Gun Free Zone

I rem,ember watching the touchdown and aftermath from Venezuela. I saw it, but I could not understand the magnitude of what the hurricane did to South Florida. A year later , I went to Miami with my partner to get some equipment quotes for our studio and place orders and a friend drove us to some of the location were the damage was still noticeable. I saw buildings that only the steel beams and concrete foundation remained standing while what once was the walls were littering the grounds. Acres upon acres of trees knocked down in one direction like gigantic roller just went over them. And that solitary car planted almost vertically in a field was the one that still bothers me for some reason.  I shivered and thank the Lord I did not have to deal with hurricanes.

And God laughed.

Over two decades in Miami and I don’t even wake up unless a Cat 1 Hurricane is about to become a Cat 2.

Via Of Arms and The Law:

Yesterday the Michigan Court of Appeals handed down a decision in a highly public and very controversial case that gun owners across the United States should applaud. In short, it demonstrates and validates the value of armed self-defense even when you do not pull the trigger and — crucially — have no cause to pull the trigger. It justifies the brandishing of a gun as pre-emptive measure to block the use of unlawful force.

A Michigan Court Case Shows the Right of Armed Self-Defense Is Broader Than You Might Think

Summary: Woman with a child in her arms points gun to another woman who was being aggressive with her vehicle. he was tried and convicted to two years in prison. The conviction was thrown out by the Court of Appeals which stated that “When one brandishes a weapon without firing it, they don’t, in fact, use “deadly force.”

We had several cases in Florida where a defendant presented a firearm in the course of a confrontation and did not shoot or shot other than killing. Prosecutors hung on to that to say that the defendant was not truly in fear for life or grave bodily harm so it was actually not self-defense but assault with a deadly weapon. Please understand the silly and heartless reasoning: You were better off legally if you killed your attacker rather than scare him off. The state demanded a corpse or at least somebody in the ER so you could claim Self Defense.
Next thing, the victim of the attack was victimized by the states with 20 years of prison because no lives were lost. The most famous case was Marissa Alexander’s which was the final coffin in the nail of Prosecutor Angela Corey, famous for forcing the Zimmerman witch trial to happen. I am still dumbfounded that the Democrats stood against this bill which actually would allow for the de-escalation of a criminally dangerous situation and save lives.

The Florida Legislature changed the law and now we have in Chapter 776, Justifiable use of force, the following wording:   Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.  I hope the Michigan Legislature follows suit and Michiganders expand their options in a Deadly Force event.

It is true, some people recoil at the sight of a knife outside the dining table. I get that there is some deep cultural distrust about the blade that goes back centuries when people had to see animals and fellow humans deeply cut by sharp objects and the sight of this cuts are rather disturbing, but as always, the darn thing does not cut by itself and it does not matter if you read about a the legend of cursed Samurai sword.

(Warning: Rehashing old story up ahead)

When I worked in a hotel, I was usually tasked to be the First Aid provider for guests and associates so I got to deal with a lot of small cuts and wounds that only required a cleaning, maybe some antibiotic ointment and a band aid. The problem was the ointment that came in an individual serving bag just like ketchups’s and it was impossible  to open wearing gloves. I started to use my EDC folder to defeat the bags, but I noticed some of the guests recoiling at the sight of the regular blade. Even my boss made some grumbling comments, but he understood some sort of knife was necessary for the job and I had the training.

What I did was to look for a smaller knife that was not a gimmick and it may be a bit more palatable to the guests. After a bit of search and a dose of blind trust, I spent $30 on a Boker Subcom Wharcom.

It is a strong little blade, a workhorse. This is actually my second Subcom since the first one is now retired after a full decade of use and abuse. This particular model with the Wharncliff  blade is almost impossible to find and if you do and have a heart, I am willing to hear a decent offer for your discovery.

I had almost no negative reactions from guests after that. A few actually found the blade cute and a an even some wanted to buy it outright from me. Nein! The only other strong negative reaction I had was a new creature in HR who asked me to help her open a just delivered box of office supplies. I pulled by Boker and she actually gasped in partial horror, “You are not supposed to have that at work!” I looked at her and I said she was right and left her office, box unopened.

The knife is the second tool human’s created. A sharp blade should be as usual as breathing and yet is treated like tuberculosis… or the Black Plague if you are in the formerly Great Britain.  I bet you find yourself at least once a day trying to open some sort of package or bag or simply separating two items by sheer strength or you are forced to look for some sort of tool to do so. Have some sort of utilitarian knife, because you are wasting time and effort for no good reason otherwise.

So the Democrats have been talking about the need for more background checks when it comes to buying guns.  They want to make it harder for bad people to get them… supposedly.

So it shocked me to read this headline:

San Francisco board rebrands ‘convicted felon’ as ‘justice-involved person,’ sanitizes other lingo

San Francisco has introduced new sanitized language for criminals, getting rid of words such as “offender” and “addict” while changing “convicted felon” to “justice-involved person.”

The Board of Supervisors adopted the changes last month even as the city reels from one of the highest crime rates in the country and staggering inequality exemplified by pervasive homelessness alongside Silicon Valley wealth.

The local officials say the new language will help change people’s views about those who commit crimes.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, from now on a convicted felon or an offender released from custody will be known as a “formerly incarcerated person,” or a “justice-involved” person or just a “returning resident.”

Having solved all of the other problems plaguing (literally, there is bubonic plague on the streets to San Francisco) San Francisco has decided to stop offended criminals.

My question is, how will this jive with background checks?

“Are you a convicted felon?”

“No, I am a returning resident who was recently justice-involved.”

“Oh, that’s fine then.”

There are lots of times that it’s good to know what someone has done.

How about sex offenders?  Do they get their crimes sanitized too?  What about child molesters?  How will San Francisco cover for them?

The Democrats want to make it harder for you to buy a gun, but San Francisco Democrats want to make it easier to hide your criminal record.

As we all know, what starts in San Francisco rapidly spreads to the rest of California and then onto the rest of the Democrat Party.

Just give it a few more years and you are going to get red-flagged for liking a gun blog on Facebook and thrown in jail for driving a V-8, while some drug dealing rapist gets to walk around calling himself “unlicensed supplier of pharmacology with a unilateral consent sexual orientation.”

Hasan Piker is the nephew of Cenk Uygur.

Uygar is the host of The Young Turks, a hyper-Progressive news opinion group named after the Turkish political party that committed the first Genocide of the 20th century.  In true form to his media company’s namesake, he’s an Armenian Genocide denier.  He’s also a vicious antisemite and general piece of shit.

Piker decided to voice his opinion about Dan Crenshaw and America.  Including that the insurgent who cost Crenshaw his eye was “a brave soldier” and that the USA deserved 9/11.

Twitch Streamer who’s (Far Left) says “America deserved 911” ⁦@Twitch⁩ has NOT banned him #DramaAlert pic.twitter.com/N0ZpcJ90Ia

— KEEM 🍿 (@KEEMSTAR) August 21, 2019

Cenk's Nephew called the man who took @DanCrenshawTX's eye a "brave fucking soldier" This is what happens when you're gifted a job by your Uncle you know you didn't earn & it eats away at your mental state. pic.twitter.com/BohESrbvJ6

— Sean Fitzgerald (Actual Justice Warrior) (@IamSean90) August 21, 2019

Of course, this human turd has the constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech.

All I’m saying is that I know a lot of people who are sort of hoping for CW2.0 because they have a list of names of turds that need flushing if shit ever gets kicked off.

From the Twitter feed of Bernie Sanders:

Fossil fuel executives should be criminally prosecuted for the destruction they have knowingly caused. #GreenNewDeal

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) August 22, 2019

There is no problem those Socialist bastards cannot solve that doesn’t involve throwing people in prison.

Bernie wants to throw the management of oil and gas companies – you know, the fuel that powers our economy – in prison for the destruction that they will attempt to qualify with dubious science.

What law have any of these execs broken now that is a prosecutable offense?

What will the charges be?

Can they prove that one weather-related death, one bit of weather-related damage, one grain of sand washed off a beach was the result of a direct action of one of these people?

No.  It is 100% fallacious to say “this storm was more destructive than it should have been because of global warming and that is why damages were $10 million instead of $1 million.”

What Bernie really wants to do is have a Soviet-style show trial where these people are dragged into a court to be convicted on purely political grounds.

The thing is, if he can do this to them, he can do this to anybody.

Bernie wants to end the use of fossil fuels, most likely with a ban.

I bought a brand new 2018 Dodge Ram Power Wagon 18 months ago.  I have barely 9,000 miles on it.  I’ve added some accessories (rumbly exhaust, light bar, etc.) because she is my baby.  I’m a truck guy to the core.

My Wagon has a 6.4L Hemi big block, I get about 12 MPG.  That doesn’t bother me because I don’t drive far (hence the 9,000 miles in 18 months).

I am persnickety about preventative maintenance.  My last truck was a 2003 Silverado 1500.  I still have it and only 109,000 miles.  I got 15 years out of that as a daily driver and it still runs strong.

My plan was to give the Wagon to my son in 11 years when he turns 16, at which point, it should have about 70,000 miles on it, which is practically brand new for a 2500 truck.

So will Bernie institute a mandatory buyback for both of my pickups?  Or will I have to buy a new electric vehicle while paying off the loan on my Wagon which I can’t get rid of because banned gas burners have no resale value?

What if I refuse to comply.  Do I get to go to prison too for wanting to keep my beloved trucks?

The same guy who wants me to give of my AR-15 is going to come for my truck too.  I don’t think so.  I’m not going to give anything up to those bureaucrats.

You can have my pickups when you pry them from my cold dead hands.