Seen in Reddit:

And I bet it works like a charm.

I’m going to get a little political here, so bear with me.

Kim Davis belongs in jail.  She should stay there until one of two things happens, she agrees to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, or she resigns.  I really don’t care which one happens.

I don’t care that Ms. Davis is claiming that issuing gay marriage licenses violates her religious beliefs, not one iota.  If she were a private citizen, engaged in private business, I believe that she has the right to decide who she wants to deal with and who she wants her customers to be.  That is her business, literally.

But she is a government official, her duty is to uphold the law, and government officials cannot willfully violate the law.  Let me say that one more time so that it sinks in.  GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS CANNOT WILLFULLY AND CONSCIOUSLY VIOLATE THE LAW JUST BECAUSE THEY DON’T AGREE WITH IT.  If she doesn’t agree with the law, and can’t in good conciseness abide by it, she has recourse, to quit, to resign, to stop being a government official.  To allow a government official to violate the law because they don’t like it, is to end the rule of law and begin the rule of man.  That is now how our system is set up.

You can say whatever you want: “the SCOTUS decision was judicial activism” or “where is gay marriage in the Constitution?” The answer is: that is totally irrelevant.  SCOTUS decisions are final.  They have been sine 1803 with Marbury vs. Madison.  If you don’t like them, petition Congress to make new law.  Wait until there is a change in justices and go back to court.  But don’t think that you can disobey a law you disagree with, especially if you have sworn an oath to uphold the law as part of your job.

This is something, that watching the news, conservatives and most of the GOP candidates running for President just don’t get.  YOU CAN’T BREAK THE LAW JUST BECAUSE YOU DON’T LIKE IT.  Especially since the same conservatives defending Davis have been accusing Obama of doing the exact same thing for the last 6 years.

But if you think I’m picking on Davis, I’m not.  It’s just that her (conservative) defenders have missed the big picture.  If Davis can not hand out marriage licenses she disagrees with because she thinks the SCOTUS decision was out of control judicial activism than guess what?  There is a whole mess of antis who think that Heller, McDonald, and Moore v. Madigan (appeals) were judicial activism too, and that an out of control SCOTUS made up individual gun rights out of whole cloth.  They are totally happy denying CCW permits every chance they have.

If you defend Davis, you have to defend them too.  I don’t.  I want Davis to go back to jail, and I want every California county Sheriff, every clerk in Maryland, the Chief of Police in DC, and every other government official who operates in a “shall issue state on paper but no issue in effect” state to be her cell mates.

You can either have the rule of law or the rule of man.  Rules that apply equally to all or rule by arbitrary and capricious officials.  You can’t cherry pick and want the rule of law when you agree with it and not when you don’t, there is room for only one standard here.  I vote for the rule of law.

The National Rifle Association truly is a repugnant organization led by despicable people.Sound harsh? You be the judge.On Thursday, the NRA tried to hijack a hashtag movement promoted by the father of a female TV reporter shot to death on live television.That’s right: The NRA decided it was OK, in the spirit of “protecting” the Second Amendment, to mock murder victims.

The father is Andy Parker; his daughter, WDBJ-TV reporter Alison Parker, was gunned down last month along with colleague Adam Ward. After the incident, Andy Parker said he would do “whatever it takes” to improve gun control laws in a needed effort to reduce gun violence. Thus was born the hashtag #WhateverItTakes, which was quickly embraced by some gun control groups.

Source: Repugnant NRA mocks gun victims, hijacks #WhateverItTakes | The Kansas City Star

Yael T. Abouhalkah is the butthurt writer of that piece. It makes me laugh that he and his ilk do believe that they are not to be opposed when they speak their piece, and find themselves horrified that others would not only have a different point of view, but are daring enough to take them in their alleged sacred grounds.  That is unfeelingly, that is impolite…we are mocking the poor victims with our presence alone! The horror! Isn’t there any humanity left?

If I missed the memo where Twitter became private parcel of the Gun Control movement, would somebody be kind enough to forward it to me?

I guess they were not expecting that the rednecks would show up, pee on the potted palms, take their sisters and a bottle of white lightning upstairs to have a good time and watch college football in their living room.

But we are ornery that way.

Every time I get to argue in Real Life or Social Media with a member of the Opposition about the need to expand Background Checks, I ask them how successful the current scheme has been. They immediately fall into the slogan of “We have stopped two million felons from getting guns!” to which I ask a simple question: Where are the two million prosecutions?

The majority stop in their tracks and can’t respond. The quickest and bravest will let you know that prosecution was never the intention of the Brady Act but only to stop Violent Prohibited People from getting guns. When I ask them why there are penalties for the violation of that law, I end up with a face full of insults and blocked.

It is simple: Two million violations of the Brady Act represent two million investigations and prosecutions, right? You have a prohibited person dead to rights by walking into a gun store or gun show (forbidden), very possibly manipulating a gun (also forbidden) and then filling the ATF form 4473 in which they have to lie or if truthful, they are signing the evidence of breaking the law with their own hand. And if a Federal Prosecutor was to save him/herself time, only one count would be issued for the multiple violations and that would entail 10 year in Fed Pen and $200,000 in fines.

So where are the two million prosecutions? Nowhere. Maybe a Million? Five Hundred thousand perhaps and that would be prosecuting only 25% of the violations? So what are the numbers?

I bumped into the info for 5 years: 2006 to 2010. I knew it was bad, but the reality is absolutely absurd. Here is a summary:

2006: Total denials: 77,233. Referred for prosecution: 172. Guilty Plea or Conviction: 73.

2007: Total denials: 66,817. Referred for prosecution: 196. Guilty Plea or Conviction: 48.

2008: Total denials: 78,906. Referred for prosecution: 147. Guilty Plea or Conviction: 43.

2009: Total denials: 67,324. Referred for prosecution: 140. Guilty Plea or Conviction: 32.

2010: Total denials: 76,142. Referred for prosecution: 62. Guilty Plea or Conviction: 13.

Of the 366,422 denials issued with pride in those five years, they only managed to get 209 convictions. That is 0.05%, half a twentieth of one percent of all denials that ended up with a conviction or a plea of guilty. In the same time frame, the number of people who were wrongfully denied (false positive) was 3,141 or 0.85%.  Basically there were 17 times more wrongful denials than successful prosecutions in that time frame.

Basically the Government decided to give a pass to 98.5% of those violating the Brady Act.

But we need more Background Checks.

And it is the NRA and Gun Owners who are the problem.

Kilo Mike Alpha.

Sources: D.O.J. National Criminal Justice Reference Service.
Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2006.
Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2007.
Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2008.
Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2009.
Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2010.

Today we remember 9-11 and the lives lost to Terrorism. I checked the Facebook pages of our Opposition:

Everytown for Gun Safety did not remember.

Moms Demand Action had amnesia.

Coalition to Stop Gun Violence apparently also forgot.

Brady Campaign didn’t give a shit either.

However all of them did not have a problem pushing their agendas.

Scum. The lot of them.