O’Malley Gun Control Plan Dismantled
Nov 3, 2015 2016 Election, Political
As governor of Maryland Martin O’Malley pushed through gun control measures that violate the US and Maryland Constitutions and he assured the morons who follow him that this would make life better and safer. The only thing O’Malley accomplished was to make it tougher for the law abiding. Criminals in Maryland still get firearms and they still shoot people. Led by Democrats the criminals in Baltimore riot and destroy with impunity.
Martin does not dislike firearms. He was perfectly happy with all the armed State Police officers who protected him and his family. He is just not too keen on everyone else having firearms. He is a typical liberal who thinks that he is better than everyone else and that he knows how to run other people’s lives. He is wrong but in his little brain he thinks he is not only correct but that people love him and think he is brilliant.
O’Malley (or O’Moron as I like to refer to him) will unveil his anti-gun platform as he tries to out liberal the other morons running for his party’s nomination. Let us take a look at his platform and dismantle it. Each item of his plan is presented and then I will comment.
Using procurement contracts to advance gun safety by requiring manufacturers that seek federal contracts to make design changes. O’Malley says the changes will “advance gun safety and improve law enforcement’s ability to trace firearms. These include hidden serial numbers that cannot be defaced, micro-stamping, magazine disconnect mechanisms and other next-generation safety improvements.
The last thing first. Being able to track firearms is only effective for tracking those legally owned. If firearms are stolen or obtained via other illegal means they might be able to track back to an individual but not necessarily the person who used the firearm illegally. As for forcing firearms manufacturers to make design changes in order to secure government contracts, what happens if none of them do so? Suppose the gun makers decide not to make changes and not to bid on contracts for government purchases? What happens when government can’t get firearms because of this insanity? I think fewer government agents having guns is a great idea and would applaud any manufacturer who told O’Malley to pound sand. Imagine a President O’Moron {{{shudder}}} who has Secret Service without firearms because no one would buckle to governmental pressure. The government should not be using OUR money to force compliance. Imagine how O’Moron would react if a contract required a company bidding on a government contract to NOT provide abortion services in its employee health care?
Ending the federal defense of gun dealer immunity by stopping enforcement of a 2005 law that O’Malley says protects irresponsible gun dealers and manufacturers from lawsuits by victims and families of victims of gun violence
Irresponsible by whose definition? There are already laws that define how gun dealers must act and how they must conduct business. If they are doing things incorrectly then they should be fined or lose their license. But a blanket statement such as this opens the door for lawsuits based on some arbitrary idea of irresponsibility. Someone could be shot with a legally purchased firearm that was later stolen and an idiot like O’Moron would claim the dealer should have known it would get stolen so he is irresponsible and therefore subject to litigation.
But hey, let’s take this idea a little farther. The government at all levels allows the sale of tobacco and alcohol. The government should not have immunity from lawsuits by those affected by its irresponsible permission for the sale of tobacco and alcohol. The government KNOWS people will be harmed by these products and that is why there are warnings on the labels of tobacco and alcohol products. So the government is being irresponsible in allowing these items to be sold. Based on what O’Moron thinks about firearms dealers the government should not have immunity from lawsuits by those harmed by these products.
Strictly enforcing existing bans on gun ownership for domestic abusers and stalkers, to “disarm those convicted for committing domestic violence
This is a tricky one. The first thing that needs to happen is that we ensure people who did not actually commit domestic violence or stalking are not convicted or charged or discriminated against. A single incident that involves two people might be domestic violence or it might not. By all means, if a person is involved in domestic violence then that person (he or she) should not be allowed to own a firearm. But before we take away this right we need to make absolutely certain and there should be a method to regain that right if circumstances warrant it.
The reality though is we already have laws that prohibit these folks from owning firearms. If these people decide they want a firearm they will get one. No law preventing the ownership of a firearm will prevent a person who wants to get one from doing so. Protective orders and orders banning a person from owning firearms are only pieces of paper that will not prevent a person from getting and using firearms. These work no better than gun control laws because those inclined to break the law will do so. This is more of a method for government to define what a person did as domestic violence and then remove guns that way. How will government strictly enforce this as O’Moron wants? It can’t enforce the gun control laws liberals have already enacted. If they could Baltimore and Chicago would be safe places instead of shooting galleries. The best thing to do would be to ensure the victims of such violence can get and carry a firearm for protection. But O’Moron opposes this. Once again, you are not as important as he and his family.
Banning so-called “cop killer” ammunition by working to close loopholes that O’Malley’s campaign says “have made hundreds of kinds of dangerous cartridges available for sale.” The campaign says he will act in his executive capacity as president to tighten current regulations
This is one of those slippery slope deals in that he can ban “cop killer” ammunition and then define all ammo as cop killer. There are bans on the manufacture of certain types of ammo and those laws should be good enough. If manufacturers are making this ammo then they need to be dealt with. But let me be clear, if government agents are allowed to have this ammo then so should the general population. Once again O’Moron talks about tightening current legislation as if that will stop people from breaking the law. It is illegal to buy, sell, possess or use Heroin but people do so every day and no law has ever stopped that. People can buy ammo from other countries and get it in here. If we can’t stop millions of illegals from walking in we sure as hell won’t stop illegal guns and ammo from getting in (though with Obama and Holder it went out of the country instead).
A new “electronic alert system” to inform local law enforcement officials when those who are prohibited from purchasing firearms attempt to do so. The campaign says the system will be “modeled on the FBI alert system used when fugitives purchase guns” and will help law enforcement officials identify which attempted sales to prosecute
This is Mickey Mouse stuff. What happens if a person is unaware that something in his past prevents him from owning a firearm and he attempts to buy one? Would not it be more prudent for the dealer to inform the person and tell him who to contact in government to see if this can be rectified? Then a notation can be made that the person was so informed and if that person attempts to buy firearms later then the police could be notified? In fact, it might be better for the dealer to inform the police of the first attempt and that the person was notified and then for the dealer to notify law enforcement of any subsequent attempts. If the system were properly annotated and working correctly this would be quite easy. O’Moron is looking for a bigger government boondoggle to further gum up the works.
Requiring the safe storage of firearms in homes by issuing and enforcing federal rules that make clear safety standards for gun locks and safes
Here is the short story. What I do in MY house with MY property is none of the government’s business and I will not be regulated by them. The reality is there are two ways to determine if you did not secure your firearms the way people like O’Malley want you to. The first is for there to be a problem with the firearm (like a child getting it and shooting someone). The second is government coming to check. Government will NOT be checking in my house to see what I do with MY property. Responsible people do not leave firearms in an unsafe manner. Yes, we hear some stories about some kid getting a gun from under a bed and shooting himself or someone else but the story usually involves a firearm that was not legally owned by a person who should not have it. Regardless, if you want to leave a loaded shotgun in the corner of a room, that is YOUR business.
Strengthening enforcement and audits of licensed dealers to ensure that they are in compliance with the law. The campaign says this action includes “conducting background checks of gun dealer employees; ensuring that dealers who have their licenses revoked do not become unlicensed sellers without first liquidating their inventories; and using audit inspections to check dealer inventories for stolen guns
This is harassment of licensed gun dealers. They already have to comply with a mountain of laws and paperwork. They get inspected and they have to renew their licenses regularly. I am fairly sure most, if not all, of this is in place. I would also imagine that a dealer runs a serial number before purchasing a firearm so it would be unlikely that he would have a stolen one in his possession.
Martin O’Moron is an elitist who thinks that responsible people should not have firearms and should have their lives run by people like him, you know, their betters. He is a low life cretin who infringes upon the rights of law abiding citizens for political gain and so that he can control them. He is not bothered by the firearms that protect him but he does not want others to have that protection.
Given the rumors of O’Malley’s extramarital affair(s) perhaps he should spend more time taking care of his own life and less time getting in our business.
I do not like this troll and I sincerely hope he is never elected to another office. It is time for him to get a real job and earn money that did not come from the sweat of OUR brows.
To paraphrase George W Bush, you are either with the Constitution or you are against it. If you are against it then you are a domestic enemy. My oath says I have to protect against people like you, Marty….
MOLON LABE Marty, you little twit.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, elitist, gun control, liberal, lies, martin o'malley, moron, statist
What Happens If the US Defaults?
Jun 18, 2015 Political
The United States is supposed to be the world’s superpower and the dollar the world’s currency but America is unable to control its spending. Despite taking in record amounts of money the federal government continues to spend even more.
We have 18 TRILLION dollars of debt but we have over 100 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. These are things the government has promised but cannot pay for. When the day comes for those items to be paid the US will not honor the obligations because it will be unable to.
The war cry from liberals is to tax the rich more. The wealthy folks in our country pay most of the taxes. The bottom 47% of earners pay NO federal tax and often get back more than was withheld in an income redistribution scheme overseen by the IRS.
Taxing the wealthy would not solve the problem. If we confiscated 100% of the money the wealthy have the government would run out of that money in a few months. Then there would be no more to take and we would still have huge bills to pay.
China, among other nations, holds a lot of our debt. If China ever called for us to pay them everything back we would go under. The Chinese could collapse our economy, and thus our nation, and it would never have to take a hostile act to do it.
We are in serious trouble and it is getting worse. Soon, if things do not change, we will be like Greece.
The government there is looking at every possibility to solve its financial woes and that includes confiscating money from citizens and limiting their access to their own money. The US has schemes and one of them is to confiscate all the money in the various retirement plans throughout the nation. Doing so would give the government TRILLIONS of dollars to spend. It would keep us from defaulting for a while but it would leave everyone penniless. We would all be wards of the state.
Nanny state types will insist it is for the greater good and that the money confiscated can pay bills and be used to evenly pay every person a retirement. It would allow them to redistribute to the poor who have little or no retirement money saved while forcing those who saved to accept small amounts and live meager lives in retirement.
This of course assumes that the public will not revolt and stop this from happening by any means possible. That is a distinct possibility since people do not like their money to be screwed with. The poor who stand to gain will likely support it as will politicians who want to enslave even more people to the government plantation. Those who stand to lose will likely not take any action lying down.
The unrest will make for an environment where any enemy can take advantage and start trouble.
This all because our government can’t live within our means. This because our government insists on spending money on things that are not authorized by the Constitution. This because the tax system is screwed up and complicated and because the money that is confiscated from the people of the states is held over the heads of the states to gain compliance with ever increasing federal rule.
We need to abolish the IRS, change to a simpler tax system where EVERY wage earner pays (and we all pay the same percentage) and we need to harness the out of control government to force it to only spend money on things it is allowed to spend on.
Troubling times are coming and we will all pay a heavy price for the things our arrogant government is doing.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: arrogance, constitution, default, founders, irs, lies, tax laws
More Backdoor Gun Control
Feb 15, 2015 Political, Second Amendment
An article at the Shooter’s Log (Cheaper Than Dirt’s Blog) describes how Obama and his minions will control guns by outlawing certain ammunition.
From the article…
It is doubtful that anyone reading this article will truly be surprised that Obama and his cronies in key government posts are trying to once again de facto suppress our Second Amendment rights. They were not able to make it happen through the legislature, but Obama has his phone and his pen. Currently, it seems the President is using both to target gun owners, specifically owners of AR-15s. If you can’t outlaw the guns, get rid of the ammunition.
Read the rest of the article here
They will do all they can to circumvent the Constitution. Obama has a pen and he is not afraid to use it.
The government has lots of the outlawed ammunition (they are not supposed to have it if we can’t) so that is where we will have to get it should the need arise. We might have to shop at their armories.
Our Founders fought a revolution over a lot less…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: ammunition, backdoor gun control, constitution, usurper
GOP Is Not Shutting Down DHS
Feb 14, 2015 Political
Barack Obama and the Democrats are.
The last budget deal funded everything except the DHS through the end of the fiscal year (ends 30 September 2015). DHS was funded through the end of February because of one thing and that is Barack Obama’s unlawful Executive Order on illegal immigrants. Obama is moving forward with his plan to allow millions of illegals to receive some sort of legal status and of course, all the benefits that American taxpayers can provide.
The Republicans funded DHS short term so they could work the issue out. Democrats do not want to work things out and are now crying about the things they used to do and are doing the things they used to cry about.
Democrats say the DHS should not be held hostage because of immigration and that the issue should be a separate issue in a separate bill. Really? They loved to put bad things in must pass bills to force Republicans to vote for them when they were in charge.
They are also filibustering in the Senate. They hated it when Republicans did so and decried the party of NO. Now they are the party of NO and are doing the very thing they said was wrong to do.
I have no problems with either party using whatever parliamentary procedures they can legally use. This is how politics work. But it is hypocritical for either party to do one thing and cry later when the same thing is done by “the other guy.”
As far as I am concerned they can shut down the DHS until Obama and his illegal actions are stopped. We did not have a DHS prior to 2001 and we survived up until then. Shut them down for as long as it takes to force Obama to stop violating his oath and OUR Constitution.
Nancy Pelosi is telling people what is right and wrong with all of this as if she actually has a clue. She lacks a brain and should be in jail for her illegal actions and for violating her oath.
Pelosi is upset at short term continuing resolutions and says they are not the way to do things. Her party used CRs for years because they never passed a budget. They always let things get to the brink of disaster and then forced votes in the middle of the night or during the holidays in order to coerce people to pass bills no matter how bad they were. She is also as responsible as anyone for the number of CRs that have been used in years past.
Shut up Nancy. No one wants to hear what comes out of your mouth because it has no brain to connect to and if it did it would be a mush filled liberal brain that is devoid of logic or intelligence.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, Democrats, dhs, executive action, illegal immigrants, lawless, lies, Obama, Pelosi
They Don’t Like It When It’s Them
Jan 26, 2015 Commentary
The police have no problem putting GPS trackers on cars without a warrant. They have no problem targeting people who have a concealed carry permit when they drive through an anti gun state. They have no issue using special devices to look through walls without a warrant (and mislead in their reports) and they have no problem driving around with license plate readers to see if you are a wanted person. They have no issue infiltrating group meetings to see what people are doing and hear what they are saying.
They always defend their actions as a matter of public safety. The logical among us would say that if this is the case then get a warrant when one is required because if it is so important the judge will agree with you.
While the police might not bat an eye at tracking you they are none too happy when they are the ones whose whereabouts are known.
There is a phone app that allows people to report, and others to read, where police officers are located.
According to a report at Yahoo, Sheriffs are campaigning to have Google turn the feature off. The police are worried that the app showing their locations make them targets for those who might want to do them harm.
There is no reported incident of that happening but officers say it is only a matter of time.
So what we have here is some officers (and how many is not disclosed in the story) upset that people are tracking them.
The thing is, they are public figures and as far as I know there is no law saying the public can’t disclose where they are. There is certainly no need for a citizen to get a warrant to track police officers.
But there is a certain document called the Constitution that protects the citizens from the actions police officers engage in each and every day.
This is not to say that some of the work they do is not important but if it is then they need to obtain warrants when those are required.
I have no sympathy for a group of people who have no issue illegally monitoring people and then whine when they are being legally tracked.
Suck it up guys. Now you know how it feels.
Then again, they might just be unhappy they are losing revenue because people know where they are and can avoid them or slow down, as the case may be.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, google, police, revenue, tracking app