The Electoral College (An Election Year Rant)

In what seems to be the norm for a general election year, opponents of the Electoral College are again hyping how unfair it is and how it needs to be eliminated. This horrible relic of electing the President/Vice President from the founding of our nation was put in place as a balance between population centers and rural areas. Naturally, the folks in charge of the population centers are the ones who are calling for its elimination. 

As you probably suspect, this is coming from the port side of aisle, the same ones who want to pack the United States Supreme Court with five new Democrat appointed Justices to ‘eliminate politics in the Court’ as well as impose term limits on the Justices, all because they don’t like their rulings. While the Democrat candidates for President and Vice President have both advocated for this, their campaigns have been forced to walk back their stance in the face of strong opposition. But that hasn’t stopped the rest of the political/pundit/sycophant crew from keeping it in the press. 

Why do we have the Electoral College? The Founders of our country studied the history of nations around the world and designed our government so as not to fall into the same trap as so many others had. In short, the Electoral College was put in place to elect the President/Vice President by our Founders who were afraid of democracy, hence why our country is a Republic not a pure Democracy. They were concerned about “the tyranny of the majority” and created the Electoral College to preserve “the sense of the people”. 

The number of electoral votes a state has equals its number of Senators (2) plus its number of Representatives in the House of Representatives. With this system, each state is guaranteed a minimum of three electoral votes. 538 electors chosen by their states award all their votes according to the winner of the popular vote in their own state, except Maine and Nebraska who have a slightly different system.  

The Founders recognized there needed to be a balance between the densely populated urban areas and the more sparsely populated rural ones.  Today, urban areas are predominately liberal/Democrat and rural areas tend to be conservative/Republican. With a direct, popular vote, a handful of urban areas in our country would determine the President in every single election. 

As with every election loss, we saw a renewed call to abolish the Electoral College following the Democrat candidate’s loss in the 2016 elections. Claims that the election was “stolen” and the “will of the people” was ignored because the candidate with the most votes didn’t win the most votes from the Electoral College. 

Attempts to do away with the Electoral College have all failed in Congress as it is recognized for what it is, a power grab from one side that would eliminate the voice of rural America. 

Not to be outdone, an alternate attack was created called The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). It is an attempt to nullify the Electoral College without actually abolishing it. Participating states would award their Electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of who won the popular vote in that individual state. 

Following the 2016 elections, there were increased drives across the country that were being courted to join the Compact. Popular themes included “one person one vote” and “make your vote count”.  People were promised that politicians would be forced to campaign for votes in every state not just the most populous areas. Of course, that’s not true. Outright lies such as “This is patently undemocratic and undermines confidence in the people that we are truly a democracy” are common. 

Sadly, my home state of Maine bought into this lunacy in 2024 with its liberal controlled legislature and joined the NPVIC, bringing the total committed electoral votes to 207 of the 270 needed. 

The sad reality is a true popular vote election would see the candidates trying to appeal to the handful of urban population centers that currently make up the majority of the popular vote. A few swing states might be in play as a counter to an unwinnable urban center for a candidate, but the rest of the country would have no say or influence on the presidential election. Their votes, their opinions, their needs, would be too small to matter. 

So why is eliminating or nullifying the Electoral College so important to them? Because playing by the rules would require coming up with a candidate, platform and strategy that appeals to the entire country instead of one that is supported by just the handful of urban population centers where furthest-from-center message is better received.  

Rules matter, especially when it comes to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. When you look at the checks and balances our Founding Fathers built into the establishment of our country, understand they did this for a reason. They looked at world history and knew what had worked and what had failed. Our country is what it is today because we have held true to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, not in spite of it. 

By the way, for those who oppose the Electoral College, ask them how they feel about the United States Senate. The Founders designed Congress with the House of Representatives based on population and the Senate with two members from every state as a balance, exactly for the same reason. If the Electoral College gives too much weight to small, rural states, certainly allowing the smallest state of Wyoming to have the same number of Senators as the largest state of California would be considered unfair as well.   

Should we redesign the Senate to be population based like the House? Or how about just eliminating it completely since we already have a population-based chamber with the House of Representatives?  I’m sure the high population states will be more than charitable to the low population ones. And if they didn’t like the decisions that were made, who cares! It’s not like they could do anything about it. 

When someone is trying to convince you to change the foundation of our nation to advance their one-sided political purpose, you can bet your life you will not be on the side to benefit.

Yes, your vote this year matters.

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #ElectoralCollege, #NoNPVIC, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com

I’m From The Government, I’m Here To Help

In the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, we are learning more about the devastation it caused to parts of our country. The loss of life, and the damage in some areas is truly catastrophic. More than a week after, some of the people impacted have yet to be contacted. While there have been isolated reports of looters, the good news is scores of volunteers have rallied to do whatever they can to save lives and minimize the suffering of the people in that area. But then, there is the government. 

The areas most impacted were interior portions of the country not normally on the track of Atlantic hurricanes. This greatly contributed to the damage with entire communities virtually wiped out, including all roads and infrastructure. Yet, the response is no different than it would be for any emergency in any area. Search and rescue the survivors, assist those who need it, and begin recovery efforts. 

The outpouring of response from volunteers across the country has been monumental. Private airplanes, helicopters and drones have come to the area and self-organized to provide assistance. Supplies are being carried into the areas by every means possible including by air, truck, ATV, motorcycle, bicycle, horses, mules and by foot. 

But then, there is the government. State and local resources, where they still exist in these areas, have been overwhelmed. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) has reportedly been slow to respond and has brought with it the full depth of the government’s bureaucracy and red tape slowing relief efforts to a crawl. Many reports are coming out indicating FEMA and other government agencies are blocking aid going into the disaster area, confiscating supplies, setting up no fly zones, blocking runways, and threatening arrest of those actively involved in providing relief. The federal government of course deny all these reports and dedicated a page to “rumor response”. I guess it boils down to who you think is a more trustworthy source of information, the volunteers or the government. 

In any case, you would think the government agency responsible for emergency response in disaster situations would embrace every single volunteer and scrap of aid brought to help rescue victims and alleviate suffering. You would expect them to help coordinate resources for the most effective response.  But that isn’t what is happening on the ground. Those in charge seem to be more concerned with getting the credit for any aid rendered than actually saving lives. 

Somewhere along the line, FEMA seems to have lost its way from directing emergency responses. The current goals of the agency reflect a far more progressive agenda. 

Goal 1: Instill Equity as a Foundation of Emergency Management
Goal 2: Lead Whole of Community in Climate Resilience
Goal 3: Promote and Sustain a Ready FEMA and Prepared Nation

Does this sound like an agency laser focused on disaster response and recovery? We’ve also been told FEMA is running out of funds for this hurricane season. Given the millions of dollars siphoned out of the department for housing our new “asylum seekers” and “migrants”, it’s not at all surprising. 

President Ronald Regan is famously quoted as saying the nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government, I’m here to help.”  It still holds true today. 

What does this mean for you? 

For the Hurricane Helene response, please give if you can. My recommendation is to contribute to the volunteer groups who are on the ground right now and working around the clock to save lives and help the victims. 

For you and your own family, use this as a wakeup call and get yourself better prepared for an emergency. As horrible as it sounds, every natural or man-made disaster is an opportunity for the rest of us to lessen the impact of these events in our own lives. 

The old rule of thumb used to be you needed 72 hours of supplies in a disaster until the government response can reach you. As we’ve come to learn, this is no longer the case. Consider what you would need for your family, pets included, to sustain yourself for a time you believe is reasonable. Be sure to include water, food, medical supplies, first aid, protection from the elements, communication, transportation and self-defense. 

There are numerous credible resources available in your community and online that can help you and it doesn’t have to cost you an arm and a leg. Seek out something that works for you. Remember, a little bit of planning now goes a long, long way in a crisis. 

This is also a good time to get to know your neighbors. Yes, even for us anti-social types. Our nation was built by neighbors coming together in time of need for everything from simple tasks, to emergencies and self-defense.  They used to have a word for these types of groups, be we dare not speak it. 

It’s sad to say, but when our government shuns self-sufficiency and members of the community coming together for a common good outside their explicit control, they consider it a threat to public safety. We’ve seen the same thing when states and municipalities attempt to severely restrict law-abiding citizens the ability to defend themselves in public as well as their own homes. The government prefers you to be 100% dependent on them for your safety instead of you and your community being independent. 

Fortunately, we have a choice in how we live our lives, just as we have a choice who represents us. 

Yes, your vote this year matters.

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #FEMA, #HurricanHelene, #Volunteers, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com

The Second Amendment BUT Crowd

The runup to the general elections always bring out the worst of the so-called Second Amendment supporters. These are the ones who make statements that start off by saying “I support the Second Amendment, but…”. The BUT is always some form of unconstitutional gun control that is the exact OPPOSITE of supporting the Second Amendment.  The campaign trail expectation is we will think other firearm owners and Second Amendment supporters, like ourselves, believe in gun control, so WE should also believe in gun control.  HA!  

The Second Amendment is short, sweet and abundantly clear.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Despite the left’s false claim it only covers the ‘state militia’ or some other creative reinterpretation of it, the Second Amendment does NOT grant the right to bear arms. It merely denies the government the authority to infringe upon the preexisting right to bear arms. 

Pen & Teller have a classic, simple explanation of the Second Amendment.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx23c84obwQ

When you hear a presidential candidate say “This business about taking everyone’s guns away; Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We’re not taking anyone’s guns away,”

BUT this same candidate has also campaigned on a mandatory gun buyback of so-called “assault weapons”. 

What is a mandatory gun buyback? We’ve seen these in other countries (Australia, New Zealand, etc.) Certain or all firearms are declared unlawful and anyone who owns one must turn it into the government for compensation. Of course, the government didn’t sell these firearms to the people in the first place, so they aren’t really conducting a ‘buyback’ and the fixed amount they pay for everyone’s firearm is rarely going to be the fair market value. And what if you don’t want to sell your firearm to the government? Well, that doesn’t matter, it’s mandatory. You can voluntarily give it to them for the set amount they will give you or they can come take it from you when they charge you with possessing an illegal gun. 

This isn’t just a case of semantics. Paying someone for something that you mandate they must give you, when they don’t want to give it to you, is still taking. 

Oh, and if you’re wondering why the other gun control zealot goal of universal background checks is so important, how do you think they know you didn’t turn in your newly illegal gun? 

Let’s also look at another previous statement from the same presidential candidate when discussing a previous San Francisco measure mandating “safe storage” in your home. 

“Just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked home doesn’t mean that we’re not going to walk into that home and check to see if you’re being responsible and safe.”

That’s not just violating your Second Amendment rights, it’s also violating your Fourth Amendment rights. What part of the Constitution could ever be interpreted to allow random government searches of firearm owner homes?

Gun control is a bottomless pit of progressively draconian regulations on the law-abiding population that is somehow, someway supposed to alter the criminal use of guns. What happens instead is the increasingly disarmed law-abiding population turns into the victim population. 

Let’s go back to California for an example. California is at the forefront of all things gun control and is proud of the highest possible ratings from the gun control groups. They famously claim, “gun laws save lives”.  But the reality on the ground is exact opposite.

California led the nation in active shooter incidents in 2021 and 2023 despite having the most restrictive gun control laws in the country. Overall crime and violence in California is rampant and getting worse every day. The mass exodus of businesses continues as companies cannot provide a safe environment for their employees or customers, or maintain a profitable business due to the widespread, uncontrolled thefts. 

What does California have to show for all their gun control laws? Some of the highest levels of crime in the nation; rivaled only by those areas where gun control of the law-abiding is also a priority. But they do have a solution. Can you guess what it is? 

Remember, gun control does absolutely nothing to increase public safety and the answer to fix that shortcoming is always to implement more gun control.

So, this election season, anytime you hear someone say ‘I support the Second Amendment, but… “, you should immediately question their motivation. More likely than not, it’s an anti-gun sponsored talking point trying to convince you that you too as a firearm owner should support gun control, you know… for your own safety. 

Yes, there are some actual firearm owners and Second Amendment “supporters” out there who, now that they have THEIR firearms, don’t care about anyone else’s rights. These folks will figure out too late that the rights they are not standing up for were in fact their own. 

Yes, your vote this year matters. 

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #GraphicFromUncleTed, #Crime, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com 

Crime – The Means to Control 

Last week I wrote about how crime is up even though our elected officials say it is down.  Why the disconnect? Well, this is election season and the folks in charge want you to believe everything they’ve been doing has reduced crime and made you safer. It’s also a sell job to get you to believe more of the same thing will bring crime down even further. Naturally, it’s all a lie. Crime is skyrocketing and people are being victimized like never before. And what’s worse, it’s all part of the plan to implement tighter controls on YOU. 

The strategy is playing out across the nation. Activist billionaire funded prosecutors are elected in ultra-liberal enclaves promising to reform the systematically racist and unfair criminal justice system.  What they do instead is immediately publish lengthy lists of crimes they will refuse to prosecute, ignoring state and local laws and the will of the people and legislatures who created them. 

Police are defunded and new laws and restrictions placed on them so they cannot do their jobs. No bail laws are created because the current system is racist and unfair, and anyone who does happen to get arrested is back out on the street within hours. Those who do make it into the court system are given slap-on-the-wrist sentences and returned to the streets. Those already in the jail/prison system are released early because of new, more lenient sentencing reforms. Prisons are closed and the overall capacity of the system goes down, further justifying the need to release prisoners early. 

Is all of this sounding familiar?

What happens in the cities, towns and neighborhoods is not only inevitable, but predictable. Crime surges. Businesses and the local citizenry are understandably angry and frighted. They demand protection from the government. The government responds with the same answer they’ve always given, more government control. 

Let’s head back to San Francisco for an example. Rampant crime and unsafe streets have caused an exodus of large and small businesses. The government must look like they’re doing something to fight the influx of retail crime. The solution? 400 automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras placed around the city. 

Yup, that’s right, the ultra-left population celebrated the introduction of voter approved, government expedited video cameras around the city as a measure to stop the wave of organized retail theft plaguing the city.

Of course, these cameras don’t just capture those involved in retail theft. They vacuum up every single car (and everything else) that passes by them. You going to the store? Logged. You going to work? Logged. You taking the kids to school? Logged. You heading into or out of the city? Logged. 24/7. Retained for as long as the city wants to. 

If you’re thinking it’s a little 1984/China Social Credit System, you’re right. Every movement is captured for later analysis. And with artificial intelligence (AI) becoming more common place, it’s even easier. 

Perhaps a comment from Larry Ellison, co-founder of Oracle and sixth richest man in the world, will help to understand where this is heading.  He recently shared his thoughts on the future of AI-powered surveillance tools. 

“.. Citizens will be on their best behavior because we are constantly recording and reporting everything that’s going on.”

What you are witnessing is a problem intentionally created by the government so the people, desperate for safety, would accept the solution they offer, even though it will be used to infringe on their rights and more tightly control them. 

For those of us interested in Second Amendment rights, we already know this strategy. I’ve written before that there is no gun control without dead children (Sacrificing Our Children – https://oddstuffing.com/archives/973).  As disgusting as this is, anti-gun extremists are more than willing to sacrifice our children to obtain the greater goal of gun control and civilian disarmament. 

The tactics are clear. Remove police officers from schools for alleged ‘explicit and implicit racism’ and an imagined ‘school-to-prison’ pipeline. Ban schools from arming teachers and staff. Ban any civilian from carrying a firearm on any school property. This leaves the unarmed and undefended schools as soft and appealing targets for deranged would-be killers. After someone takes advantage of this, they jump on the bandwagon before the children’s bodies are cold and the injured have stopped bleeding and call for the one solution, the ONLY solution they have, more gun control.  

Remember, gun control does absolutely nothing to increase public safety and the answer to fix that shortcoming is always to implement more gun control.

Increasing crime, especially violent crime, only helps to implement more restrictive gun control laws on the victims. None of their so-called “solutions” ever impact the perpetrators, the ones actually committing the crimes. They must be free to commit more crime to help implement more gun control.  

Yes, your vote this year matters. 

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #Crime, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com 

Less Reporting = Less Crime?

We’ve been hearing a lot from the President and the Democrat party about how their polices have made us safer and crime is down. They point to the FBI’s latest crime statistics showing just how much crime has fallen.   But has it really? Does this match what you see in your neighborhood/town/city, in your local news, or when talking to your friends and neighbors? Unfortunately, the truth is literally the opposite. 

Let’s take San Francisco, CA as an example. I wrote about San Francisco crime and the resulting mass business exodus last year (https://oddstuffing.com/archives/1063)  and sadly things have only gotten worse. 

Nearly every day there is a report of another retailer closing their San Francisco store. And I’m not talking about the multitude of family run, mom & pop shops who have been the lifeblood of their local neighborhoods for decades and nobody in San Francisco politics care about, I’m talking about the big, national brands where the wealthy people shop. These are businesses which have been open in the city for 10, 20, 30 plus years. You’d think that would give the city something to think about, but no. 

Why are they closing? Crime. Rampant, uncontrolled crime. Not only are the stores being looted daily thanks to the softer-than-soft on crime state and city policies, but the businesses cannot provide a safe environment for customers or staff. Violent assaults are common as is property damage, drugs and harassment from the city’s homeless and criminal population. 

Violence on the street is out of control and getting worse. When city officials do say something about it, usually because a celebrity was robbed, injured or killed, it’s defended as being “an isolated incident”. What’s actually rare is the city’s acknowledgement of the violence. By the way, take note of the agencies NOT reporting to the FBI below. 

So why are we being told crime is down? 

The latest FBI statistics do show crime is down, but what they don’t tell you is that conclusion is based on incomplete data. In 2021, the FBI went to a new NIBRS (National Incident-Based Reporting System) for compiling and reporting data and would only accept police reports through the new system. Not all departments were able to make the switch and as a result, more than 6,000 law enforcement agencies out of 18,000 total in the United States did NOT submit their data. That’s a full 1/3 of the reporting agencies. And another 24% only reported partial crime data. While a few smaller, rural agencies might not influence the totals much, the non-reporting agencies include the Los Angeles Police and Los Angeles County Sherriff, New York City Police, Phoenix Police and San Francisco Police. For the state of California, only 49% of the law enforcement agencies, covering 48% of the population reported. You can check to see if your agency reported at: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/08/15/see-if-police-in-your-state-reported-crime-data-to-the-fbi

Keep in mind that in 2020, the year before the latest change, 16,000 agencies reported their data. Why the massive drop in reporting? Money and political priorities. Having been in law enforcement and being responsible for the department’s data submissions during a previous FBI reporting shift, a lot of work needs to be done by individual agencies. But it’s also not like these things happen overnight. Changes like this are years in the making. 

So based on incomplete data, including no submissions from some of the largest, most crime infested areas of the country, the FBI declares crime is down. Did they include a clarification, a caveat or even an asterisk with an impossibly tiny font footnote explaining this was based on partial data? Of course not! The former premier law enforcement agency of the country, the ones everyone looks to for accurate, unbiased information, is once again purposely withholding the truth for the sake of partisan politics. The FBI and politicians who are saying crime is down are lying.  

For a better assessment of what is going on, look at the just released Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS).  The NCVS asks about 240,000 people each year whether they have been victims of crime to measure reported and unreported crime. 

Between 2020 and 2023, rape increased by 42%, robbery by 63%, and aggravated assaults by 55%. Note the survey does not include homicide as that is most often reported to police. 

Since 2020, the NIBRS and NCVS have been moving in opposite directions. The FBI has been finding fewer instances of crime, but people are simultaneously answering in greater numbers that they have been victims of crime. 

Other than the massive gap in reporting data, there’s another reason why reported crime can be lower. When the public loses faith in the criminal justice community – the police, prosecutors, courts, and jails/prisons – they are less likely report a crime. If the police don’t show up, don’t make an arrest, or the prosecutors won’t file charges, suspects are released on no bail and take revenge against the victim, courts don’t hold people accountable and prisons let convicts out years to decades early, the public won’t see any advantage to reporting the crime. 

The problem of course is the crime isn’t going to go away, it’s only going to continue to get worse and worse. Victims and those who do not wish to become victims, will continue to flee high crime cities and states in search of refuge elsewhere, just as the businesses already have. Those who cannot get out will continue to be victimized. 

What will the defund the police, don’t charge the offender, don’t hold the criminal accountable and release anyone who has been ‘justice contacted’ progressive politicians do? 

Well guess what, their response is all just part of the plan. 

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #SCOTUS, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #Crime, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com 

Garland v. Cargill (Bump Stocks) & Why This Is Important

On June 14, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in Garland v. Cargill, the bump stock case. In a 6-3 ruling, the Court ruled the ATF exceeded its authority in declaring bump stocks as machine guns. The ruling, which relied on the exact text of the National Firearms Act (NFA), said a bump stock did not qualify as a machine gun since they did not fire more than one round automatically per trigger pull. As such, the ATF could not regulate them through administrative action and only congressional legislation would empower them to do so. 

The ruling, concurring and dissent opinions are in the single link listed below. I encourage you to read them and decide for yourself what is based on fact or the filter of politics. 

Also note this is not about the June 28, 2024, ruling that abolished the Chevron Deference in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, however that ruling will undoubtably impact the ATF going forward. 

First off, many people, myself included, consider bump stocks a foolish range toy with limited practical use unless you’re shooting at the broad side of a barn. I’ve shot with them on a couple of occasions, and they are finnicky as hell. Sadly, they were used against a barn size target in Las Vegas in 2017 which prompted the ATF ban. Regardless, the point isn’t the type or practicality of the accessory, it’s the ATF’s administrative and systematic banning of more and more firearm and firearm related accessories that is the issue. A bit here, a bit there, and suddenly there’s very little left. 

It’s also important to note the ATF previously said bump stocks were NOT machine guns or subject to the NFA on at least 10 separate occasions through several administrations, consistently concluding that semi-automatic rifles equipped with bump stocks cannot “automatically” fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger”.  A bump stock equipped rifle cannot operate automatically since just the right amount of forward pressure must be applied with the support hand to the forward handguard. Because the shooter slides the rifle forward in the bump stock, each shot is fired by a single function of the trigger. 

The National Firearms Act defined ‘function of the trigger’ to include not only a single pull of the trigger but also any ‘analogous motions’. The ATF contends that one such analogous motion that qualifies as a single function of the trigger is sliding the rifle forward to bump the trigger.

Here is the important part. Had the ATF definition of bump stocks been upheld, then every semiautomatic rifle could be considered a machine gun since it is possible to achieve the same effect using something as simple as a rubber band or a belt loop to ‘bump’ the trigger. 

The ruling also took note of the Ithaca Model 37 shotgun, a firearm the ATF has ruled is not a machine gun even though it can fire more than one shot with a single function of the trigger. The Model 37 is famous for its ability to “slam fire” by holding down the trigger and operating the pump action. But since it does not do this “automatically”, requiring the operator to move the slide with the support hand, it is not a machine gun. 

The ATF declaring bump stocks as machine guns was a purely political decision made in the aftermath of the horrific 2017 Las Vegas shooting. As we’ve seen over and over again, the sickening mantra of “Never let a good crisis go to waste” was invoked in order to administratively slip in a targeted ban against an ‘evil’ gun accessory, while casting a net that would someday be used to ban every semiautomatic rifle. 

This text of the ruling clearly identified what is and is not a fully automatic firearm, as well as specifying the proper course of action to change the NFA must come from Congress. In response to this ruling, a bill entitled Banning Unlawful Machinegun Parts (BUMP) Act was introduced. 

Pay attention to the language it uses: 

“(A) any manual, power-driven, or electronic device primarily designed, or redesigned, so that when the device is attached to a semiautomatic firearm the device—
“(i) materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm; or
“(ii) approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun;

“(B) any device, part, or combination of parts, that is designed and functions to materially increase the rate of fire of the firearm, by eliminating the need for the operator of the firearm to make a separate movement for each individual function of the trigger; or
“(i) materially increases the rate of fire of the firearm; or

“(C) a semiautomatic firearm that has been modified in any way that—
“(ii) approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun.

Using this definition, any semiautomatic firearm potentially used with a belt loop, rubber band, hell even Jerry Miculek’s finger, could be declared a machine gun, subject to the NFA and banned.  And THAT is absolutely the intention. 

Fortunately, it was blocked from unanimous consent passage by a single Senator who said, “It’s not really about bump stocks, this bill is about banning as many firearm accessories as possible. It’s an unconstitutional attack on law-abiding gun owners.”

It is highly unlikely this will be the end of this topic. The outcome of the 2024 general elections, control of Congress and the White House could bring new interest in this and other gun control priorities. Any new laws would likely immediately be challenged and again appealed to the United States Supreme Court based on the Bruen ruling. 

Yes, your vote matters.

Bob

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-976_e29g.pdf

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #SCOTUS, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com 

POTUS v. SCOTUS (& the Second Amendment) 

In case you missed it, following the President of the United States decision not to seek reelection and pass his nomination to the Vice President, he released his plan for reforms to the Supreme Court of the United States. In what can best be described as a Democrat Party temper tantrum, the President laid out three points for his so-called “reform” of the Court. These include reversing the ruling of Presidential Immunity for crimes committed while in office, setting term limits of 18 years for Supreme Court Justices and establishing an enforceable code of conduct against Supreme Court Justices. 

The fact that the President has sat on proposing any reforms, even following the final report (link below) from his highly biased Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States until AFTER he stepped away from reelection and became a lame duck President, is indicative of the level of seriousness his so-called “reforms” should be taken as. 

One would think any of our former presidents would be deeply concerned with having the presidential immunity ruling reversed. Given the life and death decisions inherent to the job, including those made for the purposes of war, even the current President should be concerned given some of his own actions, including the disastrous and deadly Afghanistan withdrawal. However, he may be relying on the Department of Justice determination of him as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory”, to provide him with a level of prosecutable immunity. Or perhaps those supporting it have faith the Department of Justice would never go after someone they consider an ‘insider’. 

The sycophant, extremist legal pundits behind this are now saying this can be accomplished without constitutional amendments by simply imposing the conditions upon the Supreme Court by Congress and the President.  In other words, two of the three separate branches of government imposing their partisan demands on the third branch. 

If you’re thinking a move like this from Congress and the President would be constitutional, let’s imagine a couple different scenarios. 

The President (Executive Branch) decides Congress should have term limits. Remember the President cannot independently create laws, so an Executive Order is created. Congress would justifiably say this is unconstitutional as the Executive Branch cannot impose a condition on the Legislative Branch. 

The Congress (Legislative Branch) decides the Vice President is now subject to the Twenty Second Amendment limiting them to two terms in the Executive Branch and passes a law to enforce that. The President and Vice President disagree. In the first place, the President would not sign the law, as it would still be unconstitutional for the Legislative Branch to impose a condition on the Executive Branch. 

I suppose the most ironic part of this would be if the President or Congress attempt to impose these changes by executive order or legislation, the opposition to it would be heard in the US federal court system and appealed up to … the United States Supreme Court. 

The separation of powers for the three independent branches of government is a critical component of our government and thinking that two branches can just impose a new set of politically biased conditions on the third is ridiculous. 

Amending the Constitution is difficult, on purpose, as it changes the very foundation of the country. Article Five of the Constitution describes the process: 

Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate; or by a convention to propose amendments called by Congress at the request of two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must then be ratified by either, as determined by Congress, the legislatures of three-quarters of the states or by ratifying conventions conducted in three-quarters of the states. 

As with the Democrat party’s proposal to pack the court with five new liberal Justices to ‘eliminate the influence of politics’ in the Court, support from Congress, the state legislatures and the people simply aren’t there. The people are smart enough to know what is going on, an attempted political takeover of Supreme Court, and they won’t support it. 

The justification behind this is the 6-3 conservative majority on the Court. In reality, it’s a 5-3 conservative majority, with the Chief Justice, who votes last, now siding with whichever side is winning. This has become evident following his capitulation to the threat of forced reform presented in the Senate Democrat’s “Heal Thyself” memo issued during the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York case. 

The rational from the extremist left for packing the Court with five liberal Justices was “We’re not packing the Court. We’re unpacking it.”  A critical point to be considered here. If the only way to get what they call “historic, progressive laws” to pass constitutional scrutiny is to pack the Court with far-left liberal Justices who will rule in favor of them, then it’s a safe bet the laws were NEVER constitutional in the first place.

So, why is this important to us from a Second Amendment standpoint? Well, consider that Everytown for Gun Safety and Planned Parenthood have announced their joint support for the Supreme Court Tenure Establishment and Retirement Modernization Act of 2023 (TERM Act), which would create 18-year term limits for current and future Supreme Court justices. 

Everytown states: “One of America’s greatest strengths is our dynamism, which we’ve seen clearly in the growing public support for gun safety — and which is being stymied by a Supreme Court where lifetime appointments promote stagnation and stonewalling.” They cited Garland v. Cargill (the bump stock ban reversal) as a key element in their decision. 

Here’s what it boils down to. The extremist left disagrees with the decisions of the United States Supreme Court. Instead of taking it as a hint that the administrative rules, laws and executive actions are unconstitutional and perhaps they should be focusing on other areas if they want to do some good, they are hell bent on changing the makeup of the Court so that they can get a rubber stamp to infringe on the people’s rights. 

THIS is why I care and why everyone who votes this year should care. Reforms to the United States Supreme Court for the purposes of passing and sustaining unconstitutional laws should scare the crap out of everyone. An independent United States Supreme Court is pretty much the only thing preventing the systematic elimination of the Second Amendment right now. 

Yes, your vote matters. 

Bob

http://oddstuffing.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/SCOTUS-Report-Final-12.8.21-1.pdf

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #SCOTUS, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com 

Presidential Election 2024 Ballot Prediction Results (Political Post)

The Democratic National Convention has concluded, and the candidate has officially been nominated. That means it time to pull the mayonnaise jar from where it has wintered since last November in the darkest depths below Funk & Wagnall’s back porch* and see how I did on my predictions.  You can see my original prediction post at: https://oddstuffing.com/archives/1128.

The results are mixed. While I was correct as to who WAS NOT going to be the candidate, I missed on who WAS going to be the candidate. 

Quick review: Back in November 2023 I predicted the physical and mental health of our current President, Joe Biden, would have declined to the point where he could no longer be a valid candidate. It’s not that his condition in 2020 was that much better, it’s just that by now it is to the point where it can’t be covered up, denied, or explained away anymore. Everyone points to his disastrous performance in the first debate with former President Donald Trump as the reason he stepped aside. I’m sticking with the notion this was planned all along and the performance was not only anticipated, but necessary to make the move. 

As to the replacement candidate, I predicted either Gavin Newsom or Hillary Clinton. Yup, I missed on this part, and I can only think of a hundred million reasons why. The money. 

The current President’s campaign war chest at the time he stepped away from campaign was more than 100 million dollars and, since the Vice President was on the reelection ticket with him, she gets to use the money. Obviously, there are some MAJOR questions about that from a legal standpoint, but with the Federal Elections Commission, a notoriously pathetic slow to react agency in the first place being part of the Executive Branch of the current government, well guess what… it’s going be ruled as “legal” sometime in the next few years, just in time for the 2024 elections. 

The choice of Vice President Kamala Harris is an absolute surprise, not only for me but for the Democrat party. This is someone who when the President announced his reelection bid, even the party loyalists were openly calling for him to replace her on the ticket because she was dragging him down in the polls.

Vice President Harris has consistently ranked as the least popular Vice President in recent history, potentially all of time. Her patented word salad answers, to her maniacal nervous cackle when she doesn’t have an answer, to the fact she hasn’t accomplished anything she has been tasked with, all add up to someone who is in no way, shape or fashion ready to lead the country. 

Let’s also recall that in her first presidential run in 2020, she was forced to drop out BEFORE the first primary because her performance couldn’t rally enough support, despite having the funding and connections from the Clinton dynasty. When the current President announced his support for her candidacy, in an all too mysterious fashion, I was skeptical if it was the real thing. But then we started to see key campaign staff from the Clintons, Obamas and Bidens start to migrate to her staff. I had to conclude it was true. 

So how is the most unpopular, least productive Vice President going to compete as a candidate? Lots and lots of help. 

The Democratic National Committee (DNC): Through all the primaries, the Democrat party ran a candidate they knew was not going to be on the 2024 ballot, as well as viciously kept any potential primary opponent off the primary ballots. When the President stepped aside and endorsed the Vice President, all the President’s delegates magically transformed to Harris delegates. We now have a Presidential candidate who was not primaried in two election cycles as the Democrat Presidential candidate. 

If you’re thinking the Democrat party can’t simply select who they want regardless of the primaries, recall Bernie Sanders lawsuit against the DNC for unfairly biasing Hillary Clinton in the 2016 race. His case was ultimately dismissed when the Federal Court ruled the DNC could select their own candidate, period. Primaries mean absolutely NOTHING and your vote in a primary is nothing but a popularity contest so the major parties can evaluate the general election support for whomever they choose. 

The media: The media have been repeating the popular myth the Vice President has “grassroots” support across the nation. The LEAST popular Vice President, potentially of all times, whom nobody wanted to stay on the current President’s ticket, suddenly has nationwide grassroots support. Social media, the tech giants as well as traditional television and print media have been effectively erasing inconvenient facts and articles from the internet, as well as substituting complimentary articles. Searches have been altered to show only the side they want you to find. 

The polls: Polling from the day the Vice President announced show her leading the former President in all the battleground states. Yet we recall in the days, weeks, months and years leading up to this, the Vice President was polling at the bottom of the list of people who could potentially replace the current President. 

The courts: The lawfare against the Republican candidate and those who have supported him continues and we can expect ramped up efforts to muddy them up even further in the coming months.  

New voters: Over the past three and a half years, this country has seen a tsunami of unlawful residents flowing into our country, to the tune of an estimated 10 to 20 million, costing our country billions and billions of dollars to provide housing, food, clothing, transportation and medical care. How many of these so-called “asylum seekers” or “migrants” will end up on the voting rolls is unknown, but their being registered as voters is well documented.

The October surprise: We should all expect at least one, likely more, September, October and even first few days of November surprises. It may come in the form of an escalation or US brokered resolution in one of the multiple wars we are financing, a “terrorist” attacks on our own soil, political lawfare accusations, charges or sentences, a new pandemic, or even the current President resigning so the Vice President will be considered the incumbent candidate. 

Voting “season”: Our country used to have a single day when people went to the polls to vote, or had to have their absentee ballots in. Votes were tabulated then and there and the results, even if contested, were announced at the end of the night. Just about every other country in the world still does that, but not us. Our highest technology driven “safest and securest elections ever” require days to weeks or longer of extra behind closed doors counting to come up with the ‘right’ number, especially in the battleground states. 

The puppet masters: Just as I’m thoroughly convinced someone else was running our government for the past three and half years, I’m convinced a different someone else would be running the country under a President Harris administration. The same forces that originally planned to replace President Biden with Vice President Harris are doing it again. Follow the money to figure out who. 

As someone who has witnessed the current Vice President in action in her home state of Kalifornistan as well as her performance in the Senate and as Vice President, I can only shake my head in disbelief. I keep thinking we as a nation can come up with better candidates for office at the local, county, state and federal level, but it just doesn’t seem to happen. 

This is OUR fault folks. We allow the political parties to pick our representatives for us and we wind up with people who do nothing but give the public lip service while they do the bidding of those who put them in place. 

This election is going to be difficult for a lot of people as the lies and smears are going to try to convince you to make an emotional decision. All I can say is vote for the future you want for your country and godspeed. 

Bob

*Okay, it’s really Odd Stuffing’s back deck, but it’s still a valid ceremonial place to let these kinds of things properly age. 

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #2024, #POTUS, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #EditorOnHoliday, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com

A Model of Bipartisan Efficiency (Side Rant)

For those who don’t believe our elected officials are working hard in the best interests of our nation, I present to you S.4610 – A bill to amend Title 36, United States Code, to designate the bald eagle as the national bird. Yes, you read that correctly. The Senate of the 118th Congress has brought forth and in a stunning show of bipartisanship, unanimously passed S.4610. The bill now heads to the House of Representatives where it is expected to quickly pass and be sent to the President of the United States for his signature. 

S.4610 – A Senate bill officially designating the bald eagle as America’s national bird after more than 200 years of symbolizing the country.

According to one of the co-sponsors, “Today’s bipartisan passage brings us one step closer to solidifying the eagle’s place as an enduring symbol of our freedom, and I look forward to seeing this legislation pass the House and signed into law soon.”

I for one am grateful that during these trying times when runaway inflation is raising the costs of goods and services, forcing many hard working Americans to simply go without, crime in many of our cities is out of control and the streets are no longer safe to walk or drive day or night, our uncontrolled border is pouring millions of “asylum seekers” and “immigrants” (a.k.a. illegals) into our country, to have all of their needs including housing, food, clothing and healthcare paid for with our tax dollars, law abiding citizens are being stripped of their constitutionally protected rights, radical ideologies rule the day and anyone disagreeing with them faces the full weight of our nation’s law enforcement and legal system, all while our country is sponsoring two foreign proxy  wars and we are propping up economies of countless nations hostile to our own interests, our Congress is laser focused on the hard issues. 

Despite all the trivial distractions, our Congressional representatives, who we pay a minimum of $175,000 per year and enjoy extraordinarily lavish benefits, perks and the advantages of insider information not available to the common US citizen, are able to come together to pass this critical piece of timely legislation. 

BRAVO PATRIOTS!

I invite you to go to https://www.congress.gov to see what your Representatives and Senators have been doing on your behalf. Are they working on things that matter to you and your family? Are they addressing what is important to our nation? 

Maybe it’s time for some different representation. 

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #CongressFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #GunVote, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #oddstuffing.com