Say, What Does It Take To Ban All Semi-Automatic Rifles?

By William Teach March 24, 2019 – 8:31 am

The gun grabbers keep exposing their true agenda on firearms. When you look at abortion, it isn’t about making them “safe and rare”, it’s about allowing them unfettered, no restrictions, right up birth to right after birth. With firearms, it’s not about making it more safe, it really is about disarmament

From the link

New Zealand banned semi-automatic rifles this week, and made the ban effective immediately to prevent “stockpiling of weapons while the legislation is being drafted.” The Kiwis are apparently not big on the “hopes and prayers” mantra that the U.S. Congress adopts after each gun massacre.

It’s easy to be dispirited by the cravenness of conservative politicians, and by the frequency of American gun deaths. Yet those failures obscure a key development in U.S. gun politics: These are glory days for the gun-safety movement.

Hey, remember when news outlets and their opinion sections were outraged by Trump using his executive power on several things, such as building a border wall? I wonder how they would feel if he banned most abortions by executive fiat?

That momentum continues. In Washington, the House of Representatives, flush with new Democratic members who campaigned on gun regulation, passed a universal background check bill in February. Multiple inquiriesinto the National Rifle Association’s political activities and Russia connections are under way in Congress, with the NRA clearly on the defensive.

Huh. So, using the power of the federal government to investigate a private organization in order to destroy them.

The (Supreme) court made seismic pronouncements on guns in 2008 and 2010, establishing first the individual right to firearms, and then requiring states to recognize that right via the 14th Amendment. Then the court beat a retreat, declining to further define the scope of the Second Amendment.

Can semi-automatic rifles be banned? Does the Second Amendment guarantee the right to carry a firearm in a public place? The court opted not to clarify such questions. It may now, removing gun regulation from the heated political arena and declaring victory — or perhaps a series of victories — for gun-rights forces.

I thought they had been talking about the scary looking assault rifles, which are now apparently weapons of war. Yet, writer Francis Wilkinson casually mentions banning all semi-automatic rifles, which would take away all rifles used for things like hunting.

Anyhow, what would it take to do like New Zealand? Gutting the Bill of Rights, for one thing. Some of the Twitter responses

Yeah, there is that. And you have to wonder just how Democrats would make it happen. Would the police and military cooperate in this un-Constitutional scheme?

Read: Say, What Does It Take To Ban All Semi-Automatic Rifles? »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Current Affairs | 20 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Pleads For Democrats To Stop Being Unhinged Nutters

By William Teach March 23, 2019 – 4:01 pm

Good luck with this bit of pleading, Dana Milbank

Democrats, please don’t do this

Watch in slow motion as Democrats, goaded by the media, conspire to reelect President Trump:

Voters care about the economy and making education and health care affordable. And so Democrats are talking about . . . abolishing the electoral college? (snip through the various idiots yammering about this)

Naturally, Trump seized the opportunity. “The Democrats are getting very ‘strange’,” he tweeted Wednesday. “Actually, you’ve got to win it at the Ballot Box!”

Just like that, another Democratic litmus test was born. Encouraged by left-wing activists and the media, Democrats are performing acid tests like lab technicians. While the rest of the country built March Madness brackets, Democrats, in their own madness, put themselves in boxes, supporting proposals that are impossible, extreme or oversimplified: Medicare-for-all. A Green New Deal. Guaranteed jobs for all. Impeachment. Reparations to African Americans. Packing the Supreme Court. Late-term abortion. Banning PAC contributions. Abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Legalizing marijuana. Eliminating the filibuster. Opposing all Trump judicial nominees. Boycotting the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference. Abolishing the electoral college.

Many of these have merit. The problem is that they have become a battery of binary tests of ideological purity — allowing Trump to caricature Democrats as extremist.

But, they dug this hole of extremism, and keep expanding it. Remember when we thought Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer were the extreme left? When John Conyers was hold basement impeachment hearings on Bush 43? Now the party has become that of AOC and Ilhan Omar.

Read: Washington Post Pleads For Democrats To Stop Being Unhinged Nutters »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 22 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 23, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful low carbon bike which should be forced on everyone else, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on Dems in denial on Mueller report.

Doubleshot under the fold, so, see neo-neocon, with a post musing on the Electoral College.

Read More »

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Open Borders Washington To Expand Sanctuary State Laws

By William Teach March 23, 2019 – 10:30 am

If only the state cared as much about all the homeless streaming into their state and especially cities like Seattle as the did with illegal aliens

Expanded sanctuary state rules advance in Washington

A proposal to expand Washington state’s existing sanctuary state rules is moving forward in the Legislature, potentially strengthening an existing wall of West Coast states with such policies.

The bill, from Mercer Island Democratic Sen. Lisa Wellman, would limit the ability of police to inquire about immigration status in noncriminal situations. It would also require schools, courthouses and other government facilities to adopt rules minimizing the risk of being used as staging grounds for immigration stops, along with other protections

The bill had a public hearing Friday in the House. It previously passed the Senate.

At the hearing, Wellman said the measure would protect the state’s workforce in the agriculture, hospitality and high-tech sectors.

“We have 30 percent of Microsoft here on visas,” Wellman said in an interview before the hearing. At the same time, she said, “You can’t open a hotel if you don’t have immigrants in back-of-house.”

The bill would also prohibit state and local police from passing immigration status information to federal authorities unless required by law.

But, ICE doesn’t really go after those on visas, unless they have broken laws. It’s a cute way to conflate legal with illegal immigration. Regardless, they can pass these laws all they want, and all ICE will do is go to more courthouses and government buildings – excluding schools, which ICE has a policy of non-intervention – to detain illegals, which are a lot safer for the agents.

The protections would put Washington on par with – and in some areas beyond – Oregon and California, both of which have adopted their own sanctuary state policies.

Two other states that are having massive issues with homelessness. And which protect illegal aliens at the expense of legal citizens.

Read: Open Borders Washington To Expand Sanctuary State Laws »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Multiple Democrat AGs File Briefs In Support Of ‘Climate Change’ Lawsuit

By William Teach March 23, 2019 – 7:27 am

If only there was something they could do themselves

AG Becerra Files Brief in Support of Lawsuit by Oakland and SF Communities to Hold Oil and Coal Companies Accountable for Costs of Sea-Level Rise

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, leading a multistate coalition, today filed an amicus brief supporting the city of Oakland and the city and county of San Francisco in their lawsuit, City of Oakland and City and County of San Francisco. v. BP, et al. The suit seeks to hold petroleum and coal companies accountable for actions contributing to climate change and the resulting harms from sea-level rise and other effects.

“Our states and local governments protect the welfare of our residents by holding accountable those who harm our communities,” said Attorney General Becerra. “Companies that reap the benefits of fossil fuels intensify the effects of global warming. We ask the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to allow our local governments to stand up for Americans who suffer the costs of climate change.” (snip)

In September 2017, the City of Oakland brought its lawsuit against BP, et al, in Alameda County Superior Court. The same day, San Francisco city and county brought their lawsuit against the oil companies in San Francisco County Superior Court. In October, the oil companies successfully transferred the cases from state court to federal court. In February 2018, the federal district court ruled against the localities requests to have their cases heard in state court. In June, the federal court dismissed both cases. In August, the localities appealed in the Ninth Circuit, and the two cases were combined. In the amicus brief supporting the localities, the Attorneys General assert that the federal district court’s decisions not to send the cases back to state court and the dismissals should be reversed. (snip)

Joining Attorney General Becerra in filing the brief are the Attorneys General of Connecticut, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

A good question was raised

https://twitter.com/nerdynel17/status/1108704585462530053

If fossil fuels are so bad, why do all these ‘climate change’ believing cities, counties, and states keep building and maintaining roads? Fossil fueled machines are used to build and maintain roads that fossil fueled vehicles drive on. Perhaps folks like AG’s James and Becerra should sue to stop all construction. Immediate action!

Of course, this is all really about the money and power. They were upset that the jurisdictions weren’t able to sue fossil fuels companies in a shakedown attempt.

Read: Multiple Democrat AGs File Briefs In Support Of ‘Climate Change’ Lawsuit »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Now That Mueller Report Is Done, Hot Takes Abound

By William Teach March 23, 2019 – 7:06 am

CNN even noted that this is all a victory for President Trump. Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow were among many in the Credentialed Media that melted down, as did Rep Eric Swalwell. And we have a Narrative forming

Here’s the Washington Post Editorial Board

Mueller has submitted his report. Now Barr must share it with the rest of us.

IT WAS the announcement that Washington has awaited for nearly two long, tweet-filled years: Attorney General William P. Barr told Congress on Friday that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has completed his report on Russia’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election. The report is now on Mr. Barr’s desk. The question is how much of it will move from there into the hands of Congress and the public.

Though Friday’s announcement did not reveal the report’s contents, Mueller biographer Garrett M. Graff noted that there is significance in the fact that the special counsel was able to complete it relatively unhindered, and that the White House did not attempt a Nixonian purge at the Justice Department. “We shouldn’t have to celebrate something as basic as this, but it’s a sign that our system, our rule of law, and our democracy is holding — for now,” Mr. Graff said.

For now, indeed. As Mr. Barr considers what to release publicly, he must keep in mind that the Mueller inquiry is no ordinary investigation. Typically, the Justice Department is wary of revealing investigative information that did not lead to an indictment. This is the right instinct: It guards against law enforcement dragging people through the mud when prosecutors do not have enough evidence to charge them formally. But an attack on the country’s democracy — and senior officials’ response — is a national concern with unusual importance to the country’s politics and policy. Part of the point is to educate the public and reform the law to better prepare for further foreign intrusions. Mr. Mueller’s conclusions and supporting evidence must be released.

You are seeing this same thing around the left leaning opinion pages and editorials, which all seem to be the same: they, like 2020 Democrat presidential candidates, are positioning that if the full report is not released, and released quickly, it is a coverup and a “threat to our democracy.” Even though the law, as mentioned in the 3rd paragraph in the above excerpt, is meant to protect people who were investigated but found to have done nothing wrong. Kinda the way our justice system works.

Seriously, you have Adam Schiff freaking outfreaking out and stating he’ll subpoena Mueller, since he apparently knows that there is nothing in the report to support the Russia Russia Russia narrative. So far, there have been zero indictments of US citizens for collusion or anything related to the RRR narrative, but Dems are promising to continue investigating in the House. And they will be helping Trump win in 2020.

Read: Now That Mueller Report Is Done, Hot Takes Abound »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, Donald Trump | 114 Comments | Trackback URL

AOC Is Bummed That The Green Deal Narrative Is Being Manipulated Or Something

By William Teach March 22, 2019 – 8:21 pm

When you release something as bad as the Green New Deal, what do you expect? Hilariously, Fox puts this in the “Entertainment” section

AOC defends Green New Deal, says narrative being ‘manipulated’ by Trump, other critics

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., appeared on a late-night comedy talk show Thursday night but was stone-cold serious in her defense of the Green New Deal, the cornerstone of her progressive agenda.

When asked by “Late Night” host Seth Meyers if President Trump’s claims that “cows farting” and “hamburgers” would be outlawed were true, Ocasio-Cortez firmly answered “No.”

“I think it’s good to see how these narratives are manipulated,” Ocasio-Cortez said, “because they’re trying to say that the Green New Deal is about what we have to give up, what we have to cut back on, when in fact the Green New Deal itself is resolution to be more expansive.

Here it comes

“It is to be able to generate more,” she continued, “and to make sure that we’re investing in working-class Americans so that we all can afford to have more in life, so that an affordable apartment isn’t a dream but a norm and that health care is a right and not a privilege.”

The self-described Democratic socialist stressed that the Green New Deal she introduced in February “is not a bill,” but a “resolution” that doesn’t require the president’s signature.

If we passed a resolution in the House, it doesn’t go into the Senate and it doesn’t go to the president,” she explained. “It is a House resolution. It is a declaration. It is an intentional, vision document. … Listen, if we’re going to make progress, we need to declare our North Star, and our North Star is 100 percent renewable energy, it’s Medicare For All, it’s tuition-free public colleges, it’s investing in technology and renewable resources and electric vehicles. … The resolution of the Green New Deal is the vision of what we need to accomplish in the next ten years.”

I thought it was about ‘climate change’? No?

BTW, when is she going to force the House to vote on this resolution?

Read: AOC Is Bummed That The Green Deal Narrative Is Being Manipulated Or Something »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach March 22, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is an area being flooded from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with a post on New Zealanders being asked to wear the trappings of Islam today.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 52 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: ICE Sets New Record For Nailing “Non-Criminal” Illegals

By William Teach March 22, 2019 – 10:29 am

This state of affairs has made the Open Borders advocates very upset

ICE Sets New Record for Being Awful

New data released by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has revealed that arrests of undocumented immigrants with no criminal history are at an all time high, according to USA Today.

In December, only 63.5 percent of undocumented people arrested by ICE had a criminal record, the lowest number since the agency began keeping track of the data in 2012. This means that 36.5 percent of ICE arrests in December were of people who have committed no crime other than entering the country illegally.

These numbers runs counter to the narrative, frequently pushed by President Trump, that immigration agencies are going after dangerous criminals.

This is a good thing, actually, because detention of illegals involved in hard crimes are up, and ICE has stepped up catching those who are just in the country illegally, which is also a crime, but havent engaged in other serious crimes. That we know about.

“We’re wasting resources deporting a lot of people who are assets to their communities who have families and mortgages and careers and car notes, and we’re going after them with the same vigor that we’re going after kidnappers and murderers and bank robbers,” Douglas Rivlin, the communications director at immigrant advocate organization America’s Voice, told USA Today. “That’s not a smart approach to law enforcement.”

Actually, it is, as it tells all those here illegally, and those who to come illegally, that there is no free pass. Enforcement should ramp up.

Read: Bummer: ICE Sets New Record For Nailing “Non-Criminal” Illegals »

Posted in Donald Trump, Illegal Immigration | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Excitable Michael Mann: Reviewing Climate Change Claims Is Totally Stalinist

By William Teach March 22, 2019 – 7:12 am

If you search “failed climate predictions” you will find many, many, many links that list many, many, many failures. Here’s a good article to start. And a good video. But, investigating climate change claims is horrible, according to Michael “Robust Debate” Mann (via Watts Up With That?)

Donald Trump is using Stalinist tactics to discredit climate science

Americans should not be fooled by the Stalinist tactics being used by the White House to try to discredit the findings of mainstream climate science.

The Trump administration has already purged information about climate change from government websites, gagged federal experts and attempted to end funding for climate change programmes.

Now a group of hardcore climate change deniers and contrarians linked to the administration is organising a petition in support of a new panel being set up by the National Security Council to promote an alternative official explanation for climate change.

The panel will consist of scientists who do not accept the overwhelming scientific evidence that rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are behind climate change and its impacts. (snip)

The creation of the new panel of climate change deniers, and the recruitment of supporters to provide it with a veneer of legitimacy, echoes the campaign by Joseph Stalin’s regime to discredit the work of geneticists who disagreed with the disastrous pseudo-scientific theories of Trofim Lysenko.

Lysenko wrongly believed that acquired traits could be passed on by parents to their offspring. Stalin embraced lysenkoism as the basis for Soviet agricultural policy, while also denouncing and persecuting Lysenko’s scientific critics.

Yikes! It looks like Michael and co-author Bob Ward, aren’t happy that their 30 years of failed prognostications based on shaky science, computer models, a few tree rings, and fear-mongering will be exposed. As Eric Worrall notes at Watts Up With That?

There are some differences between Lysenko and Will Happer. Lysenko didn’t just criticise his opponents, he had his opponents executed, or had them deported to socialist death camps.

As far as I know President Trump doesn’t plan to allow Will Happer to execute anyone, though some people might suffer acute public embarrassment when Will Happer finds mistakes in their work.

Further, “scientists” like Mann are outraged that anyone would doublecheck their work, because no one should have their work check in Science, right? And they should be able to keep their data secret, right?

Really, one would think Mann and his Warmist cohorts would be thrilled to be given a public, presidential forum to prove to everyone once and for all that they are correct and that CO2 from mankind is the temperature control knob, right? I know that when I’m in the right I want everyone to know it.

Read: Excitable Michael Mann: Reviewing Climate Change Claims Is Totally Stalinist »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 37 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove