Archive for the ‘Constitution’ Category

Self-Defense Against Thugs Via the Second Amendment

Saturday, February 20th, 2010

“Thugs, crack-headed and jack-booted,” a phrase I often use when I argue the Second, refering to citizens defending themselves against common crooks and government would-be tyrants.

Mayor Bloomberg is high on the tyrant list, with his “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” campaign, and his own, apparently illegal campaign to entrap gun dealers in other states into selling guns to prohibited persons he hired for his little scam.

Now comes Gun Owners against Illegal Mayors, which has the run down on almost a dozen members of the MAIG campaign, mayors who have themselves been convicted of felonies.

There’s a reason these thugs want you disarmed, people: like all criminals, it’s a lot easier to rob you if you’re helpless.

Gun Bigotry

Monday, February 8th, 2010

Mark Bennett at Defending People thinks a client of his was discriminated against because of his race: white.

But read the facts of the case:

I had a client recently—call him Sam—who got in the law’s bad graces for some conduct involving alcohol and the brandishing of a firearm in his garage while his young daughter slept upstairs. The daughter—well-fed, well-loved, well-adjusted and well-cared-for—was never in any danger and never even knew what had happened.

Only a total idiot would think it was a good idea to take that child out of that home, but CPS was all over Sam’s case, questioning his daughter at school, filing suit against him, threatening to take her away from him and his wife. By spending a bunch of money on lawyers, Sam and his wife were able to fend off CPS and keep their very lucky child in their home.

Bennett then recounts another case where an eight year old girl starves to death because CPS repeatedly ignores signs of neglect.

In the first case, the parent was white; in the second, black.

I think there was bigotry, but not against race. My comment on DP [still awaiting moderation]:

One factor jumps out at me far more than race:

Sam’s case involved a firearm. I believe, based on many other stories I’ve read (i.e., anecdotal avidence) that CPS workers have a very strong prejudice against firearms and firearm owners.

Of course, Sam behaved irresponsibly. However, he in fact caused no harm. He very properly should have been rebuked with a fine. I think a mandatory gun safety course would be an excellent step. I might even support his gun being confiscated for a repeat offense.

But to confiscate his child? When no harm came to her or anyone else?

There is indeed prejudice here, outright bigotry. But it’s not against Sam’s melanin deficiency. It’s against his exercise of the Second Amendment.

Gunpal

Monday, February 8th, 2010

PayPal prohibits payments for transactions involving guns.

Gunpal “is an alternative to PayPal™ that does not discriminate based on the nature of your transaction, requiring only that the merchandise or services you purchase legal.”

Good on them, and I’ll try to use them everywhere I can.

Paypal? Piss off and die, or embrace the Second Amendment.

Why Defend the Indefensible?

Saturday, January 9th, 2010

At his excellent law blog Defending People, Mark Bennett answers The Question: “Why do you defend people who you know to be factually guilty?”

Actually, he answers seven times, after thoroughly dissecting the question itself. I’m going to abstract here, but you should absolutely read the whole thing.

I. The Sixth Amendment Answer

We swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Part of that Constitution, the Sixth Amendment, requires that everyone accused of a crime—not just everyone who a good lawyer thinks deserves it—have effective representation.

II. Cops lie [Scott Greenfield]. Prosecutors cheat. Juries screw up. Some laws should not exist, and other laws provide punishments that are grossly out of proportion….

If I take it upon me to decide who is guilty, it’s almost certain that sometimes my judgment would be wrong .

III. Jesus set the example—when called on to judge the woman caught “in the very act” of a capital offense, he defended her. Successfully.

IV. We all deserve at least one person on the damn planet willing to stand there next to us and fight on our behalf.

V. Any approximation of justice that the system creates comes about only because there are people fighting on both sides.

VI. The John Wayne Answer: When a person comes to me for a defense, with the vast power of the government arrayed against him, no matter what he did before he is the underdog now. I stand up for the underdog. I protect the weak from the strong. Every man needs a code to live by, and that is part of mine.

VII. Criminal defense is a way of looking at the world….

In other words, wir können nicht anders.

Read the whole thing, absolutely.

Overwhelmingly, a government unconstrained by constant challenge is guaranteed to do far more damage, to enslave and outright murder far more people, than even the most wicked of outlaws.

Section 311 of US Code Title 10, “Militia: composition and classes”

Sunday, December 27th, 2009

Randy Barnett explores the role of the unorganized militia in fighting terrorism.

According to press reports, a passenger helped subdue the terrorist who was attempting to bring down Northwest #253. This again highlights the importance of the unorganized militia in asymetric warfare. In Saved by the Militia, I offered this analysis in the wake of the success of the general militia on United Airlines #93 in defending Washington from terrorist attack on 9/11:

The characterization of these heroes as members of the militia is not just the opinion of one law professor. It is clearly stated in Federal statutes. Perhaps you will not believe me unless I quote Section 311 of US Code Title 10, entitled, “Militia: composition and classes” in its entirety (with emphases added):

“(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are —

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”

I’m occasionally guilty of saying that the National Guard is not part of the militia, because it’s part of the Army. Now I know better.

Read the rest of Barnett’s article for a partial explanation of why the unorganized militia is also crucial to the security of a free state.

Yeah, We Get That A Lot

Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

Blood In The Turnstiles:

A year ago, my native home town of Atlanta decided that people with CCW’s were ok to ride mass transit carrying their weapons.

And just like every other time the law abiding are allowed to exercise their rights, nothing happened.

It’s almost like the anti-gun forces are lying to us.

We’re Better Than You, So We Get to Tell You What To Do

Tuesday, December 15th, 2009

So those wonderful, oath-keeping, Constitution-upholding, best-of-the-best-of-the-best, testilying, batfuck crazies over at the BATFX have a guy in charge of licensing one of the two classes of tools explicitly protected by the Bill of Rights, Russell Vanderwerf.

Russ, it seems, is a hell of a nice guy and an exemplar citizen:

Saturday, December 12, 2009

ATF Gun Licensing Director Russell Vanderwerf Arrested

You might be able to make this up. But it would require a pretty disturbed mind. Where to begin. Initially being investigated for disabling the fire alarm systems in his hotel room, due to shower steam, he claimed, it was discovered he had replaced the hotel room door with a piece of plywood. The plywood contained a circular padded hole believed to be used for sexual acts. See gloryhole. Yes, it was facing the hotel hallway. It would seem he was interested in inspecting more than firearms. h/t BJ in email. And, no, I’m not making that up, either.

He serves as the director of industry operations for ATF’s Houston field office. The industry operations division is the regulatory arm of the agency, responsible for overseeing the inspection of all federal gun and explosives licensees, said ATF spokesman Drew Wade. He confirmed that Vanderwerf was in the New Orleans area on official business.

Yeah, I trust these guys to decide whether or not I’m fit to exercise my Constitutionally protected rights.

Uh huh. Sure I do.

“Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms: great convenience store, shitty government agency.”

McDonald v. Chicago Briefs

Sunday, November 22nd, 2009

I doubt this case will collect anything like the number of briefs that Heller did, but it’s going to be an interesting fight nevertheless, and the issue involved — whether or not the Fourteenth amendment means anything — actually has much broader application than the 2nd amendment fight in Heller.

Anyway, the ABA is collecting briefs here.

Via Arms and the Law.

Wood Control

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

Another sticky note for my own reference, so no comment on something that’s as ugly as anything I’ve seen.

Obamacare gives the government control over your body. This apparently gives the government control over everything you own made of wood — and that’s just for starters:

I don’t know what all is in that bill, but last night when I was researching something else I stumbled upon just one teensy provision of the bill — an amendment to the Lacey Act which received no media attention at all, and isn’t receiving any now.

This amendment deals with illegal plants — the primary thrust being illegal wood. Henceforth, all wood is to be a federally regulated, suspect substance. Either raw wood, lumber, or anything made of wood, from tables and chairs, to flooring, siding, particle board, to handles on knives, baskets, chopsticks, or even toothpicks has to have a label naming the genus and species of the tree that it came from and the country of origin. Incorrect labeling becomes a federal felony, and the law does not just apply to wood newly entering the country, but any wood that is in interstate commerce within the country. Here are some excerpts from a summary:

The Lacey Act now makes it unlawful to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce any plant, with some limited exceptions, taken in violation of the laws of a U.S. State, or any foreign law that protects plants. The Lacey Act also makes it unlawful to make or submit any false record, account or label for, or any false identification of, any plant.

The definition of the term “plant” includes “any wild member of the plant kingdom, including roots, seeds, parts, and products thereof, and including trees from either natural or planted forest stands.”

[...]

Anyone who imports into the United States, or exports out of the United States, illegally harvested plants or products made from illegally harvested plants, including timber, as well as anyone who exports, transports, sells, receives, acquires or purchases such products in the United States, may be prosecuted. In any prosecution under the Lacey Act, the burden of proof of a violation rests on the government.

[...]

Violations of Lacey Act provisions for timber and other plant products, as well as fish and wildlife, may be prosecuted through either civil or criminal enforcement actions. Regardless of any prosecution, the tainted plants may be seized and forfeited.

Everyone means everyone, which includes every reader of this blog.

[Note that the summary link is to a .gov domain, which means this is the official government summary, not some wild eyed conservative scaremonger.]

Crap. This is law now, and it’s being enforced. Gibson Guitars was raided under the Lacey Act a couple of days ago.

I can’t wait to hear what Billy Beck has to say about this.

[Fixed link. Since when was "ttp" not a valid protocol? The Internet SUX!]

Waterboarding Eric Holder With The Truth

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

Lindsay Graham (R-SC) upbraids Eric Holder over trying KSM in a civilian court:


Scott at Powerline explains why trying KSM in a civilian court is an “Insane Protocol”. He also provides a link to the actual, official policy document. [Since this looks like one of those docs that might change or fall down the memory hole, I've saved it here.]


Andy McCarthy at National Review Online identifies and answers eight lies Holder tells in his testimony.


Let me explain, for those who haven’t been paying attention or doing their homework, the difference between criminal justice and war:

In criminal justice, you seek out the individual responsible for a specific illegal act, and punish that individual for that act accordingly.

In war, you seek to punish an entire nation or other polity for acting in a way you do not like. The purpose is not to punish this or that individual for this or that act, but to bring your enemies to their knees and make them beg you to stop. The technical word for this is surrender, and an honorable victor will accept the surrender and cease making war.

KSM is not an individual committing specific illegal acts who needs to be punished. He is a member of a foreign polity, and a leader within that polity, determined to bring about our surrender. That polity is making war upon us. When we protect its warriors with the safeguards of our justice system, we are bowing down, preparing to surrender.