Bloomin' Onions Anyone?
As Ryan can attest, when you are researching a legal problem, the more you dig, the more rabbit trails and potential problems you uncover. Kind of like an onion. The more layers you peel, you uncover another layer and each layer stings your eyes and makes you want to cry. Well the DHS report onion keeps being peeled back to expose layer after layer....
Landon,
If people stop looking you in the eye and start shuffling their feet, you might want to be aware of a knock on the door...
Reply to this
I already booby trapped the front entrance to my house. If any of you all come by the house, be sure to come in the back door.
As noted in a previous comment I made I stated where is the extreme left DHS report. Well, evidently there is one.
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Leftwing_Extremist_Threat.pdf
and it lists several groups specifically, the Animal Liberation Front and its sister organization, the Earth Liberation Front, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, and chapters within the Animal Defense League, and Earth First and some of the attacks they have made on specific targets. Most of which were cyber attacks... Now with that being said what specific groups were listed in the Right wing extremist report? What attacks had they completed? None, I say again no organization and no attacks made. Yes it listed white supremest groups but c'mon their fight isn't so much with the gubment as it is with ethnic origins. It is easy to point the finger at a hate group. Where are the Black Panthers? Same, same.
The fact that Nazism/Aryan brotherhoods are directly linked with Iraqi and afghan vets is exactly like linking Obama and Osama. No difference.
I love my country but fuck the crooked ass gubment.
Reply to this
hell, if youre knockin on the door then that means youre not supposed to be there in the first place. and anyone coming by my place watch out for the riki tikis in the yard. stay on the concrete and youre fine. just keep in mind that youve been funneled into my kill zone so keep your hands where i can see 'em.
Reply to this
I always knew Landon was a "backdoor man."
Having said that, yes there are no specific acts just generalities alleged in the report - which is why Michael Wiener a.k.a. Savage (what an idiot that guy is) filed his lawsuit. It alleges the report was designed to chill 1st Amdt protected activities and I think it just might do just that...
And speaking of Savage, he is on here in the afternoons and I listen. I used to like him, but he is a complete idiot and shuts down anyone who disagrees with him (even the ones with a point). He misses the mark about 97% of the time on the analysis but I do catch issues that he presents. He finds the things going on and I like that but he is an idiot when it comes to analysis.
Reply to this
yes ryan, i think all of those laws are unconstitutional. including the current ccw permit i have to have. its nice of the state to allow me (with many, many restrictions) to do what i have been constitutionally mandated. the heller ruling was a joke. they upheld the right own, but left in the ruling the ability of the govt to outlaw particular weapons. and here ya go.
The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final
list will be worse):
Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
* M1 Carbine,
* Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
* AR-15,
* Bushmaster XM15,
* Armalite M15,
* AR-10,
* Thompson 1927,
* Thompson M1;
* AK,
* AKM,
* AKS,
* AK-47,
* AK-74,
* ARM,
* MAK90,
* NHM 90,
* NHM 91,
* SA 85,
* SA 93,
* VEPR;
* Olympic Arms PCR;
* AR70,
* Calico Liberty ,
* Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
* Fabrique National FN/FAL,
* FN/LAR, or FNC,
* Hi-Point20Carbine,
* HK-91,
* HK-93,
* HK-94,
* HK-PSG-1,
* Thompson 1927 Commando,
* Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
* Saiga,
* SAR-8,
* SAR-4800,
* SKS with detachable magazine,
* SLG 95,
* SLR 95 or 96,
* Steyr AU,
* Tavor,
* Uzi,
* Galil and Uzi Sporter,
* Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
* Calico M-110,
* MAC-10,
* MAC-11, or MPA3,
* Olympic Arms OA,
* TEC-9,
* TEC-DC9,
* TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
* Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
* Armscor 30 BG,
* SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
* Striker 12,
* Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new
designs):
A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a
grip, see below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable
magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip,
and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept
more than 10 rounds.
A semiautomatic shotgun with:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed
magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion
kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:
Reply to this
Ollie North penned a great "I am an extremist" piece for the WaPost The NRA distributed it.Go read it.
Hard cold fact boys, bullets are a poor substitute for votes. I know it is a sea change for most whitebreads to think that they can solve this gubmt problem without stockpiling weapons and shooting the census man on sight, but the right needs to check its approach and head this thing off with non violent political action.
The left wants the right to get violent then they can take over using the full might of the US gubmt. The last thing they want is America's 90million gun owners all registered to vote and pointing their ink pens in the same direction.
Revolution is a political action and should be approached thusly as the socialist have seen and used to great success in recent years.
They can take down America without firing a shot. All the while the right buys ammo. Hmmmm...who wins then?
This report was designed to scare right wingers away from such political activity forcing them to become more extremist and stockpile more weapons so the gubmt can declare them a danger and smash them.
Go run for office, help candidates who are running and generally carry out guerilla political action before the shooting becomes necessary. Much easier and you can bring your kids.
Otherwise if you are not willing to get politically involved then shut the fuck up and sign up for reeducation camp today. Spots are going fast.
Reply to this
This is simply where P-Daddy and Huffdaddy disagree. I have posted a point-counterpoint commentary below:
“The last thing they want is America's 90million gun owners all registered to vote and pointing their ink pens in the same direction.”
Good luck with that. There is no way you are going to get 100% of those people voting the same way. They always will vote on some other issue like which congresscritter will give them the most Social Insecurity pay.
“Revolution is a political action and should be approached thusly as the socialist have seen and used to great success in recent years.”
Problem is revolution is a multi-faceted attack using the entire spectrum of attack: political, economic, military…. They have been thus far successful at using the political spectrum and now that a lot of people are running scared because the stock market is tanking, they are using the economic spectrum to gain in the political arena. Again, Joe 24-Pack is gonna vote with his pocketbook and too many sheeple have been brainwashed to look to Uncle Sugar to give him a teet and “do something.” Again, see supra comments regarding getting 90M gun owners voting in lock-step.
“This report was designed to scare right wingers away from such political activity…”
Agreed. Which is the problem with the report and why I think it should survive a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss since it does chill freedoms of speech and association.
“Go run for office, help candidates who are running and generally carry out guerilla political action...”
Heh. Yeah right. I gots two words for ya: Ron…Paul… I have been supporting him for years and nothing is happening but the other Congresscritters are pressing ahead full steam with their agenda rolling over those who hold views of limited gubmint. IF (and I submit that is a BIG if) I were able to get elected to public office, I would simply end up like Ron Paul…ostracized and called a “looney” because I subscribe to the Jeffersonian or Classical Liberalism/Austrian school of limited gubmint/economic freedom. Ditto helping candidates who also support this viewpoint. Unless you belong to Team Red or Team Blue you ain’t gettin elected to higher public office. School boards maybe. State Legistature not as much and you can forget the Federal Legislature. Oh and then you hae to contend with the vote “counters” since he who controls the ballot box (vice ballots) controls the election. We from the Tipton know all about what goes on there…
See my most recent post ….
Sorry Dr. P but I have long ago resolved to forget about wasting my time voting and am resolved to live my life peacefully and play by the rules (or exploit them to my advantage) and deal with the changes in the rules midstream.
Reply to this
1. When you post relevant details on your booby traps online, it kind of diminishes that element of surprise you hoped to obtain in the first place. But I do apprecaite the warnings, and will be sure to hit your back door first.
2. The Savage lawsuit is pretty crappy and I'd be surprised if it wasn't tossed on a 12(b)6 / inital motion to dismiss
3. Gun owners already vote pretty well, but only consistently for gun rights. And while there are a few Dems in core urban constituencies that are in favor of more control, the issue is nothing but a vote loser for the Dem party overall, and they aren't going to do anything (I'll take bets that the 111th congress will pass no significant gun control laws. I'll also take bets that no significant legislation even makes it out of comittee)
4. Relax. There's not enough federal agents in the whole government to watch out for everyone who considers themselves right wing, owns a gun, and bitches about the government. And the actual agents tasked with keeping track of nuts has got to be pretty small. The actual report was ordered up under Bush, and just released now. And while all ya'll are jumpin around at ghosts and yellin about a conspiracy to get locked up in secret FEMA re-education camps, the government has a basis for concern. The Pittsburgh shooter from earlier this month was a extreme right wing/white supremacist who stockpilied guns and killed 3 cops unprovoked, and he was briefly in the Marines. He also voiced the same fears highlighted in the DHS report. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Pittsburgh_police_shooting
McVeigh was a vet, got into right wing milita movements, and ended up blowing up a lot of women and kids.
There are crazy radicals on the left and the right. So what? On April 15, a lot of people on the right protested. I'm not aware of fed agents swooping down on any of these protests and supressing any 1st amendment rights.
Don't be pussies getting the vapors over every little thing. It was the last president that illegally sized and tortured US citizens, not this one (yet).
Reply to this
methinks you think we liked bush.
also it depends on what you call significant gun laws. any gun law in my opinion is significant and unconstitutional. the propaganda word being bounced around now is "sensible" gun laws. sounds benign but has no real meaning.
Reply to this
I guess your big target is the National Firearms Act of 1934. Which was a major restrictive law. Followed by the 1968 Gun Control Act and then the 1986 "Firearms Owner's Protection Act" (which actually eased some restrictions, but created new ones too). But the last major piece of legislation was the "assult weapons ban," which is poorly named and was really a narrow ban of a few weapons based on certain random characteristics. But the ban has expired, and the Heller Court recently struck down the local ban in DC (originally passed in 1975). The state of the 2nd Amendemnt, per Heller, is: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
Sidenote: I did notice this interesting factoid on the NFA (no idea if actually true, but ya'll might be interested:
Muzzle-loading weapons are exempt from the Act (as they are defined as 'Antique Firearms' and are not considered 'Firearms' in the NFA). Thus, though common muzzle-loading hunting rifles are available in calibers over 0.50", they are not regulated as destructive devices, or even firearms. Muzzle-loading cannons are similarly exempt since the law draws no distinction between the size of the muzzle-loading weapons; thus it is legal for a civilian to build muzzle-loading rifles, pistols, cannons and mortars with no paperwork.
So gun restrictions appear to be in decline, although at a very modest rate, and there is no real movement to repeal the older federalrestrictions. I'd say most laws lie at the state level, and vary pretty widely. I don't think any gun laws will go anywhere in the current Congress, "sensible" or otherwise.
As for Bush, haven't seen any support for him. But have seen praise for some of his bad policies on here (like torture). And seen lots of paranoia that the Black man in the White House will start a new war of northern agression against the yeoman patriots of Tennessee (and Arkansas) to create a totalitarian society. AKA the vapors.
Reply to this
Ryan,
To piggyback on your comment, have you seen this ?
Methinks that a split of authority is the surest and fastest way for this to make its way to SCOTUS.
Reply to this
I hadn't seen it, but had heard about some 9th Circuit incorporation of Heller/2nd Amendemnt. Just part of the long rollback of the holdings in the Slaughterhouse cases.
I wouldn't expect much from it, the Roberts court seems to favor stare decis and very narrow rulings. So I wouldn't expect much deviation from Heller.
As for 12b6, Federal Judges can get pretty snippy. I could see one berating the attorney who filed that suit in a ruling on a 12b6 motion and then dismissing it just for the hell of it (take it up on appeal...). I know that "chilling effect" is a recognized reason for invalidation, but in the current environment find it hard to think a judge to find it credible.
On a blog note, I couldn't see the link when it appeared in my email. But when I logged in to the site to reply, link was present on your post. Hmm...
Also, "Vapors" was mostly snark.
Reply to this
Actually, no one is praising torture on this site (I did a search and it is pretty much mentioned by you Ryan or people responding to your mention of torture - and not a lot of mentions of torture BTW; only 7 comments out of 192 thus far and of those 7, 5 were by Ryan and 2 by Aaron, one of which was in response to a comment by Ryan). So basically only 3% of the comments mention torture and only 0.5% by commenters other than Ryan. Limited, non-scientific search, BTW - I don't have time to examine each link for torture related commentary.
Plus no paranoia that the "Black man in the White House will start a new war of northern aggression" either. There is however a lot of discussion about FEDGOV in general encroaching on society (and certainly not limited to the last 90 days either). The overall site is geared to a general discussion on numerous topics and self-sufficiency is one of the main topics. To borrow a time-tested phrase "tis better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it."
So I guess what I am trying to say is vapors? Not so much, but some get pretty fired up about certain issues. Witty banter should not be confused with vapors.
Reply to this
You can buy pre-1899 firearms with no paperwork and they will ship directly to you with no FFL requirement. (Considered collectibles and not part of NFA rules.)
http://www.antiquefirearms.org/blog/
You used to be able to pick them up for about 100 bucks each – just try to find some non-corrosive ammo to go with it or lots and lots of bore cleaner.
Reply to this
I wasn't addressing the merits of the Savage (Wiener) lawsuit, but was simply stating I thought it would survive a 12(b)(6) motion. A Motion to Dismiss for failure to state facts upon which relief may be granted is treated as a Motion for Summary Judgment and is disposed of pursuant to Rule 56.
A Motion for Summary Judgment will only be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. For this suit to get kicked at this stage, the FEDGOV as a high burden to show that there is no genuine issue of material fact. All Weiner has to do is show there is an issue of material fact and the Motion to Dismiss is denied.
In considering a motion to dismiss under subdivision 12(b)(6), the facts as alleged in the complaint are treated as true and viewed in the light most favorable to the party seeking relief, and it is improper for the trial court to look beyond the complaint to decide a motion to dismiss unless it is treating the motion as a motion for summary judgment. So a 12(b)(6) motion is likely to fail because the complaint is worded such to avoid dismissal under 12(b)(6). So a Motion for Summary Judgment is the better route, however as stated supra, that is a hard burden to meet.
As I said before, the merits are very VERY tenuous at best and I don't think the lawsuit is planning on doing anything other than get to discovery.
Reply to this
Disclaimer: Law nerd post.
Ok, my inital thoughts were based on the statements about the suit and the general thrust of it.
I've now reviewed the Complaint (a link is at the bottom of my post). And it's got nothing.
None of the Plaintiffs seem to have concrete standing (no allegations of survelliance/harrassment/chilling of their speech). Just the generalized "hey, I don't like that the gov't did something" which is routinely dismissed.
Also, Courts disregasrd allegations of legal conclusions. And all the key "allegations" are just conclusory statements without discrete facts alleged (and you need to have discreet facts that show a chilling of speech). Each section on each plaintiff just ends by stating per the fed's policies, Plaintiff is a "'rightwing extremist' subjecting him to government scrutiny, investigation, surveillance, and intimidation." That's just not good enough. They need to state an actual case of surveillance and intimidation, instead of the possibility that the "Rightwing Extremism Policy" will lead to somone monitoring tyhem in a way that chills their speech.
It just comes across as a lawsuit as publicity strategy.
Predection: Court grants a 12b6 on failure to state a claim, but allows them to amend to plead actual facts required to sustain the claim. But if they file again and still can't plead, then they'll be sanctioned for being frivolous.
Link: http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/ComplaintAgainstDepartmentofHomelandSecurity.pdf
Reply to this