SCOTUS decision in the McDonald vs Chicago case
by CmdrFenix on Jun.30, 2010, under Political Discussion
The Supreme Court has brought down a descision in the case of McDonald vs Chicago. This case was an appeal that affirmed the right of Chicago to ban handguns in the city for self defense. The constitutional question to come out of this was, does the 14th amendment which made most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states included the second amendment.
U. S. 145, 149, or, as the Court has said in a related context, whether it is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U. S. 702, 721. Heller points unmistakably to the answer. Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present, and the Heller Court held that individual self-defense is “the central component” of the SecondAmendment right. 554 U. S., at ___, ___. Explaining that “the needfor defense of self, family, and property is most acute” in the home, ibid., the Court found that this right applies to handguns because they are “the most preferred firearm in the nation to ‘keep’ and use for protection of one’s home and family,” id., at ___, ___–___. It thus concluded that citizens must be permitted “to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.” Id., at ___. Heller also clarifies that this right is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and traditions,” Glucksberg, supra, at 721. Heller explored the right’s origins in English law and noted the esteem with which the right was regarded during the colonial era and at the time of the ratification ofthe Bill of Rights. This is powerful evidence that the right was regarded as fundamental in the sense relevant here. That understanding persisted in the years immediately following the Bill of Rights’ratification and is confirmed by the state constitutions of that era,which protected the right to keep and bear arms.
This pretty much sums it all up. Something we all knew already. As to be expected, the liberal members of the SCOTUS all dissented on this saying the second amendment didn’t apply to states as the fourteenth amendment only contained a watered down filling of the bill of rights. Thankfully the rest shot down that opinion and now the court has spoken.
Of course, Mayor Daley in Chicago is busy with contingency plans and has said he’s ready to respond if they overturn this ban. I fully expect him to do the same BS that D.C. did in the wake of Heller. Make it so impossible to obtain the permits to get a gun, that you effectively ban them anyhow. I guess we’ll just have to see what happens.
Moving
by CmdrFenix on May.30, 2010, under General
Well, my living out of boxes will soon be over. I’m going to be scarce through Wed of this week for my move. These past two weeks have been pretty busy for me. Put in a new network for a client that was pretty large and complicated. Now that the bulk of that work is done, I’m going to concentrate on moving and then life can resume. Catch everyone soon!
Welcome to Chi-Town… Please enjoy your stay.
by CmdrFenix on May.28, 2010, under Political Discussion
Chicago has banned the ownership of firearms for sometime now, and much like the D.C. Ban, it was sold on the premise of making things safer and cutting down on the crime in the city. Of course, it didn’t produce the results that they wanted. They still have a high murder rate of about 15.65 per 100k, with (as of 2005) 75% of those being committed with (now) an illegally owned firearm. Has all of these statistics stopped the city from disarming the rest of it’s citizens? Would Mayor Daley admit that perhaps this strategy is wrong? That would probably hurt this Democrat’s chances of remaining CEO of Mayors against Illegal Guns. As is usually the case, when a bad law is put in place, it takes nothing short of a Supreme Court act to remove it.
Now let’s talk about the latest out of the windy city. An 80 yr old vet (his name hasn’t been released) was at home and asleep with his wife and 12 yr old grandson late one night when 29 yr old Anthony Nelson broke into his house armed with an illegally purchased firearm, and stockings over his hands to prevent leaving prints. In short, Mr. Nelson meant business. Mr. Nelson fired one or two shots at the home owner before the homeowner returned fire with his own illegally purchased firearm. The same firearm he purchased because his house was broken into just 6 months earlier. The situation ended with Mr. Nelson dead, and the occupants of the home safe and sound. The vile piece of scum who is no longer a danger to society has a 13 page rap sheet, and even with all of that, the local courts and law enforcement were unable to keep him off the streets. What is the shocker of this whole story?
Police let the Korean War veteran, who walks with the aid of a cane, go without filing immediate charges because he appeared to act in self-defense, according to police sources.
They let him go… for now? I mean these “Only Ones” are really getting soft. I’m surprised they didn’t call in the SWAT team, shoot his dog, and then throw him down on his own front lawn and shackle him. After all, he’s a criminal in the eyes of the law much is that “vile piece of scum”. Maybe it was the cane, or perhaps the fact HE HAD NO OTHER EFFECTIVE MEANS to defend himself. A person should be allowed to defend themselves in their home with whatever means they see fit with. Whether it’s a katana, handgun, rifle, Scottish claymore (totally bad ass), or even a battle axe (even more bad ass). Now I know some liberals are going to froth at the mouth thinking, “OMG you’re an extremist, you want to allow Warren Buffet and Bill Gates to own nuclear weapons!”. You may not like what I have to say, but you have to agree the law is wrong here and I am right. I just want to nip the exaggerated argument in the bud. Don’t be so afraid that admitting the other side might be right that you alienate and further divide the people around you. The discussion here is firearms, swords, and axes as a means of defense. Nothing else.
So now, with all that being said, is Mayor Daley going to come out and say, “He won’t be prosecuted” and perhaps the law was wrong in the first place? Oh of course not, you guessed it already. This is same Mayor who thinks that shoving a rifle up someone’s butt shows how effective the gun ban in Chicago is.
Mayor Richard Daley refused to say today whether an 80-year-old Army veteran who shot and killed an intruder will be charged under the city’s handgun ban. Asked about the possibility of charges, the mayor ended a news conference he had called about summer curfew in the city.
At this point, I think it’s safe to say, the only thing that should be shoved up anyone’s butt is a sized twelve boot up Mayor Daley’s ass.
War on drugs, or a foreshadowing of more things to come…
by CmdrFenix on May.06, 2010, under General
I will warn you all right now. The video I am linking at the bottom of this article isn’t easy to watch for anyone who likes dogs or animals, but here is what I’ve found so far. Police exercised a drug enforcement raid on a family in Missouri. Upon arriving around 8p, SWAT forced their way in (call it trying to exercise the element of surprise or whatever, but they forced their way in way harder than was needed), and almost immediately fired 5 shots killing one of the family dogs and severely wounding another. Only a very small amount of Marijuana was even found in the house, but they still saw fit to charge the parents with not only drug possession, but also child endangerment. I’m sorry, but their actions on the family endangered the children more than anything those parents did. All officers and investigators involved need to be reprimanded and perhaps find themselves brought up on such charges.
Stories like this really get my blood boiling because you have to wonder what the state will do you when you REALLY do something that pisses them off. In those cases you simply end up like the Branch Davidians or perhaps Randy Weaver. In this case, it’s another example of the failed war on drugs and a total overreaction of the system.
Where was the burden of proof for the police in obtaining that warrant in the first place? Have they gotten that easy to obtain that the privacy we thought to have in our homes is merely an illusion?
BP tried making fisherman sign waivers?
by CmdrFenix on May.04, 2010, under General
Well been suffering a bit of writers block. I have read the stories of Obama’s “mistress”. I’m just watching that to see what happens with that before I throw my $0.02 in.
One interesting thing that I did come across this interesting article yesterday. Most fisherman are pretty much out of business right now due to the oil slick in the Gulf. BP has been putting them to work in the cleanup operation in order to help them out. Now such a kind act on its part had to have a catch right? There is always a catch… (pun intended) They were making the fisherman (some of which can’t read) sign waivers that prevent them from suing BP in a future date.
No one wanted to waive the right to sue BP, but some fishermen, desperate for cash, signed the waiver anyway.
It took a large amount of public outcry, but as U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis stated once, “Sunlight Is the Best Disinfectant”. Once this story got out, it was so unpopular, BP voided all of the waivers and apologized. Have to wonder what they would have done if it hadn’t gone out. We need corporations and businesses to drive the economy, but this level of corporate greed completely turns my stomach.
Come on people! Back to work now! 
One nation… under arrest.
by CmdrFenix on Apr.16, 2010, under General
When I first obtained my CCW permit, I made it a point to research all aspects of firearms laws that I could find. First, I was stunned with how many there were and second I was stunned by how many people had been jailed or arrested for making a simple mistakes. I came across this article yesterday, and thought it struck several cords that I wanted to bring up. We all have seen crimes such as this in the news and every time we shake our head, and usually do nothing.
In the 21st century American legal system, things are no longer so clear. Consider Lindsay Brown, a high-school senior jailed for having a butter knife in her car.
Or Cortez Curtis, a 13-year-old arrested for bringing a calculator that contained tools (including a tiny knife blade) to school. Or 12-year-old Ansche Hedgepeth, handcuffed and detained for eating one French fry on the D.C. subway. Or 61-year-old Kay Leibrand, booked for allowing her hedges to grow too tall.
In some ways, it feels as though our society has forgotten about the spirit of the law. Prisons are overpopulated. The courts are overwhelmed, and even still we have the time to try a high school student for something so silly. I have come across numerous articles about like the story of Lindsay Brown (see above quote) who had no criminal intent on causing anyone harm. There is simply no way to know every law, but there should be some provision for determination of intent. Did that person intent on causing harm, or did they even know it was illegal? That would involved thinking though and it seems that too is something many of our elected officials
(DA’s included) have stopped doing.
“A sound reform strategy will rest on three pillars,” writes legal scholar Brian Walsh. “Restoring traditional criminal law concepts, reinvigorating constitutional rights and reforming Congress.” Each of these steps could be enacted by lawmakers.
Lawmakers reform themselves? I’m sorry, but until we vote them out of office that will NEVER happen. Everybody needs to wake up and STOP re-electing this scum to Washington. You need to research the person you put your vote on, before you go to the polls. Do NOT just do it on a party line vote. Stop falling for speeches that fill you with hope about change. Look at their record. Look at everything they have done. Then decide if you want them representing you.
“The citizens of the U.S. are responsible for the greatest trust ever confided to a political society. We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government.” – James Madison
Airsoft guns seized by ATF
by CmdrFenix on Mar.25, 2010, under General
… and that is exactly what they did. I heard about this a few days ago. I wasn’t completely shocked by the absurdity of this (it was after all coming out of the ATF), but I was worried with how this investigation was handled.
Customs and Border Protection officers have seized a shipment of 30 guns that arrived by ocean container in Tacoma in a shipment described only as “toys and parts.”
…
ATF agents determined that the rifles as shipped from Taiwan were tooled to shoot plastic balls. However ATF says a relatively quick retooling could allow them to fire live ammunition.
I have done airsoft. It’s a fun way to spend a Sun afternoon, and I have a pair of fully automatic airsoft replicas of G36ks. Does this mean with some “retooling” I could turn those into the real thing!? Is my basic level of gunsmithing enough to do this? How much would this “conversion” cost me? I would love to find out what they mean by “readily…converted.”, but none of us will see that for a while as they’ve said the owner needs to file a Freedom of Information Request to get the report. I find it VERY unlikely, knowing as much as do about firearms and airsoft guns, and if I hadn’t confirmed this was true, I’d probably be laughing right now. The ATF just reminds me of a bunch of thugs that are in need of a serious amount of reform. The swamp waters in that organization are pretty deep and slimy.
I also love the media sensationalism of this by not even mentioning the fact they were airsoft guns. They make it sound like they stopped a major shipment from Taiwan of actual machine guns. The media LOVE stories that portray guns in a negative light. They almost NEVER tell about stories where firearms have saved lives and when they do you can usually see this spin on the evens. I hardly watch main stream media anyhow as a result of this. Most of my news and information comes online. At least then I can make my own determinations.
The date that will live in infirmary
by CmdrFenix on Mar.22, 2010, under General
That was the title from the drugereport.com and I think it pretty much hits the nail on the head. Well, if you hadn’t already guessed, the “turkey” that is the Health Insurance Reform bill has passed the House and is on its way to the president to be signed.
On the cusp of succeeding where numerous past congresses and administrations have failed, jubilant House Democrats voted 219-212 late Sunday to send legislation to Obama that would extend coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans, reduce deficits and ban insurance company practices such as denying coverage to people with preexisting medical conditions.
This particular topic is very electrifying to many, but here are my feelings on it. Disagree with them if you want, I don’t care, but this is how *I* feel about it and I think Dr. Earl Sunderhaus says it best and many Americans agree with me.
Sunderhaus said he feels it is his responsibility as a physician to tell his patients to live healthier lives and that obesity and diabetes are costing the country millions of dollars.
…
“Telling this lady that she is fat is the truth, and it’s for her own good health,” Sunderhaus said. “She should be taking better care of herself, and it will be cheaper for us as a society.”
…
Because millions of Americans are secretly thinking the exact same thing as Dr. Sunderhaus and I: Why should we be forced to pay for the costs of other people’s irresponsibility?
Before I dive into the parts of the bill that I think are complete bullshit, I think the last line above speaks for me as to why I despise the concept of universal health care system. Why should I pay for other people’s indiscretions? I’m talking about things like (as shown in the link above):
- Obesity
- Cigarette smoking
- Alcohol abuse
- Reckless behavior
- Criminal activity
- Unprotected promiscuous sex
- Use of illicit drugs
- Cultural traditions
- Bad diets
All of these items are preventable by the person involved. Now I personally don’t really care if you do all these things. I don’t care if you decide to have unprotected promiscuous sex with hundreds of other partners and give yourself AIDS, but why do I need pay for it? If you want to smoke two dozen packs of cigarettes a day, have at it! Just don’t ask me to pay when you develop lung cancer. You can sit there and call me selfish, and that is fine, but the moment you start to force something like health care on people, then everyone gets turned into yentas on other people’s behavior. If Joe Blows kid is drag racing and hits a telephone pole, why should all of us pay for that? I know I’m not the only one who’s pissed off about that.
Getting off the personal beliefs about it, the CBO has shown that is does *NOT* reduce the deficit, and any person that can sit there and say we need to spend money to get ourselves out of debt is whacked. If you are short on your rent or your cable TV, you have to cut spending to pay for it, and not spend more money.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3961 [the "doc fix"], by itself, would cost $210 billion over the 2010–2019 period. CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation have separately estimated that enacting H.R. 3962 [the health care bill] would reduce federal budget deficits by $109 billion over that same period.
CBO estimates that enacting both bills would add $89 billion to budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period, somewhat less than the sum of the effects of enacting the bills separately because of interactions between their provisions. The agency estimates that the two bills together would increase the budget deficit in 2019 by $23 billion relative to current law, an increment that would grow in subsequent years.
So we’re going to spend 940 billion dollars to save 109 billion? You have to be kidding me, and before I put anyone’s boxers in a twist, that last line makes my point, “…an increment that would grow in subsequent years”. Once you force everyone to have health insurance, you now have to pay for it and if you take MA (which has universal health care) as an example, the cost of universal health care in MA is grown every year to the point the State is horribly in debt. The CBO has also shown that 500 billion in savings from Medicare is going to be spent elsewhere, which means… guess what? It’s not a savings!
Also, premiums *will* continue to rise as they have in MA. According to the CBO premiums could increase 10 to 13 percent. Look, I am not saying there isn’t problems within our health care system (our premium increases have been obnoxious and the whole concept of preexisting condition exclusion pisses me off), but this is NOT how I feel the situation should be fixed.
Political shell games
by CmdrFenix on Mar.10, 2010, under Political Discussion
So, I got a chance tonight to take part in a phone “town hall” type meeting with Mr. Hodes who is running for Sen Judd Gregg’s senate seat here in NH. I was able to listen to people ask questions and all I just to do in order to ask a question was to press *3. Well I hit that button, listened to about 25 minutes of questions and answers, and when the announcer came on to talk with me about my questions I had my outline and discussion points ready to go. It was obvious he was trying to weed out the “death panel” morons (even I can call some of the arguements ludicrious) and completely bad shit insane people, so I explained my thoughts, concerns, and questions for Mr Hodes.
Thoughts:
I explained that I *do* write my senators and representatives to speak my mind so I hope he’ll be as responsive as Mr. Gregg was. Mrs. Shaheen has only responded twice and only via email. Even if it’s a staff, it did feel good getting a letter that did directly address my points. I hope this will continue.
Concerns:
According to the CBO, they estimate 31 billion (and change) from a tobacco increase of $0.39 to $1 a pack that’ll continue to increase through 2019 to a value of 79 billion dollars. I have to ask, what crack are they smoking? (no pun intended) I know people who smoke and are paying from between $6.50 a pack now to as much as $8-9 per pack in MA. They are ALREADY at the tipping point when they will no longer be able to afford to smoke and will thus quit. How will they replace that money?
There has been talk about a meals / alcohol tax. Fine, when they do that and people like me enjoy their cigars and liquor less, who are they going to tax next? You cannot tax a behavior. It’s unsustainable. You can’t call smokers on one hand evil doers who are causing lung cancer and must be taxed to pay for health coverage of people who inhale their smoke… and then tax the smokers to quit.
If the above does happen, what additional taxes as a white, middle class, tax payer am I going to see because from where I sit, it’s going to come down my pipe at some point.
Questions:
I think everyone agrees that wall street needs a lot of reform. Mortgages and securities being shuffled around in a shell game until the table fell over was tragic, but taxing private traders to cover reform? I am new to investing, and it’s prohibitive on the costs versus the benefits. If I need to trade 500 shares of stock in order to be profitable because of a tax, I won’t trade. Quick and to the point, you cannot tax an action to such an extent that you make it unattractive to try out. Quite simply put, you won’t see your projected revenues because people won’t do it. So what do you propose as a way to keep AIG and the big players in check without completely screwing me as someone who is starting to do this?
Let me start by saying THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT FOR MR HODES. Just some of my observations. I was kind of excited about this. It was a very interesting way to get people to attend these meetings. I did some very basic research on him and I’m intrigued. I have some homework I need to do on him, but here are the important points for me:
Guns
I agree with him on:
- Maintain and strengthen the current level of enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns.
- Allow citizens to carry concealed guns.
I disagree with him on:
- Establish a national database of ballistic “fingerprints” to track guns used in criminal activities.
There are obviously more areas, and I have only begun to stratch the surface, but it’s a start. That is just my first prelim thoughts on the matter. More research is needed, but for now I’ll leave you with this very entertaining note from Penn and Teller on Gun Control.
Updates
by CmdrFenix on Mar.07, 2010, under General
Not much going on this week. Been rather tied up with work, but I did manage to upgrade my Gallery install and update the main site here. The Gallery now has a “Star Trek Online” album that has been requested. I’ll be uploading new screen captures into there in the coming days. Stay Tuned!
