Heller – what will it mean?

June 26, 2008

We know of no other enumerated constitutional right
whose core protection has been subjected to a freestanding
“interest-balancing” approach. The very enumeration of
the right takes out of the hands of government—even the
Third Branch of Government—the power to decide on a
case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting
upon. A constitutional guarantee subject to future
judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional
guarantee at all.

Here’s the opinion.

**Update**

It’s pretty weak…

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed
weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment
or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast
doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by
felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms
in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or
laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of
arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those
“in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition
of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
Pp. 54–56.
3. The handgun


Literally…

June 25, 2008

I’ve noticed the shameless abuse of the word for a while now, but this is the best example I’ve seen in print:

By day, Case is a sergeant with the Oklahoma City Police Department. By night, he is a self-admitted gun fanatic.

“He literally eats, sleeps, and breathes guns,” said Pam Case, Mike’s wife. “He loves studying them, assembling them, fixing them …

Really?  He eats guns?  Literally?  Breathes them?  I don’t even want to explore what “literally sleeping a gun” might be.

So, a note to those of you who are guilty:  The word LITERALLY does not mean, “I mean this with emphasis.”  You say literally, but you mean figuratively.  Not literally at all.  Quite the opposite.  Doublespeaker.


These are not the droids you’re looking for

May 23, 2008

“This is a safe city,” Struckman said, adding, “This type of crime doesn’t happen up in this area.”

Apparently it does.  For those of you not from around here, this happened in the middle of the nicest, busiest part of the Quad Cities – home to about half a million people.  It’s right in between the Target, Starbucks, Dick’s Sporting Goods, and the Texas Roadhouse.

And a guy gets blown away on his way into work.  The shooter hops in his car and drives away.  No act of government can prevent this kind of thing.  No law can keep you safe.  It’s up do you to take the responsiblility to be ready to defend yourself and those in your care.


Hillary’s looking for a job

May 6, 2008

Open position: Nanny/President, I’m not sure which
Job description: Take care of my family and me.
Salary: $400,000
Benefits: Unlimited power

“At the end of the day, […] You hire a president to solve problems and take care of you and your family,” she said.

That’s the fundamental problem with our government citizenship today. Everyone wants it to take care of them. In order for the government to take care of you, it has to take away from me. Everyone has their pet cause… Farm subsidies, gay marriage, roads, health care, welfare…

Just remember: Everything that the government offers to GIVE to you, it first must STEAL from someone else.  What Hillary Clinton is actually saying is,

“At the end of the day, you hire a president to take stuff away from those you envy and give that stuff to you.”

Be careful lest you someday find yourself in a position envied by the mass-electorate, where your justly-accumulated resources are subject to vote and redistribution.


Prevailing Wage

April 29, 2008

This post is dedicated to the morons at IIIFFC.org.  They “make things fair for everyone.”  They tell us about those evil contractors who are SUPPOSED to pay their workers the “prevailing wage” but DON’T.  How sinister.  But what is this “prevailing wage” they keep talking about?

The prevailing wage is by lawful definition, the UNION wage.  It’s moronic, because if the union wage were really a PREVAILING wage (in the literal sense), you wouldn’t need government goons to enforce it.  If the union wage PREVAILED over other wages, nobody would be willing to work for less.

The IIIFFC’s message only resonates with the economic-educationally illiterate.


Digital TV

April 25, 2008

This is a perfect example of the government working against itself, and costing us lots of money. First they mandate the dispersion of a technology that the market isn’t demanding (because if it were, it wouldn’t have to be legislated). Then they spend my money to give out couponos to people so that they can take advantage of the new, government-mandated technology.

Great, huh?


Feel safer…

April 25, 2008

When the state legislature trounces a bill that would allow students carry the means to defend themselves:

“I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus,”

Okay, so the position of the scaredycat gun-banners is that keeping guns out of the hands of the law-abiding and demonstrably competent citizens (remember, we’re only talking about adults with state licenses here) makes them feel safer. Stupid, but whatever… But I’m not here to argue the idiocy of such a stance. That’s been done.

So what do you suppose their stance would be on a group of people (who mistakenly kill three times as many people every year) having machine guns in a subway in New York? The War on Guns tells us:

“It’s going to make me feel safer, much safer, yes it will.”

So law-abiding, safe, licensed, competent individuals with the concealed means to defend themselves makes us scared. Demonstrably more dangerous people waving machine guns around makes us feel safer.

Got it.