Quote of the Day–George Washington: 01/11/11

"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good"

— George Washington

[Many would claim today that guns are evil and the actions of Saturday are the manifestation of that evil.  However it can be seen that they deserve a place of honor amongst those of us that are good.  – B]

Why is the left so violent?

In the wake of last Saturday there were lots of finger pointing from both sides.  With a complete disregard for those who lost loved ones that morning

This vitriol was quick and thick it was discovered that Planck Time is not the shortest period of time.  We often see how bad the anti-gunners are, but now someone combined a list of how hypocritical the left is regarding incendiary speech.

H/T: Law Dog

Well that explains the blame game.

It appears our shooter had family working for the county. This prevented the local sheriff from prosecuting this nutjob over multiple death threats he’d made, each of which would have made it illegal for him to buy guns. – The Inconvenience

Apparently, the Pima County Sheriff knew about death threats from the shooter but didn’t do anything about them because a family member of Jared Loughner works for the county.

Sheriff Clarence Dupnik has been dancing in the blood of the victims and blaming Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and the Tea Party movement, along with others, for the tragedy that took place in Tucson, Arizona on January 8th.  He knew full well that Loughner was very unstable, yet did nothing about it.

Suppressor Laws In Washington–HB 1016-2011-12

The change to the suppressor laws is coming up in the Washington State Legislature again.  Those of you in Washington State, be sure to write your Representatives.  Here’s a sample copy of what I wrote.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing you today in regards to HB 1016 – 2011-12, which will change the restrictions regarding firearm noise suppressors.

Currently within the State of Washington suppressors are outlawed from use. I can own them and I can even attach them to my weapon, however the act of discharging causes me to be guilty of committing a gross misdemeanor. To further illustrate how helpless this law is I can drive 5 miles, by road, and be perfectly legal to discharge as I am now in the state of Idaho.

The irrationality of the law in general aside, the central item in question is a safety device. Why is a safety device outlawed from use by the residents of our state? When hunting I must choose between situational awareness and permanent hearing loss. Why must I make this decision, why must I for the safety of those around me suffer permanent hearing damage at the direction of the state? Wearing hearing protection while hunting is unsafe as it limits your ability to hear, including others in the area that you wouldn’t otherwise be aware of. Not only must I suffer hearing damage but people in the surrounding areas who are not partaking in the sport are also subjected to the possibility of hearing damage due the discharge of a firearm. Another example is a pregnant woman who must use a firearm for self-defense, the resulting pressure wave from the shot can do untold damage to the fetus. Yet a simple suppressor could protect the fetus from the shot the mother fired to protect them both.

This law as currently written also applies to law enforcement, including wildlife management. There is no exemption for Section 1: C for law enforcement. This means that when using a suppressor currently our law enforcement is committing a gross misdemeanor. However, law enforcement is allowed to violate this law at their convenience; why do they get an unlawful exemption while law abiding citizens are punished by the government under the guise of “protecting them”?

Changing the suppressor laws would increase not just the health of those in our state involved in the shooting sports as well as those who have firearms within their house for defense, but also create extra revenue in the form of additional sales tax. Many shooters would gladly purchase suppressors for use; however, we do not because of this asinine law. Suppressors are not like you see in the movies, you can still hear it, but it depresses the sound to the point where hearing damage will be less likely to occur. Please, for the health of the shooters in our state, support HB 1016-2011-12.

Sincerely,

TMM

Please do your part, it’s time the stupid law is changed.

H/T Ry

Updates Here.

1st Amendment Threatened…

In lieu of the event that occurred in Arizona on Saturday, January 8th, Rep. Robert Brady wants to introduce legislation to “protect” congress.

Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress.

Watch the video, you will notice that, just like any other politician, he avoids answering the questions directed to him.

He is one of the many dancing in the blood of the victims who died and were injured.

TMM would have added this to his post had he been able to find the link.

H/T to JayG

Let No Good Crisis Go Wasted

It took no time at all for the left and right to start dancing in the blood of those that died in the tragic events of yesterday.  Now that the initial blood dance is over, our fearless leaders are already figuring out how to get the most mileage from this tragedy.

“My staff is working on looking at the different legislation fixes that we might be able to do and we might be able to introduce as early as tomorrow,” McCarthy told POLITICO in a Sunday afternoon phone interview.

This is the same woman who informed all of us in the gun community a barrel shroud “is the shoulder thing that goes up”.

It is despicable to take an even such as this and use it to your own political gains.  Even more despicable when your political agenda is the destruction of a specifically enumerated right.  This whole mess gets even better though.  Because while Ms. McCarthy attacks the Second Amendment, the Pima County Sheriff is attacking the First Amendment.

“I think the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business and what (we) see on TV and how our youngsters are being raised, that this has not become the nice United States of America that most of us grew up in. And I think it’s time that we do the soul-searching,” the sheriff said.

Translation: If you are not broadcasting something that does not tote the party line, causes one to question what they have been told, or questions the authority of the government, it is counter to the public good and should be censored. 

Both of these responses two the shooting are by no means surprising, especially Ms. McCarthy’s considering she danced in the blood on the day of the Virginia Tech Shootings.  On the contrary it was immediately what I expected when I first heard about the shooting.  Not only is it not surprising they have one strong corollary shared between the two, which goes to show their goals are not what they claim.  The Sherriff and Ms. McCarthy both blame various tools completely ignoring the responsibility of the individual himself.  As Rob Allen showed earlier today though, the choice of tools is actually irrelevantThe greatest weapon in the world is the human brain, for that is what actually does damage, without it a weapon will remain motionless and inactive.

Quote of the Day–The Inconvenience: 01092011

Says Obama, “What we do know is that such a senseless and terrible act of violence has no place in a free society.”

-Well bub, if we lived in a free society you wouldn’t have to worry about this.

[Everyone is dancing in the blood of that most traumatic event, even fearless leader.  The fact of the matter is, calling ourselves a free society because relative to the rest of the world we still are doesn’t make it so.  In a free society, the TSA, ATF, and DHS wouldn’t exist.  I would be free to purchase what ever I want as a law abiding citizen, and discharging a firearm with a suppressor wouldn’t result in Jail time.  Those little problems are just the tip of the ice berg.  -B]

Red Light Cameras

So reading through the blogosphere yesterday Uncle posted about someone getting 5 red light tickets, but they weren’t his.  I had meant at the time to do a blog post on the subject but never got around to it.  Uncle’s post gave me renewed vigor.

Red light cameras strike a special nerve with me.  The arguments for their use are much like the arguments for gun control, it makes everyone safer.  The actual numbers from the field though show the complete opposite however, again, just like gun control.

My mom got a red light ticket back home.  It was actually her vehicle in this instance.  A couple weeks later some friends of hers who live out of town called and asked about the same intersection.  The interesting thing though about these tickets is they were for turning right on red, which is legal at that intersection.

As it is a sequence of still photographs as opposed to video, you can not defend yourself by showing you came to a complete stop.  You’re stuck paying the ticket.  Ahh, a ticket, maybe it is done for revenue.  Camera tickets are not reported to insurance companies or otherwise scored in your driving record.  It’s the equivalent of getting a parking ticket(California and Oregon excluded).  You are requested to pay this please for doing X, it’s a penance, except they’re charging people now a penance for something that is legal.  I voiced my displeasure by preaching to the choir and then it happened.  An article was posted in the town paper from where I grew up.  I read the article and damn near had an embolism from my blood pressure going through the roof.

Those who question the program’s validity will admit that there does seem to be a relationship between the cameras and the safety of people. Unfortunately, some politicians and pundits are inserting a “but …” and making claims that just are not true.

After my initial rage subsided I decided that I needed to bitch beyond the choir, to the no talent ass clowns politicians pushing this garbage.  After forwarding the article to “The Short Lady with the Grey Hair” she decided to send a letter as well.  Here is a copy of my letter for the internet to retain for all eternity.

Mr. Lewis,
There are some other issues you do not cover in your statement regarding photo enforcement at intersections.

As the rates of people committing infractions drop, revenue decreases.  Revenue is needed to maintain and operate the cameras.  As that revenue drops either the cameras are no longer maintained, or things are done which produce false positives to create revenue.  In either case people are or can be falsely cited for infractions.  Examples of this are ticketing everyone who turns right on red even though it’s legal.  As it is only pictures, NOT video it is impossible to prove guilt using them, however in a court room the images are looked at as divine judgment of guilt.

I will not argue that they can help decrease accidents, however accidents are caused by people blowing lights as through traffic.  Making a right hand turn on red is perfectly legal unless specific sings are in place to indicate otherwise.  However when I hear of different individuals getting a ticket for something perfectly legal at the same intersection is shows corruption and greed within the system.  It displays the real need for these cameras is to increase revenue.

Mr. Lewis, the facts of how these cameras are used and operated, coupled with the difficulty in defending yourself from a ticket for a legal procedure indicates a gross abuse by the local government against it’s citizens as well as visitors.  I grew up in Auburn and remember it prior to it’s explosion to it’s current state.  There is a reason I now live in a town with not a single stop light.  However when I talk to friends and relatives who still remain in the area about getting a ticket for turning right on red, where there is no indication it is illegal to do so, it makes me disappointed to say I grew up in Auburn.  It makes it obvious that Auburn’s intention with the system is not to increase safety, but rather to increase revenue by false citations to the citizenry.  Eventually the locals will know not to turn right on red, but what about people from out of town visiting.  Couple that with the distance and you have a guaranteed payout.

This is completely independent of the fact that the idea of red light and speeding cameras are grossly Orwellian in nature and indicate a subservience of the public to the state.  In our “free” republic, people are elected to represent the will of the public, not do as they wish.  When issues are brought up it is your duty as a public servant to address them.  That includes saying you made a mistake instead of continuing to push public policy to preserve your public image.  I would suggest finding a local scout organization and sitting through the “citizenship” merit badges.  The questions of efficacy in this instance I do not feel center around preventing accidents, but whether those who are ticketed have actually committed a crime.

Sincerely,

TMM

I haven’t seen or heard a reply and I’m sure it was probably just tossed the garbage.  So instead it will be placed on the internet, for all to see and enjoy.  This will also provide another case for others who find themselves in the same predicament to use in support of their case when fighting a ticket ill gotten penance required by the force of government.