Monday, December 1, 2014

Spoonerisms II

Ol' Backwoods has been reading all the extant volumes of Spooner's "No Treason", and came on this gem:
The practical difficulty with our government has been, that most of those who have administered it, have taken it for granted that the Constitution, as it is written, was a thing of no importance; that it neither said what it meant, nor meant what it said; that it was gotten up by swindlers, (as many of its authors doubtless were,) who said a great many good things, which they did not mean, and meant a great many bad things, which they dared not say; 
that these men, under the false pretense of a government resting on the consent of the whole people, designed to entrap them into a government of a part; who should be powerful and fraudulent enough to cheat the weaker portion out of all the good things that were said, but not meant, and subject them to all the bad things that were meant, but not said. And most of those who have administered the government, have assumed that all these swindling intentions were to be carried into effect, in the place of the written Constitution. 
Of all these swindles, the treason swindle is the most flagitious. It is the most flagitious, because it is equally flagitious, in principle, with any; and it includes all the others. It is the instrumentality by which all the others are mode effective. A government that can at pleasure accuse, shoot, and hang men, as traitors, for the one general offence of refusing to surrender themselves and their property unreservedly to its arbitrary will, can practice any and all special and particular oppressions it pleases.
And so they have, right up until the present day.

(Emphasis mine.)

Saturday, November 29, 2014

Breaking the Gun Culture

The magnificent Oleg Volk is running a series of pictures at his blog encouraging the teaching of shooting skills, from one friend to another, especially among women.

Now a crime in Washington.
(image by Oleg Volk)
I told Oleg that he should make a version of this particular picture, the one with the gal teaching her friend to shoot, with a different caption: “This is now a crime in Washington State.”  Since the I-594 initiative became law, handing the gun to your friend is an illegal transfer.  Her handing it back to you is another illegal transfer.  Oh, and if you left the gun at your friend's house?  Felony.

Criminalizing the touching of guns one doesn't own is the #1 way the Bloomberg ghouls can destroy the right to keep and bear arms in America, and they know it. They are already pushing this in Nevada, and are preparing to do the same in Maine and Arizona. They’ll push this poison state by state as far as they can.

Once it becomes too “difficult” for the average non-wealthy person to own a gun, or learn anything about them except at a state-sanctioned facility ($$$$), most people won’t bother.  Then, most people will be ignorant of guns, and of course the ignorant will vote against the rights of those of us who do. The Bloomghouls are counting on this to break the gun culture.

"Who's going to prosecute such a crime?" you may ask.  Perhaps nobody, but that doesn't matter.  "It's essentially an unenforceable law!" you may say.  It is, but that does not matter.

You see, the modern Euro-American super-state (at the national, "state" and local levels) has so warped the minds of "middle class," threatening them with threat of financial ruin, incarceration, and legal harassment, to where most of them obey laws as a matter of course, no matter how ridiculous and freedom-sapping.  People obey all manner of silly laws just to hold the mantle of "law abiding", and they will obey the laws against touching guns, too.  Some of us will disobey this malum prohibitum nonsense, and the rest will cheer when we are jailed for "breaking the law".  And there is a vast underclass who will never obey these laws, but will never be prosecuted for it because that would be "racist."  

So share your shooting and hunting skills with those around you, while you still can.

UPDATE!  Oleg Volk did a picture regarding the Washington the I-594 "no touching guns" law.  Oleg rocks.

Image by the incomparable Oleg Volk

Monday, November 24, 2014

Officer Wilson NOT Indicted... Enjoy Those "Gun-Free Zones" Tonight!

It's "gettin' real" in St. Louis, LA, NYC, Chicago, Detroit, Memphis, Birmingham, Orlando, and all those other victim-targeting zones.  An innocent man who defended his life with lethal force against a young thug is being freed, and the race-baiters are not happy.

Shots already fired in Ferguson, as of 9:11 PM Central.  Cop cars being overturned!  It's burning!  Shots fired!  Gee, don't you think the feckless residents of those Democrat cities wish they had bought a gun and gotten training now?

h/t Free Republic
Burning police car in Fergidishu!  (H/T KMOV)
This is not  inAfrica, or Paris, or England, though you couldn't tell it by the above.    This is St. Louis, people.  Did you ever think this would happen in AMERICA?

Emperor Obama the 1st speaks, and unwittingly becomes part of the scene, actually looking like he caused it (picture from Free Republic).  Well, didn't he at least help whip it up?

Did I do that?

Those Democrat cities chose their path long ago: citizen disarmament, giving in to mob rule, buying the votes of useless eaters.  And now, their chickens are coming home to roost, right Reverend Wright?

And now, we have a Democrat State Senator in Missouri who said "This is our race war!"  You do NOT want this, woman.  You have no idea what you are unleashing.

My community won't be affected at all.  Know why?  Because the parasitic rioters roused by the Communist front groups don't dare come out here where they know a significant percentage of us are armed, and we WILL fight back with lethal force if they try to block our highways, or surround our cars and rock them.  They don't dare.

Friday, November 7, 2014

Continued Complaints against the AL RKBA Amendment: "Inalienable" v "Fundamental"

I can't believe it, but the Bama Carry organization is still caterwauling on their Facebook page about the passage (72%) of Amendment 3, as they have done since it first was voted by the Legislature to appear on the ballot.

The ballot measure amended the Alabama constitution of 1901 to read:
Every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.
If you can believe it, the objection now is the wording "fundamental right", which these rubes believe to be somehow less than rights described by the phrase "inalienable right".

There ain't a substantial difference, people.  The two terms are used interchangeably.

Don't believe it? Look, Ol' Backwoods ain't a lawyer, but I can read and reason.  And I trust those attorneys, judges, and justices who have argued and written our pro-RKBA case law. 

How about Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the majority opinion in landmark  Supreme Court case McDonald v. City of Chicago, in which the City was infringing the right of a black man to keep and bear arms?  Justice Thomas
uses the words "inalienable" and "fundamental" interchangeably in this section about the history of rights in America (emphasis from Ol' Backwoods):
Justice Thomas:
After declaring their independence, the newly formed States replaced their colonial charters with constitutions and state bills of rights, almost all of which guaranteed the same fundamental rights that the former colonists previously had claimed by virtue of their English heritage. See, e.g., Pa. Declaration of Rights (1776)... declaring that "all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights," including the “right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences” and the "right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state."
Several years later, the Founders amended the Constitution to expressly protect many of the same fundamental rights against interference by the Federal Government.
Again later in the same opinion, Justice Thomas was discussing the usages of "privileges and immunities" from the 14th Amendment (emphasis from Ol' Backwoods):

...both the States and the Federal Government had long recognized the inalienable rights of their citizens. ... Article IV, §2 of the Constitution
protected traveling citizens against state discrimination  with respect to the fundamental rights of state citizenship.

I guess Justice Thomas is a backwoods rube who doesn't know his fundamental from his inalienable, huh?

Ol' Backwoods will be back later with more on this... 

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

AL Constitution Ballot Measure on RKBA PASSED!

Despite the surprising objections from Bama Carry, and from the usual anti-gun, anti-rights culprits, Alabama is now the third fourth state in the Union to enshrine the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right which must be protected by judges from infringement with the strictest level of judicial review:

From ABC 33 News:
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) - Alabama voters have approved a constitutional amendment to make gun ownership a fundamental right. 
The measure called Amendment 3 won easily in statewide balloting Tuesday.
The Republican-backed amendment used language from the National Rifle Association.
The measure would make owning firearms a fundamental right in Alabama. It would also require that measures to control firearms would have to pass the toughest review by state courts.  
Supporters say the amendment was needed to guard against overreaching gun control. Opponents say the proposal could lead to a dismantling of existing limits on gun possession and ownership. 
Louisiana and Missouri have approved similar measures.
I know my wife and I voted for it.  We must have been among many.



UPDATE: Prominent RKBA attorney Eugene Volokh quotes the newly-amended Alabama constitution and comments:
"Every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny."  
[... the]   provision would impose a more demanding test for gun controls, though not an insuperable test (see this case upholding a limited ban on gun possession by felons under strict scrutiny). Similar restrictions have recently been enacted in Louisiana and Missouri.

I can't help thinking about how this would have played in the Washington Post (Volohk's host site) if, as Bama Carry's leadership wanted, the ballot measure would have failed.  The WaPo would have celebrated, and y'all know it.

UPDATE: I forgot about Kansas, so that makes Alabama the fourth.  Dean Weingarten at Gun Watch reminds us (and I'll forgive him for calling us Alabamians 'Alabamans'):
Alabama follows on the heels of a Missouri amendment that passed with 61 percent of the vote, which continued the trend of Kansas and Louisiana. The Louisiana measure passed with 74% of the vote; the Kansas amendment passed with 88% . Wisconsin was the last state to add an amendment, instead of strengthening an existing one. The Wisconsin amendment passed in 1998 with 74% of the vote. It is clear that legislators are listening to grassroots support of these efforts.
Alabama follows on the heels of a Missouri amendment that passed with 61 percent of the vote, which continued the trend of Kansas and  Louisiana.   The Louisiana measure passed with 74% of the vote; the Kansas amendment passed with 88% .  Wisconsin was the last state to add an amendment, instead of strengthening an existing one.  The Wisconsin amendment passed in 1998 with 74% of the vote.    It is clear that legislators are listening to grassroots support of these efforts.

Saturday, November 1, 2014

Will Malloy Raid Gun Owners After Losing the Election?

UPDATE 11/5: Malloy won.  CWII soon?


Mike Vanderboegh says he has sources in the Connecticut Governor's office and the State Police that believe so.
This week, the water-cooler rumor at the Connecticut State Police barracks around the state is that [Under Secretary for Criminal Justice] Mike Lawlor has promised that if the governor is defeated that the raids will not wait for next year, but ... will "punish the gun nuts" by starting the raids within days of [CT Gov.] Malloy's defeat. ...
On Friday, I heard from another source I trust that they, too, had heard this and believed it to be true. 
Thus, if the rumor IS true and Lawlor has his way, it doesn't matter if Malloy wins or loses -- there will be raids.
If so, will that start a hot civil war?  Or will the people of CT just give up thousands of $$$ worth of rifles, and agree to go to prison over something people in free states like my own Alabama think nothing of owning?

Stay tuned.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Update on Proposed Alabama Amendment 3 (Strict Scrutiny)



Dave Workman has an interesting article about the controversy in Alabama's gun rights community on ballot measure 3, which proposes an amendment to Alabama's constitution to direct judges to always apply a strict scrutiny level of judicial review to all cases where the right to keep and bear arms is in jeopardy.

Of course, Ol' Backwoods has covered this before, talking about the split between Bama Carry and the Alabama Gun Rights organizations (which include Alabama Open Carry).

The real story in Workman's article is in the comments.  Eddie Maxwell is a honcho in Bama Carry, and I have tried to argue for this amendment with him on the Facebook page, and was told to leave Bama Carry if I believed the Amendment was good for Alabama.  (Full disclosure: Ol' Backwoods is a paying member of Bama Carry.)  George Owens, a big wheel in the Alabama Gun Rights Organizations, is trying to argue for the amendment by showing how limited the right to keep and bear arms already is in Alabama, including the case State v. Reid (1840) which defined the right to bear arms as open carry, not concealed carry.

All I know is that a) 2nd amendment / RKBA lawyers smarter than me are for strict scrutiny, and b) if this goes down in flames here in the Deep South, the Bloombergites and the other anti's will dance up a storm, and claim that they are winning.  And maybe they do win a victory if this ballot measure is defeated.

As David Codrea says, "any chair in a bar fight."  Or, in Latin, "CUM ULLA SELLA IN PUGNO TABERNA".

Wednesday, October 22, 2014


kak·is·toc·ra·cy noun \ˌkakə̇ˈstäkrəsē\
                 Definition: government by the worst men
                 Origin:  Greek kakistos (superlative of kakos bad) + English -cracy

(First in a series)
From our friend Bob Ownes:  BOO-HOO: Eric Holder Is Really Sad He Was Unable To Disarm You Before Fleeing Office

… the first sitting U.S. Attorney General ever found in criminal contempt of Congress, regrets that he was unable to strip Americans of the firearms that the citizens would find most useful in defending themselves from tyrannical government officials such as himself ... 
Mr. Holder and his allies on the progressive far left have long desired to outlaw this popular firearms because their characteristics make them extremely useful for self defense not just against criminals (most experts regard the AR-15 platform in .223 Remington/5.56 NATO as one of the best home defense weapons made), but also against a bloated federal government that is becoming increasingly lawless, tyrannical and overbearing under his blatantly partisan and possibly criminal leadership.  ...
Curiously, Mr. Holder had very little to say about Operation Fast and Furious, Operation Gangwalker, or any of the other alleged ATF gun-walking plots that sent tens of thousands of weapons to foreign narco-terrorists and domestic gang members in an apparent scheme to manufacture violent crime to justify the gun control laws he so desperately championed.
The targeting of your RKBA does not change just because Eric Holder is leaving one un-elected position and will doubtless enter another powerful but un-elected position in some prog think tank, university, or bank.

You can bet that there are thousands of men and women just as corrupt, just as power-hungry, just as politically-correct, ,just as America-hating, and  just as determined to take your rights as Eric Holder.

And NONE of them are on the ballot in the November elections.  The continuity of the kakistocracy is always maintained.