I just received an e-mail from the White House mailing list, that President Obama is looking for nominations for the Citizen’s metal. I think it would be pretty amusing to nominate Ted Nugent.
Category: Politics
An Infamous St. Louis Courthouse
This is the courthouse the Dred Scott case was first heard in.
The War on Chemistry
Apparently the iodine found in a water purification system could be used to make meth, and you know what that means.
Faster Than You Can Say Furious
It appears the watchdog groups are getting bold with highlighting just how easy it is to get a ballot without any form of identification. The title of the post refers to a line of comedy gold in the video about how not even the Attorney General is safe from voter fraud that could be committed in his name.
U.S. Reps Propose Bill of Attainder
John Richardson reports on several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who are proffering what looks to me like a Bill of Attainder, which targets George Zimmerman by name. Granted, this is merely a resolution, rather than a law that enacts punishment, so it could arguably not be considered one as a matter of law. But certainly, condemning someone by name insults the spirit of the constitutional provision prohibiting them.
Could It Happen Here?
That Patriot-News, the world renowned experts on self-defense, hysterically say yes, someone could indeed shoot another in Pennsylvania under questionable circumstances. Shocking! Clearly these folks were Presidents of the debate society in school. No, says the York Daily Record, since Pennsylvania law is different from Florida.
The York Daily Record is closer to correct, but the fact of the matter is even Florida’s law isn’t factoring into the Martin shooting, based on both narratives. Maybe the traditional media ought to take a look at their shallow and inaccurate coverage of complex issues, often deliberate in my opinion, to understand why people are turning away from them in ever increasing numbers.
2 out of 3 of Brian Aitken Convictions Squashed
Eugene Volokh mentions the case. Aitken’s convictions for unlicensed transport, and high capacity magazines were reversed. His conviction for having hollow point ammunition was allowed to stand. There’s one crime Brian Aitken is guilty of, and that’s believing when he moved to New Jersey he was still living in America.
- On the charge of transportation without a permit, the court found that the judge’s failure to properly instruct the jury as to exceptions was sufficient to squash the conviction.
- On the charge of the high capacity magazine, the court ruled that the state failed to introduce proper evidence that the device was a large capacity magazine. At trial they showed that the magazine could hold 16 rounds of ammunition, but they failed to show that it was operable with that many rounds of ammunition, and the court ruled that was required.
- On the issue of hollow nosed ammunition, Aitken argued that the statute was unconstitutionally vague. He also argued that the rule of lenity should apply, given that the statute didn’t exempt moving between residences, that it should based on a reading of the statute, which allows possession in the home.
- Aitken also made a Second Amendment claim, which the court summarily dismissed without any discussion. This is wrong.
So Aitken is still a convicted felon and prohibited person, because of the hollow nose bullet charge. I think he should appeal, and appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court if necessary.
Jennifer Granholm “Forgets” Her Past Legislative Achievements to Become a Liberal Darling
Jennifer Granholm has decided that attacking NRA and siding with Media Matters is the way to win viewers to her new show on Al Gore’s Current.
NRA admits to helping draft #StandYourGround law. Are you surprised? http://bit.ly/H1mdVO via @MMFA @GranholmTWR #TheWarRoom
I guess she presumes they will just lap up everything she has to say without question. So far, it seems to be working. Only pro-gun folks have caught on to the fact that Governor Jennifer Granholm gladly signed six bills to make Michigan’s castle doctrine and stand your ground laws stronger. From July 20, 2006:
Today Governor Jennifer Granholm signed into law a package of six self-defense bills backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA), bringing “Castle Doctrine” protections to law-abiding Michigan citizens. …
The six-bill Castle Doctrine Package passed with bi-partisan, supermajority support in both houses of the Michigan legislature:
- SB 1046, sponsored by Sen. Alan Cropsey, outlines rebuttal presumptions for justified use of self-defense. The bill makes it clear that there is no “duty to retreat” if a person is in a place where they have a legal right to be.
- SB 1185, sponsored by Sen. Ron Jelinek, allows for the award of court and attorney fees in civil cases where it was determined a person acted in accordance with the Self Defense Act and where civil immunities apply.
- HB 5548, sponsored by Rep. Tim Moore, gives civil immunities to persons acting in accordance with the Self Defense Act, preventing criminals and their families from suing law-abiding citizens.
- HB 5153, sponsored by Rep. Leslie Mortimer, puts the burden of proof on the prosecutor to show that a person acted unlawfully in the application of force, rather than the person using the force having to prove they acted lawfully.
- HB 5142, sponsored by Rep. Tom Casperson, expands the definition of “dwelling” to include a person’s garage, barn, backyard, etc.
- HB 5143, sponsored by Rep. Rick Jones, creates the Self Defense Act and specifies that it is not a crime to use force or deadly force to defend oneself if that person is not breaking any laws when defensive force was used. The person must be facing imminent threat of death or great bodily harm.
I guess she doesn’t want to highlight her record working with law-abiding gun owners and instead is embracing darlings of the left like Media Matters and their leaders who have been accused of carrying firearms illegally. (h/t @graycpeterson)
Regulating Away Private Charity
Is it better to starve or eat something that might be a little salty or a bit heavier on calories than the government would prefer? Well, Bloomberg’s agencies in New York think it’s better for people to go hungry than to eat something they haven’t tested for nutritional value.
The Bloomberg administration is now taking the term “food police†to new depths, blocking food donations to all government-run facilities that serve the city’s homeless.
In conjunction with a mayoral task force and the Health Department, the Department of Homeless Services recently started enforcing new nutritional rules for food served at city shelters. Since DHS can’t assess the nutritional content of donated food, shelters have to turn away good Samaritans.
The story highlights good samaritans who have been donating food for decades, but who have been turned away and their food turned down because of these new restrictions.
This is the kind of regulation designed to frustrate people into stopping their acts of charity and community work because the government knows best. If the bureaucrats can keep them from getting involved, then the government will be the only source for solving this “problem.” Reliance on government means more government employees who are doing more “good.”
I don’t mean to present this as a tinfoil hat type of conspiracy that the Bloomberg administration is purposefully letting people go hungry in order to create more dependency on the government. But, it is a mindset of many people who think up these regulations. They are the government and they know best. They might acknowledge that the good samaritans mean well, but they don’t care about motivations or even outcomes since clearly a government structure to organize it all is better than people getting involved from the community in a way that they cannot control with perfect certainty. They don’t particularly care that their restrictions may end a tradition of civic engagement because bureaucrats are paid to be engaged, they don’t need volunteers to do that work for them. It’s oddly logical when you’re working within a system that is always growing.
I actually believe that acts of private charity and civic involvement are the best ways to fight the expansion of government. Everyone heard the stories about how private companies and organizations were the first ones into New Orleans when the government workers wouldn’t get around to going in there and getting the goods the city residents needed. Normal folks, when they hear these kinds of stories about NYC turning down private food donations for the homeless, have a gut reaction that the government is going too far. It’s actually by being engaged at this level where small government advocates can pick up the stories and examples of how we don’t need the government to handle it all.