama cynicism.  Recall that the US Department of Agriculture would be forced to “furlough” a significant portion of its meat inspectors, among other personnel.  In the meantime, though, and again post-sequester, the Obama administration

continues to pursue a “partnership” with the Mexican government to “raise awareness” about food stamps among immigrants from that country.

In complete disregard for current immigration law that says immigrants can’t come in unless they are, or can reasonably be expected to be, self-supporting.

And this:

School officials on Native American reservations across Minnesota are forced into making cuts to their current budgets in anticipation of sequester cuts.  These  are programs that had been making progress, improving high school graduation rates by the small, but concrete, 3% per year.

But in post-sequester DC, a six-figure income position was created for a former aide to Congressman Charles Rangel (D, NY) with the important title of Executive Director of the White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African-Americans.

Apparently some uses for post-sequester money are more important than others.  Especially when there’s political gain to be had.

Another Victory over Big Government

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s the long and the short of it, as summarized in The Wall Street Journal:

A federal judge this week struck down a controversial set of laws allowing the Federal Bureau of Investigation to seek people’s records without a court’s approval, saying the strict secrecy orders demanded by the laws are not constitutional.

US District Judge Susan Illston (Northern District of California) ordered the government to stop sending national security letters or to stop trying to enforce gag orders related to them, but she stayed her order pending the government’s appeal.

Of course, it’ll go to the 9th Circuit, which means it will go on to the Supreme Court, so the fight isn’t over.  But this is an excellent start.

Illston’s opinion decried these violations of Americans’ individual freedom:

[The] pervasive use of nondisclosure orders…creates too large a danger that speech is being unnecessarily restricted.

She added [emphasis added]:

[T]he statute impermissibly attempts to circumscribe a court’s ability to review the necessity of nondisclosure orders.  …the NSL nondisclosure provisions significantly infringe on speech regarding controversial government powers.  …  As written, the statute expressly limits a court’s powers to modify or set aside a nondisclosure order to [certain] situations….  The statute’s intent…is incompatible with the court’s duty to searchingly test restrictions on speech.

There are two problems with these letters.  One is that they allow searches without a court’s warrant.  The FBI can use them to search for phone data and for financial and electronic records, and all the FBI agent needs is his Field Office Special Agent in Charge to say it’s all jake.  This is a clear violation of our 4th Amendment.

The other problem worsens this exponentially: the FBI can require (or could before Illston’s ruling) the recipient of the letter to keep quiet about his receipt—denying the owner of the records any opportunity to respond to the search before it happens.  This also denies two critical aspects of the 1st Amendment: that right to speak of receipt and the duty of a court to adjudicate any allegation of a 1st Amendment violation.

Illston’s ruling can be read here.