Category: Politics

Trying not to start the public floggings

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.

The “Revolution” Fails

Marxists, Resistance

It is, as they say, to laugh:

As predicted, the Texas Democrat legislators who fled to blue states to deny a quorum for redistricting have folded. Still, I’m not sure anyone expected them to fold this soon. 

According to ABC News, the runaways who claimed to be saving “democracy” are heading back to their home state early, claiming to have accomplished their goal of raising “awareness” about gerrymandering. That’s a very polite way of saying they failed miserably.

Yep.  This time, TXGov Abbott wasn’t messing around.

The pressure campaign put forth by Republicans was effective. That included stopping direct deposits of paychecks and promising to call multiple special sessions to keep these Texas Democrats stranded in blue states indefinitely unless they returned to provide a quorum. They were also incurring daily fines. That all started to add up for the legislators who aren’t independently wealthy, and it was just a matter of time before the donor class got tired of funding a dead end. You also have to factor in time away from family members. None of it was ever sustainable. 

But still they did it, acting like naughty little children.  And now that their beau geste  (LOL) has failed, they’re crying like little children at their failure.

Even better, the redistricting move in Texas is going to take place, was always going to take place despite all the foot-stamping and pouting.

Feckless idiots.

Self-Evident

Anti-Gun Nannies, The Gun Thing

From some guy in Arizona who gets the idea (of the Second Amendment):

Arizona state Rep. Quang Nguyen (R) used an X post to warn that an American citizenry devoid of guns would soon be a citizenry without freedom of speech and property rights too.

He noted that the Second Amendment “right to keep and bear arms” is the one which upholds and protects all the other freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights. A disarmed citizenry would put in jeopardy the ability to control one’s own property, hedged in by the Third Amendment, as well the freedom to exercise rights to privacy and security, hedged in by the Fourth Amendment.

Nguyen warned that, “A disarmed populace is more vulnerable to censorship, unlawful search and seizure, and political oppression.”

Yup, we all know that, but thankee for re-stating the point, sir.

Now here’s a graphic illustration of a non-Second Amendment society:

Never confront burglars. They could be armed. They could be high on drugs. You don’t know anything about them, except that they are in your home. And you want them out.

But don’t just lie there terrified, praying that they won’t come into your bedroom.

The law allows a householder to act in self-defense. But prowling the house is not self-defense. And keeping a weapon by your bed implies premeditated intention to commit assault.

Burglars are not looking for a fight. They just want your valuables, probably so they can sell them to get money for drugs or drink. These days, with so many young people carrying knives or machetes, it’s increasingly likely that an intruder will be armed. But even so, if you go on the attack, the law will label you as the assailant.

Well, maybe.  Maybe the burglar just wants to get your stuff.  On the other hand, maybe your stuff is not what he’s after;  he’s after your life, your wife’s life (or body), your daughter’s life (or body) or your son’s life (or body).  We can debate the point forever, but the plain fact is that the criminal’s motives are unknown to everyone except him.

We — that is, our politicians as well as the public — are aware of that fact, but it appears the British have willfully chosen to bury their heads in the sand.

And the reason that their law is more on the side of the criminal than the victim is, quite simply, because the people have been systematically disarmed by the government, so the government gets to make the decisions on behalf of the public, with the result that the nation of once-Great Britain has been turned into a nation of victims.

Thanks, but no thanks.  We’ve seen what’s happened Over There, and we want no part of it.

We uncultured rubes on this side of The Pond prefer to turn criminals into victims.  And we have the law on our side.

Moron Move

Disaster, Politics

Published: August 4, 2025 2:10pm

Trump to withhold disaster aid from cities, states that boycott Israel

Published: August 4, 2025 5:59pm

Trump admin drops Israel boycott conditions from disaster aid guidance after intense backlash

I should hope so.

It would be difficult to find a more staunch supporter of Eretz Israel than I am.  But here’s a pro tip for all politicians — and in this case, especially for The Donald:

Disaster aid is not a fucking bargaining chip.

When a flood strikes a small town in Tennessee or Arkansas, the very last thing that these wretched people should have to think about as they’re sitting on their rooftop about is their state government’s attitude towards a country on the other side of the Earth.

This was a moron move, reflected by how quickly the idea was reversed.

And as for POTUS:  start thinking before you open your yap.  We did not elect you to do this kind of bullshit.  America first;  all other countries (including Israel) can fall second, or third, or fourth.

Tricksies & Accomplices

Legal Stuff, Resistance

From Reader Mike S., news of this little reindeer game:

As Republicans in Texas move full steam ahead with a plan to redraw the state’s congressional districts, Democrats are privately mulling their options, including an expensive and legally dicey quorum break.

If they go that route, it appears they will have the backing of big-dollar Democratic donors.

By fleeing the state to deprive the Legislature of enough members to function, Democrats would each incur a fine of $500 per day and face the threat of arrest. Deep-pocketed donors within the party appear ready to cover these expenses, according to three people involved in the discussions.

The donors’ willingness to foot the bill eliminates a major deterrent to walking out — the personal financial cost — and could embolden Democrats who might otherwise hesitate.

Two people involved in the latest Democratic fundraising strategy sessions, who were granted anonymity to discuss private conversations, claim their legal teams have found a way to disburse the funds to the members but declined to provide any additional details.

Rep. Jasmine Crockett, a Dallas Democrat who was part of the 2021 quorum break, sees a path to circumvent the campaign finance rules: With minimal limits on external income, Texas lawmakers can simply accept the donations as another salary, she said. As one of the most prolific fundraisers in the U.S. House, Crockett said she’s willing to tap her donor base — and her $3.7 million war chest — to cover the expenses.

On private donor calls, members of Congress, including Rep. Greg Casar of Austin, have been making the case for high-stakes Democratic resistance, including a quorum break, according to two people familiar with the calls.

Well, yes… except:

Attorney General Ken Paxton has also called for fleeing Democrats to be arrested and offered his office’s services in “hunting down and compelling the attendance of anyone who abandons their office” by breaking quorum.

And as Reader Mike points out, the last time these assholes tried this, they were tracked down in their little out-of-state hidey-holes by the Texas Rangers, arrested and brought back to Austin.

Maybe they could go to Cuba.  They’d fit right in, especially that Commie bitch Crockett — and by the way:  that “war chest” of hers?  It’s against the law to use campaign funds in this manner.

Should be fun.  And the gerrymandered districts are going to be redrawn eventually, anyway.

Idiots.

Not-So-Greener Pastures

Immigration

I read the following article with interest:

More than half of young people have considered leaving Britain under Labour, a think tank has found.
Adults between 18-30 years old said they had “serious concerns” about housing, personal finances and their future in the UK, leaving them “overtaxed, underhoused and undervalued”.
According to The Adam Smith Institute poll, 28 per cent of young Britons are either actively planning (8 per cent) or have seriously considered (20 per cent) emigrating. A further 30 per cent have briefly considered it.

But:

The researchers found that Australia, the USA, Canada and Italy were the most popular destinations for young people considering emigrating.

Well, okay then.  Certainly, anyone looking for better prospects that they have in once-Great Britain might certainly consider the USA — although the current MAGA attitude of Americans might well stick in their craw, if they believe everything they’ve been told by the BBC et al.

But Strylia and Canuckistan?

I don’ thank so, Scooter.

There are good reasons to suspect that Down Under and the Great White Place provide, if anything, even worse prospects for the more youthful than their home country.  (Just wait till they try to find affordable accommodation in Sydney / Melbourne or Toronto / Vancouver.  Might as well go to Chelsea / Knightsbridge.)

As for the socio-political world… oy.  Both Strylia and Canuckistan almost define the term “woke” in terms of their attitude, and their respective national governments are on a par with Britishland’s when it comes to dismal economic prospects.

And finally:  I’m not sure that Murka really wants a bunch of young Brits transplanted Over Here, given that said demographic group is in thrall to working from home (WFH), wokeness and similar nonsense.  Now, if we were talking about their parents (e.g Mr. Free Market and his ilk) — now that’s a more acceptable prospect;  but those worthies have already made plans to move to Switzerland, Monaco and other exotic, low-tax or tax-free locales.

Try Italy, kids.  Just deal with the fact that you’ll have to learn to speak Italian because surprise, surprise:  not everyone wants to speak English, or is prepared to put up with people who refuse to speak anything but.  Also, I have a suspicion that your Italian peer group probably feels about their prospects in Italy in exactly the same way that you do yours in the UK.

Good luck with that.