Drip, drip, drip...

Hardly a day passes without some erosion of our rights as American citizens occurring. 

It could be small.  It often is.  But it could also be quite substantial. 

In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, the Left has forged on with flank speed to pass any, any gun control law before the furor amongst the low-information voter subsides.  They want to take advantage, as Barry O'bama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel so famously said, by not letting this - or any - crisis go to waste.

Example?  There are many, but let me use recent proposed legislation by NY State's Congressweenie Carolyn McCarthy.  She actually suggested that prospective gun owners be required to purchase liability insurance under her "Gun Owners' Risk Abatement Act," or be subject to a $10,000 fine. 

You read that right.  The "...right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" in NY State now means you are assumed to be a red-neck, inbred, child-molesting, monotoothed cretin who is likely to do bad things with that awful gun you, for some unearthly and unexplained reason, want to buy, so we must force you to insure yourself and the weapon before that bad thing that's sure to happen, happens.  

We know that the weenies in California are trying their very hardest to tax ammunition purchases, no doubt under the theory that if they make ammo too expensive, gun owners won't be able to exercise their Constitutional rights.  Connecticut legislators just passed a bill that would require you to buy an annual permission slip to buy ammo, which, of course, would come with a stiff fee to afford you that opportunity.  And many of the weeniest states are trying to eliminate the crude and irresponsible act of passing guns on from father to son without an onerous, unnecessary and expensive universal background check to make sure 11-year old little Johnnie isn't a terrorist.

Let's just call this spade a spade (in this hyper-politically correct society, can we still say that?).  The Lefties among us can't quite understand why the One Hundred Million of us gun owners want to own guns.  They think if they just come up with creative little roadblocks to place in our way we'll give up and join their Utopian little, trust the cops and the Gummint to protect us, ranks. 

They are wrong.

But, for the sake of some jocularity, I've decided to help them.  I've come up with a few other plans to help them in their quest.  Nothing head on, mind you, just kind of nibbling around the edges.  So here goes...

The "Anything Black Except People is Bad" bill:  So-called "assault weapons" are black.  If you outlaw the color "black," then people won't be able to buy black weapons.  Ergo, no more assault weapons.  Clever?  I thought you'd like it.

The "No Shooting on Days Ending in "Y" bill:  This little piece of legislation would outlaw the discharge of a gun inside or outside of the city limits of any city, anywhere, on any day ending in "y."  Enough said.

The "Forefinger is Verboten" bill:  Pass this little bill and Americans could no longer use their forefinger to discharge a weapon.  That oughta' slow 'em down!

The "You Have to Eat Everything You Kill" bill:  Except for out-and-out cannibals, this should slow down gang killings in urban paradises like Chicago, Detroit and Camden, Neuwww Jersey.

The "Protecting Animals by Forbidding Aiming" bill:  No more gun sights or telescopic sights would be allowed if this legislation passes.  You have to kind of point the gun and hope.  And if you're unsuccessful, then there's a really good chance you'll simply give up and go to Safeway for your Saran-wrapped packaged meats.  Or, you'll miss your desired target and off some inner-city gangbanger and they'll prosecute the Hell out of you and put you away until Conservatives take power once again. 

Oh, my friends, there are other creative ways to put stumbling blocks in the path of those who would attempt to subvert  our God-given rights.  Maybe you can come up with a few.  Write me with those you recommend.  I'll pass them along to the otherwise unemployables in Sacrarobyou in Round Two in this ongoing screed.  I'm sure they'll appreciate the favor...

To keep and bear arms...

The last bastion of freedom for us Americans is  -  wait for it -
county sheriffs.

Yes, children, it's true.  No matter what the weenies in Foggy Bottom decide, or the almost-as-weenie weenies in America's state capitols come up with, it's the county sheriffs in our great Country who are charged with following the constraints of the Constitution of the United States of America. 

Doubt it?  Think about Arizona's infamous Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  This guy has been a thorn in the side of redistributionist, illegal immigrant-loving, lefty legislators since Jimmy Carter was screwing up America.  This is the guy that keeps arresting illegals, feeding them baloney sandwiches, putting them in pink undies and housing them in a tent city. He just tells everyone who disagrees with him to get bent, and goes about doing the job his constituents hired him to do.  Right on, Joe!

Remember, the Constitution tells the Government what it cannot do, i.e., "negative rights," versus what it can.  That sooooo irritates the Progressives among us.  And let's look again at that pesky 2nd Amendment...

"...the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Need the definition of those little highlighted words?

Keep:  To maintain, store, safeguard, secrete, save, reserve, stock, employ, shield, shelter, own, look after, care for, house, store, etc.

Bear:  To hold, support, carry, wield, display, control, show, flash, produce, shoulder, wear, holster, have, convey, bring, take, etc.

That means, Messrs. Obama, Biden, Schumer, Emmanuel, Durbin, etc., and Ms.'s Feinstein, Boxer, McCarthy, et. al., we Americans can buy guns, and openly wear them, with no more authorization than a dog-eared copy of the Constitution of the United States of America in our shirt pocket (trust me, I'm really, REALLY close to giving that a try here in the second least-free state in the Union).

Okay then, students of English, which I would assume most of our states' legislators are, should understand quite well that any movement they make, besides bowel, of course, to infringe upon those God-given rights, would be negatively received.  And they are, by everyone except the CPDLW (commie pinko dumbass liberal weenies).  But does that stop them? 

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

They are Hell-bent to keep the Sandy Hook massacre crisis from going to waste.  They want to pass any, any negative measure they can, while they can, against guns and their owners, especially their red-neck, wife-beating, tattooed, inbred owners, before the low-information voter's attention returns to DWTS (Dancing With The Stars).

And hundreds, hundreds, of county sheriffs across the fruited plain are lining up as friends and protectors of the Constitution and its Second Amendment, stating publicly that they will not enforce any law, new or otherwise, that in any way infringes on the Second Amendment.  And, as a kicker, they openly threaten to jail any Federal agent who attempts to enforce anti-2nd Amendment laws within their borders.  And kiddies, those statements are not sitting well with the CPDLW in statehouses across the Country.

Let's take Colorado for instance.  CO legislators are warning their county sheriffs that they risk losing their annual raises if they don't fall into lockstep behind the new, unconstitutional laws.  And if that doesn't work, they say they'll move to fire those that are appointed.  And so far, the sheriffs are telling the legislators to pound sand.   

Good for them.  Keep it up.  The citizens of America who love freedom are solidly behind you.  And the citizens of the states with CPDLW governors and/or legislators who love the Constitution and freedom are preparing to toss these bastards out of office at the very first opportunity.  

As Thomas Jefferson so famously said, "The tree of freedom needs to be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots."

I think that time may well have come... 


.

Children

I just had an epiphany.

I have been wondering non-stop as to why there's anyone left in California besides illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, gang members, drug-addled, naked San Franciscan hippies, sign twirlers, Starbucks baristas and slimy, liberal politicians.  Oh, and my wife and me.

I think I've finally found the answer:  Children.

Children, you say?  Why, Mr. Chuckmeister?  Well, my well-educated, high-information, snappily-dressed and unfailingly polite friends, here's why:

People came here to the once-Golden State looking for beautiful vistas, enticing seashores, glorious mountains, vast, shimmering arid deserts and a climate about which people go all orgasmically rhapsodic.  Oh, and the chance to make something of oneself.  Start a company, create something important, even become a movie star!  It was all here.  And that past-tense reference was completely intentional.

Now, California is a wasteland of liberal failure.  Decades of looney lib policies have turned this paradise into a place where businesses go to die, or die aborning before they ever get the chance to live. 

Examples?  The highest corporate taxes in America.  The highest personal tax rates in America.  Among the highest unemployment rates in the Country.  The lowest credit rating among all states in the nation.  The most restrictive pollution and environmental protection regulations.  The highest fiscal debt per capita.  The most restrictive anti-Second Amendment laws in America, and poised to get much, much worse.  Perennially rated as one of the worst governed States.  Ranked by CEO's as the worst state in which to do business for the past eight years in a row.  The worst collection of rules and regulations that make business formation difficult (ranked 50th in new business formation...is there anything worst than 50th?  Oh wait...Obama said he'd been to all 57 states...), and continued operation almost impossible.

As an example, our citizenry, including illegals who voted en masse, just passed a new law championed by our perennial Governor, Jerry Brown, who is likely to live out his entire life without ever having had a real, private-sector job.  It's called Proposition 30, which serves to redistribute wealth from those that made to those that sit on their asses and drink Pabst Blue Ribbon.

We now have one-party rule in Sacrascrewyou, completely unrestrained in any way as to the passage of new taxes.  I, for one, think the very best job in California now is to be a Republican legislator:  no one asks for their opinion, no one wants their opinion, and nobody gives a damn about their opinion.  The rumblings among the lib weenies are even beginning to start over their very public desire to overturn at least a part of Prop. 13.  Oh boy!  Property taxes are going up, ladies and gents!  Prepare yourselves.  When that happens it won't be a straw that break the camel's back; it will be the whole damn wheat field.

We here in the land of fruits and nuts even have our own "cap and trade" legislation whereby those who, according to our tree-huggers, pollute a little (very little!) can buy the right to do that polluting from those who don't pollute at all, but could.  And the pols in Sactorupyours will be pleased, thank you, to sell you that right.  That will produce even more money for them to spread around by selling those rights.  If you're a commie in Sacradonkeybrain and you can sell this bulls*t for a few hundred million, why wouldn't you?

Yes, kiddies we can buy credits enabling us to break a law that shouldn't exist by paying a fine...up front.  Apparently the otherwise unemployables in Sacranumbnuts believe there's a 60,000 foot tall Plexiglas wall encasing California, which keeps our air in, and the air from the rest of the world out.  Apparently they aren't aware that what's in Shanghai today will be here in about a week.  Like I said, otherwise unemployable.

Did I mention that we're the first and so far only state to do this little kabuki theater?  The Feds have even trying to enact such tomfoolery for several years, but even they are too smart, or too scared, to engage in such nonsense (even they?).  It's purely and simply another form of redistribution of wealth from the makers to the takers.  And the makers are getting really pissed.

There's many other ways California is blowing it.  But suffice it to say that the states that surround us, like AZ and NV and UT, are damned happy we are.  They are recruiting our best and brightest at flank speed, offering us a better and less expensive life just a few miles away.  They actually have offices in California dedicated to recruiting our people and their businesses.  Just recently, Texas Governor Rick Perry visited San Fran, the Silicon Valley and L.A. on a business-mining trip.  And he'll was warmly greeted by business owners who are ripe for the poaching.

Over the past decade more than a million of (now ex-) Californians have chosen to head for greener (or, in the case of Nevada, beige-er) pastures.  There's even in index rating of business exodus that ranks us at the very top in terms of the cost of one-way rentals of U-Haul trucks.  They're leaving so fast U-Haul has to hire people to drive them back here - empty - from other states.  Sad.  And alarming.

So, if it's that bad, why havent' even more Californians elected to leave?  Children.   We come here, we meet Miss or Mr. Right, we get married and we start procreating.  Then, one or two or three kids, or even more, result.  And then you discover that the harder you work the farther behind you become.  But by then it's too late.  You can't leave.  Your kids grow up, get married and then have kids of their own.  Your kids now have your grandkids.  Can you leave for tax-free Nevada or Texas and a better, cheaper life then?  No, you can't.

In fact, if I were a commie pinko dumbass liberal weenie politician up in Sactyohorsesass, I would begin offering special tax preferences and direct payouts to those who start pumping out kids like a Xerox machine.  These little "anchors" will insure you're stuck here, paying taxes until the day you drop dead.  They'll then be able to take all your money and redistribute it to those I listed in the second paragraph above.  Pretty scary, don't you think?

And infuriating...

CCW = Enhanced Safety

It was reported yesterday that Florida has just surpassed 1,000,000 legal concealed carry weapons permits.  That's a 30% increase over the preceding year.

That means that one in every 20 Floridians is now packing heat.  And, as I like to say, if only 5% of the ducks were armed, do you think anyone would go duck hunting?

It was reported in the same AP news release that major crime in Florida is down 30% from the year earlier.

Do you think one statistic has anything to do with the other?

Well, do ya' punk?

Reprinted without comment...

 

"O.C. lawmakers push bill to arm teachers"

 

 

Orange County Register, Brian Joseph, Register Writer,

January 31, 2013

 

 

"In the wake of the Newtown, Conn., school shooting, three Orange County Assembly members are  co-authoring legislation to secretly arm California teachers, janitors and other school employees with concealed weapons.

 

Assembly members Curt Hagman, R-chino Hills; Diane Harkey, R-Dana Point; and Don Wagner, R-Irvine, have signed onto a proposal introduced this week by Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, R-Twin Peaks."

 

"Donnelly's proposal, AB202, is in the same vein as the National Rifle Association's post-Newtown plan to install armed guards in schools.

 

To protect children from crazed attackers, AB202 would allow "school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to use "general purpose funds to train any qualified and willing to carry a concealed gun on campus.

 

These volunteers, to be known as "school marshals," would be anonymous under the California School Marshal Plan,would exempt the disclosure of school marshal volunteers from the state's public records act.

 

"In light of the devastating tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary, Donnelly said in a news release about the bill, "we must develop a plan that will provide both true, immediate p[protection to our children and teachers, and a deterrent to future predators."

 

Donnelly says the bill would "simply allow school districts to fund the necessary training to faculty and staff who are already legally allowed to protect their school."



Gun Free Zones

The echoes from the gunshots had barely died out before the hysterical bleatings from the gun-haters for ever-tougher gun control laws reached a crescendo.  Lamentable, but predictable.  It happens every time somebody goes off the deep end and commits mass murder using a gun.  But while they're banging the "take the guns" drum, let's take a look at the real problem, and one proposed solution.

The Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut was a "gun free zone."  The Cinemark movie theater in Aurora, Colorado was a "gun free zone."  The Virginia Technical Institute was a "gun free zone."  And surprisingly, Fort Hood, Texas was a "gun free zone."  In fact, every single mass killing over the past decade where 3 or more people died occurred in a "gun free zone." 

Doesn't it seem that mass murderers tend to select "gun free zones" when they're in the mood  to kill a bunch of people?  Had there been an armed citizen, trained in the use of his or her weapon, at that school, or in that theater, or at that college, or even in the largest military installation in the United States (thanks to Billy Jeff Clinton, all military installations are now gun free zones!), doesn't it seem likely, as statistics indicate, that the number of people killed would have been severely minimized?  And, had that been a possibility, doesn't it seem likely that the killer might have thought twice before selecting those targets of opportunity?  Or any such targets before deciding to kill fellow citizens and then himself? 

Nobody knows what possessed the 20 year old in CT to go on a rampage and start killing little children.  Or to first take his mother's guns and shoot her in the face.  He couldn't pass a background check earlier in the week (that gun control law worked), so stealing his mother's guns was his only option (a felony).  Wouldn't it have been nice if she'd secured those guns under lock and key (her not doing so was a felony)?  He couldn't get into the school that day.  It was on lockdown, just like so many other schools are these days.  So he used Mom's .40 caliber Glock pistol to shoot his way in (a felony).  Should we encase every school in bullet-proof glass?  And then he loaded his weapons (a felony) and gunned down 20 kids and 6 teachers and administrators (26 felonies, plus sentencing enhancements, like that would have mattered).  Should we, like the NRA's CEO suggests, position an armed guard in every school in America (no, I say)?  Or do we being to repurpose our society away from trying desperately to pry guns out of the hands of lawful Americans who use them for self-defense, hunting and target shooting, and instead try to identify those mentally unbalanced citizens who are likely to become mass murderers before they can act?

By the way, England's Parliament is now debating whether to ban ki8tchen knives...thought you'd like to know how far liberal lunacy can go if left unchecked.

One hundred million Americans who own 270,000,000 guns didn't shoot anybody yesterday.  But have one insane kid shot a bunch of little children and the gun-hating loons are in a frenzy to once again try to deny citizens their Constitutional rights. 

According to a study performed by Florida State University, 2,500,000 times a year citizens using lawfully-owned weapons prevent a crime, or at least minimize the negative impact of crimes in progress.  Why isn't that reported in the alphabet media (that was a rhetorical question)?  

Points to ponder:  There are no "assault weapons."  There are only weapons which may be used in assaults, including your grandfather's shotgun.  The term "assault weapons" was coined by Sen Dianne Feinstein and fellow gun-hating liberals in the early '90s in an effort to color the publics' opinion against those scary-looking, "black" rifles that America loves and liberal politicians hate.  The AR-style rifle possibly used in the Connecticut shooting is the most popular hunting weapon in use in America today.  It is being used to hunt everything from squirrels to Kodiak Brown Bears.   

Second, there are no automatic weapons in use in America today; they have been outlawed since the 1930's.  There are semi-automatic weapons, which require the trigger to be pulled once for every shot fired.  There are dozens and dozens of semi-automatic hunting rifles and shotguns and pistols for sale in America today, and have been for more than 100 years, and none are "assault weapons." 

Third, has anyone looked at the extremely violent, desensitizing video games for sale today?  Maybe shooting up cops and soldiers on the TV with a joy stick has had a tendency to make such mass murders more likely.  And there's new evidence to indicate that the CT shooter was addicted to one such video game.  And who's looking to identify mentally unstable citizens?  It seems when you turn 18 you drop off the grid.  Getting a kid in this category institutionalized is nearly impossible.  That' got to change.

Fourth, deaths from illegal guns has gone down every single year for the past twenty years, most likely due to the increasing number of legally-owned weapons in the hands of law-abiding citizens.  As an example, concealed-carry gun permits just surpassed one million in Florida, and Florida gun crime is way, way down.  As they say, an armed society is a polite society. 


Chicago has had an outright ban on guns for more than 40 years.  Yet, Chicago is the murder capitol of America, with gun deaths totalling 535 for 2012, and 19,000 since 1990.  Perhaps that famous sometime-Chicago resident, B. Hussein Obama, would care to explain to us why outright gun bans do nothing to ban guns.

Perhaps instead of "gun free zones," we should have "guns welcome here" zones.  Then, prospective mass murderes would have to factor in the very real probability of being dropped like a bad habit by a good guy with a gun before getting off the first shot.

So what's my plan, you ask?  Simple.  Offer teachers and administrators free gun safety and proper handling courses for those who wish to participate, on a purely voluntary - and confidential - basis.  Then provide appropriate weapons for each, and all licensing, permits and certification necessary for legal concealed carry, on their persons only (no guns in desk drawers or in bookcases or in their cars).  We should offer monetary stipends to each participant as Adjunct Safety Officers as an inducement to participate.  Then, somewhere between none and maybe as many as a couple of dozen trained, armed volunteers, plus the occasional cop, would be active in each of our schools, at a negligible overall one-time cost, perhaps not more than $1,000 per participant, and the bad guys wouldn't know who or how many or where.

If we can trust them to teach our kids, can't we trust teachers to also protect our kids, especially volunteers with proper training? 

The result?  A less attractive target of opportunity.  Bad guys will pick "soft targets" if they can, like shopping malls and bowling alleys and grocery stores.  But like they're now doing in TX and OK and CO and NV and UT and WY (Ohio gun ranges just trained their four thousandth teacher, for free), and many others, let's make our schools "hard targets" as soon as possible and put an end to school shootings, once and for all.

Also ask yourself this:  if only 5% of the ducks were armed, do you think anybody would go duck hunting?

And, once again with apologies, for those who think that guns kill people, I guess they also believe that pencils cause misspelled words.

Too extreme, you say?  Don't think it would work?  President Obama sends his kids to Sidwell Friends School in Washington, D.C., along with many of the more-equal-than-you, Inside-the-Beltway "swells."  Sidwell Friends School employs 11 full-time armed guards and is currently planning to add a 12th.  It it's okay for him and his kids, why not you and yours?   

Update on Michigan

The almost unthinkable occurred this week.  Michigan elected to make the freedom to choose a new state law. 

Both houses of its legislature and its governor signed into law legislation enabling MI workers who choose not to join unions decide whether or not to pay union dues.  Heretofore, all workers had to cough up union dues even if they did not wish to become a union member.  And as we know, not everyone who belongs to a union agrees with the default position unions take: supporting the Democrat Party almost exclusively.  And so, Michigan has become the 24th "Right to Work" state in the Union.  And I would predict that many more will soon follow.

Right to work states have considerably lower unemployment rates than do those with forced unionization.  Yes, they often have slightly lower pay rates, for when forced unionization is kicked to the curb, also trashed is so-called "prevailing wages."  But most would agree a job at slightly lower wages is better than no job at all.  And no job at all is what's happening in states not choosing to see the light.  California is a prime example. 

So, even as Detroit is going bankrupt, almost certainly to be taken over by the state, the state itself has taken a step toward fiscal sanity.  Those doubting my assertion are invited to take a look at Indiana and Ohio and Wisconsin.  All have Republican governors.  All have adopted new legislation limiting restrictive organized labor policies, or eliminating them altogether.  And all have eliminated budget shortfalls, attracted new businesses and lowered unemployment rates.  Michigan will very likely now do the same.

I end this posting with one simple question:  Why, pray tell, are those who so loudly demand the right to choose whether or not to abort a fetus, also so strident in their demand that we relinquish all such choice in where to send our kids to school or whether to pay union dues? 

I guess the "right to choose" depends upon who's doing the choosing...