Category: Rights

More Gubernatorial Ass-Kicking

Legal Stuff, Resistance, Rights

I really like this trend (if it is indeed a trend):

The Kansas State Legislature overrode Governor Laura Kelly’s veto of a bill named in honor of assassinated political commentator Charlie Kirk that strengthens free speech protections on college campuses.

House Bill 2333 received two-thirds support in both chambers this month, overruling the governor’s objection. 

Part of the bill, known as the Kansas Intellectual Rights and Knowledge Act or KIRK Act, protects “expressive activities.” It deems outdoor areas “public forums for the campus community.”

“Any individual who wishes to engage in non-commercial expressive activity on campus shall be permitted to do so freely, so long as the individual’s conduct is lawful and does not materially and substantially disrupt the functioning of the postsecondary educational institution,” the act states. 

Here’s the reason for the veto:

Gov. Kelly argued the bill was unnecessary as free speech is already protected.

Yeah, just like the right to own guns is “already” protected by the Second Amendment — except where it isn’t, in states like California, New York, Illinois and other Blue shitholes.

I hate the fact that we need additional laws to underline the freedoms already supposedly guaranteed by the Constitution (like this KIRK law and the USSC’s Gruen decision);  but these are the times we live in, sadly.

And it’s safe to say that it should be so unlikely that the KIRK law should be necessary on, of all places, college campuses — except that it’s in these very institutions where free speech is most threatened, whether at the hands of radical Left students’ “counter-protests” or at the hands of radical Left college administrations.

Let’s have more KIRK laws, then, and more veto overrides of this nature.

“Bannings”

Anti-Gun Nannies, Rights

Ran into this little A.I. video SOTI, and while none of it concerns me — yet — I think there are a couple of things worth noting.

The “12 Guns Being Banned in 2026” are interesting, although none of them fall within my “I Want This Thing In My Gun Safe” parameters, mostly because they are chambered in calibers that don’t interest me (although that new Zastava M70…hmmm), too expensive (e.g. Daniel Defense) or else I’m just not interested in that type of gun (e.g. Tavor 12ga multi-tube shotgun).

However, what does interest me is that the GFW state legislators — all the usual suspects, plus Vermont (!!! WTF?) — have decided that if they can’t ban a gun just because it’s a gun, they’re going to ban it because it’s “military-specific” (like that matters), “common sporting purposes” (ditto), “concealable” (ditto) or, more worryingly, because of various features that they don’t like.  In other words, the guns are becoming too efficient and reliable, and only the military should have access to these features (again, bullshit, but it’s what they’re running with).

It’s a long video and both boring and/or irritating (#A.I.narration), but like I said, what it reveals is the ways with which the GFWs are targeting guns.  And my Virginia Readers should pay special attention because that’s the direction your state is heading if it’s not there already (ditto Colorado, a.k.a. Eastern California).

Of course, the Second Amendment Foundation will get involved at some point, and maybe a few of these abuses will reach the Supreme Court to have their pee-pees whacked;  but that’s leaving our fate in the hands of lawyers, which is always a risky proposition.

However, there may come a time when some guy (or guys) will get sick of all this bullshit and say “Come and get them” to which the state will reply “Challenge accepted” and the whole thing will end in tears.  I should point out that this is precisely the outcome these totalitarian bastards are hoping for.

Be careful out there, buy more ammo, and practice a lot.  And now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the range.

Afterthought:  I think it’s time I should look at one of those FRT (forced recoil trigger) thingies, just because I suspect that they will soon be a definite target for the GFWs.  Which is why I should get one, most probably for the FrankenPoodleShooter.

Likewise, as soon as I can buy a moderator (“silencer”) over the counter without paperwork, that too will be added to the above.  Not because I especially want one, but because they don’t want me to have one.

Un-Constitutional, Illegal And Nonsensical

Anti-Gun Nannies, Bureaucracy, Government Thugs, Rights, The Gun Thing

…and yet the National Firearms Act (NFA) is still with us, becoming evermore ridiculous, evermore illogical, and always (still) un-Constitutional.

Here’s the best history of the disgusting thing I’ve ever seen which — as with so many of the bullshit laws and bureaucracies that still bedevil us to this very day — stemmed from the diseased liberal New York mind of the sainted Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

And the Act’s very vagueness of terminology makes it almost unique among our forest of laws in its ability to turn any gun owner into an instant felon without him knowing about it until the AT-fucking-F agency thugs drag him away in chains.  And said feature alone should make it legal poison, except that the Department of (alleged) Justice is too busy fucking around with irrelevancies like the Epstein files.

Kill the NFA.  Kill it stone dead, and then abolish the ATF in toto, because the government has no business in the alcohol, tobacco and (especially) the firearms business.  I might make a teeny exception for the oft-elided “E” — explosives — part of the agency’s nomenclature, but those first three initials?  X marks the spot in the back of the neck, for each of them.

Otherwise?  Line ’em up.

Scum & Villains

Rights, Taxes and Theft

Given the state concerned, one has to wonder what John and Sam Adams (not to mention John Hancock) would have thought of this piece of theft and anti-Constitutional skulduggery (brought to my attention by Reader Mike L., who is inexplicably resident* in said state):

A Beacon Hill committee met on Monday to discuss a proposed excise tax on firearms and ammunition, aimed at enhancing public safety in Massachusetts.

The proposed bill, introduced by western Massachusetts Representative Mindy Domb, seeks to increase the excise tax on firearms and ammunition, with the revenue directed to a Public Health and Safety Fund. This fund would support community-based research, public health interventions, and services for gun violence survivors and victims’ families.

“Tragic gun deaths and catastrophic gun injuries cost the great state of Massachusetts an astounding 3.5 billion dollars each year, of which 85.4 million dollars is paid by taxpayers,” said a testifier, Matthew Nugent, during the hearing.

The proposed excise tax is set at 4.75% of the wholesale value of each firearm and individual round of ammunition. If implemented, Massachusetts would join states like California and Colorado in using gun tax revenue for violence prevention and support services.

Now I’m not proposing — what does the Left call it?  oh yeah — direct action (a.k.a. violence) should be brought to bear against the people who are supporting this un-Constitutional and illegal theft.

All I’m saying is that Sam Adams (he — and  brother  cousin John both — of Sons of Liberty fame) would by now be firing up the tar barrels and plucking a few geese, and yea even preparing a few firebrands to be tossed into some houses.  Because if they were prepared to go all fire, tar & feathers on people over a tax on paper, imagine how they’d feel about a tax on guns.

But this is modern-day Massachusetts, not the pre-Revolutionary state where the whole thing started over taxes.

More’s the pity.

*Mike, my longtime Friend & Reader:  GTFO, willya?

No Such Thing, Blondie

Government Thugs, Rights

Nobody but nobody can step on their own dick quicker than a Republican.  In this particular instance, metaphorically speaking, it was Attorney-General Pam Bondi who came out with this bullshit:

Speaking with the Trump administration Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller’s wife, Katie Miller, yesterday, Attorney General Pam Bondi decried “hate speech” and vowed to “target anyone with hate speech.”

“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech,” Bondi explained.

To quote the memorable line from the late Robert Redford’s movie The Sting:  “Try not to live up to all my expectations of you.”

One more time, with feeling:  There’s no such thing as “hate speech” — from a legal perspective.

In other words, I may say that Rep. Ilhan Omar (Communist-MN) is a foul pustule who should be whipped in the public square once per week — which I admit frankly is hateful speech, because I loathe the African-born bitch with a passion.  But if some federal badgeholder tries to arrest me for saying that, there will be gunfire.  Because what I said about the dreadful Omar is my opinion, and therefore protected by the First Amendment.

Now, if I say, “I’m going to murder that bitch Omar with my home-made bazooka next Tuesday” — yeah, that’s a threat and you’re not only welcome to come after me, you have to do so.

But “hate speech”?  Fuck that for a bowl of cherries.

Bloody hell, it just goes to show that no matter which party’s wearing the high-heeled jackboots, the outcome is always the same:  our rights get trampled.

Update:  I see that AG Blondie has been trying to “clarify” her statement.  Not buying it.  Fuck off, Pam.  Go after the real criminals — and if you don’t know who they are after all this time, GTFO and let someone better to come in and do your job.

Never Justified

Anti-Gun Nannies, Rights, The Gun Thing

I see that someone in the Golden Shower State has come to their senses:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a mandate Thursday overturning California’s “one-gun-a-month” restriction.

The Second Amendment Foundation noted the “one-gun-a-month” restriction allows law-abiding citizens to purchase only one handgun or semi-automatic centerfire rifle (or combination thereof), from a licensed dealer within a 30-day period.

Here’s the thing about this ridiculous law.

Quite apart from its prima facie  Constitutional illegality, the 30-day restriction just makes absolutely no sense — I mean, what are they trying to achieve (other than a broad restriction, of course)?  Are they trying to stop someone from arming a group or gang? (I know, nonsensical.)

As with all laws like this, it should be looked at as part of a whole.  What is intended is to make a thicket of laws like this so that the breaking thereof becomes an inevitability — and the side-benefit (to the anti-gunners) is that the people most likely to fall foul of this nonsense would be gun owners.  (We always talk about lawful or law-abiding gun owners, but what we sometimes forget is that to the anti-gun set, all gun owners are evil, and not just the criminals.)

Anyway, it’s gone away, and good riddance.  Best of all is that because of this ruling, it’s going to apply to any and all other states who have similar nonsense in their raft of laws;  and all that’s left is for the SAF guys bring suit in each of them.

Go to it, guys.

Side note:  I have more than one friend who won’t give money to any gun lobbying group like the NRA or even GOA.  But they give lots to the Second Amendment Foundation because Alan Gottlieb and his guys are doing the work where it matters most:  in the courts.

Think about it.