Or perhaps I should have worded it the former Republic’s government policy…
It was recently announced that the BATFE was moving to ban certain ammunition familiar to users of the AR-15 rifle, specifically:
In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress.
It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control. First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated “manufacturing” of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less than year old position on firing a shouldered “pistol.” Now, BATFE has released a “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c)”, which would eliminate M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.
Now, aside from petty power and control, why would they bother to do this? Because they see a future where armored troops are engaging the
citizenry serfs for power and control? Perhaps.
But I think it’s that time ‘honored’ reason – because they can. And have.
Which brings us to the larger question. Should anything be BANNED in a Free Republic? Or should the marketplace be the controlling factor?
Possessing, manufacturing or distributing child pornography is essentially banned. This doesn’t stop possession, manufacture or distribution. How about drugs? Substandard (or poisonous/dangerous) products from overseas? Or those domestically produced? Remember cyclamates and hexaclorophene?
Perhaps it’s a bit callous of me, but I think the marketplace should be the deciding factor. If you don’t want cyclamates, poisons or substandard foreign crap, don’t buy it! Child pornography harms children in the production prima facie, so banning that is acceptable and appropriate. Drugs? If you are an adult, it should be up to you. But, driving under the influence or committing crimes to support your habit is another thing altogether. Then you are bringing others into the mix. Without their permission.
If you inadvertently purchase something harmful, sue the bastards! But, you have a responsibility – you should be an informed consumer.
Now, to the proposed ammunition ban. The ‘sporting purposes’ argument. Obviously, the Second Amendment is not about hunting.
Their regulation and argument is invalid.
From the CONCLUSION:
Accordingly, the Court DECLARES that 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3), 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a) are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing these provisions. The Court will issue its final judgment separately.
SO ORDERED on this 11th day of February, 2015.
[Emphasis in the original]
Courtesy of Not Clauswitz et al
In English – Non-residents may now purchase firearms in Texas, and presumably anywhere else it is legal.
Could removal of ridiculous restrictions on citizens BE any cooler? – Chandler Bing
Of course, this was from a federal district court. And as the bloggers above suspect, until there is an edict from the BATFE, I don’t see much of this kind of activity.
I see a Supreme Court battle in our future.
Throughout the city, precincts are being ordered to hand up to borough commanders “activity sheets” indicating the number of arrests and summonses per shift, sources told The Post.
“Police officers around the city are now threatened with transfers, no vacation time and sick time unless they write summonses,” one union source said.
“This is the same practice that caused officers to be labeled racist and abusers of power.”
More @ Resister In The Rockies
So, that tired meme about cops not having a quota of summonses (“I can write as many as I want!”) has been laid to rest in NYC. Quantity, not Quality seems to be the order of the day.
There was a time, when law enforcement was about enforcing the law, NOT generating revenue or creating numbers to justify budgets. Not unlike news organizations pandering to bring in an audience for the advertisers, instead of just reporting the news. (If it bleeds, it leads!)
I’m a capitalist. I’m all about the profit motive. Free enterprise. But some people need to focus on their duty, not their dollar!
h/t Free North Carolina
Is it out there, anymore?
I remember my Father ranting about the dearth of customer service when I was a teenager – and that was in the 60’s.
Back then a guy in a uniform (or at least a uniform shirt) filled your tank, checked your oil, and cleaned your windshield. And no tip was asked or expected. Now, IF there’s a monitor/cashier at the self-service gas station behind the bulletproof glass, it’s an effort to get them to look up from their graphic novel to take your card for purchase.
And waiters/waitresses? One would think when they are first being trained, they would be instructed that the more courteous and efficient they are, the better tip they will receive. But most these days are barely capable in getting your food to you at all. Need extra napkins or a refill on that beverage? Good luck with that.
And getting the order correct in the first place? Fuggedaboutit!
Retail stores? Just try to find someone who has any idea where stock might be, or even be able to direct you to it.
Call centers? Pshaw.
And we who chat regarding firearms on the Internet are familiar with H & K’s (in)famous lack of customer service.
One word. OBAMACARE. And government services in general.
And, while I’m on the subject – do any of these aforementioned folks speak American English? This assumes I don’t have to migrate through a computer-generated menu prompt resembling a RPG in Urdu to get to a human.
We now return you to your post-holiday festivities.
I remember a time, not that long ago…
When Canada was thought of as the weak sister to the North of The United States. Still symbolically tied to a monarchy, NO Bill of Rights, The Mounties were the FBI on steroids, high taxation to pay for their universal health care (wherein many folks came HERE for more-timely surgery), and their jeezly nickels and pennies kept finding their way into OUR change!
They did make good beer, and had a quaint way of verbally punctuating with the syllable ‘eh?’ though. :-)
I do hear about the Yukon and The Northwest Territories largely ignoring gun control edicts from Ottawa, to the point where they reversed their rifle registration scheme. So there is some hope.
Just think – if they adopted OUR Bill of Rights, we could move there and with a population akin to the U.S. in 1860, and a still largely polite society, we could have Utopia.
A COLD Utopia…
Hey, a guy can dream…
(I’m doing MY part! – Guffaw)
I’ve said it here and elsewhere, but I’ll say it again:
Democrats are the party of hatred, envy and bigotry. It’s the basis of everything they do, and they use it at every opportunity.
If you disagree with them on race, it’s because you’re white (even if you’re Thomas Sowell, Mia Love or Marco Rubio). If you disagree with them about women’s rights, it’s because you’re a man (even if you’re Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter or Megyn Kelly). If you disagree with them about gay rights, it’s because you’re straight (even if you’re Liz Cheney, Jimmy LaSalvia or Chris Barron). They’re not interested in empowering minorities, they’re only interested in punishing white people. They’re not interested in empowering women, they’re only interested in punishing men. They’re not interested in empowering gays, they’re only interested in punishing straight people. They’re not interested in helping people become successful, they’re only interested in punishing the wealthy. They don’t want justice, in fact they work hard to subvert it… because they pander to those who want revenge.
Of course, they’ll always claim the opposite. But it isn’t the Republicans who wanted a Supreme Court Justice who thought she could do better than others because she wasn’t white. It isn’t the Republicans who called a black politician a “house nigger.” It isn’t the Republicans who coined the term “white hispanic.” It’s not the Republicans who TO THIS DAY call Justice Thomas an “Uncle Tom.” It’s not the Republicans who delight in “Teabagger” as a derogatory term.
It isn’t the Republicans who are proud to be associated with openly racist organizations like the NAACP and La Raza. It wasn’t the Republicans who proudly put a sexual predator in the White House in the 90s. It wasn’t the Republicans who were proud of voting for our current President because he’s not white. It’s not the Republicans who have fought tooth and nail to make it easy to get on welfare, but hard to succeed in business.
Democrats have spent the last several years calling Republicans “terrorists,” “suicide bombers” and “hostage takers.” But virtually every supporter of Hamas in America is a Democrat.
I’m an agnostic, and yes, I find it annoying when Christians act as if I’m some poor deluded soul who must be saved from his own stupidity. But at least Christians treat me as if I am a human being, and by their lights they are trying to help me. They’ll try to change my mind, but they don’t try to have me arrested or outcast when I don’t. The anti-Christian left thinks I should be punished for daring to disagree with them, IF they concede that I should be allowed to exist AT ALL.
“Diversity” my hairy butt. I want my doctor, my lawyer, my local police and firefighters, to be the best, and I don’t care what color they are, whether their underwear has a fly, or who they kiss when they go home in the evening.
My largest bone of contention with this rant is two-fold. First, they say Democrats, when I would say PROGRESSIVES – not necessarily the same thing. Second, they don’t rant at the Republicans, for all their misdeeds – The Patriot Act and it’s evil children, for example.
I’m a libertarian (small L), and I say vote ‘em ALL OUT! Of course, the only problem with that, of course, is with whom do we replace?
…I’m here to protect you!”
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a proposed rule Monday (two weeks ago) requiring all new light vehicles — including cars, SUVs, trucks and vans — to have “rear-view visibility systems,” in effect, requiring backup cameras.
The rule — which would be final in 60 days — would start phasing in on May 1, 2016 models and be at 100% May 1, 2018.
Yes, my friends, the almighty government is saving us once again.
It is to be ultimately a NERF™ WORLD!
I thing JayG said it best:
The problem isn’t that drivers can’t see the people behind them, it’s that the drivers aren’t looking. The video that plays in the accompanying story is a very sad one indeed – a woman out for a walk was backed over by a teenaged driver. It’s terrible, certainly, and 100% avoidable. But to think that a backup camera would make a teenager pay better attention? REALLY?
Driving, not unlike carrying a firearm, is an inherently dangerous act!
At Gun Nuts Media, I was shocked to see this article headline. Even more so when I read the professional in question was Hilton Yam!
An excerpt from Mr. Yam’s essay:
It is easy to get caught up in the mystique and history of the 1911, but the design is over 100 years old, and we have learned a few things about designing and manufacturing since then. If you enjoy the craftsmanship of a finely built 1911 or you enjoy tinkering on your own, by all means continue to enjoy them. However, if training, shooting, and performance is your primary goal and you lack the resources, time, patience, or knowledge to keep after a 1911, then be realistic and choose something more modern. These days I spend much less time at the workbench fixing my training guns or having to wonder if the latest build or mod will work. I no longer need the 1911 as a crutch, and can now just concentrate on the performance.
Of course, I am not a LEO, SWAT trainer, and team leader like Mr. Yam. I do greatly respect his judgement and expertise. And, perhaps, if I had the finances, I would opt for a carry pistol that was more reliable and less finicky than a 1911?
BUT, the point is moot, as I do not and will not. I will continue to carry my S&W 442 electroless nickel and (weather-permitting) my National Match 5″ 1911. The only hiccups I’ve had with MY 1911 were due to improper maintenance (need of lubrication and lack of cleaning). When reasonably clean and lubed, she runs like a champ! And has for over 15,000 rounds since 1983!
Perhaps old-timers like me are akin to the guys 100 years ago who stuck by their horses or black powder? I’m not a specops guy or even a LEO. I’m just an old crippled guy on disability who doesn’t get out much.
But, plastic guns STILL have no soul.
h/t Gun Nuts Media, Modern Service Weapons
Lagniappe’s Lair (Murphy’s Law) posted about one of his favorite eateries posting a ‘no open carry of weapons’ sign.
Regarding the restaurant’s decision to limit the patronage of their establishment, and his decision to not eat there, henceforth.
One of his commenters, Papa Bear, posted the following:
Huh, I wonder what would happen if I owned a business and posted a sign “No openly gay or closet individuals allowed”?
An interesting twist on the rights of business to refuse service, and the rights of individuals to be let alone with their proclivities. Got me thinking of this flap on AZ Governor Jan Brewer’s desk, the ‘right to refuse service’ bill – which the media is soundly trouncing, lest she sign it.
I still believe in the businesses right to refuse service, and the individual’s right to vote with their feet, and take their stomachs and money elsewhere.
Of course, as another of Murphy’s commenters said (in part):
They do have that right, and they are allowed to make that business decision. We, however, also have a right to take our business there or elsewhere. Well, we did until Obamacare came about, anyhow.
As my dear departed Father used to say, “ANOTHER country heard from!”
Is this Republic’s goal to support the rights of individuals, or is this democracy’s goal to enforce the will of the majority, ignoring minority rights. Or the will of the elite?
I fear that decision has already been made…
THIS JUST IN. ARIZONA GOVERNOR JAN BREWER VETOED THE BILL. Was it her choice as governor, or ‘the will of the
vocal ‘majority’? Who knows?
Kevin Baker, of The Smallest Minority fame, said what many (including me) have been thinking, with regard to this Arizona ‘Right To Refuse Service’ Bill pending in State government.
The liberal media have been painting this as pure bigotry by Christians against Gays. “It’s another black mark against Arizona – we could lose the Super Bowl!”
And, that may be true. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t necessary.
I, for one, do not like the government mandating with whom I may or may not do business. Period.
I think the free marketplace will provide a solution. If you don’t like (gays, blacks, women, short people, Republicans, Jews ad infinitum, ad nauseum) FINE. Don’t do business with them.
And see how your profits dry up.
I don’t have a business, but, if I did, I’d choose not to do business with felons, pedophiles and bureaucrats. I know, I’m repeating myself…
But, Kevin says it better:
The function of government should not be to punish people for acting on their fervently held beliefs. It’s function should be to ensure that potential customers are made aware up front who a person, business or legal entity will refuse service to.
They already do that in a tiny way under Arizona Revised Statute §4-229, which states:
A. A person with a permit issued pursuant to section 13-3112 may carry a concealed handgun on the premises of a licensee who is an on-sale retailer unless the licensee posts a sign that clearly prohibits the possession of weapons on the licensed premises. The sign shall conform to the following requirements:
1. Be posted in a conspicuous location accessible to the general public and immediately adjacent to the liquor license posted on the licensed premises.
2. Contain a pictogram that shows a firearm within a red circle and a diagonal red line across the firearm.
3. Contain the words, “no firearms allowed pursuant to A.R.S. section 4-229″
So, the legislature should simply extend this logic to whatever other prejudices there are out there and require signage to advise potential customers where they’re not wanted. Something like this, for instance:
That way everyone will know right up front what kind of bigots they will be dealing with, and can decide for themselves whether or not they want to spend their money there. No hurt feelings, no lawsuits.
PS – The media is all up in arms (figuratively, of course) about conservative Christians. What about those Muslims who not only don’t want to serve gays, but want to KILL THEM? Oh, that’s right. We can’t talk about them, that’s (bigoted, racist, non-inclusive).
Political Correctness IS killing this Nation!
h/t Dawn Daniels