Tag: #FactsMatter

Vote Early, Vote Often… A Santa Cruz Story

It’s been five years since I escaped the People’s Republic of Kalifornistan, so imagine my joy at receiving yet another notice from the Santa Cruz County Elections Board to validate my address for my absentee ballot in the upcoming general elections. The notice had my residence address listed as my old Scotts Valley address, with the mailing address of my previous address in New Mexico. The new owners of the property were kind enough to forward it on to Maine for me. 

Now keep in mind, in the past five years, I moved to New Mexico, where I obtained a driver’s license, registered to vote and voted while I was there, then moved to Maine, where I obtained a driver’s license, registered to vote and voted since I’ve been here. According to this notice I received, either of these should have triggered them removing me from the voting rolls in California. But apparently not. 

An unscrupulous person might say, screw it… if they want to send me a ballot, I’ll vote there too. It wouldn’t be a vote they’ll like, but I could send it anyway. But that’s not only dishonest, but illegal. So, one more time, I returned the notice saying I was no longer at either address.

For a while I thought about sending back a notice saying I had died thinking that might give them the hint to clear me off their list, but then I really didn’t want to join the Democrat party. 

Not to be outdone, every year the City of Scotts Valley sends me a reminder that my business license has expired, and I need to renew it promptly to avoid a late renewal penalty. Being the persnickety person I am, I cancelled everything before I escaped the iron grip of Kalifornistan, but again, it doesn’t seem to have taken. Although at this point, I admit to getting a little nostalgic when I read these notices. It’s kind of like getting a Christmas card from an ex. You can appreciate the thought but really wish they’d stop.

Voting integrity is serious problem in this country, as witnessed by the last few general elections. The explosion of mail in ballots (thanks covid), lax to zero validation, purposely signing up unlawful residents or the dearly expired, and unaccountable counting has caused many, myself included, to lose faith in our electoral system. 

How can we consider ourselves a first world nation, a leader in technology, economics, trade, law, medical care, morality and living standards, but we can’t manage to accurately tally the votes for a general election on the same day as the election. Just about every other country on the plant can do it, from the biggest and most advanced countries down to the most rural, remote and destitute third world countries. 

You have to wonder, is it our highly advanced, saftest and securest voting systems ever that cause us to take days, weeks and months to count votes (but only in the battleground states) and can’t be fully audited or is it the people running them? 

While the left leaning of our nation pushes universal mail in voting, the same left leaning companies who support them demand in-person voting for things such as union organizing. Why? Because they don’t have faith the elections will be free from fraud otherwise. Go figure. 

Elections are arguably the biggest civic obligation we as United States citizens have, yet we have a dismal voting participation rate of 66% in the last elections – up from 59% in the previous general elections – placing us as 73rd out of 198 nations. 

As for the imaginary barriers to voting that discriminate against otherwise eligible voters, well, those just don’t exist. They make great campaign fodder and news stories, but they simply do not exist in real life. Anyone who wants it is fully capable of obtaining proper identification documents needed to legally cast a ballot anywhere in the country, but saying some can’t and will be disenfranchised is a great way to keep the voting rolls as open and malleable as possible. 

So, on Tuesday, November 5th, 2024, I encourage you to get out and vote early, but vote only once. 

Fun side note: I wanted to check the date for the general elections this year, so I typed “what date are the general elections in 2024” into a popular search engine. Along with a list or articles and the date, over on the right side of the results page was the picture and article on the candidacy for the current Vice President, and ONLY the current Vice President. Subtle…

Bob

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

Lost Rights (Maine Edition) 72 Hour Waiting Period Begins 

Useless gun control begins in Maine as the 72 hour waiting period to purchase a firearm goes into effect August 9th. This law is a knee jerk reaction by the gun control community who capitalized on the horrific tragedy in Lewiston. The legacy of those who lost their lives because of the absolute failure of the government agencies who swore to protect them and had all the legal means to do so is now a law which may itself cost more innocent lives. Well played Maine gun grabbers. 

A post purchase wait, a so-called ‘cooling off’ period, before taking delivery of a firearm is primarily designed as a suicide prevention measure, even though the waiting periods have never been proven to reduce suicide. Some studies have shown it ‘potentially’ reduces suicide by firearms, but none of the studies have ever looked at suicide as a whole. If denied the use of one means, a firearm, did the person simply commit suicide by another means, such as drugs, sharp objects, gravity from falling off a building or any of the myriad ways people have ended their own lives? The blanket claim of having a waiting period for firearm purchases prevent suicide is absolutely false, as is one of the left-wing sponsor’s statement of “It’s going to save lives”.

Advocates of this new gun control restriction admit that this particular bill has been around for years and was never able to get enough traction to be implemented. However, the tragic shooting in Lewiston allowed them to move it forward. While it would have done absolutely NOTHING to stop what happened, the gun control zealots were more than willing to celebrate the passage because of the outrage and sympathy the corpses of dead Mainers brought. 

This new law is an example of the sickening mantra of “Never let a good crisis go to waste”. 

Just as they have done in other previously free states, they needed to wait for a triggering event to get the gun control ball rolling. According to one sponsor, “There was a greater awareness of the prevalence of gun violence and a greater interest, perhaps, in addressing gun safety.”

Let’s not forget the legislative gamesmanship of the like rarely seen before in the State of Maine practiced to get this law passed. These included such tactics as having vulnerable Democrat members conveniently absent during key votes and an obscure “vote paring” scheme to create the illusion of opposition while passively allowing the measures to pass. The Governor herself allowed this bill to become law without her signature to create the optical illusion of not supporting gun control in a very pro Second Amendment state. 

The law summary: “This bill requires a 72-hour waiting period between an agreement for the purchase and sale of a firearm and the delivery of that firearm to the purchaser. Certain exemptions, such as the sale to a federally licensed firearm dealer or a law enforcement officer, are specified.”

The law is horribly written and leaves many questions unanswered. Up until just days before it went into effect, there was zero guidance from the State about how this law would be implemented or enforced. The little direction there is has come in the form of a three page unsigned, undated, FAQ style document titled “Advisory on 72 Hour Waiting Period” with the seals of the Maine Department of Public Safety and Maine Office of the Attorney General at the top. See the attached document below. 

What exactly constitutes an “agreement” is still open to interpretation, in other words an ideal law for discriminatory prosecutions. It could be a conversation, a phone call, a text or an actual exchange of money. The State will get to decide what is and isn’t an agreement on a case-by-case basis by making those they target prove they complied with the law, instead of the State proving they didn’t. 

The idea that a cooling off period increases public safety is a sick joke.  Suicide, while itself heartbreaking, is not so-called “gun violence”. A waiting period is however a hinderance to those who would need to purchase a firearm in an emergency for the protection of their lives or the lives of their family. While the new law gives exemptions for law enforcement, corrections and certain security officers, none is provided for victims or potential victims of violent acts. The State seems to feel they are better left unarmed and dependent on them for protection. 

While other gun controlled states around the country with much longer waiting periods, such as California’s 10-day and New Mexico’s recently enacted seven day waiting period might consider Maine’s 3-day wait a dream, all recognize this is only the start and now that Maine has allowed the first gun control laws to come in, the floodgates will open.

What will follow is more small incremental, but absolutely necessary “common sense” steps to close the loopholes written into this law and increase the illusion of public safety. Given the gaping holes built into this starter gun control law, we should expect bills for state and local licensing and inspections retailers/Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL’s) to be introduced in the next legislative session. 

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

Lawsuits against the new law have been in the works by various Second Amendment supporting organizations since it was passed and will undoubtably be filed on or shortly after August 9th. Like similar efforts in other states, they will begin a long and expensive trip through the state and federal court systems. The gun control lobby and their paid contract legal resources will be doing everything in their power to draw this out until the makeup of the United States Supreme Court is changed and they are assured it will be adjudicated in their favor. 

I’ll say it again, fighting gun control laws after they are passed is a fool’s errand. It is long shot to even get the right appeal and we the citizens of the United States are not only funding the appeal but the defense of an unconstitutional law. In this game, only the lawyers win and we the people lose our rights. 

What does work? Electing representatives at the local, county, state and federal level who will NOT sell our constitutionally protected rights to the gun control zealots. EVERY seat on EVERY board matters. 

Bob

Advisory On Waiting Period Law.pdf

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

Human Authored Since 2015

As the world embraces more and more artificial intelligence (AI) over the work of humans, it’s important to recognize some things are better left to the old fashioned human mind. 

A recent “State of the Internet” report showed that 42% of all internet traffic is now attributed to AI bots and 65% of those bots are malicious. Scraper bots are commonly used for competitive intelligence and espionage, inventory hoarding, imposter site creation, and other nefarious schemes. 

Are there drawbacks to human works? Of course! Humans are subject to influencing factors such as age, illness, injury, sleep disruptions, family emergencies, shifting priorities, schedule conflicts, torrential rains, heat, humidity, blizzards and wicked cold, as well as good old fashioned writer’s block. 

AI doesn’t have those problems. It might have a little susceptibility to power outages, but that only comes into play if someone’s data center backup power fails. You just plug in your parameters, and it spits out the results based on its programming and the information it’s been fed to ‘learn’. 

While many businesses are embracing AI for the operational efficiencies it creates, allowing them to reduce their reliance on human employees, the benefits to the creative industries such as art, music and writing are less impressive. AI gaffs on American history and images of people, objects and places have been nothing short of epic. 

The problem is the human factor in encoding and teaching the various AI programs. While the introduction of a little bias is probably expected, programmatically introducing woke ideology, one extreme wing of the political spectrum, and fabricated works of cultural fiction are inevitably going to produce radically one sided results presented as “fact”. 

Does this mean all writers should go back to using a manual typewriter to avoid any technology bias? Oh hell no! Word processors, spell check and grammar checking tools are definitely the writer’s best friends. Tools like this are merely applying simple structure rules against the writer’s creative thoughts. Of course, I don’t always take that advice anyway since many times the ‘proper’ way doesn’t always sound like something I’d say or write. 

Why do I bring this AI BS up? Because I could produce many more articles in a timelier fashion if I embraced AI. If I fed all my previous articles in, along with my research from c:\OddStuffing folder, I could simply request a two page article on say ‘The Importance of the Second Amendment Today’ and be done with this week’s post. 

But that wouldn’t be me. That wouldn’t be what I’m thinking, the emotions I’m feeling on the topic at that moment in time, recent interactions I’ve had with others or my passion (a.k.a. expressed as rambling) for the topic, all things that shape not only what I write but how I write it. 

There is a side of me that would like to try using AI for a pro Second Amendment article if for no other reason than to see how badly it would turn out, but that’s not where my interests are. 

So if I don’t post something for a while, it doesn’t mean my enthusiasm for the Second Amendment has faded, I’ve given up writing about the threats we are facing or I simply don’t care anymore. It only means that one or more of the aforementioned human influencing factors has occurred and my attention was temporarily required else ware.  

We all need to pay attention to what is going on and do our part to make the situation better. We also need to understand that outsourcing the things that are most important to someone or something else may not produce the desired results. 

Bob (?)

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

Knee-High By The Fourth of July 

Happy Birthday America! On this Independence Day In 2024, our country celebrates its 248th birthday as a sovereign nation, winning her freedom from Great Britian in the Revolutionary War. 

The saying “Knee-high by the Fourth of July” was used by corn farmers as a measure of success of their crops on Independence Day. It was said that knee-high stalks by the fourth of July would mean a good crop yield. Today, through advances in agricultural technology, farming techniques and genetic improvements, stalks in the Iowa corn fields are typically eight feet tall by now. Those of us in the northern most parts of the country who experienced hard frosts into June this year can still be happy with knee-high corn today.

Corn stalk growth is one of many things that have improved in the 248 years of our country. The quality and longevity of our lives, our standards of living and our recognition and protection of rights have all made great strides. We are a better and stronger nation not in spite of our diversity, but because of it. Peoples from all around the world coming together, united in the common belief that freedom is worth fighting for and protecting. 

Yet progress has not always been easy. Our civil war tore us apart. International enemies have attacked us. Internal turmoil, propagated by those who would profit from the chaos and division, cause our citizens to fight among themselves instead of working together.  

The general elections are coming up and the partisan rhetoric, slanders and lies are flying fast and furious. Money is flowing not to convince you that someone is the right candidate, but that the other candidate is wrong. A very sad state of affairs. 

In the 2020 general elections, 66% of the eligible voters participated, the highest turnout since 1900. This was up from about 55% in 2016. (The number of actual vs. fictious voters is still debated, but that’s a different topic.) But while the 2020 numbers are a good, our nation still lags far behind other so-called developed nations. Our voting participation seems to have peaked in 1876 when approximately 82% of eligible voters cast their ballots. I guess voting was cooler back then. 

Of course, election participation doesn’t always equal quality elections. Free and fair elections are subject to the whim of whomever is running them, a fact well known around the world. We’ve also learned that more technology doesn’t make voting better or more accurate, it just makes it more vulnerable. 

Consider also that in just about every other country, all the votes are tabulated, even with millions cast and counted by hand, and the winners announced at the by the end of the actual election day. It wasn’t so long ago we used to be able to do that in our country. So much for a technological advantage. 

Sometimes the old ways are the best ways, even in our high tech, AI driven, hyper politically correct society. Just because there is a new technological solution to a problem, doesn’t mean it should be done that way. 

I’ve said it before. Every seat on every board in every community is important. If we are not showing up, we are ceding control of our communities, our states, and our nation to those who may not share our interests. 

It used to be very common for Americans to have home gardens. Many had chickens or other small livestock, even in cities. While technology has helped increase the quality and yield of many crops, someone still has to plant it.  


United States citizens used to vote a lot more too. We used to think of our voting rights as our civic responsibly. Now far too many are content to let others handle things while they sit back and complain. 

There’s still time to plant some seeds and grow some wonderful fresh veggies this year. While you’re at it, register to vote and grow a great country too. 

Bob

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

Government Failures = Lost Rights (Maine Edition)

Once again government failures have resulted in citizen’s lost rights. I am referring to recently enacted gun control laws in Maine. The federal, state and county agencies who had all the information AND the legal authority to take decisive action which could have prevented the horrific tragedy in Lewiston, all failed to do so. Now the citizens of the state will lose their rights as gleeful left wing gun control extremist legislators start Maine down the never ending path of useless gun control laws, because… Lewiston. 

Let’s go back to Maine before the horrific shootings in Lewiston on October 25th, 2023. Maine has always been ranked in the top three of the safest states in the country, usually residing at the #1 spot. Maine also ranks as one of the least gun controlled states in the country. This of course made Maine a target of the gun control groups. And just as they did with other previously ‘free’ states, they just needed to wait for a triggering event to get the gun control ball rolling following the sickening mantra of “Never let a good crisis go to waste”.

Low crime rates and low gun control is no coincidence. The gun control zealots will tell you this is in spite of the lack of gun control laws and point to their so-called “studies” showing how violent non-gun controlled states are. They bizarrely claim that while “Maine is also a permitless carry state, though it continues to have low gun violence relative to its firearm laws, likely in part because it is protected by the strong laws of other states in the region.”

In reality, the exact opposite is true. Fewer gun control laws allow the law-abiding citizens of the state to be responsible for their own safety and security. More gun control laws mean a constant spiral of more government failures, more violence, followed by 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.

The sad truth here is the number of federal, state and county agencies who had first-hand information about the danger the suspect posed in the months leading up to tragedy, yet failed to act on it, despite having full legal authority to do so. From the US Army/Army Reserve, the New York State Police to the Sagadahoc County Sheriff’s Department, who were all either witness to his violent behavior and stated intentions or received the information from witnesses. 

Despite the vehement denials by the Sagadahoc County Sheriff’s Department and the deputy involved saying they absolutely did not have legal authority to act, and simply did not want to make matters worse, the Independent Commission appointed by Maine’s Governor to investigate the incident made it clear they did in an interim report. Excerpts from that report include:*  

“The Commission unanimously concludes that the Sagadahoc County Sheriff’s Office had more than sufficient information to begin the process of securing a Yellow Flag order against Robert Card Jr. on September 17th, 2023.”

“The Commission recognizes that, to take Mr. Card into protective custody, an officer would have had to make “face-to-face” contact with him. We also recognize that that process might not have been without difficulty and potential risk. Taking Mr. Card into protective custody, however, was warranted by the information known to Sgt. Skolfield as of September 17, 2023, and a plan to intervene and take Mr. Card into protective custody should have been undertaken.”

“As reported, the Yellow Flag process may sometimes be cumbersome. A review of other Yellow Flag orders in Maine, both before and after the October 25th shootings, demonstrates that the process can and has been successfully used. An officer needs to have knowledge of the process, use all the resources the officer has to gather the necessary information, and have the dedication and persistence to follow through with the investigation and the process.”

As I indicated above, gleeful left wing gun control extremist legislators in Maine were more than happy to capitalize on the deaths of innocent victims to pursue their agenda. MANY gun control bills were introduced, and legislative gamesmanship of the like rarely seen before in the State of Maine were practiced to move them forward. These included such tactics as having vulnerable Democrat members out for walks during key votes and an obscure “vote paring” scheme to create the illusion of opposition while passively allowing the measures to pass. 

In the end, a 72 hour waiting period was approved, as well as a mandating background checks for private advertised sales and “improvements” to the state’s Yellow Flag law. 

What impact will the new laws have? The 72 hour waiting period will result in significant lost business to the state’s hunting and sporting business (a major goal of the gun control lobby) and potentially the loss of the state’s largest firearms retailer who may move to New Hampshire (another major goal of the gun control lobby). With no exceptions for those who are seeking protection from abusers, victims of domestic violence will be left to fend for themselves.  

Changing the state’s Yellow Flag law by removing some of the due-process protections in favor of simplified actions for law enforcement has now turned the Yellow Flag law a dark shade of orange. While not a full-fledged red flag law with an expansive laundry list of people who can petition to remove your firearms and Second Amendment rights, the ‘streamlining’ allows law enforcement to take the action for them. As we’ve already seen around the country, streamlined simplicity leads to abuse. 

While other gun controlled states around the country with much longer waiting periods, such as California’s 10-day and New Mexico’s recently enacted seven day waiting period might consider Maine’s 3-day wait a dream, they all realize this is only the start and now that Maine has allowed the first gun control laws to come in, the floodgates will open. 

Maine’s new gun laws go into effect on August 8th, 2024.

By the way, if you’re wondering what the state’s law-abiding citizens response was to the tragedy in Lewiston, it was to purchase firearms and get training. People are understanding the government will never be able to protect them and they are responsible for their own and the protection of their families.


Yes, it does matter who you vote for. 

Bob

* Note: I normally do not include the names of the pathetic psychopaths who commit these horrific crimes, however I chose to quote the Independent Commission’s Interim Report directly. 

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

Patriots’ Day

Today is Patriots’ Day here in my home state of Maine, as it is in five other states. It commemorates the battles of Lexington, Concord, and Menotomy which were among the first battles of the American Revolutionary War. While we remember those who fought for our freedom, it seems like the perfect time to take note of what modern day citizens are doing to protect our liberty. 

As of February 2024, the NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) reported background checks of more than ONE MILLION adjusted background checks in a single month for the 55th consecutive month in a row. 

It is important to note that according to the NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation) this does not translate into a one-to-one number for firearm sales. Twenty-four states have at least one qualified alternative permit, which, under the Brady Act, allows the permit holder, who has undergone a background check to obtain the permit, to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer without a separate additional background check for that transfer. The number of NICS checks in these states does not include these legal transfers based on qualifying permits, and the NSSF does not adjust for these transfers. It also does not include private, party-to-party sales not conducted through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). 

However, based on these latest numbers, it is now estimated there are over 500 million firearms owned by private individuals in the United States.

But what, there’s more!

NSSF’s most recent Detachable Magazine Report estimates a total of 963,772,000 ammunition magazines in circulation. Of those, an estimated 717,900,000 have a capacity of greater than ten rounds. The data shows what the gun control zealots term a so-called “large capacity magazine” is in fact a common and ordinary standard capacity magazine in the United States and most often used for lawful defensive and sporting purposes. 

When it comes to ammunition, even the most conservative estimates put the number in the trillions. 

These numbers are clear and convincing evidence that Americans are rejecting the disarmament regime and the idea that law abiding people are ‘safer’ when they are disarmed.

If you’re wondering why, let me quote you the recent exchange between a Lily Tang Williams, a Chinese immigrant and candidate for office and perpetual gun control prop David Hogg. The link to this exchange is below.

Lily Tang Williams question:

“Hi, my name is Lily Tang Williams”, “Welcome to my ‘Live Free or Die’ state. Actually, I am a Chinese immigrant who survived communism, and under Mao, you know, 40 million people were starving to death after he sold communism to them and 20 million people died… murdered during his Cultural Revolution. So, my question to you, David, is can you guarantee me, a gun owner tonight, our government in the US, in DC, will never become a tyrannical government? Can you guarantee that to me?”

David Hogg’s response:

“There is no way I can guarantee that any government will not be tyrannical,” 

Lily Tang Williams reply:

“Well, then, the debate on gun control is over because I will never give up my guns, never, never. And you should go to China to see how gun control works for dictatorship, for the CCP.”

This folks is why the Second Amendment is just as relevant today as it was at the founding of our nation. There is no guarantee our government, now or any time in the future, will not become a tyrannical one.  Not only are firearms in the hands of law abiding private citizens critical for the self-defense in the home AND in public for you and your family, but to keep our own government in check.

Today we remember those who began our fight for freedom, and to secure it so we would never have to fight for it again. Let’s try to keep it that way. 

Bob

Williams vs. Hogg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khAWldEPdyA

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #PatriotsDay, #GunControlFails, #NaturalRights, #FactsMatter, #GunsSaveLives, #GunVote, #EditorOnHoliday, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #oddstuffing.com

The Right To Bear Arms For All? 

Every so often a case comes around that makes me stop and rethink my views on firearms rights. Such is the case of Heriberto Carbajal-Flores who is residing in the United States illegally and was charged for possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), the noncitizen possession statute. US District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman ruled this section of the law to be unconstitutional and dismissed the charges. 

18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) is quite simply 
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person— 
(5) who, being an alien—
(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26)));

The ruling was based on the United States Supreme Court’s New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (Bruen) ruling as the key element. Post Bruen, all Second Amendment related laws must be consistent with the “text, history, and tradition” of the country, with the burden of proof falling on the State when a law is challenged.

Carbajal-Flores had never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon. In this case, Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020. 

The logic behind the applicability to a non-citizen in the United States boils down to the wording of the Second Amendment. 

“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.”

Like the First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, the word “people” was used, not “citizen”. This was certainly not a mistake of terminology as the Founders understood the difference and used the word “citizen” eleven times in the Constitution. 

We correctly view our rights as “natural rights” or “pre-existing, inalienable rights”, protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, not granted by them. 

To say the United States does not recognize the difference is absurd. Amendment XIV, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution directs that all persons born in the United States are citizens. First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments are unquestionably applied to non-citizens in the United States. 

The United States detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba was specifically created to keep enemy combatants captured during the War on Terror following the 9/11 attacks out of the US court system and have them subject to the same Constitutional rights and privileges as those on US soil. 

This case comes at a noteworthy time in our country with the current administration facilitating the influx of millions of illegal aliens, politically termed as “migrants”, and “asylum seekers”. The administration wants to bestow upon them all the rights and privileges of citizenship, including voting, along with many benefits not available to citizens such as free healthcare, housing, provisions, income, and legal representation. But at the same time, the one enumerated right they don’t believe anyone should have, the right to bear arms, is something they are willing to deny. 

It will be interesting to see if the federal government uses the same type of historical analogues the states have used in their defense of gun control laws which have been ruled unconstitutional. Recall numerous arguments have been made which referenced laws restricting the sale and trade of firearms and gunpowder to Native Americans due to the risk of “Native violence”. Perhaps they’ll be able to cite the disarmament of British loyalists, Native Americans, and black people as applicable “text, history, and tradition”. 

There are of course multiple avenues to keep firearms out of the hands of non-citizens. Universal background checks, a favorite (yet useless) approach of the gun control zealots, mandates all firearms sales and transfers must be conducted through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). Even if question 21, l (Are you an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States?) on Form 4473 was voided, they could deny the transfers based on inadequate personal identification. 

This would be directly opposite of the decision to allow illegal aliens to fly into and around the United States using nothing more than a civil immigration violation form or an unvalidated entry in the CBP One app, while being able to decline having their picture taken. The rest of us must have an enhanced driver’s license or passport to fly, and the correct, current and valid photo ID to purchase a firearm. 

As I said at the beginning, this case has caused me to rethink my views on firearm rights. I’ve always accepted the noncitizen possession statute as a matter of course, most likely from years of reading and enforcing the provisions on the 4473. Yet when you recognize the rights of the “people” include all people and all “natural rights”, it causes you to take a second look. 

Of course, allowing non-citizens to legally purchase or possess firearms is a long way from a done deal. This was just the first ruling from a US District Court judge and there is zero chance our administration will let a ruling with the potential to allow millions and millions of non-citizens to possess firearms become the law of the land without a fight. 

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NaturalRights, #FactsMatter, #GunsSaveLives, #GunVote, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #oddstuffing.com

More Than 1 Gun in 30 Days in Kalifornistan?

On Monday, March 11, San Diego based Federal Judge William Q Hayes ruled in the case of Nguyen v. Bonta that California’s one-gun-a-month (OGM) law is unconstitutional. The enforcement of the judgment was stayed for 30 days for the State to appeal. 

This case adds to the growing list of California’s do-nothing-to-increase-public-safety gun control laws to be ruled unconstitutional. This ruling (linked below) is significant as it comes from a second federal judge rather than numerous rulings from Judge Roger T. Benitez. 

It should be noted California hasn’t been deterred by other states repealing their own 1-in-30 laws or having them struck down in court. In recent years, the State decided to double down and expand its own 1-in-30 law in a classic case of gun control scope creep. We can only speculate as to what would be next. 

When initially enacted in 2000, the limitation only applied to handguns. It was expanded in 2021 to include all semiautomatic centerfire rifles (or combination of rifle and handgun) and expanded again in 2024 to include any firearm, including completed frames or receivers, or so-called “firearm precursor parts”. 

While officially justified as to “stop one gun purchaser from buying several firearms and transferring a firearm to another person who does not have the legal ability to buy a gun him/herself”, I clearly recall the rhetoric from the initial 1-in-30 handgun ban, and the subsequent expansions saying this was needed since ‘no one should be able to buy an arsenal all at once’.  After all, straw purchases, buying a gun on behalf of a prohibited person, is already illegal in California, as well as the rest of the country, so why would this law even be needed?

The reaction from California’s Governor/Yet-To-Be-Announced Presidential Candidate was as predictable as it was ignorant with him choosing to insult the judge and push his own ridiculous anti-gun 28th Amendment. 

“Another day, another common sense gun safety law struck down by a right-wing judge. This is exactly why we need to amend the U.S. Constitution to establish a Right to Safety.”

Let’s not forget where this all begins, the Second Amendment:  

“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.” 


Just as other cases have ruled that the right to keep arms “necessarily involves the right to purchase them”, purchasing more than one firearm (or ammunition) from a licensed dealer is covered by the Second Amendment. 

Once again, the United States Supreme Court’s New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (Bruen) ruling is the key element. Post Bruen, all Second Amendment related laws must be consistent with the “text, history, and tradition” of the country, with the burden of proof falling on the State when a law is challenged.

The State’s justifications for “text, history, and tradition” in this case provides an insight into how little they regard individual rights and the Constitution. 

The State relied on “expert testimony” that firearms were not widely owned or purchased during the Founding and Reconstruction era, logic not backed up by actual historical data.

The state referenced laws regulating the storage, sale, and transport of gunpowder which in fact were fire-safety laws, not gun control laws. Also referenced were laws which restricted the sale and trade of firearms and gunpowder to Native Americans due to the risk of “Native violence” or carrying firearms and gunpower more than a certain distance from a settlement lest they fall into Native American hands. 

Similar to previous Bruen “text, history, and tradition” arguments, the State relied on racist laws from the colonial era to justify the constitutionality of modern day gun control laws. 

As with the other cases involving the invalidation of unconstitutional California gun control laws, the State will appeal this to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. There is zero doubt the “Nutty Ninth” will issue a stay for Nguyen v. Bonta and begin the torturously slow appeals process. We can expect the case will be slow walked, delayed, stalled and motioned to death until the current 5-4 conservative majority of the Supreme Court flips to a liberal majority, either by the replacement of a justice or packing of the Court with new liberal justices.  

Meanwhile, your unlimited tax dollars will be used to argue against your rights, and your donations will be used to argue for them. While a final ruling on this case is likely years away, the lawyers on both sides will be the big winners while your rights are on hold. 

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

The ONLY way to keep more gun control laws from being passed is to STOP electing people who will not protect our natural, constitutionally protected rights.

Yes, it does matter who you vote for!

Bob

https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/akvemjzqgvr/03112024california.pdf

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

2024 – Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

A brand spank’n new year is upon us, but a lot of the same old crappy baggage continues to hang on for another round. While we’ve seen a lot of progress with our efforts to protect and restore our Second Amendment protected natural rights, we’ve seen our share of setbacks too. The coming year is going to be full of battles in hostile-to-Second-Amendment-rights courtrooms and it’s the final outcome we need to focus on, not simply the ‘interim successes’. 

Many of what I call interim successes have been to obtain preliminary injunctions or otherwise block enforcement of select portions of new, draconian gun control laws while the cases play out in the federal courts. They are simply a foot in the door of the looming legal battle. Actual victories include things like eliminating the requirement for a government issued permit to carry a firearm in public and stopping new gun control laws before they see the light of day. 

A couple of cases in point for interim successes. 

California’s Bruen Response bill SB 2, among other things, makes nearly every place in public, including all non-specifically posted private property, a “sensitive place” and thus off limits to anyone with or without a concealed carry license. Scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2024, a federal court issued a Preliminary Injunction on December 20, 2023, against 26 specific location types of the new law. This was certainly an interim success although it did not invalidate the entire list of “sensitive places” or the portion that eliminated 95% of the instructors providing conceal carry certification instruction in the state. 

Then, on December 30th, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay against the preliminary injunction, clearing the way for the full text of SB 2 to go into effect at the first of the year. The stay is “pending resolution of the motion for a stay pending appeal by the merits panel”, which has no set schedule to resolve the issue. 

In New Mexico, the Governor issued a total ban against carrying of firearms in public, licensed or unlicensed, in Albuquerque and all of Bernalillo County on September 8th as part of an executive order declaring so-called “State of Public Health Emergency Due To Gun Violence”. This 30-day executive order, renewed monthly since that time, also including a new state mandated monthly inspection of firearm dealers. 

On September 13th, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against the portion of the original executive order which banned all open or concealed carry in Albuquerque and the rest of Bernalillo County. A new executive order issued on September 15th now only bans public parks or playgrounds, or other public areas provided for children to play, an enormously nebulous definition. Untouched are the other provisions including the monthly inspections for firearm dealers OR the entire concept of implementing gun control via executive order. 

While this plays out in court, the Governor has announced her intention to utilize this year’s 30-day legislative budget session beginning on January 16, 2024, to introduce a number of new gun control measures. 

While preliminary injunctions and partial restraining orders are a step in the right direction, they are nowhere near a decisive victory. These are just a couple of significant cases heading towards a showdown in the United States Supreme Court, including:

Mock v. Garland (Pistol Brace Rule)
VanDeStok v. Garland (Frame or Receiver Rule)
Miller v. Bonta (CA “Assault Weapon” Ban)
Renna v. Bonta (CA Handgun Roster)
Multiple “Bruen Response” bills banning public carry of firearms in NJ, NY, MD & CA. 

Along with numerous others. 

The timing of when these cases get to the United States Supreme Court is likely to be the deciding factor in their outcome.  Today there is a 5-4 conservative majority on the Court. All it will take is for ONE seat to be flipped during the current or ANY democratic administration, and these cases will go down in flames. Any progress in protecting or restoring Second Amendment protected natural rights will most certainly be reversed at the very first opportunity by a “liberal” Supreme Court. 

Clearly, there is no such thing as “expanding” gun rights as the anti-gun zealots view any ruling against gun control laws. The United States Supreme Court has never expanded gun rights, and never can. They have only restored rights that were taken away by unconstitutional laws. 

Also keep in mind there is a significant effort underway by the extreme left wing, both in Congress and in the (government funded) private sector right now to unseat one or more of the “conservative” Associate Justices, or at least force a recusal from several important cases coming before the Court. Public smears of fabricated ethics violations are being pushed against the “conservative” side, while suppressing allegations against the “liberal” side. 

Of course, nothing can erase the absolute absurdity of a conservative vs. liberal point of view in any of our constitutional courts, least of which at the United States Supreme Court.

So as these cases play out their very expensive game in court, let’s not forget that two steps forward and one step back is still progress in the right direction. But at the same time, anything short of a complete and total repeal of these unconstitutional gun control laws is also two steps forward and one step back for the anti-gun side.

As a reminder, the ONLY way to keep more gun control laws from being passed is to STOP electing people who will not protect our natural, constitutionally protected rights.

Bob

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

California’s SB 2 Update: Repugnant to the Second Amendment

On Wednesday, December 20, 2023, United States District Judge Cormac J. Carney issued a Preliminary Injunction against certain “sensitive places” provisions of California’s SB 2 law scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2024. In a brutal rebuke, Judge Carney wrote “SB2’s coverage is sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.” 

Few comments better characterize California’s childish Bruen response law than the temper tantrum reaction to the injunction from the Governor. 

“Defying common sense, this ruling outrageously calls California’s data-backed gun safety efforts ‘repugnant’. What is repugnant is this ruling, which green lights the proliferation of guns in our hospitals, libraries, and children’s playgrounds – spaces, which should be safe for all. California will keep fighting to defend our laws and to enshrine a Right To Safety in the Constitution. The lives of our kids depend on it.” 

You’ll notice the Governor had to get in a pitch for his yet-to-be-announced Presidential campaign platform of adding a 28th Amendment to repeal your natural rights protected by the Second Amendment. 

This is of course a huge victory, even if it turns out to be short lived. Enjoined are: 

  • Hospitals, mental health facilities, nursing homes, medical offices, urgent care facilities, and other places where medical services are customarily provided,
  • Public transportation,
  • Establishments where intoxicating liquor is sold for consumption on the premises,
  • Public gatherings and special events,
  • Playgrounds and private youth centers,
  • Parks and athletic facilities,
  • Department of Parks and Recreation and Department of Fish and Wildlife property, except hunting areas,
  • Casinos and gambling establishments,
  • Stadiums and arenas,
  • Public libraries,
  • Amusement parks,
  • Zoos and museums,
  • Churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places of worship,
  • Financial institutions, and
  • Any other privately owned commercial establishment that is open to the public, unless the operator clearly and conspicuously posts a sign indicating that license holders are permitted to carry firearms on the property.
  • “Parking areas” made a “sensitive place.”

Note the order does not enjoin schools, state or local public buildings, airports and legislative offices. Nor does it prevent the implementation of new instructor rules which immediately ban up to 95% of the instructors currently providing conceal carry firearm training in the state today. 

A few quotes from the order (references removed): 

SB2 turns nearly every public place in California into a “sensitive place,” effectively abolishing the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding and exceptionally qualified citizens to be armed and to defend themselves in public.

The Second Amendment reads: “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”.  It “guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation” both inside the home and outside it. The text’s “right to ‘bear arms” refers to the right to ‘wear, bear, or carry upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’ 

That the vast majority of conceal carry permit holders are law-abiding. Indeed, CCW permitholders are not responsible for any of the mass shootings or horrific gun violence that has occurred in California. And herein lies the problem: despite ample opportunity for an evidentiary hearing, the State has failed to offer any evidence that law-abiding responsible citizens who carry firearms in public for self-defense are responsible for an increase in gun violence.

CCW permitholders are among the most responsible, reliable law-abiding citizens. They have been through a vigorous vetting and training process following their application to carry a concealed handgun. 

The California State Sheriffs’ Association that “[i]nstead of focusing on a law-abiding population, efforts should address preventing gun crimes committed by those who disobey the law and holding them accountable.”

What’s next:

Here is the next critical piece coming from the California Attorney General’s comments. “We believe the court got this wrong, and that SB2 adheres to the guidelines set by the Supreme Court in Bruen. We will seek the opinion of the appellate court to make it right.”

And this is where things will get funky. They don’t call the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the Nutty Ninth for nothing. A three-judge panel could go either way depending on the draw of the judges. However, an en banc panel, given the Ninth’s “creative interpretation” of evidentiary rules and Supreme Court precedent, would unquestionably rule to uphold SB 2. While the Preliminary Injunction is factually and legally correct, it may not survive the purely political judgement from the Nutty Ninth. This Preliminary Injunction is good news, but it ain’t over yet. 

As a reminder, the ONLY way to keep more gun control laws from being passed is to STOP electing people who will not protect our natural, constitutionally protected rights.

Bob

Read the ruling at: https://crpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2023-12-20-Order-Granting-Plfs-MPI.pdf

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunsSaveLives, #GunVote, #NoToSB2, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #oddstuffing.com