Gun Free Zone

Another one worth full volume.

I caught this on Twitter.  Space Force has announced their uniforms.  Hint: they went with the same OCP camo that the Army and Air Force currently use.

The first #SpaceForce utility uniform nametapes have touched down in the
Pentagon. @EsperDoD @SecAFOfficial @SpaceForceCSO @GenDaveGoldfein @DeptofDefense@usairforce pic.twitter.com/Jvzt5bvNl7

— United States Space Force (@SpaceForceDoD) January 18, 2020

Twitter, being a cesspool of humanity with a Left-leaning bent went on the attack, with the kind of idiocy you’d expect.

This was my favorite:

This is dumb as a box of shit stupid plus Orange Man Bad.

Where do these people think that GPS came from?

Was it something that Steve Jobs or Google launched to sell cell phones?

GPS was dropping bombs on Saddam decades before these dipshits bought their first TomTom.

If it wasn’t for our desire to hit things with cruise missiles over line-of-sight, these numb-nuts wouldn’t have it in their phones.

Really, I feel that people this stupid should be punished.  I think the most appropriate way for them to be pushed for being so remarkably brain dead towards Space Force is this:

They lose their privilege to satellite communications.  They should all be forced to use nothing but landlines for the rest of their miserable lives.

From the BBC News:

Leyton machete attack: PC was ‘fighting to stay alive’

A police officer was fighting to “stay alive” when he was attacked with a machete during a routine stop in east London, a court has heard.

PC Stuart Outten, 29, was stabbed in the head as he tried to arrest Muhammad Rodwan in Leyton on 7 August last year.

London PC culturally enriched.

Mr Rodwan, 56, of Luton, admits striking the PC but denies attempted murder, claiming it was self defence.

I find this odd since self-defense was outlawed in the UK.  At least for Britons.

PC Outten suffered six wounds to the head, skull fractures, injuries to the arm and broken fingers, the jury has been told.

Giving evidence, the Met PC told the court he was “on the lookout” for traffic offences during a night shift when he came across a “suspicious” white van which he thought could be without insurance.

PC Outten said Mr Rodwan had appeared “extremely angry” at being stopped and tried to make off but he used his leg to stop the 56-year-old closing the van door.

“I tried to say ‘you’re not leaving’ and then the defendant punched me twice to the face,” he said.

The officer told the jury he “grabbed” Mr Rodwan by the belt, neck and dreadlocks “to incapacitate him” but the 56-year-old lunged into the van.

The officer said he then felt “something sharp being snapped against my head” and realised he was being attacked with a 2ft (60cm) long rusty machete.

I guess those knife disposal bins are working fantastic.

PC Outten said he then stumbled away and “gave a quick command of ‘police with Taser’,” before he fired it.

When he was asked why he fired, the officer replied: “To stop myself being attacked with a machete and save my own life.”

“I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to zap a guy who was trying to chop my head off with a fucking sword.”

Apparently a cop in the UK defending himself with a less-than-lethal weapon when being attacked with a machete is looked down upon.  Or is that only when attacked by a Muslim?

The Daily Mirror has posted cellphone video of the attack:

In the US that cop would have filled the guy who attacked him with a machete with Gold Dot, and it would have been a good shoot.

The UK is getting to dangerous for London police to keep going around unarmed.

If you read my last post, you will notice a theme.  People on the Left wanting to destroy the electoral system in order to dilute Republicans out of power, permanently.

An anonymous writer with the Harvard Law Review has another idea on how to do this.

Also, more evidence that Harvard is a worthless Leftist diploma mill.

Pack the Union: A Proposal to Admit New States for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution to Ensure Equal Representation

We have pretty equal representation now.  That is the House of Representatives and the Senate.  Populous states have more Representatives and all states have two Senators.  It’s called the Great Compromise and it’s worked for 244 years.  You’d think somebody at Harvard Law would know that.

Recent events have highlighted some of the ways in which federal elections in the United States are profoundly undemocratic and, thus, profoundly unfair.  The Electoral College — when it contravenes the popular vote — is an obvious example of this unfairness. But it is just one of the mathematically undemocratic features in the Constitution. Equal representation of states in the Senate, for example, gives citizens of low-population states undue influence in Congress. Conversely, American citizens residing in U.S. territories have no meaningful representation in Congress or the Electoral College.

No… it’s what kept states like Rhode Island from getting the shit kicked out of it by New York.  It was the Senate that got the little state to ratify the Constitution in the first place.  Today, that holds equally well for people in Wyoming, the Dakotas, and other states.

When the 53 members of Congress from California say “no more domestic drilling for oil,” the one representative from North Dakota hasn’t a chance.  When the two Senators from California repeat “no more domestic drilling for oil,” the two Senators from North Dakota can stand toe to tow with them.

This was the whole point of a bicameral legislature.

Just as it was unfair to exclude women and minorities from the franchise, so too is it unfair to weight votes differently. The 600,000 residents of Wyoming and the 40,000,000 residents of California should not be represented by the same number of senators.

Yes, they should, for exactly the reason I stated above.  What angers the Left is that they are concentrated in pockets.  They don’t have a problem with the House because they control the big urban population centers.  They don’t control rural America so they want to take away rural America’s meaningful representation.

While a step in the right direction, these proposals are inadequate. To create a system where every vote counts equally, the Constitution must be amended. To do this, Congress should pass legislation reducing the size of Washington, D.C., to an area encompassing only a few core federal buildings and then admit the rest of the District’s 127 neighborhoods as states. 

This will create 127 new Congressional Seats and 254 new Senators, all which represent one of the bluest and the most big-government bureaucracy dependent areas in the country.

The US Congress will become a permanent Blue super-majority with unchecked power.  It will also elect a Democrat to the Presidency every time.

Doing this, will also give the Left the ability to rewrite the Constitution at will.

These states — which could be added with a simple congressional majority — would add enough votes in Congress to ratify four amendments: (1) a transfer of the Senate’s power to a body that represents citizens equally; (2) an expansion of the House so that all citizens are represented in equal-sized districts; (3) a replacement of the Electoral College with a popular vote; and (4) a modification of the Constitution’s amendment process that would ensure future amendments are ratified by states representing most Americans.

So California and New York could amend the constitution whenever they felt like it but the Deep South and Midwest can’t say no.

Radical as this proposal may sound, it is no more radical than a nominally democratic system of government that gives citizens widely disproportionate voting power depending on where they live.

Bullshit.  Our current system has worked for nearly two-and-a-half centuries.

The Left lost the 2016 election and can’t rely on the Senate to impeach Trump so now they want to nuke the system and make DC, NYC, San Francisco, and Los Angeles in total dictatorial control of the United States.

Of course, the nutjobs at Vox love this shit.

A modest proposal to save American democracy
A law journal just floated a wild idea to add 127 more states to the union. And it’s all constitutional.

They want to save American democracy by totally destroying it and giving one party by way of one city, super-majority power.  That doesn’t sound very democratic.

American democracy is broken.

Broken = Democrats not in total control.

An unsigned note, entitled “Pack the Union: A Proposal to Admit New States for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution to Ensure Equal Representation” and published in the Harvard Law Review, offers an entirely constitutional way out of this dilemma: Add new states — a lot of new states — then use this bloc of states to rewrite the Constitution so that the United States has an election system “where every vote counts equally.”

Again, one party super-majority with no check or balance on that.

Our system was designed to prevent easy change.  Our Founding Fathers emboldened the “no” vote.

One can quarrel with the details of the Harvard proposal. Ratifying a constitutional amendment, for example, requires the consent of three-fourths of the states. So it makes more sense to divide the District of Columbia into 150 states, rather than 127 states, to ensure that pro-democracy amendments will actually be ratified. (Under the Harvard proposal, there would be 177 states, so 133 of them would have to agree to a new amendment. That means that six existing states would need to play along.)

The issue for Vox is that the insane Harvard Law idea isn’t insane enough.

It also would be a good idea to draw the boundaries of those new states to ensure that the electorate within each of the new states supports such amendments.

So Gerrymandering is great when it guarantees Democrat outcomes.

Details aside, however, the wild thing about this Harvard Law Review proposal is that it is absolutely, 100 percent constitutional. The Constitution provides that “new states may be admitted by the Congress into this union,” but it places no limits on the size of a state either in terms of population or in terms of physical space.

Literally nothing in the Constitution prevents Congress from admitting the Obama family’s personal DC residence as a state — a state which would then be entitled to two senators, one member of the House, and exactly as much say on whether the Constitution should be amended as the entire state of Texas.

So it’s unfair that Wyoming – a Red state – has as much power in the Senate as California – a Blue state – but it’s totes awesome to make Obama’s house its own state – a Blue state – with as much Senate power as Texas – a Red state.

See how this really isn’t about fairness as it is giving the Democrats monopolistic power?

Congress could then follow up this move by adding the personal DC residences of 149 other staunch Democratic families as states, each of which would then get two senators of their very own.

Absolute Democratic monopolistic power.

So let’s be frank. The Harvard note’s proposal is ridiculous, but it is no more ridiculous than a system where the nearly 40 million people in California have no more Senate representation than the 578,759 people in Wyoming.

If the people of Wyoming decided that they had enough of being told they didn’t deserve representation because there are so few of them, and decided to do something about that with violence.  I think I would be sympathetic to them.

That’s the one thing that Harvard Law and Vox have overlooked.

We believe in the Constitution because its the law of the land and it works for everyone.

The second that the Obamas, and Nancy Pelosi’s daughter, and Hunter Biden are given the power to invalidate the votes of the people of Arkansas or Oklahoma or Nebraska or the Dakotas or Kansas, the respect that we have for the Constitution will distribute.

The corrective action for that will be to remind Harvard Law and Vox that we own 400 million guns and a trillion rounds of ammo.

Speaking of Jouranlists creating racist strawmen and then using them to attack you, this was published by NBC.

Trump voters motivated by racism may be violating the Constitution. Can they be stopped?

I’ve been assured by the media for the last three years that all Trump voters are racist and the only motivation anyone has for voting for Trump is racism.

So now it seems that a journalist writing for NBC has figured out how to use that assumption to deny Trump voters their franchise.

If the Trump era has taught us anything, it’s that large numbers of white people in the United States are motivated at least in part by racism in the voting booth.

Right….

Terry Smith, a visiting professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, offers a different response in his new book, “Whitelash: Unmasking White Grievance at the Ballot Box.” Rather than excuse racist voters or try to figure out how to live with their choices, he argues that racist voting is not just immoral, but illegal. The government, Smith says, has the ability, and the responsibility, to address it.

How to keep Trump from winning 2020, deny them the right to vote.  But legally, by assuming their motives, because voter suppression is wrong.

But Smith argues that it’s in line with the Constitution and with years of court rulings. For example, Smith points out that racist appeals in union elections are illegal and that an election in which one side uses racist appeals can be invalidated by the National Labor Relations Board. Similarly, in the 2016 case Peña v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court ruled that when a juror expresses overt bigotry, the jury’s verdict should be invalidated.

So is the plan to put law enforcement outside poling places and ask white people “how are you voting for?”  If they answer with Trump, they are then asked: “why are you voting for Trump?”  And if the answer sounds racist, they are turned away from the polls.  Because that’s what I feel like they are getting at?

“When voters go to the booth, they’re not expressing a mere personal preference,” Smith told me. According to Smith, voters who pull the levers to harm black people are violating the Constitution. If the Constitution means that overt racist appeals undermine the legality of union elections, it stands to reason that they undermine the legality of other elections, as well.

And how do we know that voters are “pull[ing] the levers to harm black people?”

My tax return doubled after Trump passed his tax plan.  The creation of Space Force is boosting money and jobs in Huntsville.  So if I vote for Trump in 2020, will they assume it’s because I want to keep my larger tax return and see Huntsville be SPACECOM, or that it’s because I want black people to suffer?  Who am I kidding, they will assume the worst about me.

So how can you tell when voters are acting out of prejudice? Again, Smith says, employment discrimination law provides a useful analogy. In discrimination cases, courts look for pretexts. If someone gives a reason for a hiring decision that is obviously false or makes little sense in context, the court has good reason to believe that prejudice or bias may have influenced the hiring decision.

What sort of background check will voters be subjected to before they are determined not racist enough to vote?

Maybe “did you vote for Trump in 2016?” or “did you vote against Barack Obama?”  Answer “yes” to either of those and you don’t get your ballot.

It’s more difficult to censure voters who have violated their constitutional duties. Nullifying elections would be essentially impossible. But Smith argues that there are other options.

I’d like to know.

Even more ambitiously, Smith suggests expanding the Voting Rights Act to address the racist patterns of voting in Senate elections in the South. Because the majority of white voters in the South vote Republican, and because they outnumber black voters, there isn’t a single Democratic senator from the Deep South other than Doug Jones in Alabama, who may well lose his seat in 2020. Smith argues that we could remedy these disparate, racially motivated outcomes by creating Senate districts. Presumably, that would make it at least possible for black voters to elect a senator who would support their interests.

So the answer is to turn the Senate into a more powerful version of the House of Representatives? Will those black only senators get their own black-only electoral college votes?

I guess the Progressives are no longer happy with the 17th Amendment.  The Left really hates the Senate.

Still, Smith points out, in the long term, “these remedies are a lot more practical than a lot of people might think.” Republicans won’t always control the presidency and the Senate, and judges don’t live forever. Democrats could also expand the number of seats on lower courts or even on the Supreme Court — another controversial proposal known as court-packing. If Democrats decide that responding to racist voting is a vital priority, they could, in time, take steps to do something about it.

“And once the Democrats control the Senate and Presidency again, we will fix it so the Republicans never win it ever again, even if they have to destroy the entire electoral process to do it.”

Politicians and pundits, Republican and Democratic alike, have been unwilling to reprimand voters or hold them accountable.

The Democrats have been reprimanding voters for not voting for Hillary for three years.  What they haven’t been able to do is punish them.  That is going to change.

But voters are not well-intentioned innocents who are helplessly manipulated by malevolent leaders. They make important decisions as constitutional actors, for which they have moral responsibility. Racist voting isn’t an accident. It’s a choice that may violate the principles of our Constitution and our legal system. We should say so, and then we should find ways to reduce the harm it causes.

But how do you separate the racist voters from the non-racist?

Clearly, given the last three years, the answer is simple.  Assume all non-Democrat voters are racist work to deny them the franchise or eliminate their representation in government.

Before I forget. Since I am bit being paid nor generate revenue for all this work, if you want to contact legislators by phone, click on the Senators’ Directory or the Reepresentatives’ Directory. Maybe I’ll feel inspired come December to add the phones to the lists.

The list of committees and sub-committees are only those that are holding hearings on Gun and Self Defense related bills.

You will find links to the page on the right-hand column of this blog under “Florida 2020 Legislative Season”

Please, if you see something missing or in need of correction, send me an email to miguel AT gunfreezone DOT net

List of Committees and Sub-Committees (Gun Bills) with names and email addresses. (Excel)

2020 Florida – All Senators Emails [Excel]

2020 Florida – All House Members Emails [Excel]

I’ve said it before, Medium has become the Leftist version of Stormfront.  It is one of the most racist websites on the internet.

Still, I get notices from it.

Today’s racist diatribe is from a woman, K.C. Compton, who is a journalist from Seattle.  Clearly she is very Woke.  So Woke in fact, that she wants to reinstitute the Nazi’s Nuremburg laws.

Attention Angry White People: 8 New Rules

Oh, I can’t wait.  But firsts, she has to open with a preamble about how Woke she is.

In the past couple of months, I have eaten food from at least six nationalities (go, Seattle!) and have had personal interactions with black people, white people, Latinx people, transgender people, Asian people, gay people, Jewish people, Hindu people, Christian people, Muslim people, unaffiliated reprobates like myself, male people, female people and people who have chosen not to pick sides. And probably a number of other categories I’ve forgotten by now because I don’t care. This is just how my life rolls in a diverse city, among a diverse community, with a heart that is richer for all of them.

Seattle’s diversity makes it better than you and your city.  We’re not going to talk about the rampant homelessness, drug addiction, tent cities, poop and needles on the street, or anything else like that.

She then goes into the crisis facing Maine about the aging of the population and the lack of young workers.  This is clearly a job for the immigrants.

People from other countries have long filled the ranks of medical professionals and caregivers in this nation, but with harsher immigration policies and a public sentiment that makes the U.S. less inviting, the immigrant population will, predictably, dwindle.

I need to have an aside for a moment.  My grandmother still lives in Miami.  One of the biggest problems there for the elderly is at home cursing care.  Largely, the problem is that of cost.  Medicare doesn’t pay much for it and these people are on a fixed income.  To lower the cost the at-home nursing population has been filled with a large immigrant population and the results are fucking awful.

The nurses do not speak the same language as the patients.  There is wanton cruelty.  Care is poor.  Theft is common.

I experienced this myself when I was in the hospital in Miami for almost two weeks.  My doctors were excellent.  My orderlies were less so.

I was on a restricted diet.  I was brought all the wrong food and could not communicate with the woman who brought me the wrong food that I needed something else because I don’t speak Haitian Creole.  My mother ended up bringing me food from outside the hospital because it was easier than trying to send it back and get the right stuff.

Bringing in lost cost, unskilled, immigrant workers into the bottom end of healthcare to make it cheap is not a recipe for quality patient care, and being opposed to that doesn’t make a person racist.

My doctor was Venezuelan.  She was excellent.

For the vast majority of people on the right, the issue with immigration isn’t that we don’t want brown people coming to America.  It’s that brining in low skilled, poorly educated, people to do low-cost work even more cheaply is bad for the economy and the wages of Americans.

For her, it’s only about skin color.

I wonder how some of the horrible white people we are seeing on a daily basis these days insisting in the local Starbucks that the people a table away (who weren’t talking to them) SPEAK ENGLISH!!! or castigating the waiter in the MEXICAN restaurant where they were buying tacos (!!!) to GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM (“Unh … it’s my restaurant…”) are eventually going to deal with the fact that their lily white bum gets wiped by a foreigner or it doesn’t get wiped at all. That should be a day of reckoning, for sure.

So this Progressive woman has a solution.

If I were named Queen for a Day, these are a few of the new rules I would hereby order for all those angry white people:

1. If you don’t want immigrants to live in the U.S.A. and/or you think brown people of any type are your inferiors, you will be required to wear an indelible stamp across your forehead (not a tattoo, because we want you to have a change of heart) with a big, fat purple B for Bigot.

That’s somewhere been a yellow star and an arm tattoo.

2. If you are wearing your required B-for-Bigot stamp and you become ill, you will not be able to access care by anyone brown or from another country, especially Muslim or shit-hole countries (is “shit-hole” hyphenated or one word? Whatever).

Death by forced neglect.

3. You have to give up any food that any immigrant group has ever introduced here. No Mexican food, no Chinese, no Thai hot, no sushi, no Indian buffet, no soul food — no nuthin’ but potatoes and whatever some Native American might be kind enough to cook up for you. They will retain the right to refuse. You cannot eat anything harvested by any immigrant ever. You will starve.

I’m pretty sure this woman is too dumb to realize that the Mexican and Chinese food we eat in the US is not what they eat in Mexico or China.  Or that potatoes are originally from the Americas before being adopted in Europe a few hundred years ago.  Or that there is a huge tradition of European foods that are excellent.

She even seems to get race and immigration confused.  Is Italian food “immigrant food” or not to her.

What is important is that you will starve and die.

4. You will not be able to sell anything to anyone from an immigrant group or with skin darker than copy paper.

Just a reminder, the Nazis prohibited good Germans from buying from Jewish store owners or patronizing Jewish businesses.

5. You must relinquish all access to any music imported from any immigrant group or via any brown people. This leaves … unh … gosh … hmmm … still thinking. Even bluegrass or old-time country are out because that came to us courtesy of that pesky Irish/Scot invasion and, even though these were my people and they borrowed heavily on the African traditions already taking root in the South, they were, at one point, nasty immigrants.

By now, her logic has jumped ship.  Is there any group, even of white supremacists, that doesn’t acknowledge that white people in the US are of European descent?  So who are these straw-man nativists that are so nativists that the Scot/Irish who came in the 1700’s (American folk music predates the Irish Migration of 1840’s) are unwanted immigrant groups?

6. You will never be able to enjoy any electronic devices again — iPhones, tablets, laptops, PCs. According to the Census Bureau, despite making up only 16 percent of the resident population holding a bachelor’s degree or higher, immigrants represent 33 percent of engineers, 27 percent of mathematicians, statisticians, and computer scientist, and 24 percent of physical scientists.

I wonder how this woman feels about the fact that most of this data is represented by Japanese and Chinese immigrants, who now do so well financially that most of the SJW scene has stopped caring about Asians and colleges such as Harvard and the California University system actively discriminate against them?

Congratulations Asians, you are the new Jews.  You are too rich and successful to be good minorities anymore.

Also, again, the issue isn’t some kid who came to the US to get his degree in Computer Science and create the next billion-dollar dot com.  The problem is, if we’re going to talk about immigration in STEM, H1B visa abuse is terrible.

One IT company fired all of its American IT workers to bring over people from India for $800 per month.   It’s not racists to object to unscrupulous companies using immigrants to get away with paying tech workers less than minimum wage.

This woman realizes that her hate-train jumped the track so tries to correct:

Because this conclusion apparently isn’t clear to some readers, let me be completely explicit: We would not have a worthwhile culture or a society without the contributions of immigrants and/or people of color — who, yes, I know, are not necessarily the same.

So what started out as an attack on people who don’t believe an economic fix is to bring in low cost, low skill, immigrant labor has turned into an attack on generic white people who are not as woke as she is.

So you (wanna be white separatists) go ahead and sit over there in your little whitey-tighty corner, wrapped in gauze and buffered from any encounter with anyone not on your list of approved races, ethnic groups and/or gender expressions. I haven’t seen this list, but I assume you’ve all gotten together and worked it out, right?

These actual people measure in the hand full.  They are not representative of the majority opinion.

Let me spell it out.  This isn’t the 1800’s anymore.  We don’t grow more food by bringing in more farmhands to plow with a horse and harvest with a sickle.  One guy with a tractor can do the work of 100 men 100 years ago.  The nature of work in the US as changed.  The economy is less driven by low skill manual labor than ever before.  Even in areas like construction, the skill and knowledge to build things to code are necessary.

The situation we are running into in America is we have more low skilled people than we have jobs for them.  We have a glut of open jobs for people who have skills (welders, linesmen, pipe fitters, etc.).  An immigration policy that brings in more low skilled workers to compete with the low skilled workers we already have.

True story.  Remember how the Left went ballistic that ICE raided some chicken processing plants in Mississippi and arrested 680 illegal immigrant workers?  Here is the story they didn’t run after that.

The Illinois-based company had a job fair in Forest, Mississippi on Monday — in the same town where many of the immigrants swept up in the raids live.

Bell said more than 200 people filled out applications during the job fair, which ran from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Several applicants told VICE News they heard about the job fair on social media and wanted to work at Koch because they had worked there in the past and had been relatively well-paid. Many said they’d heard about the ICE raids and some said they had friends and acquaintances who’d been swept up.

Wow, 200 good-paying jobs in a town of 5,600 with a high poverty rate.  Sound like the (mostly black) population benefited from enforcement of our immigration laws.

Her disjointed logic, constant confusion or conflation of immigrants and minorities, and creating ruled that explicitly lead to the deaths of those she disagrees with is all part and parcel.

If you disagree with her Progressive politics, it doesn’t matter why, you will publicly branded, isolated from society, and forced to die.

But somehow it’s Trump supporters that are Fascists?

I guess I am not Progressive enough to understand how it’s a good thing to bring back the Nuremberg laws as long as they are aimed at white people.