Michael Koter: Gun Control Through Punishment
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The second amendment. You can dissect it, interpret it, twist and shout. The facts are this. When it was written, a militia was made up of citizens. The revolutionary war was won because of those citizens. The founders recognized this fact and made sure that the people would always have the ability and means to protect their freedom, no matter from where the danger came. But this can be argued forever. SCOTUS can study this and render an opinion, but like Roe v Wade, there will always be opposition. President Obama himself is for gun control, and in the past has supported a gun ban.
Obama on gun control:
“Hale DeMar, a 52-year-old Wilmette resident, was arrested and charged with misdemeanor violations for shooting, in the shoulder and leg, a burglar who broke into his home not once, but twice. Cook County prosecutors dropped all charges against DeMar.
“In March 2004, the Illinois Senate passed Senate Bill 2165, a law introduced in response to DeMar’s case, with provisions designed to assert a right of citizens to protect themselves against home invasions, such that self-defense requirements would be viewed to take precedence over local ordinances against handgun possession. The measure passed the Illinois Senate by a vote of 38-20. Barack Obama was one of the 20 state senators voting against the measure.
“Governor Rod Blagojevich vetoed the bill. On Nov. 9, 2004, the Illinois Senate voted 40-18 to override Blagojevich’s veto. Again, Obama acted against the bill.
“On Nov. 17, the Illinois House voted overwhelmingly, 85-30, to override the governor’s veto and Senate Bill 2165 became law.”
Source: Obama Nation, by Jerome Corsi, p.241-242 Aug 1, 2008
How do our other representatives feel? Go here to find out.
Senator Lautenberg (D-NJ) proposes “Extraordinary Powers” be given to the U.S. Attorney General to limit gun sales. Lautenberg has now introduced a bill that would give the Attorney General the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists. Once passed, this bill will give unprecedented authority to limit gun sales exclusively to the U.S. Attorney General. Once this power has been granted, it will be easy to amend for more sweeping gun control.
So maybe, instead of laws to prevent the people from owning guns and legally carrying them, we should provide an incentive to obey laws that protect the citizens from criminals. Gun control laws do not decrease crime because criminals by definition do not care about the law. Go here for statistics supporting this. Perhaps we should approach the problem from a different angle. Only punish the criminals. Now there’s a novel idea. Instead of punishing everyone, just punish the lawbreakers.
Florida has a three strikes and you’re out law. The third time you commit a crime with a gun, you go to jail for life. There are also the three degrees of gun violence laws. Use a gun, shoot the gun, kill someone, each holding a different punishment. But how many criminals are released after only serving a portion of their sentence, only to kill again?
The best gun control is punishment. A person who kills during the commission of a crime should receive a mandatory life sentence with no opportunity for parole, or be executed within a mandatory period in death penalty states. Or perhaps the venue of punishment should be changed. Prisons are overcrowded and too expensive. Why not a more military-style prison, in a desert setting, much as Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona has done. No air conditioners, no TV and a simple healthy diet. If our own military personnel can survive in those conditions, so certainly can our criminals. When the punishment becomes too uncomfortable, gun crimes will diminish. Incentives work. We don’t need more laws, just enforcement of the laws we have. Make sentences mandatory and prison conditions uncomfortable. Not cruel and unusual, just uncomfortable. Stop treating violent criminals better than our soldiers and veterans.
Gun control through better punishment.
Even the NRA can live with that.
It’s Time for the 16th Amendment to Go!
February, 1913, saw the ratification of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and, with it, the empowerment of the Congress “to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” With its passage, Congress’s powers expanded by an order of magnitude. Whereas, previously, federal revenues were largely realized through customs duties and taxes on such things as alcohol and tobacco, Congress now found itself with the power to lay claim to the fruits of the people’s labors, to reach into their pockets and take what it wanted, for whatever reason.
At the time of its passage, one proponent of the amendment, Rep. Cordell Hull, of Tennessee, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying, “One of the important results of an income tax will be the curbing of unnecessary Federal expenditures. When a great part of the government’s income is derived by a direct tax upon the citizens of the nation, they will scrutinize more carefully the appropriations made by Congress.” (more…)
What about freedom (or Why The Liberal Agenda Will Never Succeed)
My mother in-law (I am the lucky guy with an awesome one) has very conservative parents. Her mom can debate anyone, and often does, on the failures of socialism. She was fairly delighted to learn that I share many of her views (except the “war on drugs” but that is another article) and loves to share info with me. Among that last pile of books she sent me I was pleased to find copy’s of “Rules for Radicals”, and “Guilty”. So I jumped right in to both of them.
It only took a day or so to kind of put “guilty” on the back burner and become fully engrossed in “Rules”. What I’ve found, as I’d heard it was, is the playbook for community organizing. The goal of which is the eventual “political paradise that is communism”. It is a fairly rambling and sort of nonsensical guide to revolting against the failure of capitalism. While the logic of the reasons behind the revolt fails the smell test, it very coherent in its instructions, rules, and methods. You can see the fruition of many of the goals in the current administration, no question. And I believe if more Americans new the intent, they would never have chosen a Chicago community organizer to be POTUS. (more…)
Should Holder Investigate Alleged CIA Interrogation Abuses?
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appears to be poised to appoint a criminal prosecutor to investigate alleged CIA abuses committed during the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Holder envisions a narrow inquiry that would focus on “whether people went beyond the techniques that were authorized” in Bush administration memos that interpreted anti-torture laws.
President Obama has publicly discouraged such an investigation, but months ago left the door open for Holder to make the call. An inquiry would likely drive a new wedge between the CIA and the Justice Department, as well as create additional political tension in Washington already aggravated by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s claims in May that the CIA “mislead us (Congress) all the time”.
The U.S. anti-torture statute requires proving that an interrogator “specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering,” a challenging legal hurdle. In April, Holder decreed “We’re going to follow the evidence wherever it takes us, follow the law wherever that takes us….no one is above the law” when asked whether government officials would face prosecution over coercive interrogation techniques.
Tell that to the voters in Philadelphia, who were threatened on November 4 by nightstick-wielding members of the New Black Panther Party. Holder gave them a pass, even after the government prevailed by default when the Panthers ignored court process. In that case, other considerations apparently outweighed Mr. Holder’s desire to following the evidence. The Panthers who turned out to be above the law included Jerry Jackson, a credentialed Democratic-party poll-watcher who brays on MySpace about “Killing Crakkkas.” Thanks to Holder’s decision Jackson is back in business, having obtained new poll-watcher credentials just days after his case was dismissed.
Is this investigation politically motivated and yet another distraction from ongoing domestic issue debates? Does it threaten to set a dangerous precedent that will undermine the effectiveness of the CIA out of concern for retroactive rule changes applied by future administrations? Or is there a legitimate cause of action, in the interest of protecting America’s moral standing as champions of human dignity and individual rights?
T. Lee Mac: The Health Care Scam – Their REAL Agenda
Soon after a maverick inland hurricane destroyed our home and one-third of our storage units, we rented a building down town that had formerly been used as a health clinic. We put our office in the front and the several examination rooms and closets we turned into storage units to make up for some of those lost in the storm. While working on this conversion, I went next door to the local hardware store and made a certain purchase, I don’t recall the exact expenditure but it was around $40 and I remember the disgust I felt at having just spent $40 for something I absolutely did not want and did not need.
Now, just what does this have to do with providing quality health care to the 50 million odd people in America (allegedly) who have no access (allegedly) to such a vital necessity? Well, nothing, really. And that’s the first point I want to make. While my story above has absolutely nothing to do with providing health care to those in need, it has just as much to do with providing that quality health care to needy people as does the current legislation being pushed in Washington. (more…)
Susanne: Smelt Update
UPDATE: Huron, CA – August 11, 2009
California: The New Dust Bowl?
———————————————————————————————————–
MISSING PERSON REPORT: Nancy Pelosi-D, San Francisco, CA
White, Woman, 50/60-ish??
Short Brown Hair, Botox Forehead
Devin Nunes-R Congressman and Paul Rodriques-Comedian broadcast live from Huron, California, providing an update on the continuing struggle of farmers to save their land and prevent the next Dust Bowl.
At this time, ½ million acres of farmland, equivalent to the size of Rhode Island, continues to die due to the Silver Minnow. After a visit from Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, who gave empty promises, the pumps remain closed. After every mayor in these affected counties sent a letter to President Obama pleading for his intervention, the pumps remain closed. After visiting the capital of California, Sacramento, the pumps remain closed. After traveling to Washington, D.C. to beg for relief, the pumps remain closed.
In Iraq, China, Brazil and India new water infrastructure projects are being implemented. In California there are no new water infrastructure projects, and the existing water infrastructure has been shut off to save the Silver Minnow, at the expense of the California farmers and US agricultural independence.
Where is Pelosi? She is missing in action. Where is President Obama? Wrapped up in establishing his legacy by reforming Healthcare, oh wait, now it’s Health Insurance reform.
Can we, those in CG13, take the time to save people that can be saved right now, not somewhere down the road with free healthcare? Some California communities impacted by this inaction are suffering unemployment rates in excess of 40%. Now is the time to act. Save our fellow Americans in California before it’s too late. Please.
The Death of Rational Discussion
Franking is a process by which Congress, the President and some cabinet members correspond with the public using their signature on the envelope instead of a stamp. These mailings to constituents are limited by budget allotment and of course are paid for with taxpayer dollars. The Franking Commission approves the content of materials to prevent abuse of the privilege.
Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.) sends a regular newsletter to his constituents. When he recently attempted to mail a newsletter to his district regarding healthcare, he was forced to remove the following language before Democrats on the commission would approve payment:
“The below quote is from President Obama at a recent town hall on health care, responding to a question on possible medical treatment for an elderly woman who had heart problems and received a pacemaker:
‘Look, the first thing for all of us to understand that is we actually have some — some choices to make about how we want to deal with our own end-of-life care… we as a culture and as a society [can start] to make better decisions within our own families and for ourselves…at least we can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what? Maybe this isn’t going to help. Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller.’
Security Vs Freedom
Freedom VS Security
In writing my last piece I came to realize some thing. Sort of a re-epiphany. And that is the essential difference in thinking between a liberal and a conservative. I mean, it has always intrigued me that we can be so divided in our views and values. We are all Americans after all. Aren’t we all taught the same things? That our founders, and many other generations, fought, bled and died for our freedom? That they were willing to die for it should, at least, lead us to the conclusion that it was their top value. Their sacrifice is supposed to be our shining beacon, the reminder that freedom isn’t free.
So if freedom is supposed to be the top value of Americans, why are so many of us suddenly so smitten with the ideal of security? Helen Kellar said “Security is illusion, Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. Security does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than exposure.”
So if it is illusion, why is it set forth as an ideal worthy of pursuit? Are the purveyors of security (the progressive movement) intentionally using illusion to usurp power? Then what of President Bush? I remember distinctly his using “the security of the American people” as a reason for expansion of government over and over. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the creation of Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, The expansion of FEMA, etc. All done in the name of security by a so-called conservative. Does this make Bush an illusionist? Do you feel safer and more secure right now than you did in say early 2002? Have we achieved security?
Apparently not because now the effort to provide security has really ramped up. Bush provided the template and Obama seems to be greatly expanding it. Again, in the name of security, we are seeing another unprecedented expansion of federal government. Following on Bush’s unprecedented expansion. Kind of makes you wonder what’s next.
So that’s it. I write this to re-ask myself the question, what is it I seek, Freedom or security. And the answer is, I choose freedom. That is the question that I’m seeking an answer to from my fellow Americans as well as any person who asks for my vote.. And I will try to be understanding of those that seek security. But I think letting them take power in this country is a mistake. By seeking security, they will trample the freedom so many sacrificed for. To be free is to risk. And to be secure, it seems to me, is impossible.
T. Lee Mac: Perspicacity Deficit Syndrome
The U. S. Government has fallen ill again. The symptoms grow rapidly worse day by day, and include bloating, hyper-activity, Attention Deficit Disorder, loss of self-preserving inhibitions, acute loss of vision, hearing loss, delirium, delusions and hallucinations. The whole disease has been dubbed Perspicacity Deficit Syndrome, or PDS, which can be rendered easier to understand by the much simpler but equally accurate term, Pretty Damn Stupid. (more…)
Obama’s Bush Moment?
On Sunday, August 2, the first indications that the free ride might not be free, after all, came to the fore. Treasury Secretary Geithner and Lawrence Summers, of the president’s economic council, both hinted that, in light of the enormous spending program upon which the government has embarked, which will generate gargantuan deficits well into the future, Obama’s grand plan can’t be sustained.
Asked if the middle class, who are part of the 95 percent of us who won’t see our taxes increase, could see a tax hike, neither would rule it out. As Summers said on Face the Nation, “It’s never a good idea to absolutely rule things, rule things out no matter what.” Geithner, on This Week, said, “We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically … That’s going to require some very hard choices.”
Geithner went on to say, “We will not get this economy back on track, recovery will not be strong and sustained, unless we convince the American people that we are going to have the will to bring these deficits down once recovery is firmly established.”
Many Americans have long realized that the promise of no new or higher taxes is little more than legerdemain aimed at winning election, having heard the same promises, not all that long ago, from another man whose eyes were on that most coveted of prizes. Will this turn out to be Obama’s “Bush moment?”
