Surprise: Democrats Admit That Their “Assault Weapons” Ban Harms Law Abiding Citizens

By William Teach September 12, 2019 – 8:29 am

Democrats are having a bit of an issue getting their “assault weapons” ban to the floor, all while a main sponsor explains what it would really do

Support erodes for a ban on assault weapons

As Democrats make an aggressive push for new gun control legislation, they have made a calculated decision to stop short of pursuing their most ambitious goal: an assault weapons ban.

The overwhelming majority of House Democrats — 211, seven shy of the 218 needed for passage — are co-sponsoring legislation to ban military-style semi-automatic weapons, similar to the ban in effect from 1994 to 2004. But some centrist Democrats remain skittish about any proposal that keeps firearms from law-abiding citizens — a frequent charge against Democrats by Republicans and gun rights groups — making a ban politically risky for moderates in Trump-friendly districts. In the Senate, it draws less support.

The split reveals just how complicated gun politics remain inside the Democratic Party, even as mass shootings are terrorizing the nation and the Twitter hashtag #DoSomething has captured the mounting public demands for Congress to act.

“A frequent charge against Democrats”

“Let’s be honest,” said Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island, the sponsor of the current assault weapons measure. “Every other bill that we’ve done tries to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. This is the one piece of legislation that keeps a particular weapon out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. A lot of people have enormous objections to that.”

So, it is about taking weapons away from law abiding citizens. But, wait, I thought any push for a new ban wouldn’t affect current owners? No? Isn’t that what they tell us? That this bill would simply outlaw the new sales of the hundreds of firearm models (the 1994 ban only banned 19)? It sounds like they are trying to take them away from citizens.

(The 1994 assault weapons ban) also outlawed magazines that could hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, while allowing people who already had such weapons to keep them. But it had a sunset provision, and Congress refused to renew it when it expired in 2004, in part because Democrats were nervous that it could cost them reelection.

What happens when you try and actually ban magazines that hold more than 10 round and take them away from citizens?

Not an exageration

A New Jersey State Police spokesman said not a single large-capacity magazine has been turned in since the law went into effect nearly nine months ago. Residents can also bring them to their local police departments.

Remember, Australia has only seen about 20% of weapons turned in from their ban, and New Zealand isn’t seeing that many turned in.

Read: Surprise: Democrats Admit That Their “Assault Weapons” Ban Harms Law Abiding Citizens »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

HotCold Take: 9/11 Took Focus Away From ‘Climate Change’, Other SJW Things

By William Teach September 11, 2019 – 4:44 pm

Over at the NY Times, which has almost no coverage of September 11th, despite being in one of 3 cities that saw specific damage from the attacks (not too mention where all the murdered people were from), Omer Aziz writes what you think might be one of those “Islamophobia” pieces, complaining about people being mean to him because Muslim extremists attacked America that day, based on the headline and subhead

The World 9/11 Took From Us
I’m still mourning the life I lived before I learned that I was different.

It actually doesn’t really go down those roads, except very lightly. Here’s where it does end up going deep in the piece

There was a hidden cost to all this enormous energy expended on war and bombings. Not just the refugees or the cages or the guarantee of tomorrow’s terrorists. Not just the racism and xenophobia internalized by brown-skinned children who became adults in the shadows of this mass tragedy. All the policy focus on war meant there was too little time spent on the cataclysmic challenges of the 21st century: climate change and wealth inequality, both of which will plague our generation long after the warmongers have disappeared.

There were a few other hot-takes, such as the “Bush lied” meme, but, seriously, dragging ‘climate change’ into this is just stupid, along with the other stuff. Aziz does try to soften that blow

This is not to exculpate the terrorists or their ideology. For them, I reserve a special fury, just as their actions induce in me a special shame. When I think of Islamists monopolizing and weaponizing a great religion, I am filled with rage — rage at the audacity to shout Allah’s name while sending innocent people to their deaths; rage at the perversion of so many minds by their religious leaders; rage at the reality of living in a brown body that is stereotyped, misperceived and disfigured beyond my recognition — and there is nothing I can do to save it. This is the world Sept. 11 gave us.

Whoops, some Islamophobia, which seems to make him more upset than his co-religionists being murderous nutjobs.

Read: HotCold Take: 9/11 Took Focus Away From ‘Climate Change’, Other SJW Things »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Barking Moonbats, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 11, 2019 – 1:00 pm

….the awesome American flag, you might just be a Patriot

Skipping the normal today for September 11th, so, the blogs of the day with 9/11 posts (at the time of writing this early am) are

Never Forget.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in 2996, If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Trump Wants To Take On Homelessness, And, Of Course, That’s a Bad Thing

By William Teach September 11, 2019 – 10:56 am

It’s mostly Democratic Party run cities that are having massive problems with homelessness, especially in places like San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Los Angeles, and others. So, hottakes abound. Here’s the LA Times

Editorial: Surprise! Trump wants to help L.A.’s homeless by cracking down on them

Everyone in Los Angeles County knows how pervasive and intractable a problem homelessness is. Even as we increase the number of shelter beds and build permanent supportive housing and dispense rental subsidies and provide all manner of other services, it’s not enough to stanch the flow of newly homeless people onto the sidewalks.

So the arrival this week of a group of officials from the Trump administration saying they want to learn about homelessness ought to be a hopeful sign. It should be a good thing that the federal government, with all its experts and money and other resources, is interested and wants to help. (snip)

But, sadly, help is not what we’ve come to expect from the Trump administration. The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the president wants to conduct a sweeping “crackdown” on California’s homeless, razing encampments and moving homeless people into “government-backed facilities.” A Trump spokesman said that the president blames “liberal policies of overregulation, excessive taxation, and poor public service delivery” for homelessness and poverty in California, which he has called “a disgrace.”

So, giving them a roof over their head, beds, clean clothes, and food is Bad because Trump wants to help.

(NY Times) Three mayors — Libby Schaaf of Oakland, Sam Liccardo of San Jose and Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento — said they saw the administration’s foray into the state’s homelessness crisis as 2020 presidential politics.

“Homelessness is not a partisan issue and we shouldn’t make it one,” Mr. Liccardo said. “Both Democrats and Republicans are dying on our streets.”

But the ballooning crisis in the state — the number of homeless people in San Jose, for example, is up by 42 percent from two years ago — has happened on the Democrats’ watch and Mr. Trump appears to see political vulnerability for them in the issue.

Or, perhaps Trump cares that these shithole liberal cities are failing their residents and wants to actually help. Esquire’s headline/subhead is

Trump’s Sudden Interest in California’s Homeless Is a 2020 Campaign Tactic, Plain and Simple
The rubes at the rallies love horror stories about The Big Bad Cities and The Big Bad People who live there.

Media Matters For Amerika goes with conspiracy

Fox News has spent months demonizing homelessness in California. Now Trump wants a major crackdown.

Deranged

Read: Trump Wants To Take On Homelessness, And, Of Course, That’s a Bad Thing »

Posted in Democrats, Donald Trump, Unhinged Tools | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Tackle Eco-Anxiety And Hotcoldwetdry At The Same Time

By William Teach September 11, 2019 – 8:03 am

Small, tiny, minuscule acts can totally help soothe their nuttbaggery, you know

Tackling eco-anxiety and climate change one small act at a time

“I’m just one person. There’s nothing I can do.”

It’s an excuse Jessica Correa hears often. But it’s a mindset she hopes to change as she travels across the country this fall to offer hope in a world sometimes filled with despair.

Correa, founder of Random Acts of Green, says she understands the anxiety, frustration and helplessness Canadians are feeling as they witness the devastating impact climate change is having on the planet every day. And the weight of that burden can often times feel overwhelming.

But there are lots of ways individuals can make a difference, she says, even if they are feeling they are not doing enough.

“All of those small things can have a large impact,” says Correa.

Random Acts of Green (RAOG), a Canadian social enterprise dedicated to encouraging participation in “green acts” that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, helps connect the dots between one person doing something to the other hundreds of thousands of people taking action – showing them that there is a critical mass of individuals that are all working toward collective change.

“We aren’t asking a handful of people to be completely perfect, rather we are asking the 37 million people living in Canada to incorporate small changes in their lives, which add up to a big collective impact,” says Correa.

See, climate cultists can download an app

App users can log and track their Green Acts – actions such as carpooling, composting, washing their laundry in cold water, and refusing single-use plastic items. Those acts can earn users green points that can be redeemed for real-world discounts with participating business partners, like restaurants.

Strange, nothing about giving up their own use of fossil fuels, paying tens of thousands for solar panels on their homes, on moving into a tiny home. On getting rid of ice makers, line drying their clothes, and so many of the big things.

She says each person needs to find the actions and approach that best suit their preference and lifestyle; that way, their actions will be ones that are more sustainable. She says the impacts of climate change simply can’t be ignored and people need to take ownership in making changes.

On that, she’s right, Warmists do need to practice what they preach. But, other than token measures, that doesn’t happen. And they’re all still nuts.

Read: Warmists Tackle Eco-Anxiety And Hotcoldwetdry At The Same Time »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Senator Booker Introduces Bill Requiring Federal License For Lawful Gun Owners

By William Teach September 11, 2019 – 7:48 am

What could possibly go wrong with something like this?

Booker introduces bill requiring gun owners get a federal license

Legislation requiring gun owners to receive a federal license every five years was introduced Tuesday by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, who has made gun safety a major issue during his campaign for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

“This bill is based on a very simple concept – if you need a license to drive a car, you should need a license to buy and possess a gun,” said Booker, who first proposed mandatory gun licensing in May.

Booker’s bill would require would-be gun owners to pass a firearm safety training course, undergo a criminal background check and provide fingerprints. The license would be valid for five years after which time the applicant must pass another safety course and another background check.

In addition, applicants must submit the make, model and serial number of the gun they want to buy, as well as the name of person they are buying or receiving the weapon from.

There’s quite a bit to unpack, even getting beyond the notion that driving is not a Right. You also do not need a federal license to drive, and most licenses are good for more than 5 years. Law abiding citizens already go through a background check, as required by law from any federally licensed firearms dealer (so, almost every transaction). Now they want fingerprints? Is he saying that all law abiding citizens are criminals? Strange how this doesn’t touch on the use of firearms by actual criminals. Just law abiding citizens. I’m not necessarily against a safety course, but, how hard might they make it, thereby making sure most do not pass it? What if the personal is literally buying, say, a bolt action rifle for hunting? Weren’t the gun grabbers good with rifles for hunting? No?

How many will be denied said permit for Reasons? Much like was occurring in Washington, D.C., which led to the Heller decision? What happen’s when mission creep slips in by leftist bureaucrats? And Dem controlled White House and Congress makes the permits more restrictive? How much will the license be? There’s no specific details on it yet, as the text of the bill is not up yet, nor does he include it on his official Senate page.

Then we come to registration of firearms, so the government knows who has what and where, making it that much easier to confiscate, through Red Flags and mass forced turnins/buybacks and/or straight confiscation. Will current firearms owners be forced to get said license and register their weapon? My money would be on “yes.”

Further, can Senator Spartacus explain how this would stop criminals from using firearms in the commission of a crime, rather than just causing problems for people wanting firearms for hunting, protection, and simply because they are fun to shoot? As someone in the comments at the article writes (and there are many more similar)

Sooooo let’s say someone registers their gun, passes their safety course and gets their federal license. Then they go on a mass shooting. How did this help? Or a criminal who cannot have guns illegally obtains one and goes on a mass shooting. How did this help or prevent anything? So you want to affect the law abiding citizens on something that comprises of less than >1% of all gun homicides. But not a single bill to curb CRIMINALS who shoot up our inner city streets daily that comprises of most of the gun homicides.

It has zero change of passing right now, not with Trump in office and the Senate controlled by Republicans. And something like this will energize Republicans to get out the vote in 2020. Interestingly, Booker also opposes ID for voting. As someone else writes “I should not need the governments permission to exercise my constitutionally guaranteed right.” Seriously, Cory, how about a law which requires a federal permit for free speech, practicing your religion, petitioning for redress of grievance, and protesting peaceably? That would be just as constitutional.

Read: Senator Booker Introduces Bill Requiring Federal License For Lawful Gun Owners »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

9/11 At Eighteen Years: Remembering Those Lost

By William Teach September 11, 2019 – 7:14 am

As I have done every year since the 5th anniversary of September 11th, I remember two wonderful individuals, Brook Jackman and Andrew Golkin, who I’ll never have a possible chance to meet and converse with, due to 19 murderous Islamist terrorists and their superiors, who attacked our country on that fateful day.

Read More »

Read: 9/11 At Eighteen Years: Remembering Those Lost »

Posted in 2996 | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

Hot Idea: Tax Companies Which Replace Workers With Robots

By William Teach September 10, 2019 – 3:19 pm

So:

  1. Artificially increase payroll cost through unrealistic, SJW minimum wage raises
  2. Companies replace workers with automation to stay in business
  3. Tax those companies

Is there anything that Democrats do not want to tax?

Fortunately, we get a new federal agency to deal with this! From the screed

To start, my plan calls for a new federal agency, the Federal Automation and Worker Protection Agency (FAWPA), to oversee automation and safeguard jobs and communities.

FAWPA would create a permitting process for any company seeking to increase automation that would displace workers. Approval of those plans would be conditioned on protecting workers; if their jobs are eliminated through automation, the company would be required to offer their workers new jobs with equal pay, or a severance package in line with their tenure at the company.

Additionally, my plan would close tax loopholes worth hundreds of billions of dollars for corporations that invest in automation and then often deduct it on their taxes, even if they know that their “investment” will likely destroy their employees’ jobs.

Lastly, my proposal would institute a “robot tax” on large companies that eliminate jobs through increased automation and fail to provide adequate replacement jobs. They’d be required to pay five years of payroll taxes up front for each employee eliminated. That revenue would go right into a new generation of labor-intensive, high-employment infrastructure projects and new jobs in areas such as health care and green energy that would provide new employment. Displaced workers would be guaranteed new jobs created in these fields at comparable salaries.

Nice! So, Companies will no longer be able to make business decisions without the approval of The People’s Committee On Robots. This will work out well, right?

Read: Hot Idea: Tax Companies Which Replace Workers With Robots »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 10, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful big city which everyone could live in so Everyone Else’s cars could be banned, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on NASCAR taking a left turn on guns.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

UN Claims Human Rights Violations From ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach September 10, 2019 – 10:34 am

The United Nations, comprised of numerous hardcore dictators, is Concerned

UN sounds alarm over climate change’s impact on human rights

Climate change is not only having a devastating impact on the environments we live in, but also on respect for human rights globally, the UN warned Monday, urging collective action.

UN rights chief Michelle Bachelet cited the civil wars sparked by a warming planet and the plight of indigenous people in an Amazon ravaged by wildfires and rampant deforestation.

She also denounced attacks on environmental activists, particularly in Latin America, and the abuse aimed at high-profile figures such as teenage campaigner Greta Thunberg.

“The world has never seen a threat to human rights of this scope,” she told the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Wow, I had no idea that civic wars didn’t happen and people weren’t mean before CO2 went above 350ppm. We can solve this with a tax, you know.

“The economies of all nations, the institutional, political, social and cultural fabric of every state, and the rights of all your people, and future generations, will be impacted” by climate change, she warned.

Low-lying small island states like the Bahamas, which are heavily impacted by climate change, are quickly seeing rights to water, sanitation, health, food, work and adequate housing, she warned. She called for international action to mitigate the impact there.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights also denounced the “drastic acceleration of deforestation of the Amazon.

Also the United Nations

Unbelievable! Venezuela’s dictatorship is about to win a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council | Opinion

This is no joke: Venezuela — the most repressive regime in the Americas since the days of Argentina and Chile’s military dictatorships in the 1970s — is expected to win a seat at the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Council.

Never mind that, according to the United Nations’ own High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro’s death squads are responsible for more than 6,800 extrajudicial killings just between January 2018 and May 2019.

In addition, the U.N. report cites widespread use of torture against political prisoners, including electric shocks, suffocation with plastic bags and sexual violence. There were at least 2,000 political arrests in the first five months of this year. There were 720 political prisoners in May, Bachelet’s report said.

I’m sure what Maduro is doing is the fault of carbon pollution, right?

Read: UN Claims Human Rights Violations From ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming, UN | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove