American Defense Enterprises

Many of you have probably heard that the US Supreme Court is going to be hearing another case about the Second Amendment.  I have heard a lot of press about this and mostly it tends to be wrong as the news sources don’t seem to get what the issue is.

I finally found a good story about this by Michael Dorf available at Findlaw.

Here is the short summary:  The Heller v DC ruling answered the question “is the right to bear arms” an individual or a collective freedom — it is an individual freedom.  So, as far as the Federal Government is concerned, it cannot pass laws that restrict an individual’s right.  But here is the catch:  The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written and applied to the Federal Government, not the states.   So, in the past, a state could have passed a law that restricted freedom of the press, but, the Federal government could not. — Washington DC is governed by the Federal Government so Heller v DC is the law of DC.

I said that “in the past” a state could pass such laws.  That changed with the 14th Amendment.  As part of the interpretation of  “XIV” is the idea of “incorporation” of certain laws against the states.  Over time, a very clear mandate has come down, for example, that the 1st and 4th Amendment very much apply to state laws, so, these days a state cannot pass a law that violates either of these amendments.

Chicago has a law that says you cannot own a handgun.  The question in McDonald v Chicago is whether the 14th Amendment provides for the incorporation of the 2nd Amendment against the states much like it does the 1st and the 4th.  The answer seems fairly obvious — why would only some amendments be affected and not others? But, it turns out that legally it is a phenomenally complicated matter involving different specific rights provided for by the 14th Amendment and how those rights get applied to state laws — is it a due process issue?  is it a  “privileges and immunities” issue?  What are the history of those issues, etc. etc. etc.   Ug!

Of course the word “State” appears in the 2nd Amendment just to add minor complications .  Sure, it seems that “State” means nation in this case, but, perhaps the individual States’ freedoms are being what is protected…  Of course then the States could determine their own measure of safety by putting in place any laws they want….

Man without hands can’t cash checks because he cannot provide a thumbprint.

Grandmother gets thrown in jail for purchasing too much cold medicine for her grandchildren.  It was obvious that she wasn’t making meth, but, the law is the law.

Clove cigarettes (and other flavored cigarettes) become outlawed.  Because kids like to smoke $8/pack lung-burning cigarettes rather than $4/pack smooth Camels (or just stealing them from their parents)?  Best law ever.  Our smoking president signed it, it doesn’t affect him.  Menthol cigarettes are specifically listed as still ok, presumably because it mostly kills black americans…

LAUSD spends $8300/student and is considered one of the worst public schools in the nation.  For $9100, we can send them to a community college.  $9k, also gets you into a decent private school — but you have to come up with that yourself.

I wonder why we are having a budget crisis…

The government (all of them) likes control over the populace.  That is why we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights.  After 9/11, government agencies at all levels used fear tactics and rule by mandate to seize overwhelming amounts of power from the people severely curtailing our liberties.

This is one place where Democrats tend to be superior to Republicans; while the Republicans are fighting to renew sun-setting anti-freedom laws and trying to pass new ones, the Democrats are looking at the past 8 years and arguing that perhaps it would be better to have our liberties back.  Not completely — as I mentioned, it is just a truth that governments like to have absolute control over their people.

Anyway — When Al Franken (from SNL) was being confirmed for the US Senate, I never expected to form an opinion about him as a politician.  Then I found this story where “Al Franken Reads the 4th Amendment to Justice Department Official”

And this video:

Perhaps a little smarmy, but, thank you for doing the obvious thing that should have been done back in 2001.

Per the Amtrak website on baggage:

Prohibited Items

The following kinds of items are prohibited as both checked and carry-on baggage:

* Any type of gun, firearm, ammunition, explosives, or weapon.

I found this by surprise when I was planning a trip and considering using the train because of the convenience of the Amtrak terminal to my work. Needless to say, this ended my trip plans immediately.  Apparently guns on planes are ok, but, just not acceptable on trains — even in checked baggage.  This was a change in policy, apparently in response to 9/11.

Well..  The Senate just passed a resolution to have Amtrak allow people to carry on firearms in their checked baggage.  Since Amtrak is a private company, the government can’t just force Amtrak to change their policy…. But, what the resolution did do was say that Amtrak would be ineligible for certain federally available funds unless they changed their policy — this typically works.  Woo Hoo!  Now just thru the Assembly and I might be able to take a train again..

This story has been making the rounds a bit (link here to Wasington Post).  Happy 1 year anniversary of the court decision that support this crap.

( Story, details at: howstuffworks.com)

Short summary:  Without suspicion or cause, at the border DHS can seize pretty much any electronic gizmo you have and search it for signs of illegal activity.  Of course, liking firearms might mean you have “militia propaganda” on your computer.  Just something to keep in mind.

Wow.  DON’T FOLLOW THESE LINKS YET, but,   GunPundit found a beauty of a story. over at MSNBC.

Here is the first part of the story…  Read this first.

2 suspects dead, 2 injured after 72-year-old opens fire in New York City

NEW YORK – The sidewalk outside the Harlem store still was smeared with blood Friday, and the glass on the door still was blown out.

Above the entrance, someone had scribbled the words, “Abandon hope all ye who enter here.”

Less than 24 hours after a deadly showdown at the shop worthy of a Clint Eastwood script, Charles “Gus” Augusto Jr. entered his store — oblivious of the inscription taken from Dante’s “Inferno.”

We all learned in pre-jr. high that the first 3 paragraphs pretty much tell the story.  What do you think the horrible details are in this tragedy?  Form an idea in your mind.  Then read the story at MSNBC and Gunpundit’s analysis of it.  Now ask, what do you know of your world and how much of what you know is shaped and decided by media bias.  Reporting is truly dead.

For that matter.  NY is really becoming a great place to live. Consider the story.

• criminals (armed) come in demanding money
• criminals pistol whip an employee
• 72 year old(!) owner uses shotgun in defense
• community in outrage
• shotgun was confiscated (illegal no doubt)

GunPundit has this right…

“If the bad guys had pistol-whipped everyone and gotten away clean with a few bucks, there would have been little or no new coverage. Little or no hand-wringing over “a sad day.” Little or no “mixed reaction.” Criminals pull this shit all the time every day.“

As seen at FourthAmendment.com, use of peer-to-peer software on your computer is now considered a tacit waiver of your expectation of privacy. The theory is that basically, since file sharing software is created expressly to share your files, then, well, how can you argue that the files on your computer are considered private?

Unfortunately, it was not clear in the story if the courts considered that such software tends to have extensive access restriction that can limit the files to be shared.  In my experience with DNA evidence, I will have to assume that the courts did not consider this point.  Lawyers and judges tend not to have extensive technical backgrounds and rulings are made accordingly — you have file sharing software, so, you want to share your files.

“[a]lthough as a general matter an individual has an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in his personal computer, we fail to see how this expectation can survive [Stults's] decision to install and use file-sharing software, thereby opening his computer to anyone else with the same freely available program.”

As reported in Overlawyered (via NRA-ILA), David Michaels is anti gun.  The evidence presented links to a blog post he made back in 2007.

In the blog post, Michaels voices his opposition to laws that reaffirm the peoples’ rights to bring firearms with them in the cars to their workplace parking lots.  He expands that after tragedies we frequently pass laws to make things safer.  He looks at the VA tech shooting and questions why we aren’t passing more anti-gun legislation.    He is obviously missing a bit of his history.  It was the Luby Massacre in Texas that prompted the passage of their much more lenient CCW laws.  Since the CCW reform in Texas, crime (including homicide) has decreased.  Like many liberals, he has an agenda against guns, and there is only one solution.

http://www.gwumc.edu/sphhs/faculty/michaels_david.cfm

If, by getting rid of all guns, we could end all violence and murder then, let’s do it!  Unfortunately, things just don’t work that way.  People that take advantage of other people (from asshole to psychopath) will tend to take advantage of victims that are more powerless.  Gun control disparately reduces the power of honest people.  For somebody that pushes the idea of using science to shape public policy, this is an interesting contradiction to hold as truth.

Anyway, why would David Michaels as head of OSHA be bad for gun owners?  When I go to a firing range, I am glad that there are laws that require there to be proper ventilation.  What if Michaels decided that there is “no safe limit for voluntary exposure to lead”?  What if he decided that airport exposure to noise is acceptable, but, “sporting” related exposure to noise is not acceptable.  If not for the participants, then, perhaps for the people that work at these establishments?  There are definite health risks to people that work in ranges — they should have safe working conditions.  But, it is a slippery slope and the right person in the right position should shut down the entire industry….

p.s.  FTIW, I really do not know how much guns are on his agenda…

So, we are all used to the lies that gun control folk use to say why guns are bad and evil (guns cause crime, are never used in self defense, etc)…. I just learned a new tidbit that I thought I would share….

Did you know that burglars in the United States are less willing to enter occupied homes than burglars in other countries???

Its true…  “According to Kleck, most Americans take it for granted that a burglar won’t burglarize them when they’re home. Only about 12 percent of U.S. burglaries take place when people are home, compared to 40 to 50 percent in England, Canada, and the Netherlands, where gun laws are more restrictive and ownership is much lower.“  Holy F#$%#!!!  Can you imagine living in a world where 50% of burglaries occurred in occupied homes?!?!?!?!?!  I’ll support my 2nd amendment rights just to keep that number down!!!

Opinion piece on the WSJ

A few days ago the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal about health care reform titled “Eight things we can do to improve health care without adding to the deficit.”

Here’s a summary of his eight reforms, but I encourage you to read the whole opinion piece.

1. Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs).

2. Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.

3. Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines.

4. Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover.

5. Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

6. Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost.

7. Enact Medicare reform.

8. Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

I am a big fan of high deductible health care plans and health savings accounts.  You can use the the pretax HSA money on any legitimate health related expenses you wish.  If you have sniffles and want to see the doctor just go to anyone you want and spend your HSA account to get the care you need.  If you have a horrible accident or need an expensive surgery then the health insurance benefits cover the really expensive costs that could financially ruin you.  That is what insurance is for, protecting you from financial catastrophe due to unforeseen events, not an E-ticket to free health care.  I also love the idea of equal tax breaks for individually owned health insurance.  You buy your own health insurance and is yours as long as you own the policy regardless of your employer.  I will stop there so this is not too long winded.

I think that it is sad and a poor reflection on Whole Foods customers that the well thought out points in this opinion piece  have lead to at least two Whole Foods customers vowing to never patronize the store again.  It takes a special kind of hypocrisy to say that you are willing to pay premium prices for organic food, but are unwilling to spend one more dime of your money on your health care.