This morning I hat to take mom for a doctor’s appointment. While waiting, I had to suck on the TV tuned to the Chicano version of Good Morning America & similar AM crap. Well yeah, the Special Hell and all.

So they start talking about who won and who lost the debate last night and apparently according to them, it was Biden, Kamala and Beto. Next, Cute Young Pneumatic Babe proceeds to interview some political “expert” who was giving his impression about the debate. Young Pneumatic Babe (YPB) then asks him about Beto’s promise of mandating to “retire” AR-15s and AK-47s (Yes, she used that word.) The expert corrected her on the spot saying that Beto did not say “retire” but “confiscate.”. She looked shocked she got forcibly rebuked  and was even less happier when the expert told her that was damn near impossible. .

I have to think how  somebody told YPB to use the word “retire” rather than confiscation as the connotation of the word outside Mexico and its suburb of Los Angeles is very negative. Latin America has been plagued by confiscations by government (or those that want to become government by force) for a couple of centuries now.  Every effing dictator and every effing revolutionary would inevitable come to your land or home and “confiscate” the fruits of your labor for the good of the country or the good of the revolution. Many people decide only to work the bare minimum because they were always afraid somebody would target them for having too much and come take away. And in some cases (lots) they simply wanted all you have and you were issued a bullet in the back of the head as compensation.

As I said, probably the word confiscation did not produce a lot of consternation in Republica Popular de California, but in Florida? Beginning with the Cubans and the rest of the Latin American escapees from Socialist governments? You bet your ass it may make a difference.

I don’t think we will see the rest of the candidates taking such a extreme position or it would deliver Florida to Trump again.

…and simply said “Say when.”

I know he is going to try to squeeze this for only one reason: Fundraising.

Bu the only thing he has managed is to make sure this weekend there will be brisk sale of rifles and a revision of priorities for the near future.

The Fake Irish Taco just went and declared war on 80 million Americans. He should have chosen to get involved in a land war in Asia.  It would have been easier.

We are the New Negroes was one of my very fist posts when I started this blog.  Eleven years later and the same forces are at it again trying to convince companies and people we are sub human and undesirables.  We give them Freedom cooties, it seems because we do no submit to their whims.

Call them what they are: The new Generation of Jim Crow blessed by the spirit of Bull Connor pretending to care for the little ones.

I have been derelict on my duty to keep an eye on Mayors being arrested. And here we have the latest one!

Jasiel Correia, the 27-year-old Democrat mayor of Fall River, Massachusetts, was arrested Friday on charges of fraud, extortion, bribery, and filing false tax returns
…
Within months of becoming mayor in January 2016, CORREIA began monetizing his official position to fund his lavish lifestyle and mounting legal bills. As set forth below, CORREIA used his office to: (i) extort at least four marijuana vendors for hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribe payments; (ii) extort a building owner for cash and a Rolex watch in exchange for, among other things, the approval of, and payment for, permits and excavating work to activate the water supply to a commercial building; and (iii) corruptly demand that his chief of staff give him half of her salary and almost all of a $10,000 “snow stipend,” in return for appointing her and allowing her to keep her city job.

Massachusetts Mayor Arrested For Alleged Extortion Of Marijuana Companies

Overachiever young thing, ain’t he? Sumbitch sounds like a Colombian Mafiosi.  And, of course member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

The old slogan is true: Criminals love Gun Control

And there was much agitation in the interwebs when Colt announced that they were leaving (again) the civilian market to concentrate in Military and Police business. The ZOMG! were loud and across the sphere and many a conspiracy was brought out. The official reason?

Over the last few years, the market for modern sporting rifles has seen a significant decline in demand, leading to some of the lowest prices ever seen for new-in-box AR-15s.

“What’s true today is that the MSR market is much more price-driven,” Spitale said. “We’ve seen a pretty sharp decline in rifle sales, given our price points, resulting in significant inventory build-up held by our distributors.”

The Truth About Colt’s AR-15 Production 

They could not compete. Let’s face it, Colt is not an inexpensive rifle and if you can afford one, God bless. But technology has made the production of non-military spec AR-15s available to more than just Military contractors and that reflects on the availability and lower prices. I mean people, you can buy a stripped receiver in  blister pack! That is pure unadulterated Capitalism, Huzza! .

And I think Colt has never gotten the feel of selling to the public. I don’t thin it is in its corporate DNA and truthfully, outside of a few AR purists, few people will miss them. A decade or more ago, having a Colt AR was the goal of anybody getting in the platform. Now? And that price? It would end up being a Safe Queen.

Godspeed to Colt and I do hope they make money for everybody in the company.

From CNBC:

Chief executives of 145 companies urge Senate to pass gun control laws

Leaders of 145 companies wrote a letter to the Senate Thursday, urging the governmental body to take action on gun safety.

The letter notes recent gun violence in Chicago, Newport News, Virginia and other places, calling it a “public health crisis.” But the leaders also say that gun violence is preventable, and lawmakers can step in to prevent tragedies.

“That’s why we we urge the Senate to stand with the American public and take action on gun safety by passing a bill to require background checks on all gun sales and a strong Red Flag law that would allow courts to issue life-saving extreme risk protection orders,” they wrote in the letter.

Ah, yes, the Red Flag laws that we’ve documented are guaranteed to be abused by assholes out to ruin a gun owner’s life.  I’ve posted two examples of abuse in as many days.

Seriously.  Has anybody thought of the implications here?  What happens if a person is Red Flagged for entirely vindictive reasons?

Will their employer be notified?  What happens if their employer finds out and decides that having a Red Flagged person on their staff is a risk, will the employer fire them?  Probably.

How will someone who gets fired for a Red Flag be able to get another job?  Who would hire someone with an outstanding Red Flag?   Even if that Red Flag is eventually expunged, what company would take the risk of hiring someone who had be Red Flagged?

This to me seems to be a great way to make a person destitute and unemployable for a very long time.  So when I say “ruin a gun owner’s life” I mean just that.

Maybe that is a feature, not a bug.

So given all that, CEO’s of 145 companies still want to push this system onto us.

Here is the text of exactly what they want:

That s why we urge the Senate to stand with the American public and take action on gun safety by passing a bill to require background checks on all gun sales and a strong Red Flag law that would allow courts to issue life-saving extreme risk protection orders.

A universal background check law that will do nothing to prevent crime because criminals are not going to background check their dealers before they trade a stolen gun for drugs. And Red Flag laws that are rife for abuse.

Fantastic.

The list of CEO’s includes all the social media and tech CEO’s that you suspect, as well as quite a lot of financial CEO’s.

I remember when CEO’s were only interested enough in politics to hire lobbyists to give them the leg up in business.  This new form of woke capitalism where CEO’s believe that because they are rich and economically powerful, they need to micromanage your lives is very quickly getting tiring.

It’s going to suck when they decide that because of my internet purchase and search history that I’m probably a gun owing Republican and they decide to nuke my cellphone, cancel my credit cards, and foreclose on my mortgage, which I have a feeling the Democrats are going to give them the power to do.

Woke capitalism fucking sucks.

Over a year ago I covered a push by the New York Times to get credit card companies and banks to enact gun control that government wouldn’t by telling us what lawful products we can and cannot use our credit cards to purchase.  In essence, if you wanted to buy an AR or high capacity magazines, the New York Times wanted your credit card to be declined.

At the time I said this was a bad idea.  It would be inviting pushback from Conservatives would be forced to punish the banks with regulations.

In addition, this raises the question that if credit card companies have the obligation to limit our purchase of legal products “to save lives” than shouldn’t the credit card companies first stop the sale of alcohol which is responsible for 88,000 deaths per year or tobacco which is responsible for 480,000 deaths per year?

One would think that old-school Liberalism, which was suspicious of big banks and corporations, would be disinclined to let private industry micromanage our lives.  But since the banks turned their eyes to limiting gun sales, now the big banks are their friends.

Fast forward to today, and Robert “Cultural Appropriation” O’Rourke decided to make forcing the banks and credit card companies to be our nannies by declining the sales of gun purchases part of his platform.

Credit cards have enabled many of America’s mass shootings in the last decade—and with Washington unwilling to act, they need to cut off the sales of weapons of war today. https://t.co/yqLHMF0EWD

— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) September 12, 2019

Banks and credit card companies must:
1⃣Refuse to take part in the sale of assault weapons.
2⃣Stop processing transactions for gun sales online & at gun shows without background checks.
3⃣Stop doing business with gun & ammo manufacturers who produce or sell assault weapons

— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) September 12, 2019

If enough of us make our voices heard now, we will force banks and credit card companies to act. Add your name to this petition we’re sending Visa, Mastercard, and the big banks: https://t.co/GcNPVfVOc4

— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) September 12, 2019

Sure, he’s trending at <1% right now, but don’t underestimate that.  Eric “Douche Nukem” Swalwell was trending at a whopping 0% but managed to make make gun confiscation part of the Democrat platform with multiple candidates talking about mandatory buybacks.

Let him push this for a little bit, maybe bring it up at a debate, and watch as Warren, Sanders, and Harris all vie for the position of Face-Stamping Regulator in Chief.

Just wait until they decide to give the banks the power to Red Flag you.

Did you just make a $1,200 dollar purchase at Cabela’s?  Was that for guns an ammo?  Why are you buying that much ammo?  That’s a Red Flag.

Right now, the banks have the duty to report cash deposits over $10,000, because that could be terrorism or drug money.  But if you make too many smaller deposits that add up to $10,000, they have to report that too, because that be you trying to hide your terrorism or drug money.

Once they ban using credit cards to buy guns, should the banks report large cash withdraws?  Why do you need $1,200 in cash if not to buy something you can’t use your credit card for?

Since eating meat is bad for the planet, will the credit card companies be given the ability to decline my card at a steak house?

I can only see bad things happening when the banks are given the authority to limit our ability to purchase lawful products.  It would be the ugliest runaround of the Constitution imaginable.  If they can’t deny us our rights by law, they will make them impossible to access by restricting our ability to purchase them with our money.  Which is exactly why I can see the Democrats thinking this is such a good idea.