Gun Owners Foundation has come to the defense of a West Virginia teenager who is actually being prosecuted (a.k.a., persecuted) for his pro-gun views.Jared Marcum wore a T-shirt to his Logan County middle school in West Virginia on April 18 — a decision that has since sparked a national controversy.No, Jared’s T-shirt did not depict a Muslim beheading a victim while shouting Alahu Akhbar! Such depictions of violence would violate the school’s dress code.Jared’s T-shirt depicted a hunting rifle with the message: “Protect Your Right.” And now, he faces up to a year in jail for doing so!The outrageousness of this case has prompted the involvement of Gun Owners Foundation, which has agreed to help Jared pro bono.
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
It was an NRA tee shirt that got Jared Marcum in trouble -- but it is GOA which is doing something about it.
Ms. Horsley's parents assert that at the age of 18--old enough to serve in the military (and indeed to join without her parents' permission), using some of the most powerful weapons in the history of humanity--she is not old enough for the responsibility of possessing a double barrel shotgun to defend her life. At 18, that is no longer their judgment to make.
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
The bill being crafted by Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) would allow for the ATF’s functions to be shifted to another agency, such as the FBI, effectively bypassing the need for the Senate to confirm a director of the embattled bureau.“It strikes me that if the Senate has not confirmed the head of an agency as important as this, after a certain period of time, that we should transfer the jurisdiction of that agency to the FBI for example, which has a long-term director,” Durbin told The Hill.
Riiight. First, they wouldn't be able to get it past the House and second, the FBI will make sure it never happens because they don't want the mission. The J.Edgar files would come out to defend themselves from that tar baby.
Well, folks, we've made our minimum of 100 on the magazines to smuggle into Colorado -- and then some. The generosity of my readers never ceases to amaze me. Along with magazines, I've received brass and even bullets to enhance my reloading efforts in the same boxes, and of course voluntary donations for gas and expenses. God bless you all.
The problem is that as yet the plan for distributing them has yet to come together. There is a civil disobedience already planned for Custer County on the 4th, but we are given to understand (after an initial invitation by organizers) that they "don't want outsiders" there, Custer County would be a great place to do it because the sheriff there is one of the ones who has signed onto the lawsuit against the intolerable act, and says he won't enforce it, so politically it would be a two-fer. Since I'm going to be out in Colorado anyway, I may cover the event for Sipsey Street because the civil disobedience is news in and of itself.
The other possibility is a 1 July civil disobedience planned for the statehouse steps in Denver, but I am awaiting more information on that. This action, planned on Facebook, is described this way:
1- This isn't a political rally. There will be no guest speakers sound systems mc's or dj's. The time for talking about action is over. This is about willful civil disobedience on the doorstep of those who feign to be our rulers.2-this is a protest of the new state law. As it is being done in Denver, I suggest everyone bring or exchange magazines that come as close to the 15 round unit as possible while still going over.3- There is a real possibility of arrest here. with that in mind, I don't recommend bringing mags you cant afford to lose, and i do not recommend carrying."
The organizer is Ryan Tuleja and I am waiting for some more info from him. Previously I had been persuaded by Colorado friends that doing anything in Denver was more than problematic if the crowd numbers were not there. If I'm going to certainly be arrested (as seems to be Tuleja's plan for himself), I don't need a hundred magazines, just one. Perhaps it will be possible to do all three -- participate in the 1 July action in Denver, get bailed out of jail (assuming the bail money can be raised), cover the 4 July action in Custer County AND smuggle in the 100 magazines (with suitable press coverage).
That is how my mind is trending at the moment.
Madigan's stall tactics are a transparent attempt to inflict the most restrictive, intrusive and unworkable defensive firearm carry law possible on the people of Illinois. At the same time, while she stalls, Illinoisans are being forced to choose between "law abiding" (and thus defenseless against predatory muggers, rapists and murderers), and prepared to defend themselves (and thus "gun criminals," as per a law already ruled to be unconstitutional, but still enforced in 99 of the state's 102 counties). The Supreme Court has no business helping her in that endeavor.
Monday, June 17, 2013
“Whoever was in my work computer, the only thing I was working on were work-related things with CBS were big stories I guess during the time period in questions were I guess Benghazi and ‘Fast and Furious.’ The intruders did have access to personal information including passwords to my financial accounts and so on, but didn’t tamper with those, so they weren’t interested in stealing my identity or doing things to my finances. So people can decide on their own what they might have been trying to do in there.”
His narrative is instructive, because it exposes the often-repeated and obvious falsehood that the MAIG group is only interested in going after “illegal guns.” According to this report, they saw lawful activity they do not approve of and still attempted to use armed authorities to put a stop to it, which means they're not above using law enforcement to endanger peaceable citizens exercising freedoms they oppose.
Today is the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, which as we all know was actually fought on Breed's Hill.
Recently my friend Stewart Rhodes sent me a copy of Bunker Hill -- A City, A Siege, a Revolution by Nathaniel Philbrick. It is, in short sentence, the best single work I've ever read on the battle, its prelude (including the Stamp Act, the Boston Massacre, the Tea Party, the Powder Alarm and Lexington and Concord) as well as its aftermath.
I most especially recommend it to those generally anonymous posters who quibble with my policy of "No Fort Sumters" and who dispute my contention that the Founders were smart men who understood the necessity of goading the Crown forces into firing first, thereby forcing them to cede the moral high ground to the forces of liberty. They did, in fact, leave us a template for future action to defend the Republic they bequeathed us. Even when they engaged in street violence, these were conservative men who sought to control events with the Boston mob. Their responses to British provocations were measured -- and maddening -- to both the Crown and the Tories:
The appearance of Joyce Junior (MBV: a masked mob leader who actually was the 26 year old son of Harvard professor John Winthrop and descended from THE Winthrops who had founded Massachusetts Bay Colony) in January 1774 appears to have been part of an effort by patriot leaders to control the aftermath of the Tea Party. Unwieldy mob eruptions such as the one that provoked the Boston Massacre inevitably made for bad publicity in both America and England. In an effort to depict the destruction of East India tea as an act of principle rather than of rage, the Tea Party had been minutely choreographed from the start. Joyce Junior was continuing this attempt to channel if not contain the violence.
So, on this anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, get this book and sift its many lessons from the Founders. You will, I think, come to understand that the Founders themselves would have embraced the principle of "No Fort Sumters."
The Death of General Warren at Breed's Hill.