Last Thursday, the Harris-Biden [sic] administration announced six gun control Executive Actions. The first five were simple requests that quite honestly could have been handled by a phone call or email. But then that wouldn’t have been as flashy as a televised Rose Garden event with the gun control crowd. The final one however, is of the most concern. The nomination of a gun control extremist / spokesperson and oath breaker to lead the federal agency responsible for the regulation of the firearm industry foreshadows what we can expect from this administration on gun control.
The photo is of ATF Director Nominee David Chipman proudly posing for a picture in front of the still smoldering ashes of the Branch Davidian compound and the bodies of 76 American citizens, including 20 children burned alive in Waco, TX, the end result of the botched ATF raid on the compound.
The announcement ceremony of the Executive Actions was exactly what you would expect from this administration. It included the now all-to-common unintelligible Presidential speaking gaffs as well as outright lies about the Constitution, the Second Amendment, American history, firearms laws and the impact of gun control. Yes, I said lies. Not misspeaks or things that could be interpreted in multiple ways, lies. These were statements that are factually wrong.
All of the Executive Actions announced on Thursday are of concern for the Second Amendment community and are already attracting broad opposition across the country. However, it is the last one, the nomination of Chipman for Director of the ATF that is the most troublesome.
Chipman is a 25-year veteran of the ATF, notably being the case agent for the Branch Davidian raid. Upon retiring from the ATF, he went on to be a senior policy advisor for Mayors Against Illegal Guns and provided training and support for gun control groups such as The Joyce Foundation, Americans for Responsible Solutions, The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and the Center for American Progress. He later became the senior policy advisor for the Giffords gun control group.
Chipman, who describes himself as “proud and responsible gun owner” says “I am also permitted to carry a concealed handgun.” Please note his use of the word “permitted” here vs. ‘I have a right to carry a firearm.’ Allowing only a select, chosen few to carry a firearm outside their homes is a common goal of gun control extremists like Chipman. It is also important to realize that as a retired law enforcement officer, Chipman has a 50-state concealed carry permit granted to him through the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA). Yet national concealed carry permit reciprocity is denied the average American citizen.
Then there are the lies. Chipman lied when he said “At Waco, cult members used 2 .50 caliber Barretts to shoot down two Texas Air National Guard helicopters. Point, it is true we are fortunate they are not used in crime more often.” The record is clear on this. No helicopters were shot down.
Chipman lied when he testified before Congress and claimed that the American gun market was “flooded” with “foreign made ARs.” Nearly all AR pattern rifles are American made, something a seasoned ATF veteran would know.
Chipman falsely testified that the reason why NFA (National Firearm Act) weapons are seldom used in crimes is because there is a background check with photos and fingerprints taken, along with a $200 tax. The real reason NFA firearms and accessories are not used in crimes is they range from rather to extraordinarily expensive and are owned by law-abiding citizens. Criminals, who possess and use the EXACT SAME type of firearms and accessories in crimes DO NOT register them with the NFA.
While referring to so-called “assault weapons”, Chipman testified “I believe we should ban the future production and sale to civilians and afford current owners of these firearms the ability to license these particular guns with ATF under the National Firearms Act.” He is quoted as saying “What I support is treating them just like machine guns.”
Now consider the current push for universal background checks which is touted as being the ONLY way to keep guns out of the hand of criminals. Keep in mind all commercially made firearms must be initially purchased through a federally licensed firearms dealer WITH a background check. But if that background check is insufficient to prevent them from being used in crimes like NFA firearms, then how long will it be before ALL firearm ownership and purchases will be subjected to NFA requirements including the registration, transfer and transport restrictions and tax?
Chipman has falsely described firearm suppressors as “The gun does not sound gun-like. It takes the edge out of the tone . . . This is how I would describe it: It makes a gun sort of sound like a nail gun.” In reality, the 30-35 dBA difference between a nail gun and a suppressed pistol will be perceived as at least eight times louder to the human ear.
David Chipman is a prime example of the type of “proud and responsible gun owner” gun control organizations love. He is willing to turn his back on his oath and use his reputation to restrict and eliminate the very same type of firearms he owns, uses and surrounds himself with for his protection, all in the finest tradition of the gun control elite.
Finally, handing over the reins of a government agency to a paid gun control extremist who has not only endorsed but participated in the heavy-handed enforcement efforts the ATF has regrettably become infamous for should be a signal for all law-abiding firearm owners of what we can expect from the Harris-Biden administration beyond these “initial” gun control measures.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #NFA, #AssaultWeapons, #ATF, #GunControlFails, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #oddstuffing.com
Tag: #oddstuffing.com
Revisiting The Defund Police Movement
We’re about a year into the Defund Police Movement, so I thought it would be a good time to take a look at the progress being made in areas that pledged to eliminate their police departments. One would expect by now the new “community-led public safety” programs set to replace the police would have a well-established track record of success.
In reality, it’s been an unmitigated disaster. Just about every category of crime, especially violent crime and murder, has been skyrocketing in these Defund Police cities. But guess what, victimized business owners and residents are finally being heard and things are slowly starting to change…
Let’s not forget how this started, blaming every police officer and the entire system for the actions of a few. The kneejerk reaction was to declare the entire system of law enforcement systemically racist, tie it to the old South slave patrols and “white supremacy”, and dismantle it all.
Millions of dollars were cut from police budgets around the country, axing specialized units dedicated to street crime, gangs, sexual assault, patrol, overtime and training. Woke politician-with-badges chiefs sold out their officers by stripping them of the tools and techniques they needed to be effective and stay safe on the job.
The new system to replace it was to be based on the wonderfully woke principles of trauma-informed, gender-affirming, anti-racist praxis. A “community-led public safety” program where “an unarmed urgent responder trained in behavioral and mental health comes within 5 minutes” or in response to incidents of rising gun violence, “a trauma informed crisis intervention team works with community activists to disarm and deescalate conflicts”.
Ultra-woke cities hired “experts” to help them with police reform. Seattle hired a felon, ex-pimp (convicted of running a prostitution ring which included underage girls) as a $150,000 per year “Street Czar” to provide the city with “expertise and support services in de-escalation, community engagement, and alternatives to policing.” Ithaca and Tompkins County hired a released cop-killer for their “Reimagining Public Safety Collaborative’’ as part of New York’s mandatory police reform program.
The results were about what you would expect. Skyrocketing violence and crime. Crime that used to be committed at night or away from public eyes is now rampant in the streets in broad daylight. Criminals, gang bangers, terrorists and thugs who have no fear of the law or law enforcement have taken over the streets. Autonomous zones where police are not allowed have sprung up in some Defund cities. Theft, extortion, looting, arson, assaults, rapes and murder have all occurred within their heavily armed hard borders to the outside world.
Prosecutors have played their part as well. Aside from refusing to file charges, dropping charges or decriminalizing crimes they believe are part of the corrupt system, they have facilitated the wholescale release of criminals from jails and prisons to protect them from COVID. Sadly, no protection was offered the law-abiding citizens from those summarily released.
Now look around and see what is happening.
Atlanta is hiring 250 police officers after homicides increase 58%. One suburb of Atlanta had already contracted with a security company, staffed by off-duty Atlanta police, Fulton County Deputies and Georgia State Police, for protection. They are also looking to separate from Atlanta so they can form their own police department.
Minneapolis recently approved $6.4 million in additional funding to the Minneapolis Police Department following a “dramatic uptick in violent crime”.
Los Angeles is adding $36 million in funding to the Los Angeles Police Department, Long Beach Police Department and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Departments following a surge in violent crime including a “more than eight-fold rise in shootings, from 59 in the first two weeks of 2021 compared with just 7 at the same time last year.”
Portland is working to add $2 million in police funding to combat surging “gun violence” and homicides. “More people died of gunfire last year in Portland — 40 — than the entire tally of homicides the previous year. The number of shootings — 900 — was nearly 2 1/2 times higher than the year before.”
The progressive district attorneys of San Francisco and Los Angeles are both facing recall efforts for their failure to uphold the law and hold criminals accountable.
Yet the ultra-left politicians still believe they need to do more to restrict and reform police. Colorado and New York City have eliminated police officer’s qualified immunity. The very same legal protection they themselves enjoy and protect them from lawsuits from residents who have lost their homes and businesses, been victims of violent crime or lost family members to the rampant violence directly caused by the politicians’ decisions to defund and eliminate police.
2020 & 2021 to date has seen record firearms and ammunition sales in this country. The purchasers have been across all races, genders, incomes, origins and political parties, with at least 40% being made by first time buyers. Are people buying firearms in record numbers because they are concerned with a supposedly “systemically racist” justice system? NO! They’re buying firearms for the safety of themselves and their families because they know the government is no longer able to answer their calls for help.
It’s time to stop living in this fantasy dreamland and recognize that evil will always exist and if you don’t have the police, that progressive model of a community love is going to be a war zone. It is WAY past time to stop experimenting with people’s lives and re-fund the police.
P.S. If you’re wondering where violent crime hasn’t been skyrocketing, take a look at the cities who have not gone the woke/defund route. Go figure.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #Re-FundThePolice, #DefendThePolice, #BackTheBlue, #NoMoreMobRule, #Responsibility, #police, #justice, #mewe, #gab, #medium, #parler, #oddstuffing.com
SCOTUS vs. The Second Amendment, Part 2 (And Then There Were Two)
With a number of high profile Second Amendment cases either headed towards the United States Supreme Court, or already being heard, this is a critical time for the future of our constitutionally protected rights. At the same time, we have a Court under extreme pressure to make the ‘correct’ rulings as defined by the extremist left. These politicians have made it abundantly clear that if the Court does not see things their way, it will be restructured and packed with justices who will.
Given the reprehensible conduct by some of our elected officials, this is the most dangerous time in history for significant Second Amendment protected rights cases to be brought before the Supreme Court.
The independence of the Supreme Court, one of the three branches of our government, is one of the cornerstones of our nation. Each branch has its own powers and responsibilities to ensure the government is effective and citizen’s rights are protected. The Judiciary, specifically the Supreme Court, has a role which includes the final check and balance of the constitutionality in our country.
Most of us understand this fundamental design of our government and believe in a strong and independent judiciary. Others see it as a hinderance to their plans for more government power and control, power and control stripped away from the people.
For a government official, if your legislation is a little iffy on the constitutionality side, how do you get it to survive a court challenge? Easy, you influence the courts. While simply campaigning on an issue and creating popular support for your questionably constitutional law might help, an independent judge is going to ignore public pressure and decide the case based on the Constitution and the law, as would be expected in a Republic. Therefore, the influence you need to get favorable court rulings is to seat judges who agree with your politics and will interpret the law from your political point of view.
Of course, the whole idea of liberal and conservative justices on the Supreme Court – or any court for that matter – is an abomination in the first place. There should be no political skew in either direction. There should be no other consideration at play other than the Constitution and the law. By the time any case reaches the highest court in the land, politics and the justices’ personal views should be long gone and only the law should enter into their decisions. Sadly, this is no longer the case and ‘legal’ decisions that should be unanimous are now split along political lines.
Look at how contentious the last few Supreme Court appointments were. Remember how desperately certain Senators fought to keep originalist jurists off the bench. Remember how outraged the left was at the possibility of replacing a left leaning justice with a right leaning one. A Supreme Court with a single vote, 5-4 conservative advantage could derail an entire political agenda due to constitutional challenges. It was a “threat to democracy” itself. A new strategy had to be put in place.
Remember the Senate Democrats “Heal Thyself” letter threatening to pack the Supreme Court if it didn’t moot the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York. This letter is widely credited with not only Chief Justice Roberts decision to moot the case but to more firmly side with the left wing of the Court. The Court was saved from being packed, at least temporarily.
Restructuring the Court and packing it with liberal appointed justices to “reduce the influence of politics” is a bold and aggressive plan. It would permanently cement the Court to a left-leaning rubber stamp for generations to come, or at least until the next Congress repacked it. This scheme would face massive opposition from both parties and the public who recognize it for what it really is, a partisan power play. But removing an unpopular Associate Justice, one who has been vilified in the press, to be replaced by a liberal appointed one, that might fly.
You now understand the never-ending defamation campaign against Justice Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh, who faced one of the most disgraceful confirmation hearings in the history of the Senate, has continued to be harassed and threatened while on the bench. Far left Democrats, including the current Vice President, have called for congressional hearings and his impeachment. Social media is awash with slanders calling him the “rapist on the Supreme Court”. (See: A Shot Across The Bow of the USS SCOTUS https://oddstuffing.com/archives/792)
Yet that alone wouldn’t be enough. They needed to apply pressure to another conservative Justice. This latest round of intimidation comes following Justice Thomas’s dissent on the Supreme Court’s denial of the GOP challenge to the Pennsylvania state court’s decision to extend mail-in ballot deadline for November’s presidential election.
Critics claimed Justice Thomas’s dissent was a tacit endorsement of the takeover of the U.S. Capitol on January 6th and convinced Amazon to remove a documentary film about Thomas, “Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words” from their streaming service – during Black History Month.
To make their point even more clear, left-wing congressional politicians and agitators called for an investigation of Justice Thomas’ wife for her support of the January 6th D.C. rally and questioned why Justice Thomas was allowed to be on the Court at all.
The message from Congressional Democrats is crystal clear. Incorrect rulings will be severely punished, either by removing the involved justice(s) from the Court or by a complete restructuring and packing of the Court by liberal appointed jurists. Correct rulings on the other hand, will result in the Court being allowed to continue with its current structure, albeit under the thumb of Congress.
A Supreme Court operating under outright threats and intimidation of the Executive and Legislative branches is far from independent. If the independent Judicial branch allows its decisions to be muted by political influence, it will be no different than a restructured and packed Court. We will, in effect, have two branches of government, the Executive and Legislative, with the Judicial acting only as a servant to the Legislative du jour.
The cases mentioned in Part 1 have the potential to affirm or deny the constitutionally protected rights of millions of Americans. Simply rejecting these cases in favor of addressing an issue later at a less politically dangerous time risks the very lives of those who would be on one side of a political border vs. the other. Ignoring the Bill of Rights is not an option.
The American public is waiting, but will the Supreme Court step up?
Bob
#BillOfRights, #Constitution, #SecondtAmendment, #FourthAmendment, #BillOfRights, #SCOTUS, #GunControlFails, #medium, #mewe, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com
2021 Federal Gun Control Part 1: H.R. 8 (Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021)
True to their word, the Harris-Biden [sic] administration and the Democrat controlled House of Representatives and Senate have begun ramming through their draconian gun control agenda. H.R. 8 is just the first of three announced so far. It was passed out of the House with no hearings and only cursory debate allowed. It hit the House floor at 12:24 pm and was passed at 3:45 pm.
H.R. 8 is titled the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021, but would more accurately be called the Universal Background Check and National Firearm & Firearm Owner Registry Act. The “bipartisan” part of the name implies that this is something that both sides of the isle strongly support. In fact, the name has nothing to do with the support. Only eight RINO (Republican In Name Only) members of the House voted for it, each with a history of voting for gun control legislation.
But that’s not all that is wrong with this bill.
The promoters of the bill falsely claim that this will eliminate the so-called “gun show” and “internet sales” loopholes. But then the truth has never been part of the gun control movement. Firearm dealers’ sales at gun shows have always had to follow the same paperwork and background check requirements they do in their retail establishment. The other claim is that internet firearm sales without background checks are rampant, something their own research and purchase attempts proved was false a few years ago when nobody would sell them a firearm without going through a dealer.
What is in play is the person-to-person transaction of selling a firearm. Many people do sell firearms to others in states where it is legal, and the vast, Vast, VAST majority of these sales are done conscientiously for the simple reason the sellers don’t want to have firearms end up in the wrong hands.
The gun control extremists sell this as keeping guns out of criminals’ hands. By forcing the transaction to be done through an FFL (Federal Firearm Licensee) who is required to run a background check on the buyer, it will keep guns out of criminals’ hands. There are just a few things wrong with this story.
The most obvious is that criminals don’t get their guns through firearm retails. The same applies to firearms transferred through firearm retailers. Criminals mainly obtain their guns through underground sources (stolen), theft or straw purchases by friends and family members. As such, the criminal acquisition of guns is unaffected by universal background checks.
The other category of illegal firearm usage gun control extremists like to bring up is mass shootings. But even a cursory look at some of the most horrific mass casualty events shows the firearms used were purchased legally, through licensed firearms retailers, with successful background checks. Using these tragic events as an excuse for universal background checks knowing they would never have stopped them is not only insulting, it is sickening.
The author of the bill also put out the unsubstantiated claim that: “This bill has bipartisan support from 90 percent of the American peopled [sic] and it’s long past time to get it enacted into law.” Given the extremely vocal and widespread opposition from the firearm and Second Amendment communities, this claim is nothing more than a lie to try to convince people they should be supporting what the majority of the country supports.
Even with all the fatal flaws of logic and fact built into H.R. 8, the worst is the section that claims it does not create a national firearms registry.
“(c) Rules Of Interpretation.—Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to—
(1) authorize the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a national firearms registry; or”
This fails in two ways. The first is the background check itself. Even in states where the firearm information is not transmitted to the state or federal government, the purchaser’s information is. This in of itself creates a record of all persons who purchase a firearm. Hence, a registry of firearm owners.
Yes, I know. The federal government has laws in place that say they cannot retain that information after a certain time frame. I’m not sure anyone actually believes this is true.
The second is the firearm information. Full firearm registration has always been a goal of the gun control extremists, but just coming out and implementing it all at once like what is outlined in H.R. 127 would receive too much pushback. Universal background checks are the answer to this problem.
By forcing all person-to-person sales through a firearm retailer, a record is created in the FFL’s books and on a federal form 4473, the Firearms Transaction Record. In some states like California, the information is also loaded into a state database by the FFL. In most other states, the record remains with the FFL. But does it?
For years FFL’s have been complaining about the ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) scanning, copying or photographing all their acquisition and disposition bound books AND 4473s. This scooping up of information hasn’t been in response to a procedural investigation of the FFL or a criminal investigation of the purchasers as directed by law, it’s been to collect information. The latest redesign of the 4473 putting the firearm and purchaser information on the same page has been attributed to making this data collection more efficient.
Where does this information go? That’s the million-dollar question. But it’s a fair bet that if the information is being collected, it’s being compiled and stored.
And what’s so wrong with a national firearms registry? Aside from it is currently illegal under federal law – although I expect we’ll see that change over the next two years – the ONLY purpose of a firearms registry is to enable a confiscation of these firearms later on. If the historical accounts of tyrannical foreign governments requiring registration of firearms then confiscating them later doesn’t do it for you, simply look at examples in our own country.
In the 1960’s New York City began registering long guns. Naturally, they assured the list would never be used to take firearms away from law-abiding citizens. Yet beginning in 1991 when the city banned many of those long guns, they began confiscating them. The registration / confiscation cycle continues today as many registered firearms “capable” of accepting a so-called “high-capacity” magazine have been made illegal and are therefore, being confiscated.
There are of course many more examples, but the results are the same. Registration always leads to confiscation. What you lawfully own today can be made illegal tomorrow by no action on your part. The whims of an ultra-left majority can be made into law and you become a criminal overnight when the firearm you own is declared too dangerous for civilian ownership.
Or perhaps you are the problem. You are a member of a non-favored political party that is accused of being white supremacists and domestic terrorists. Simply by your association, you are put on the Domestic Terror Watch List, something that has already been proposed.
In either situation, you’ve never done or even dreamed of doing anything illegal in your life but now that you and your firearm information are registered, your Second Amendment protected rights will be stripped away.
Universal background checks are a solution in search of a problem. They do not prevent crime, nor do they make anyone safer. They do however provide the mechanism for a full national firearm and firearm owner database, the purpose of which made abundantly clear when more and more firearms are made illegal and law-abiding firearm owners are turned into criminals.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #HR8, #UniversalBackgroundChecks, #GunControlFails, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com
Two Weeks to Flatten the Curve: One Year Anniversary
Today we celebrate one year of “Two Weeks to Flatten the Curve” in the United States. While it’s been a difficult year for most of us, we have all learned a lot from it. Unfortunately, a lot of what we’ve learned is about how dictatorial our government can be and how the basic human rights and freedoms we thought were protected by our Constitution were so easily whisked aside for a “health emergency”. Far too many people seem to have forgotten the Bill of Rights wasn’t written with an “except for… ” clause and applies in every situation, especially emergencies.
With COVID we’ve learned that banning travel, requiring tests and mandatory quarantines from certain areas outside the country is racist and xenophobic. Banning travel, requiring tests and mandatory quarantines from certain states within the country is science.
We’ve learned masks are not required. Then we learned masks are required. Now we’ve learned double masks are required. And even though you are required to wear a mask, the people requiring them are not going to provide you one, but will fine you, cite you and physically wrestle you to the ground, arrest you and throw you in jail if you don’t wear one.
We’ve learned most anything will do for a mask, except those one-way value ones that actually offer you the best level of protection. Thin permeable cloth, scarves, your handkerchief, underwear, etc. are all acceptable as long as you cover your mouth and nose. We’ve also learned there’s no requirement to ever wear a fresh mask or treat the one you’ve been using out in public like it’s been exposed to anything contagious.
We’ve learned our state governors are the sole, unquestionable authorities on all aspects of life. They can dictate whether you can leave your home and under what circumstances, or if you must remain locked inside. We’ve learned governors can determine who you can have in your private home and who you can’t.
We’ve learned governors can dictate which businesses are “essential” and which ones are “non-essential” and destined to go out of business forever. We’ve learned governors can dictate what products can be sold, what hours businesses can be open, how businesses operate and how much employees must be paid, all with the stroke of a pen.
We’ve learned governors can dictate what conditions must be met in order for “non-essential” businesses to reopen, then move the goalposts on these conditions repeatedly to include more nebulous or “equitable” factors. The “science” and data behind these decisions do not have to be released as it “would confuse and potentially mislead the public if they were made public.”
We’ve learned governors can dictate which of your constitutionally protected rights are valid during a “health emergency” and which ones are suspended. Religion, free speech, peaceably assemble or petition the government for redress of grievances – are all subject to approval by the governor, as well as the ability to purchase or bear or use firearms.
We’ve learned the very politicians who impose family contact, business and travel restrictions upon you, exempt themselves and their families. Also exempted are professional sports teams, the entertainment industry and celebrities, as long as they subscribe to the correct political ideology.
We’ve learned public and private events are complex and must be evaluated by their political ideology.
Progressive, social justice “mostly peaceful” riots do not spread COVID-19.
Standing by yourself, wearing a mask in a public place to protest the lockdown is a violation of the health codes that override your First Amendment rights.
Celebrating a left-wing election victory does not spread COVID-19.
Conservative rallies are super-spreader events.
We’ve learned it is far too risky for public school teachers to go back into the classrooms, but hiring minimum wage, untenured “classroom monitors” to supervise children in schools while the teachers instruct remotely is safe.
We’ve learned that questioning the government authorities on the causes or treatment of COVID is subject to censure in the medical community as well as being censored in the news and social media worlds.
We’ve learned that our nation’s administration cannot explain why the COVID infection rates are so similar between lockdown and non-lockdown states. “… This is a little beyond our explanation.”
There are also some things we haven’t learned.
We haven’t learned the true origin of the pandemic. After dissecting, analyzing and investigating COVID-19 for over a year, the truth is still hidden. Sure, it seems to have originated from a certain area of a certain province in a certain overseas country (which we can’t talk about because that would be xenophobic) but did it develop organically or in a lab? If we suggest it was in a lab, we are thought of as conspiracy theorists.
The COVID vaccine is now available and being distributed around the country, subject to the ever-changing rules of the governors. Fortunately, first responders and health care workers are at the top of the list, but so are politicians and convicts, at least the convicts who weren’t released due to the risk of COVID. If you are not in one of the current priority groups being vaccinated, there are still multiple ways to get bumped up, as evidenced by the celebrities and favored industries being given priority jabs.
While the current CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) guidelines do allow for more freedom for those who are fully inoculated, masks, social distancing and other restrictions remain in place for the foreseeable future.
What does our future look like post-COVID?
Nobody is willing to commit to a timeline to return to a pre-COVID normal. In fact, most point to the “new normal” that will take its place. Depending on what day it is and who is talking, we may see universally less COVID restrictions in place by the end of 2021 or even 2022.
We can also look forward to “COVID Passports” to prove you have been inoculated in order to travel, work or go into stores and public venues. It is already being suggested you will need an annual COVID vaccination to stay protected and current in your “COVID Passport”. Naturally, the government would never mandate a COVID vaccination, but they will allow private businesses to do so with their full endorsement.
If you feel like you’ve been lied to in order to further political agendas, you’re not alone. Many in this country believe this is just another example of extremist politicians applying the rule of “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste”. Far too many people have died, had their businesses and lives destroyed and their rights stripped away unnecessarily for a never ending “crisis”.
We used to be responsible for our own lives, our own businesses and our families. We used to be able to make our own decisions about what is best for our own family’s health and safety. It is WAY past time we started exercising our rights as citizens and boot the dictators out of office.
Bob
#BecauseScience, #BillOfRights, #Constitution, #COVID19, #FirstAmendment, #SecondAmendment, # TwoWeekstoFlattentheCurve, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com
Constitutional Carry Moves Forward
Utah and Montana are joining the ranks of those who support permitless carry. 18 states will now recognize their citizens’ right to be armed in public without a license or permit. Several other states are currently working through legislation to remove licensing requirements as well. While this is a very positive step forward in the national recognition of the right to keep and bear arms, it is important to realize that this is not a new or expanded right being granted, it is the removal of laws which previously infringed upon natural rights. This is the way it should be for all law-abiding citizens.
True constitutional carry is the ability for everyone to carry a firearm openly or concealed, without requiring a license or permit. Some of these 18 states meet this definition while others have limitations such as for state residents only or for concealed carry only. All but one, Vermont, still issue permits for either enhanced carry privileges or for concealed carry reciprocity with other states. Vermont has never had a concealed carry license or permit since it was established as a state in 1791.
Keep in mind the right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally protected natural right as written in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
“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”
Some contend being able to carry a firearm outside your home is a privilege and subject to any form of “reasonable” regulation, control and fees the government decides to impose. The most frequently used comparison is to that of a driver’s license. Of course, the ability to operate a motor vehicle on a public highway isn’t a constitutionally protected natural right, it is a privilege. But that’s what the gun control lobby want you to believe, that driving a car and carrying a firearm are the same thing. They have always wanted to restrict or revoke your rights and turn them into privileges they can control and restrict.
If you have to ask for permission to exercise a right, it’s a privilege.
If you have to pay a fee to exercise a right, it’s a privilege.
If you have to take training and tests to exercise a right, it’s a privilege.
If you have to carry a license or permit to exercise a right, it’s a privilege.
If you can be denied exercising a right, it’s a privilege.
As the gun control zealots have always done when legislation is being considered to allow permitless carry or for firearm carry on college campuses, they put their propaganda machine into overdrive. These states were no exception. Wild stories abound about how there will be shoot-outs over minor issues, blood flowing in the streets and cities turned into the wild, wild west. On college campuses, students and instructors will be afraid to speak openly for fear of being gunned down. In state capitols, legislators will be afraid to vote on bills for fear of being shot. Vivid, emotionally charged scenarios of violence and death because someone carrying a gun decides to kill people to settle every minor disagreement are spread to instill fear.
They point to “emerging data”, self-funded “academic studies” and “research” showing how violent crime will increase when permitless carry is allowed. They allege that only strong, “may issue” carry laws are appropriate. Only laws where persons applying for permission to carry a firearm in public must prove they have “good cause” or “justifiable need” to carry a firearm as well as demonstrate they are of “good character”. This is usually combined with significant mandatory training, substantial license fees and the ability of the issuing authority to deny their permit for any reason, or no reason at all, is the only way to allow a precious few the privilege of being able to carry a firearm outside their homes.
What really happens when more people are allowed to carry concealed firearms? Violent crime goes down. That’s all. No gun fights in the streets, no people shooting up the town or duels at high noon. Maine’s experience is typical. The state went from the third safest state in the nation to the safest state in the nation following their move to being a constitutional carry state.
For those who contend more guns equals more violence and death, recall those long-buried CDC (Centers for Disease Control) studies that found civilian defensive use of firearms outnumbered felonious use by a rate of 3 to 1, to the tune of 2.5 to 3 million uses per year. It is critical to note that not all of the events involved the discharge of a firearm by the civilian. Often times, the mere presenting or challenge to the criminal with a firearm was enough to stop the intended crime. It’s also important to realize this number ONLY includes persons who were not performing defensive duties as part of their employment such as law enforcement or security services.
Eliminating restrictions on who can carry a firearm for protection of themselves and their families in public makes us all safer. When criminals believe someone may be armed and wiling to defend themselves, they are less likely to risk their own lives and move on to an easier target or commit a crime that doesn’t involve person-to-person contact. The more potentially armed law-abiding citizens, the less likely everyone is to become a victim of violent crime.
Please keep in mind these 18 states are constitutional carry FOR NOW. As fear-based gun control legislation pushes forward in states and in the federal government, constitutional carry and even permitted carry of firearms outside the home are going to come under attack. Only by vigorously defending our natural rights at the local and state level will we be able retain them for ourselves and our decedents.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #ConstitutionalCarry, #GunControlFails, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com
Eliminating Law Enforcement Qualified Immunity
Recently I committed the horrible transgression of hitting “Haha” on a Facebook post relating to why law enforcement officers should not be opposed to a new law that would strip them of their qualified immunity. Personally, I thought it was amusing that the article, written by someone with a grand total of three years of reserve officer experience 20 years ago in a small municipality in Washington, was writing an article supporting this new law in my state. The credibility of the phrase “… as a former cop, take it from me… “ rang pretty hollow, but is exactly what you’d expect from a paid political activist.
Is eliminating police qualified immunity about accountability, integrity, professionalism or trust? No, it’s about finding a way to further restrict law enforcement activities to the point where no officer dares to confront any criminal. But it actually goes deeper than that. It is about eliminating local law enforcement as we know it.
Along with defunding police departments, eliminating law enforcement qualified immunity is a vogue “do something” act for progressive politicians. It shows they have bought into narrative the entire law enforcement system is broken and has always been broken – even though they actively supported and approved of it until the woke mob showed up at their door.
Quite simply, the qualified immunity doctrine protects law enforcement officials from frivolous lawsuits and financial liability in cases where they acted in good faith in unclear legal situations. It is important to recognize qualified immunity applies only in civil litigation and does not protect the government itself from suits arising from officials’ actions nor does it apply to criminal actions.
Still, this doctrine is now being blamed as the major hinderance to police accountability. Certain researchers falsely allege “qualified immunity permits law enforcement and other government officials to violate people’s constitutional rights with virtual impunity”.
Note that the very same government officials who are working to strip qualified immunity away from law enforcement officers enjoy qualified immunity themselves. None of them are working to eliminate their own qualified immunity.
For the application of the doctrine, let’s compare it to a “Stand Your Ground” law. Gun control zealots claim this is an automatic “shoot first, ask questions later” law. In reality, just because someone claims they acted under “Stand Your Ground” doesn’t mean it applies in their situation, it must be adjudicated as such. If it is not, then that particular defense does not apply. The very same concept applies with qualified immunity. If it is not adjudicated as valid, it does not apply. It is up to the courts to decide this. It is not something that simply gets claimed in every case and that’s the end of it.
Knowing this, if civil cases against individual officers are being dismissed because of qualified immunity, it’s because the courts say this is the correct action under these unique circumstances. Simply feeling wronged by an enforcement action and finding a lawyer, activist or “news” channel to take your side, doesn’t mean your case is valid.
So, what is behind the push to eliminate law enforcement qualified immunity? It’s the same logic as the defund the police. Take the illegal acts committed by a handful of officers, highly publicized by a certain segment of the news media, and project that as the standard practices of every officer in the nation.
If you’re wondering where this is all headed, it’s the elimination of the locally controlled and administered law enforcement agency. By slashing agency budgets, they are reducing the number of officers and restricting the tools and techniques available to the remaining officers. Eliminating specialized units such as proactive anti-crime patrols, domestic violence and sexual assault units, community policing and training all serve to make the agency less effective at their primary function of crime prevention and law enforcement.
The answer to the pleas from citizens victimized by thugs glorified as heroes in the woke communities will come from the state or federal level law enforcement agencies. These agencies, who have been spared the media condemnation of their municipal counterparts, will be called in to take over law enforcement in the defunded police communities. And this is a very bad thing.
Law enforcement is and always has been best served by local officers who are locally funded, directed and held accountable by their communities. Local communities can set their own priorities and be responsive to the needs of their residents.
Eliminating law enforcement qualified immunity will only serve to make police services less effective in their communities. It has absolutely nothing to do with police professionalism, accountability, trust or the effectiveness of police within the community. It is only about intimidating officers to the point where they will not act and to punish those who do by having to defend against frivolous lawsuits. Even when these lawsuits are ruled completely baseless, they will be used to attack their professional credibility.
For the author of this propaganda piece (the link to the full article is below so you can read it for yourself), I give him the same level of credibility as the former Army Lt. General who called an AR-15 a “weapon of war” and coined the ludicrous phrase, “full semi-automatic”. Someone with minimal, part-time law enforcement experience, who enjoyed the protection of qualified immunity throughout the rest of his career, is now saying “trust me” as a paid political activist.
There is no great secret for law enforcement gaining the trust of the community and being effective. It comes from honesty, communication and involvement. Call it whatever the current fashionable administrative term you want, but it’s always been good old fashioned one-on-one police work.
Law enforcement is at best a difficult career. We demand they make instantaneous life altering decisions under extraordinary circumstances most people could never imagine. And while the anti-police activists consistently minimize the dangers and wildly exaggerate the abuses, the truth of the matter is the vast, Vast, VAST majority of law enforcement officers do their jobs every day with honor and distinction, to the tune of millions and millions of public interactions per year.
I stand unapologetically behind our nation’s law enforcement officers and will continue to call out and oppose the attacks on their ability to do their jobs safely and effectively.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #QualifiedImmunity, #Responsibility, #LocalControl, #Police, #ThinBlueLine, #mewe, #medium, #gab, #parler, #oddstuffing.com
https://www.santafenewmexican.com/opinion/my_view/police-shouldnt-fear-new-civil-rights-bill/article_6058619c-70af-11eb-a5b8-5fdc49de19be.html
Welcome To DCAZ (District of Columbia Autonomous Zone)
With the new administration transforming the United States Capitol into a fenced, barricaded and heavily armed military zone with its own rules and discriminatory access policies, it is high time to consider changing the Washington DC name to something more appropriate to the way the area is now being run. In the spirit of new militancy inspired by CHOP/CHAZ and the RHAZ (Red House Autonomous Zone), I am officially proposing the new name of DCAZ – the District of Columbia Autonomous Zone. And in a tip of the hat to the Cold War, the perimeter should be posted with historically correct “YOU ARE LEAVING THE AMERICAN SECTOR” signs to warn United States citizens of the censorship and denial of rights and personal liberties to expect if they dare venture inside.
If you think about it, the DCAZ has a lot in common with CHOP/CHAZ & RHAZ. They all created armed and fortified barriers to keep out anyone who didn’t think like them and support their movement. They all have/had leaders that rule by executive mandate and edict instead of citizen and bipartisan consensus. They all operate/operated by rules and regulations that apply to them, and them only, and exempt themselves from laws of the “outside world”. They all highly censor/censored any information coming out of their zone. They all want/wanted to impose their way of thinking, and ONLY their way of thinking on everyone outside the zone.
Of course, the full name Washington District of Columbia is problematic and not reflective of the new thinking since it was named after our first president and founding father, George Washington and explorer Christopher Columbus. Washington was a slave owner who committed many other future crimes and Columbus was a colonizer. Given the absolute need to erase all of the names and any history associated with them, DCAZ (acronyms are themselves now considered racist) should be known as the Democrat Controlled Autonomous Zone.
Many have voiced concerns about proposals granting DC statehood and reversing the Residence Act of 1790 making it a federal district. Personally, I feel autonomous zone status is far more appropriate. Statehood would subject DC to rules, regulations and laws of common, non-privileged states. That would simply never be tolerated. DCAZ stands alone!
Welcome to your new United States Capitol.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #FirstAmendment, #Congress, #ThePeoplesHouse, #EmployeesNotRoyalty, #DCAZ, #snark, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com
Myths and Monsters from The Gun Control ID
This year will see many direct assaults on our Second Amendment protected rights at the local, state and federal level. In order to justify these draconian and ineffective infringements, we’ll see a host of creative flawed logic and half-truths from the gun control zealots. They will try to convince us their laws are necessary by creating myths and monsters of problems where problems don’t exist. As such, I’m comparing these zealots to the human ID as neither are in touch with the external world or are affected by reality, logic or everyday life. They exist in their own closed existence and are attempting to tap into the basic fears of people looking for security in a chaotic world they themselves created. Let’s look at a couple of these myths and monsters from the gun control ID.
One of the more popular myths being spread by the gun control zealots is the 2020 surge in firearm sales is responsible for more gun violence. Here’s the way it was reported by one far left “news” outlet.
“An increase in gun purchases in just the first three months of the coronavirus pandemic was associated with a nearly 8% increase in firearm violence in the US, according to an estimate from researchers at the University of California, Davis.”
“That increase translated into an estimated 776 additional shooting injuries in the US from March through May, the researchers found. States that had lower levels of violent crime pre-Covid saw a stronger connection between additional gun purchases and more gun violence.”
What the reader is led to believe is that because of increased firearm sales, there were more shootings. A cause (firearm sales) and effect (more shootings). This of course is a carefully crafted lie. What really happened is the exact opposite. BECAUSE there were more shootings, more law-abiding citizens purchased firearms for protection.
If what they were implying was true, you would be seeing reports of about how people have been rushing to gun stores to buy guns and rushing out to commit acts of violence with them. It would be on the front page of every left-wing propaganda outlet and their lead story every night. Obviously, it has not, and the reason is simple. The historic increase in firearms purchases throughout 2020 has been by law-abiding citizens wanting to protect themselves and their families. And who can blame them?
2020 saw violent crime skyrocket as liberal controlled cities turned their streets over to the mobs. Blaming the police for centuries of so-called “systemic racism”, they slashed law enforcement budgets and reduced police presence and capabilities on the streets. Prosecutors pushed for the wholescale release of convicted criminals, including the most violent, and declined to press charges against new offenders. The result has been easily predictable. Criminals, thugs and “mostly peaceful” rioters have no fear of the police, courts or jails and can commit any crime they want with near impunity. You don’t have to believe me, just look at the news and witness the murders, shootings and assaults committed in broad daylight in front of crowds of witnesses by thugs who fear no consequences. This isn’t BECAUSE more firearms are being sold, this is WHY more firearms are being sold.
Another monster created by the gun control zealots is that so-called “assault weapons” or the ever-popular misnomer “weapons of war”, are “too deadly for civilian use” and must be eliminated.
Just for the sake of argument, let’s assume the gun control zealots are correct and so-called “assault weapons” are the most commonly used criminal weapon in the US. They are not, but let’s play along here. Their logic says banning these “assault weapons” will save all these lives.
To understand this logic, let’s compare it to another situation. The most commonly stolen vehicle in the United States is the Ford F-150 pickup at 38,938 per year. In order to eliminate 38,938 stolen vehicles, the government bans Ford F-150 pickups. Their expected result is 38,938 less stolen vehicles. Would this plan work? No, of course not! Banning the #1 vehicle theft target is only going to push thieves to steal more of the #2 vehicle theft target, the Honda Civic, and others further down on the list.
Likewise, banning one particular category of weapon is only going to increase the use of the next most popular categories of weapons. For those thinking that means we need to get rid of all firearms, please remember people have successfully been killing other people, one at a time and in mass quantities, since the beginning of time. If you eliminate one means, something else will be used in its place.
That’s because it isn’t the weapon, it’s the act of violence. The act of killing someone else has nothing to do with the tool used, it has to do with the desire to kill that other person. That’s why posting “Gun Free Zone” signs or making it a crime to use a certain kind of weapon will never prevent a single act of violence. If someone is going to kill another person, committing a homicide, the most serious criminal act possible, simply saying you can’t do it here or use this particular tool will do absolutely nothing to stop it.
So-called “assault weapons” themselves are used in only a small fraction of homicides; it’s just these are the instances the propaganda media highlights. Then of course there is the inconvenient truth that more homicides are committed in this country by knives or cutting instruments OR personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.) OR blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.) than ALL rifles – a category which includes the most widely used definition of “assault weapon”.
To correct this flaw, gun control zealots have expanded the definition of “assault weapons” to include more cosmetic features and even the semi-automatic mechanism itself, neither of which have anything to do with the so-called “lethality” of the firearm. They’ve also lowered the threshold of crimes to include assault instead of just homicide and included lawful uses of firearms, including by law enforcement, to increase the numbers.
These myths and monsters from the gun control ID are nothing more than an attempt to frighten people into believing they need to be protected from something which only exists in the dark recesses of disconnected minds. It’s used as justification to strip away rights – and firearms – from the law-abiding while simultaneously decreasing overall public safety.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #MythsAndMonsters, #GunControlFails, #AssaultWeaponBanFails, #ForbiddenPlanet, #Freud, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com
The People’s House
There’s been a lot of misinformation, misdirection and flat out lies about what happened at the United States Capitol on January 6th. Let’s be clear about a couple of things. Assaulting law enforcement, destruction of property and violence in the name of legitimate protest is wrong. Those who committed illegal acts should be held fully accountable. At the same time, let’s not forget this is THE PEOPLE’S HOUSE. It does not belong to the elected representatives who infest it, it belongs to the people. As such, there should never be an instance where Congress is in session and working on behalf of the people where the doors are locked and the halls and galleries not accessible to the people.
A lot of what happened and who actually instigated the crowd to storm the Capitol will never be known. It will be buried and covered up like everything else that is politically embarrassing. Calls for a 9/11 style commission to be empaneled to ‘expose the truth’ about who was involved is nothing more than a desire to have a flashy, waste of time and money, political witch hunt where anyone who said or did anything in support of the 45th President will be portrayed as a criminal and traitor. Meanwhile, the hypocrisy for supporting a year of violence, death and destruction all across the country will be ignored.
Did anyone speaking at the political rally that day “incite” the violence or was there “non-verbal incitement”? No, of course not. There isn’t a reasonable person alive that would watch the speeches or listen to the words and say it was a call to go violently take over the Capitol building. But this isn’t about reason, reality, logic or objectivity. We’re dealing with people who are trying to find any excuse to blame the 45th President for something else he didn’t do and keep him from ever being a political threat to them again.
It’s also a chance to further promulgate the lie that white supremacy is now the greatest threat to the country and ALL OF THE VIOLENCE was because of racists and white supremacy. Everyone who ever supported the 45th President is now officially a violent racist and threat to the Constitution, democracy and the country.
As was so eloquently pointed out on the House floor, it was nice to see the Democrats finally supporting law enforcement following the incident. Alas that support was short lived. Within 24 hours the President and Vice President Elect raised the race flag and everything that happened in D.C. was officially about race. From that moment on, white supremacy has been the ONLY reason for everything. They’ve even come up with a new term to explain why non-white individuals are supporting this – multiracial whiteness.
Following that very brief time where law enforcement was thanked for protecting our elected representatives, the administration elect stated:
“No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protestors yesterday that they wouldn’t have been treated very differently than the mob that stormed the Capitol,” “We all know that’s true — and it’s unacceptable.”
Odd Stuffing’s Fact Check: False as well as true (but absolutely NOT as intended).
False: This was federal property being protected by federal law enforcement. As we saw during the non-stop BLM/Antifa riots in 2020, federal authorities aggressively defended and sought prosecution on those who were caught, as we’re now seeing with the takeover of the Capitol.
True (but absolutely NOT as intended): Had this been a BLM/Antifa “mostly peaceful” riot, local law enforcement would have been held back and allowed them to assault, destroy and burn at will. Those few who were taken into custody would have been promptly released without charges by local prosecutors or bailed out by celebrity and politician (including our new Vice President) endorsed funds. Witness what happened on the streets of D.C itself to see how hands-off local law enforcement was.
The fallout from this was a complete militarization of the Capitol and all of D.C. in preparation for the inauguration. 25,000 National Guard troops from around the country were called in to supplement the thousands of federal, state, county and local law enforcement officers to protect the Capitol from rumored threats. Fences, barricades and checkpoints were setup throughout the city. Special permission was required for residents and employees to move in the few areas of the city not completely off limits.
So great was this supposed threat of white supremist militants plotting insurrections around the country, state capitols were locked down, boarded up, fenced in and guarded by heavily armed law enforcement and National Guard troops. The public was completely prohibited.
What happened? Nothing. Not a damn thing happened. Anywhere. It was all a dog and pony show to make the public believe the supporters of the 45th President were SO violent and SO much of a threat, this was the ONLY means to stop them. It was all a lie. Still, at least 7,000 National Guard troops will now be remaining in D.C. through at least March.
Our elected officials have been acting like royalty ruling over their subjects instead of employees working on behalf of their constituents for far too long. With the new layers of fences, barricades and heavily armed security, they have effectively cut off public access to the Capitol, and more importantly, to them. They can now make their decisions on how to run our country without any input or oversight from the pesky public.
This is not acceptable.
There should NEVER be a time when the people’s business is being conducted behind closed doors. No, cameras and video feeds are not an acceptable alternative. The people must have access to where the issues that impact them are being debated, negotiated and decided, and the people who represent them are working. Our elected officials need to look us in the face on a daily basis instead of hiding behind locked doors and having interns reply to emails with a form letter.
If there is a single hearing, debate, meeting or vote being taken anywhere in the Capitol, the doors should be open, and the people allowed in. There should be no such thing as “visitor hours”. The people are NOT visitors, we are CITIZENS! This is OUR house! If our Congress is working, the doors to the Capitol need to be open. If meetings run all night long, then the public has access all night long. Individual elected officials may set their own office hours, but the Capitol – the people’s house – needs to stay open.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #FirstAmendment #SecondAmendment, #Congress, #ThePeoplesHouse, #EmployeesNotRoyalty, #mewe, #medium, #parler, #gab, #oddstuffing.com