Posts
All Comments
I cannot find any news that the government appealed the ruling in Texas to the 5th circuit, so the as applied ruling stands?
Next we get to see who is actually named in this.
I remember at least one video naming Palmetto State Armory's customers, and I have been a frequent PSA customer.
We're about an hour and a half from the first transfer in Texas without a Form 4.
Are they live streaming it?
I should check.
Something I keep wondering about is if why do we even have things that can be abused by the government?
Gun registration lists cannot be used by the government to track gun owners if there is no list.
But they make a list and tell us they're not accessing it. Because it's illegal.
I don't want it to be illegal to misuse a list, I want it to be impossible.
The only way for that to happen is for there to be no list at all and not collecting any information that could be used in a list.
Not even if a non-governmental entity holds the list, government will access it.
Flock cameras are the same thing.
Because it is possible for the government to use the information to violate my rights, they will do so. "They have not done so yet!" is a very weak defense and Flock's own spokesman doesn't much reassure me that they won't enthusiastically assist government in fucking me over.
But if there are no Flock cameras...
I did not save the link...
But it would appear that Flock's surveillance and its use by the cops was found to not be a violation of privacy because there weren't enough cameras in use to provide 100% coverage and thus the person surveilled could have routed around them.
There are Supreme Court cases holding that milder infractions are violations of our right to privacy. The recent one about geo-fencing is one.
It would appear to me, reading the tea leaves, that even one use without a warrant is a violation and Flock is digging it's own grave by pointing out how many cameras they have operating.
Someone is eventually going to tie a penumbra to these cameras from the cyberstalking laws and the "we did it to everyone" defense is just going to increase the number of counts in the charges.
Because while government can use the "we did it to everyone equally" defense, they're not allowed to do it to anyone without a warrant.
"We did it to everyone," is not a defense a private party can use when invading someone's privacy.
Hawaii's vampire rule has been struck on 2nd and 14th Amendment grounds.
For everyone scoring at home, this is another 14th Amendment incorporation moment.
It's also reminding Hawaii that they're a state and subservient to the US Constitution and there's no legal binding to the spirit of aloha.
40 years, yesterday, the Firearms Owners Protection Act went into effect.
Overall, a net positive, but the ban on new machine guns is still a thorn.
A few states reversed some of the gains, but most of us got freer.
The Firearms Policy Coalition has posted this list to their Facebook account.
Nearly all good as far as I can see. The Devil will be in the details, of course.FPC LEGAL ALERT
The ATF has posted summaries of the new regulations, which include:
1) Repeal Biden's pistol brace rule
2) Revising "engaged in the business" rule
3) Revising machine gun definition in response to Cargill decision
4) Remove requirement for FFLs to post info about Youth Handgun Safety Act
5) Revising 4473 form, including allowing electronic forms and increase the time NICS checks remain valid
6) Allow FFLs to keep electronic records
7) Replace indefinite retention of 4473s with definite time periods of 20 or 30 yearsAllow “Non-Over-the-Counter” firearm sales by FFLs to residents of the same state
9) Repeal interstate NFA transport notice requirement for trips under 365 days, with all others no longer requiring approval before transport
10) Joint NFA registration for married couples
11) Remove NFA CLEO notification
12) Clarify that "common, reasonably necessary activities during travel" are covered by FOPA transportation protection
13) Allow import of dual-use frames, receivers, and barrels
14) Clarify that "training rounds" are not ammunition
15) Eliminate engraving requirement for people making NFA firearms out of existing serialized guns
16) "Clarify that a person receiving assistance in only one functional area (such as financial management) would not, on that basis alone, be considered prohibited" under mental health disqualifier
17) Requiring biological sex on ATF Forms
18) Clarify when a transaction is a straw purchase
19) Formally define "willfully" for firearms violations.
20) "Remove the list of former Soviet countries from which ATF currently denies applications to permanently import most firearms and ammunition, retaining only the Russian Federation"
Obviously, we want all their stupid shit deleted and the "The Lord giveth and the The Lord taketh away," nature of ATF regulation be eliminated; but we fucking marched to where we are since 1934; stopping and doing some baby steps backwards is a huge deal.
Devon Eriksen says:
If you don't own a rifle, your opinion is mostly irrelevant.
Everything humans do to interact and work together is a proxy for force.
Force is base-level communication, because it requires no common language or concepts, and it definitively settles every dispute. Problem with it is, it's risky, expensive, and mostly not very enjoyable.
So we developed proxies for it. First language, then persuasion, deception, negotiation, money, blackmail, fake news, advertising, psychology, etc, etc, it's all a proxy for the underlying asset... force.
So if you have no weapon, then your opinion is only relevant when it influences those who do, whether directly or through second and higher order effects.
This places you at a considerable disadvantage, not only because those who can wield force directly can cut through the abstractions and wield that force directly, but also because the threat, stated or implied, of doing so carries weight and can change how others wield those higher-level abstractions.
This is why Jordan Peterson is wrong.
Free speech, when available, can be used to defend many things, but when it is under threat, it cannot be used to defend itself.
The right to bear arms, however, can be used to defend the right to bear arms.
And that is the difference.
If you need a further example, look at what is happening in Britain. The masters do not want their slaves expressing certain opinions, and they are imprisoning them for doing so.
Their real plan of attack, for course, has little to do with the people being imprisoned. They only have the resources to do that to a tiny fraction of the population.
The real plan is heads on spikes. It's using the fear of being one of those people to shut everyone up. Everyone but them.
But ask yourself... if you were British, or French, or Canadian, or Australian (or perhaps you actually are), instead of having the outrageous good fortune to be American, what the hell would you do?
How would you use the right of free speech to defend the right of free speech? If you say this is wrong, they'll find an excuse to call it hate speech and lock you up.
And you consented to this, you morons. A few crazies shot a vanishingly small percentage of kids, and instead of locking up the crazies, like any sensible population, you let them take away your only capacity to resist them.
You cheered for it.
You begged for it.
You brag about it.
You try to snap back at us with it, saying that at least .00000000001% of your schoolchildren (in the ghetto) aren't being shot (by other feral teens in the ghetto), as third-world barbarians hack your little girls to death with machetes and rape your teenage daughters and your own government won't lift a finger to stop it, because they hate you and they want it to happen.
You don't want to admit that the primary civil right, the right on which all the others is based, is the right to be armed.
Because if you did, you would have to face three horrifying truths:
1. You've been wrong all this time, and the very thing you were smuggest about was your biggest mistake.
2. You are in a shit situation, because you now have to figure out how to bring down a government that hates you, can use force on you any time they want, and you can't stop them.
3. America, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic are the only free countries on Earth. Everywhere else is a police state.
Americans have always known that ultimately, no matter who you are, now matter where you are, no one is coming to save you. You must possess the means to save yourself, or at least to fight back, to make yourself expensive and dangerous to kill, so you can save the next guy.
This is the reason, the real reason, why Americans love guns.
We let you pretend it was because we were fat stupid belligerent rednecks who like power fantasies, because that lie seemed to make you happy, and it's not nice to take away the comforting delusions of toddlers and crazy people.
But now that delusion is hurting you, and, contemptuous as you have been of us, you are fellow human beings, fellow civilized humans beings, and we don't want to see you die, so we have to tell you the truth.
We love guns because they are not only the tool of liberty, they are symbol of our value, not as tools or slaves of regime, but as independent, free human beings of inherent worth.
In America, when I walk past a police officer on the street, he has a badge and a gun. But I have a gun, too. Right there under my shirt. And [mine] works just like his.
And that changes everything. Because now I am not the only one dependent on the rule of law. He is dependent upon the rule of law, too. Because if the rule of law is the only thing that prevents him from killing me under color of authority, then the rule of law is the only thing that prevents me from killing him in the act of resistance.
The deterrents exist on both sides, and we all have to play nice. And mostly, we do. Because those deterrents make sure we really, really want to.
They're not playing nice any more on your side of the big blue wobbly thing. They have guns. All you have is a mouth and a keyboard.
How that working out for you?
An armed society is a polite society. That's not just a saying. That's not just fiction.
And Terry Pratchett was dead wrong. It doesn't just last until "some twerp drinks out of the wrong mug or picks up someone else's change by mistake and five minutes later you're picking noses out of the beer nuts."
Only a person from a disarmed society, who has never lived in a armed one, could have been so profoundly, pig-headedly, disastrously delusional.
If you haven't trained with guns, owned guns, carried guns, you have no idea what they're like, or what you would do if you had one, or what everyone would do in a bar where everyone had one.
Because the answer, the real answer, to "[what everyone does] in a pub where everyone goes armed" is "not get their goohuloog heads kicked in by the police for speaking out against their masters".
Years ago I commented that I support the end of the Islamic theocracy in Iran.
I still hope the people of Iran manage it.
They appear to be trying to do it again.
On the plus side the IRGC doesn't seem to doing its normal murder lots of people to suppress protests thing.
It probably helps that it's not Obama in office this time around.
Best of luck to the people of Iran!
When women have 100% the choice about whether they get or stay pregnant, they don't get to claim any right to the father's money.
Their body, their choice.
They choose poorly, to Hell with them!
Enshrined in law is:
Both parents don't want a kid, kid can be aborted or given up for adoption.
Both parents want a kid, no problem, they get down to the job of being parents.
Mom doesn't want a kid, Dad does. Mom can get an abortion or give the kid up for adoption without any recourse for Dad.
Dad doesn't want a kid, Mom does. Mom carries to term and gets The State to take money away from him. Again, Dad has little to no recourse if his genes match the kid's.
Since Mom gets to make the decision about having a kid, I don't see how any father is responsible unless he volunteers for the job.
No rights = No responsibilities.
Worse, Mom can completely eliminate Dad from the raising of the children while simultaneously demanding child support. He gets no visitation, no say in how they are raised or educated. He's just financially responsible.
So, girls, if you want men to assume duties, you have to give them rights.
It should be our bodies, our choices.
And, although it's a staid position, maybe consider aspirin held between the knees for birth control until you're in a loving, lasting relationship where the kids will have two parents who agree on it.
PS: Before you comment, this is not the place to have a debate about the morality of abortion. If you try, your comment gets deleted and I will call you a mouthbreathing Walz.
108 years ago Finland decided to stop being part of Russia and declined it's first invitation to be part of the Soviet Union.
I am sitting here looking at 41 days of the government being shut down and except for the ATC slow-down...
I'm not seeing any ill effects.
And the ATC slow down doesn't really affect my non-flying ass.
It's really making me scream, "If we don't need it, why do we have it?!"
Harvey is out doing her running around and she sends:
"The fuckin' protesters. No kings protest. They are everywhere and oh my God they are stupid!"
Can't say I disagree.
I have just stopped following the Associated Calibers Podcast Facebook group.
Unfriended a couple of people there too.
The constant warnings about what will happen if someone actually exercises their rights and how that will doom us all was old back when Miggy still lived near Miami.
I'm sick to death of people who're supposedly all about freedom and liberty balking at the idea that you can exercise your freedoms in a manner they wouldn't.
Apparently, I did not get the memo that I was supposed to stop liking things that they disliked.
Case in point is a couple of people open carrying at the local sheriff and seeing if the sheriff will break the law and harass them.
The cries of doom that this is not helping are, almost literally, insane.
But; is it actually hurting?
Because they cited Texas as a place where open carrying at people hurt gun rights in Texas. They do not, of course, cite any examples.
They cite California as an example of a place where open carrying hurt gun rights in California. They alluded to an example that I recognized. Sped up the process is probably what happened rather than caused open carry of long guns to be banned.
We get the internet here in Florida too, you know, we can use our choice of search engine to check on what happened after people open carried in front of cameras.
I keep having to make this post because they don't seem to remember that what they're scared of never happens. Isn't odd that it's so often in October?
 |
| Green: Permitless; Yellow: Permit Required/Restricted; Red: Forbidden |
Compare that map with the one from 2019. I'll help you out and tell you that the only place that got worse in the past six years was California. California gets worse without triggering events, so we can't use them as a barometer of what causes things to get worse elsewhere.
Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island stayed the same with their restrictions.
But look at all the states where it got better!
Despite Open Carry Texas.
Despite Florida Carry's fishing events.
Despite the naysayers and gloomers.
You suck at this, stop making predictions.
Despite FUDDs and scolds, I am pleased we stuck to our guns (literally) and successfully fought back since 1994 on gun control.
Looking at Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom since they put in gun control and watching what they're dealing with and what we aren't there's some satisfaction in seeing the wisdom of the founders play out in real time.
Most of the anglosphere has been reduced to saying, "stop or I will say stop again!" at best. Because I've seen stories from England where saying stop will get you jailed for being intolerant.
That Bill of Rights thing turned out to be prescient.
I also remember politicians in Australia, Canada and the UK assuring their citizens that their fears were unfounded and they would NEVER do what they're doing now.
Picked up some firewood and today was the same as a week ago.
This despite the legalization of open carry in Florida.
Blood is not running in the streets.
People are not having running gunfights over minor traffic altercations.
Dogs and cats are living together.
Almost as if ALL of the naysayers were wrong.
Again.
Lots of people are exulting that Charlie Kirk did once say, "I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights."
I've repeatedly said that freedom has warts.
Every liberty has a down side, but the upsides more than counter them.
Millions of defensive gun uses that saved someone's life more than counter the thousands of murders and suicides.
Even if all guns miraculously disappeared, there would still be murder and suicide. There would still be a need to defend oneself from murderers and thieves.
It's not the guns that are the problem.
It's the rage that's been sold since, around, 2000, that the right wing are evil.
Rage that has led to violence that was unpunished.
Outright encouragement of violence against "fascists" was the norm.
Antifa and Black Lives Matter destroyed how much property? Injured or killed how many people?
Yet, only the right saw any real punishment. Isn't it amazing how they found everyone who entered the capitol building on January 6, but we can't find arsonists in any of the various places that Antifa rioted in?
It's not guns that told them to go do evil and assured them they would not be punished.
It's not guns that provided bail money and delivered bricks on pallets near where these violent protests would occur.
It's not guns.
It's also not the right that's been murdering people.
I, for one, am sick of being blamed for things I didn't do.
I am sick of being punished for things that other people did.
That's against the entire concept of individual liberty that this nation was founded upon!
