…….

…….

Sore loser telling lies and projection

This is the ad that California Governor Gavin Newsom is running in Florida.

 

First of all, remember that Gavin Newsom was subject to a recall vote.  He survived, but consider how bad a governor has to be for a recall vote to even be brought against him.

Then there is this from an article from 2021:

The number of Californians getting Florida driver’s licenses in 2019 was 18,103, according to data that the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shared with me Wednesday. The number of Californians getting Florida licenses dipped slightly in 2020 to 17,524 as the pandemic may have put some moves on hold.

But in the first four months of this year, 8,174 former Californians obtained their Florida driver’s licenses. At that pace, more than 24,000 former Californians would be moving to Florida this year, up sharply from each of the previous two years.

California is hemorrhaging citizens to other states and Florida us one of the top destinations.

Californians are voting with their feet.

I guess Newsom is trying to attract some of them back, along with some Leftist Floridians.

But one of the most annoying parts of this is the very first statistic that Newsom throws out about DeSantis banning books.

This is from The Washington Post:

The Education Department said it rejected 41 percent of books — “the most in Florida’s history.” At least 24 of the titles scored high marks from official state reviewers for conforming to Florida standards but were turned down anyway.

The reviewers overwhelmingly noted that the books had avoided forbidden topics such as critical race theory, a once-obscure academic term — describing an intellectual movement that examines the way policies and laws perpetuate systemic racism — that conservatives have used to describe teaching on race and diversity, and social-emotional learning, which conservatives say is a vehicle for teaching critical race theory. The reviews mostly addressed how well the books taught Florida’s academic standards.

But a few reviews stood out. They highlighted issues that seemed to conflict less with the law than with personal beliefs, accusing the textbooks of bias for talking about climate change and vaccines.

Chris Allen, the vice chair for the Indian River chapter of the conservative group Moms for Liberty, is an engineer and the mother of a public school student. And although she has never found anything objectionable in her child’s learning materials, she answered a call from the state Education Department for help with the review process. She found reams of examples of what she considered to be critical race theory — which is forbidden in textbooks.

She flagged a statement that said that the United States has not eradicated poverty or racism.

“Emphasis that racism is embedded in American society,” Allen wrote, “contains Critical Race Theory which is prohibited.”

She also highlighted a word problem that talked about the gender pay gap, identifying how much less money women make over the course of a lifetime, saying that she didn’t like the message it sent to young women. 

That has been the problem that people on the Right have been complaining about and DeSantis has actually done some to address.

The insidious way social commentary is slipped into math and science texts.

A word problem will be about income disparity in race or gender.

The kids have now been given a fact as part of a math problem and it’s never challenged.  The kids just hear black people make X% less than white people or women make Y% less than men.  No context is provided and they just absorb it as true.

Little by little these little bits add up to a perception that America is a fundamentally racist, sexist, and unjust place.

So DeSantis, said no.

Word problems need to be devoid of social commentary.

Then the Left shouts: “DeSantis is banning books, he’s just like Hitler.  He’s trying to indoctrinate children.  He wants to make Florida a Christofascist state.”

Because word problems in Florida should ask “if Jonny has 50 apples and 18% are green and the rest are red, how many of each type of apples does he have.”

Not “If a white man makes $50,000 per year and a woman POC makes 83% of what a white man makes, what is Zaara’s salary as a Somali-American woman?”

But it’s DeSantis and the Right who are bad and indoctrinating.

Newsom says “the freedom to love.”

Florida hasn’t banned gay marriage.

Gavin Newsom just signed a law that reduces the penalty for non-forcible sodomy and homosexual sex with minors from a felony to a misdemeanor and eliminates the mandatory registration as a sex offender.

So “freedom to love” in California now includes statutory rape.

I’m not kidding.  Right now, in California, an adult male with HIV can go online, groom a boy, meet up with him, have non-forcible sex with him, and knowingly infect him with HIV, and will have committed two misdemeanors.  The adult will most likely spend no time in prison, pay a fine, and not have to register as a sex offender.

But DeSantis is the bad guy.

What can you expect from a state that encourages a drag queen can spread his butt checks and show his anus to children as a restaurant.

 

I’m just tired of the lies and projection from a side that has revealed its true character and is being rejected.

 

 

Avoiding Bruen: New Jersey, Sensitive Places and Property Rights

We knew that the gun rights infringers would lose their every loving minds if Bruen was decided in favor of gun rights. The decision is great not because it struck down New York State and City “may issue but not likely” permitting scheme but because it reaffirmed that the people have a right to self defense outside of their homes.

It reaffirmed that ordinary people have the right to carry a weapon for self defense.

Most importantly it stated clearly that the second amendment will be treated as a real guarantee of our rights. No more two tier means-end balancing.

Unfortunately the opinion left a few gotchas in place. The first was “sensitive places” and the other was “reasonable permitting regulations.”

While some states have issued guidance that makes the state “shall issue” others are fighting back. Massachusetts issued guidance that the good cause is no longer needed but everything else about getting a permit is still in place. In my opinion this means that the question of why I want a permit is answered with “All lawful purposes”. California did similar and I believe New Jersey did as well.

Unfortunately places like New York have hit on an attack vector that we expected. New Jersey is looking to go down the same path.

In short, they are going to define as many places as possible as “sensitive” and make them gun free zones. In addition, they are making violations of gun free zones felonies. This means that a CCW that is carrying can lose their rights because they happen to enter one of the many many forbidden zones.

The other way they are making it impossible to carry is by creating a default gun free zone for all private property. The wording is a little unclear but it seems to say that it requires both the owner of the property and the lessee to agree to allowing CCW on or in the property. By the wording it implies to me that in the case of the lessee posting a sign allowing and the owner not posting a sign the CCW could still be in violation.

Note the “on or in” clause.

Imagine if you would that you are a CCW carrier and you decide to go for a drive. You glance at your gas gauge and determine you need gas. You pull into your local gas station to pump some gas. As you do you are now on the property. If there is no sign saying your firearm is permitted, you just committed a felony.

On a practical note, they law calls for “clear and conspicuous signage indicating that the carrying of firearms … is permitted…”. It will not surprise me when we find out that the regulations on signage will require the businesses to buy expensive signs. Consider a simple MUTCD compliant STOP sign is $75 dollars, what do you think a NYS or NJ approved sign will cost?

I believe in both our right to self defense and our property rights. I personally have a rule that on our property if we are having a gathering of people that are not all gun people that concealed carry is allowed but open is not. We have some friends that are to scared of firearms to even look at them in person. That’s fine.

If a business wants to limit firearm possession in their place of business to criminals only, that is their choice. I’ll respect it and take my business else where.

There are many challenges dropping right now against all of the laws being put in place to get around the second amendment now that Bruen has been decided. I’m hoping that they move quickly.

New York State’s Gun Control Bill of 2022
Star-Ledger Begging For NJ to do the same