Politics – Page 148 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Obama Administration Creates HSUS Wet Dream

If you haven’t yet read about the Missouri family being fined $90,643 for selling a few rabbits, then you should go read this story now. They are in no way accused of mistreating animals. In fact, they were recognized by folks in the area for their incredible quality and how well they treat them. That’s why a pet store started buying some off of them. And when they didn’t fill out the right paperwork, well, that brings down the force of the federal government on you.

But what’s telling about this story is that the USDA staff have repeatedly said they are stepping up enforcement of these laws – even if it means fining families $90K for paperwork violations – and that they intend to use these kinds of cases in order to teach a lesson. And where do we get that directive? Directly from the HSUS Change Agenda for Animals presented to the Obama administration at the beginning of his term. Here’s the portion relevant to the Missouri case:

U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
3) Enforcement – …increase oversight of key federal laws (…Animal Welfare Act (AWA)…); …impose strong penalties (not suspension of fines, as is so typical now); …resume issuance of press releases on enforcement actions to maximize deterrent impact…

Hunters, you better pay attention. PAGunRights already outlined all of the provisions in the “Change Agenda” that go after your participation in the outdoor sports. They won’t ban it directly, but they’ll make your life hell with the full force of the federal government.

Things That Excite Me about Tim Pawlenty

Even though he’s a reasonably attractive candidate, Tim Pawlenty just isn’t driving a lot of excitement for Republican voters. He comes off as a pretty laid back guy just going in to do the jobs he has previously been elected to do. To be honest, that’s very appealing to me right now. It certainly has a lot more appeal than a leader who thinks he’s a rock star.

But I can tell you one thing that excites me about Pawlenty. I had the chance to meet him & actually talk to him at the Sportsmen for McCain launch in 2008. We had a chance to speak while we were watching the junior shooters who were shooting rounds of trap at the club. I didn’t really expect him to know gun policy. Many pro-gun politicians support the Second Amendment, but they don’t know the details of the actual policies that we either want to see enacted or benefit from in the real world like concealed carry. He and I chatted about concealed carry and other issues, and he actually knew the issues. I wish I could remember more specifics, but I was a little busy picking my jaw up off the ground after he started talking about it. So, yeah, that excites me.

Apologies for the poor video quality since my old digital camcorder was crap, but here is the video of his speech to kick off Sportsmen for McCain:

A Stretch

RedState is trying to paint Harry Reid as against Second Amendment rights, once again, by offering some pretty flimsy evidence. From what I can see, Reid employed a rule in order to lock out amendments on 9/11 extension bill from being offered. One of those bills was a Rand Paul Amendment that would have fixed access by FISA courts to 4473s.

It is not out of the question that Reid is getting softer on the gun issue, but I’d need more convincing evidence than this. To me this just looks like run of the mill partisan bickering, for which one of the amendments being tied up is Rand Paul’s. As far as I know there’s no Senate rule that allows exemptions to be made for singular amendments if you invoke a procedure that disallows amendments generally.

Foundation for the Defense of Some Democratic Values?

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies says they are “dedicated exclusively to promoting pluralism, defending democratic values, and fighting the ideologies that threaten democracy.” It doesn’t say anything about being an organization dedicated to promoting and defending due process before depriving people constitutional rights. That’s good,Â because it they said that, they’d be hypocrites. I’ll leave it to the readers to decide whether that fundamental principle is among the “democratic values” that this organization claims to defend.

Bucks County Repeals Guns in Parks Ordinance

A local Bucks County resident by the name of Ken Richmond decided to challenge Bucks County Commissioners that their ordinance banning firearms in county parks ran contrary to state law.Â They agreed and repealed it. While these ordinances have been unlawful for at least twenty years, it good to get the blue laws off the books, regardless. I’m not surprised the Daily News managed to get a jab in by asking picnickers to avoid shooting the ants, as if anyone lawfully carrying a firearm is just a loose cannon waiting for the right excuse.

It’s the case that a lot of counties ban firearms in their parks, contrary to state laws which prohibit local governments and municipalities from regulating on this subject. I never recommended people obey these ordinances, because hey are illegal. In the event that anyone does somehow managed to get found out, and get a fine, it would be a relatively easy matter to challenge it and prevail. Preemption in this field is well established law in the Commonwealth, and the case law is pretty black and white.

The Libertarian’s Choice

Ilya Somin likes Gary Johnson over Ron Paul. I heartily agree with Professor Somin, for many of the reasons he outlines. Â Gary Johnson got on my radar screen, when after finishing out his second term as Governor of New Mexico, he proceeded to question the wisdom of the War on Drugs, calling it “an expensive bust.” In short, I think Johnson might be all the wookie we’re looking for, but without the suit.

I am concerned about his name recognition problem and his ability to raise money.

Good to See the GOP Has Their Priorities Straight

While New York State is busy hemorrhaging money due to serious budget shortfalls, some in the NY GOP have decided to flog the gay marriage deceased equine a few more times. This is what the GOP does best when they can’t balance budgets. Unfortunately for them, this issue increasingly rings hollow with younger generations, and is probably doing more to alienate younger voters than any of their other failings.Â I predict this will be a winning issue for Democrats, especially downstate, if the GOP chooses to press it.

In other news, it would seem the term being used now is “marriage equality” rather than “gay marriage,” or “same-sex marriage.” This makes sense from a PR perspective. Kind of like how we framed the term “modern sporting rifle” when our opponents started using the word “assault weapon” to describe anything under the sun that hurled a projectile out of a long barrel that had a few ugly accessories attached to it. After all, who can be against equality? And who doesn’t like modernity, and sportsmanship? I mean other than Andrew Goddard.

Let us hope that the GOP does not borrow an idea from our opponents and adopt “assault marriage,” to describe same-sex marriage. Some of them are getting close.

Violating Election Laws in Philly

When one party has complete control over government, little things like “laws” don’t really apply to them – especially if it’s an election law and the violation helps keep them in power.

It reminds me of what PAFOA’s Dan Pehrson warned about back in 2008 in regards to the lawlessness that exists in all corners of Philadelphia.

Yet, what baffles me the most is that these leaders wonder where criminals get the idea that laws don’t apply to them! Don’t they see the example they set so publicly? The willful defiance has made headlines for weeks, reminding residents that the Council, mayor and police commissioner consider themselves to be above state law. Why shouldn’t average citizens be as well?

More 4th Amendment Weakening

Burgers and Boomsticks has a summary of a recent SCOTUS case that further weakens Fourth Amendment protections. Now it would seem of the police can come knocking on your door without a warrant, and provided they report hearing some kind of noise inside, will be able to enter claiming exigent circumstances claiming they had probable cause to believe you were destroying evidence. That has been the law for a while now, but I don’t think it’s right. Ginsburg was the only dissenter.

The 4th Amendment has been out of favor for a while now, and it’s one of the great travesties of the more conservative court in recent years. I am, for the most part, a Fourth Amendment absolutist. I don’t really agree with how Terry v. Ohio has been structured, nor do I agree with police being able to enter a private residence without a warrant except under emergency conditions, like someone calling 911 for a health emergency, the house being on fire, or hearing someone inside screaming for help. To me the Fourth Amendment means being able to live your life with your property and privacy safe from the depredations of governments. It is not a problem for law enforcement to look for ways around, with full help by American courts.

Philly OC Abuse Case Getting Media Attention

Folks might remember the YouTube sensation from a month or so ago of a Philadelphia man who was threatened by a Philadelphia Police officer for legally carrying a firearm. You might also remember that the City is charging him with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct. This weekend activists held a protest to demonstrate against this kind of treatment. This, to me, is a textbook example of how to use open carry effectively as a form of protest.

Today, the media is on fire with the story. First, from the Daily News, complete with a transcript. Next John Stossel has picked up on it at Fox News Business. The Daily News notes that they will be retraining officers on open carry:

“Our officers weren’t up to speed [because] we never really addressed it,” said Lt. Francis Healy, the department’s lawyer.

“In the last several weeks, we’ve done a lot of training and put out a lot of information about what is allowed and what’s not allowed. Right now, our officers are better-versed on the subject matter.”

Of course, this isn’t entirely true, as this directive from last year demonstrates. This is a very interesting case, in addition to being an utter disgrace. Pretty clearly Fiorino has a pretty good case for a Civil Rights lawsuit, but we’ll have to see what happens with these charges. It’s hard to believe that they will stick, given he was exercising his rights and was within the law.