Another (how many in the Administration?) to go!
Attorney General Eric Holder will announce later today his plans to step down, FoxNews.com has confirmed.
One hopes he steps down into a courtroom preparatory to his trial, but I doubt it!
From Joel, in part:
‘Sovereign Citizen’ Terrorist Group May Be Growing in U.S.
American law enforcement officials view sovereign citizens as the No. 1 potential terrorist threat in the United States, according to a 2014 study.
For those who ask, “Uncle Joel, in your deep wisdom and experience, could you please explain the ‘Sovereign Citizen’ movement for your audience?” I must reply…
No. I really can’t. I’ve hung with these guys and I can’t tell you what it’s about. It’s sort of a cargo cult law-as-ritual thing where if you add this particular incantation to a legal document any judge in the land is forced to throw up his hands, exclaim “Curses, foiled again” and let you off to do as you will, and everybody knows about this one guy who did that and it worked. Somewhere. Fringes on flags in courtrooms have something to do with it. People have sat me down and tried very earnestly to explain it, but I’m hopeless as a lawyer. Or a whacko.
So Sovereign types as the #1 terrorist threat in the land? Having a hard time buying it. And the article’s narrative isn’t helping…
Certainly there are enemies of the Constitutional Republic. Both foreign AND domestic.
Remember the Sons of the Gestapo, who pulled off the train derailment of The Sunset Limited in Arizona a few years back? More like the Sons of the Pioneers!
Or perhaps the result of an agent provocateur in place, stirring up the faux-militia crowd. You know, a community-organizer sent by government to enrage the weak-minded of the patriot crowd.
Remember your Criminal Law – When the idea of the criminal act originates with law enforcement, it becomes entrapment!
We DO have enemies – both foreign and domestic, including those who would foment crimes to solve them to make their stats look good!
These government agents, too, are enemies of the Republic.
While there ARE
illegal aliens, undocumented workers, freedom-seeking wretched refuse who do enter this nation illegally searching for their American Dream, most are honest, hard-working folk.
Just like the folks who
obeyed the law rules did it the right way. Legally. Right?
How can we tell – who is here with good intent, and who is a
scofflaw smuggler cartel member just trying to have a better life escape?
Colorado (God Bless ‘Em) recently enabled such folks to obtain legal State-Issued driver licenses! Just-in-case they were tempted to do something heinous, the documents were marked with a black band, lest they try to use their new ID to board aircraft, vote, or or enter a federal building unnoticed.
Of course The State (in their infinite wisdom) promptly posted regular Driver Licenses to about 524 applicants with the regular markings – sans the black identifying mark!
To amend their error, Colorado immediately requested such folks return them – even offering a bribe gift card as incentive!
What percentage did their civic duty and exchanged their erroneous ID for legitimate ones?
I see this as a good approximation meter to measure the goodliness of those who have already broken the law to get here. Who knows what else they will do?
h/t Murphy’s Law
(as purloined from Random Nuclear Strikes…)
While writing about the NYT tale of how “Assault Weapon” is a term made to scare white folks, Surber refuses to hold the tough questions back.
Instead of going after the gangs, Urban Democrats go after the law-abiding citizenry, unconstitutionally banning handguns and the like until the Supreme Court’s Heller decision reversed that.
In politics, unintended consequences are rare. By going after the weapons white suburbanites and rural people enjoy, Democrats obfuscate the real issue: Black young men killing black young men for profit in cities controlled by Democrats.
Don Surber – Do Democrats Care About Dead Black Men?
The answer is: Only if will help them get votes.
(Guffaw says) To be fair, every time this game has been played in a major metropolitan area in The United States (over the past 70 years) it hasn’t always been Democrats. But it’s always been Progressives of some ilk. And how have such policies worked in places like Chicago, New York and Los Angeles?
I’m not even expanding to discussing economies in such places as Detroit.
That’s for another blog.
(as stolen from Aaron @ The Shekel)
I have a hypothetical law-abiding client who had an issue related to a firearm for which he was contacted by a detective to come in and talk about it.
Did he retain counsel then? NO.
Did he appear with an attorney? NO.
Did he make a statement that is likely going to incriminate the heck out of him? Why YES, yes he did.
Did the statement cause other immediate ill effects? YES, yes it did.
You see, part of this matter involved a vehicle and a firearm.
He works for an employer with a strict no guns policy on the premises.
This includes parking lots. Note well that Michigan lacks any laws protecting law-abiding carriers having their gun locked in their cars while at work from being terminated.
In his statement to police he noted he began his journey before the incident at his employer’s parking lot with the gun in the vehicle.
The real dick move in this is the detective contacted the employer and told the employer the fellow had a gun in the vehicle in the parking lot. This had nothing to do with the incident in question which happened miles and mile away from the employer’s workplace. He has a squeaky-clean record both at work and in life without even a speeding ticket.
The employer immediately terminated the client for violating the no weapons policy.
Remember folks, if you receive a call from the police asking you to immediately come down to talk with them the response is not “I’ll be right there”. The proper response is “I’ll be right there after I’ve contacted my lawyer and we’ll let you know as soon as we can come in to talk with you and we intend to cooperate fully as soon as that can be arranged.”
You need to understand that when police call you in for a friendly chat it’s not because they’re lonely and want to make a new friend. Instead, they’re trying to make a case and if they’ve zeroed in on you, rightly or wrongly, as the suspect rather than the victim in the incident you need a lawyer and you need to shut up until you get one.
There are some allegations so heinous, if someone already looked askance at one, it is assumed one is guilty. (Michael Jackson comes to mind)
And we all know about assuming…(Thank you, again Don Brown!)
There has been a ‘news’ story floating around the past few days regarding Will Hayden, formerly of The Discovery Channel’s Sons of Guns. His ex-wife (or girlfriend) is alleging Mr. Hayden repeatedly raped their minor daughter, starting at age 11.
It may be assumed (there’s that word, again) that Mr. Hayden has substantial assets ripe for the attachment, and that as his persona was that of a cool, somewhat likeable, no-nonsense hard ass on the TV show, that these allegations might be spurious.
Of course, who knows?
I’ve a good friend for many years who was sexually abused by both her father and uncle – both of whom were upstanding community leaders – and they never were brought to justice for their crimes. I also know two men who were childhood victims of relatives. One perpetrator was a woman.
No justice for these folks was ever found.
My point is we don’t know the truth, yet, about Mr. Hayden. The Discovery Channel has sought to distance itself from the TV show and Mr. Hayden.
Is this simply an evil woman bringing unfounded charges to gain wealth, or vengeance, or is the evil in Mr. Hayden?
Regardless of the truth, I believe too much of this kind of heinous crime occurs, without earthly consequence.
Perhaps there is other-than-earthly consequence for such evil persons?
I certainly hope so.
(While I believe in ‘the system’, and ‘due process’, persons who destroy the lives of children in this manner should be drawn and quartered – Guffaw)
I’ve posted before in this venue about what a cesspool Detroit is and how 60 years of socialist politics have brought a once proud hub of American Industry to it’s knees, and even the police have advised the citizenry they must fend for themselves.
Apparently, they have listened and responded!!
(Below, a short snippet from the article)
Space prohibits a thorough account of Detroiters fighting criminals with lawfully obtained firearms, doing so would run longer than our infamous Hillary piece (our longest column ever, as several critics were kind enough to note). But a search of the Detroit papers for 2014 reveals instance after instance. Just one week’s reportage from February should suffice to demonstrate:
■At 2 a.m. Feb. 22, two men broke into a house on the city’s southwest side; the homeowner shot both men. A 21-year-old man died and the other man escaped.
■Earlier on Feb. 22, at 12:30 a.m., a woman who was surprised by a gunman when she pulled her car into the garage was able to reach for her own gun and fatally shot the man.
■A woman on Feb. 17 opened fire on three teens who kicked in her door. The alleged intruders, ages 14, 14 and 15, were caught by police and charged with home invasion.”
Now if only New Orleans, Oakland, New York and Washington, D.C. would pick up the same mantle!
h/t Kevin Baker
(Courtesy of Fill Yer Hands, in part)
In a landmark ruling today (08-16-14) in the lawsuit against Cinemark by victims of the Aurora, Colorado theater shooting, US District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson ruled that because they are Gun Free Victim Zones,
“the patrons of a movie theater are, perhaps even more than students in a school or shoppers in a mall, ‘sitting ducks.’”
This means that the owners of the Century Aurora 16 Theater should have known its patrons faced a risk, and taken steps to protect them, which they did not.
Perhaps this is FINALLY the beginning of the end of forced victim, free-fire, targets-of-opportunity zones. Now, if we can extend this to all schools, colleges, churches and government buildings, we can take back some of our sovereignty!
And our right of self defense.
Rand Paul:”If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot.”
The outrage in Ferguson is understandable—though there is never an excuse for rioting or looting. There is a legitimate role for the police to keep the peace, but there should be a difference between a police response and a military response.
The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action.
Glenn Reynolds, in Popular Mechanics, recognized the increasing militarization of the police five years ago. In 2009 he wrote:
Soldiers and police are supposed to be different. … Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force.
It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians.
You should go and read the whole article.
Now I’m in no way suggesting disarming the police. However, as with so many things, this is about mindset. When I took Police Science courses (1973-75), it was about apprehending lawbreakers and protecting the rights and persons of all involved – suspects, subjects, witnesses and police. For some reason, we seem to have lost that. And the term Peace Officer is no longer in use. The doctrine of posse comitatus is no longer in effect. We are no longer worried about the military being used as civilian police. The police have become the military.
h/t Brock Townsend
(as stolen from ENDO)
Take a look at this very unbiased article from BBC where three blind guys tell their stories of the trials and tribulations of being blind and into guns.
I’ve actually posted about Carey McWilliams (one of the blind guys) before. Seems like a good guy.
I don’t know who at the NRA pooped their pants over the fact Moms Demand Action didn’t like the NRA’s Dom Raso “Guns For the Blind” video and decided to remove it, but what a WEAK MOVE. In a hilarious twist, Mom’s Demand Action reposted it (unlisted) on their YouTube page. DRAAAAAAAmmmaaahhhhhh! Seriously though why you gotta be like that NRA? The NRA is supposed to be powerful and take out the anti-gun trash, walking all over Mom’s who “DEMAND” action. Not cower at criticism.
Thoughts? You liking all this guns and the blind drama?
I remember this fictional scene below, and chuckling at it even then. A blind guy fighting…SERIOUSLY? Obviously, times have changed – as had my opinion.
The less-sighted need to be able to defend themselves as much as we crippled guys! Or regular folk. And a firearm is one tool for that.