surprisingly some ATF people actually say just how screwed-up the agency is. And how they screwed Dobyns. And ATF lawyer admits just how much they care about rules and law:
"ATF was audio recording him twice without his permission, without his
acquired authorization from the US Attorney's office," said Reed,
outside the courthouse.
During closing arguments, DOJ lead attorney, David Harrington, admitted
that there was "no proper authorization of taping (Dobyns') phone
calls."
What? ATF wiretapped illegally? Who could have imagined such a thing...(Put your hands down, you're distracting me)
I would have to disagree with Agent Atteberry on something:
Q: And as part of doing that review of the file, did you reach certain
conclusions about the quality of ATF's response to the fire event on
August 10, 2008?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And what were those conclusions?
A: They were unacceptable.
Q: Can you please --
A: They were unprofessional. I was embarrassed because that's not the
way we operate, and we should have cleared the bench when that fire
happened.
Problem is that that is EXACTLY how ATF operates. See 'Fast & Furious' and God knows how many screwed-over citizens.
Not to mention that if ATF DIDN'T work that way, Dobyns wouldn't have been screwed in the first place, and his family endangered, and all the other crap.
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Tab clearing
The weather weenies blew it? No!
Progressive 'thought'. Or the absence thereof.
Yes, even some Democrats are realizing what a pile of crap and insane regulations Obamacare is.
Further reason to despise John Effing Kerry: he'd just LOVE to have commissars ordering what research and speech about is allowed.
This is so effing sad... 23, married and a kid is an 'alternative lifestyle'. And he's acting like an ADULT, at that age!
Because illegally sucking up your e-mails and calls isn't enough.
At this point why WOULD anybody trust the IRS? Or want to give them more money, considering how they'd probably use it?
Can you say 'idiot Democrat'? I knew you could.
Progressive 'thought'. Or the absence thereof.
Yes, even some Democrats are realizing what a pile of crap and insane regulations Obamacare is.
Further reason to despise John Effing Kerry: he'd just LOVE to have commissars ordering what research and speech about is allowed.
This is so effing sad... 23, married and a kid is an 'alternative lifestyle'. And he's acting like an ADULT, at that age!
Because illegally sucking up your e-mails and calls isn't enough.
At this point why WOULD anybody trust the IRS? Or want to give them more money, considering how they'd probably use it?
Can you say 'idiot Democrat'? I knew you could.
On a less disturbing and rant-filled subject: shaving
Son's been using this soap, and highly recommended it, so I finally got a cake. I've now used it two days.
Holy crap, this is good stuff.
Wet the face, wet the brush and work up some lather, soap the face. Wait about a minute, and shave. With a blade that'd already been used a few times it shaved clean and smooth. I like it.
The other good thing? Yeah, the cake cost about $23 with shipping; son's been using his last for over a year now, still has a month or two left; that spreads that cost out over a long time.
I'll throw in that using a safety razor has good points, too: instead of $4/each cartridges or plastic razors you throw away after a few days, a set of ten Wilkinson blades is about $3. The higher-quality blades are more expensive, $2-2.50 for five. Takes a few days for your face to get used to the new razor, after that you're good.
Holy crap, this is good stuff.
Wet the face, wet the brush and work up some lather, soap the face. Wait about a minute, and shave. With a blade that'd already been used a few times it shaved clean and smooth. I like it.
The other good thing? Yeah, the cake cost about $23 with shipping; son's been using his last for over a year now, still has a month or two left; that spreads that cost out over a long time.
I'll throw in that using a safety razor has good points, too: instead of $4/each cartridges or plastic razors you throw away after a few days, a set of ten Wilkinson blades is about $3. The higher-quality blades are more expensive, $2-2.50 for five. Takes a few days for your face to get used to the new razor, after that you're good.
Yeah, this will stir up both the Usual Suspects and a lot of the cops
The law states:
(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.
I think this is a good thing. Not only because of all the wrong-address and 'we had a tip/I smelled chemicals' raids, but because I'm sick to death of reading things like this:
Roupe's young life ended Friday night when Euharlee police officers showed up at the door of his home in the Eagle View Mobile Home Park to serve a probation violation warrant for his father.
A female police officer told GBI investigators that Roupe pointed a gun at her when he opened the door.
Gun?
“We don't know where that statement came from. The eyewitnesses on the scene clearly state that he had a Wii controller in his hand. He heard a knock at the door. He asked who it was, there was no response so he opened the door and upon opening the door he was immediately shot in the chest,” Law said.
But the officer went home safe, and that's all that counts, right?
(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.
I think this is a good thing. Not only because of all the wrong-address and 'we had a tip/I smelled chemicals' raids, but because I'm sick to death of reading things like this:
Roupe's young life ended Friday night when Euharlee police officers showed up at the door of his home in the Eagle View Mobile Home Park to serve a probation violation warrant for his father.
A female police officer told GBI investigators that Roupe pointed a gun at her when he opened the door.
Gun?
“We don't know where that statement came from. The eyewitnesses on the scene clearly state that he had a Wii controller in his hand. He heard a knock at the door. He asked who it was, there was no response so he opened the door and upon opening the door he was immediately shot in the chest,” Law said.
But the officer went home safe, and that's all that counts, right?
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
You know who won't have to surrender their weapons?
People who
quietly told the state to fuck off.
More thoughts on the situation in Connecticut. The paragraph preceding the above:
This, of course, is the eternally fulfilled fear of those who oppose registration of things governments don't like—that allowing the government to know about them will result in their eventual confiscation. Such confiscation, despite assurances to the contrary, occurred in New York, California, and elsewhere. Connecticut has accomplished something special, though, by making "eventual" a synonym for "right now."
And right now a bunch of politicians are considering
Just how many people do we want to try to put in prison to attempt to enforce this law?
Just how many voters are how pissed-off at me right now?
and the big one:
What do we do if they keep publicly telling us "Fuck you. Come and take it." ?
This has to go under the heading of 'The Horror' and 'Somebody needs to pay'.
Found at Miguel's.
According to Posner, paranoid libertarians pose a genuine risk to the social order, since their incessant harping on government misdeeds threatens to undermine the functioning of the American state. “If people trust the government, they may accept its assurances that flying or nuclear power is safe. They may absorb the messages of its educational programs. If they don’t trust the government, thenno go,” Posner writes.
Posner, you fucking idiot, that's AMERICA; we're not INTENDED to trust the government.
Especially because of tools like you.
More thoughts on the situation in Connecticut. The paragraph preceding the above:
This, of course, is the eternally fulfilled fear of those who oppose registration of things governments don't like—that allowing the government to know about them will result in their eventual confiscation. Such confiscation, despite assurances to the contrary, occurred in New York, California, and elsewhere. Connecticut has accomplished something special, though, by making "eventual" a synonym for "right now."
And right now a bunch of politicians are considering
Just how many people do we want to try to put in prison to attempt to enforce this law?
Just how many voters are how pissed-off at me right now?
and the big one:
What do we do if they keep publicly telling us "Fuck you. Come and take it." ?
This has to go under the heading of 'The Horror' and 'Somebody needs to pay'.
According to Posner, paranoid libertarians pose a genuine risk to the social order, since their incessant harping on government misdeeds threatens to undermine the functioning of the American state. “If people trust the government, they may accept its assurances that flying or nuclear power is safe. They may absorb the messages of its educational programs. If they don’t trust the government, thenno go,” Posner writes.
Posner, you fucking idiot, that's AMERICA; we're not INTENDED to trust the government.
Especially because of tools like you.
No, Officer Dumbass, you DON'T know the law
better than she does. And any settlement should come out of your own damn pocket.
A Florida woman spent the night in jail after a Broward County sheriff’s deputy accused her of committing a “felony” by audio recording their conversation during a simple traffic stop. Upon review, all charges against her were dropped — but now the Broward Sheriff’s Office (BSO) is facing a lawsuit.
A Florida woman spent the night in jail after a Broward County sheriff’s deputy accused her of committing a “felony” by audio recording their conversation during a simple traffic stop. Upon review, all charges against her were dropped — but now the Broward Sheriff’s Office (BSO) is facing a lawsuit.
A reloading experiment (load data updated)
in 7.62x39.
My personal inclination, if I ever got a AR15, would be for one in 7.62x39 for various reasons. So when I had the chance to help work up a practice load for one, well, yeah! Find out just what I think of it and assist in getting someone to the range.
He wanted a practice load for ranges out to 50 yards using the X-Treme plated bullet and H4198 powder. The bullet because A: they're much more available and less expensive than jacketed, and B: didn't want to use jacketed for general practice/plinking out to, say, 50 yards. Since the local indoor range rifle area runs to 30 yards, would work nicely there. That powder because he had a couple of pounds of it, and didn't want to chase something else down in the current situation.
The problem: you can't push these as fast as a jacketed bullet, and the minimum load shown for that powder and this bullet weight is 24.5 grains. For jacketed that shows 2190 feet per second; considering the max velocity recommended by X-Treme is 1500fps, that's a bit high. Especially since the softer plated bullets are probably going faster than that.
Here's how it went:
DISCLAIMER
This worked out nicely on the rifle in question: that does NOT mean it will in yours. I'm not recommending you do this, just relating what we found to work in this case. So if you try it and something untoward happens, don't yell at me.
We did try the 24.5 grains as a baseline; everything worked normally, no nasty fouling in the bore, but accuracy at 30 yards was so-so(~4". And it is driving the bullet way over what X-Treme recommends.
Reduced loads it is. We looked the information over and decided to try a big drop: loaded five rounds with 22.0 grains. Tried them, and liked them: better accuracy(about 2" at 30 yards), the action still cycled normally, and the cases looked normal. And 2.5 grains less per load works out to a lot of powder over time.
Further experimenting was called for, so loaded five rounds each in half-grain increments: 22.0, 21.5, 21.0, 20.5, 20.0, 19.5. All worked normally except the last: 19.5 grains would cycle the bolt just far enough to pick up the next round(three out of five), but not enough to lock the bolt back. It also had feeding problems. And the brass from those was really dirty: the pressure is not sufficient to cause the brass to fully expand and seal the chamber, so a lot of fouling in the chamber and on the cases. That one's out, even if it had had the best accuracy.
20.5 showed more fouling on the brass than full-power loads but MUCH less than 19.5, full functioning. About two inches at 30 yards.
21.0, 21.5 and 22.0 all gave full function of the action and normal-looking cases, groups around 2-3" at 30 yards off a so-so rest, and no sign of any nastiness in the bore. Since all seemed to give same-size groups, decided on 21.0 as the practice load. Reasons:
This is primarily a plinking/indoor range load, so higher velocity not necessary or needed, especially with these bullets.
If 21.0 works as well as 22.0, why use 22.0?
This was assuming it gave decent groups at the 50 yard distance; if it can't reliably hit a coke can at that range, well.
Update:
Occasionally, it was reported that the 21.0 load didn't quite cycle fully, so wound up going with 22.0 grains. Zero problems, and good accuracy.
Borrowed from this post, finally had the chance to run these over the Chrony, and the 22.0 grain load averaged 1839 feet per second; higher than X-Treme recommends for these bullets. However, no problem with copper fouling, no signs of bullet wobble or jacket-stripping, and good accuracy.
End update
Yesterday had a chance to hit the outdoor range, which gave us 50 and 100 yards to try. Shooting from a solid rest, this load gave 2.5 to 2.75" groups at 50. Quite satisfactory. I did set up the Chrony to check velocity, but I'm not going to swear by the numbers. It was nasty windy and gusty, on the level I had to use a chair to block/support the tripod to keep it from blowing over, and some cloud around. I know light conditions can affect the readings, but opinions seem to vary about wind; in any case, the readings jumped enough that I don't trust them. Get another chance in the future on a calmer day I'd like to try them again. By 'jumped' I mean from the 1550fps range on some to 1860fps on others.
No, we didn't try them at 100. With the lower velocity and that wind decided wasn't worth it. Did try the rifle with some PMC ball and some handloads using the Hornady 123-grain softpoint; it liked both, when either of us did our part got sub-2" groups, which under the conditions I thought quite acceptable.
So if I wound up with a AR15 I know what I'd get it in. And I know the X-Treme bullets will do nicely for practice.
My personal inclination, if I ever got a AR15, would be for one in 7.62x39 for various reasons. So when I had the chance to help work up a practice load for one, well, yeah! Find out just what I think of it and assist in getting someone to the range.
He wanted a practice load for ranges out to 50 yards using the X-Treme plated bullet and H4198 powder. The bullet because A: they're much more available and less expensive than jacketed, and B: didn't want to use jacketed for general practice/plinking out to, say, 50 yards. Since the local indoor range rifle area runs to 30 yards, would work nicely there. That powder because he had a couple of pounds of it, and didn't want to chase something else down in the current situation.
The problem: you can't push these as fast as a jacketed bullet, and the minimum load shown for that powder and this bullet weight is 24.5 grains. For jacketed that shows 2190 feet per second; considering the max velocity recommended by X-Treme is 1500fps, that's a bit high. Especially since the softer plated bullets are probably going faster than that.
Here's how it went:
DISCLAIMER
This worked out nicely on the rifle in question: that does NOT mean it will in yours. I'm not recommending you do this, just relating what we found to work in this case. So if you try it and something untoward happens, don't yell at me.
We did try the 24.5 grains as a baseline; everything worked normally, no nasty fouling in the bore, but accuracy at 30 yards was so-so(~4". And it is driving the bullet way over what X-Treme recommends.
Reduced loads it is. We looked the information over and decided to try a big drop: loaded five rounds with 22.0 grains. Tried them, and liked them: better accuracy(about 2" at 30 yards), the action still cycled normally, and the cases looked normal. And 2.5 grains less per load works out to a lot of powder over time.
Further experimenting was called for, so loaded five rounds each in half-grain increments: 22.0, 21.5, 21.0, 20.5, 20.0, 19.5. All worked normally except the last: 19.5 grains would cycle the bolt just far enough to pick up the next round(three out of five), but not enough to lock the bolt back. It also had feeding problems. And the brass from those was really dirty: the pressure is not sufficient to cause the brass to fully expand and seal the chamber, so a lot of fouling in the chamber and on the cases. That one's out, even if it had had the best accuracy.
20.5 showed more fouling on the brass than full-power loads but MUCH less than 19.5, full functioning. About two inches at 30 yards.
21.0, 21.5 and 22.0 all gave full function of the action and normal-looking cases, groups around 2-3" at 30 yards off a so-so rest, and no sign of any nastiness in the bore. Since all seemed to give same-size groups, decided on 21.0 as the practice load. Reasons:
This is primarily a plinking/indoor range load, so higher velocity not necessary or needed, especially with these bullets.
If 21.0 works as well as 22.0, why use 22.0?
This was assuming it gave decent groups at the 50 yard distance; if it can't reliably hit a coke can at that range, well.
Update:
Occasionally, it was reported that the 21.0 load didn't quite cycle fully, so wound up going with 22.0 grains. Zero problems, and good accuracy.
Borrowed from this post, finally had the chance to run these over the Chrony, and the 22.0 grain load averaged 1839 feet per second; higher than X-Treme recommends for these bullets. However, no problem with copper fouling, no signs of bullet wobble or jacket-stripping, and good accuracy.
End update
Yesterday had a chance to hit the outdoor range, which gave us 50 and 100 yards to try. Shooting from a solid rest, this load gave 2.5 to 2.75" groups at 50. Quite satisfactory. I did set up the Chrony to check velocity, but I'm not going to swear by the numbers. It was nasty windy and gusty, on the level I had to use a chair to block/support the tripod to keep it from blowing over, and some cloud around. I know light conditions can affect the readings, but opinions seem to vary about wind; in any case, the readings jumped enough that I don't trust them. Get another chance in the future on a calmer day I'd like to try them again. By 'jumped' I mean from the 1550fps range on some to 1860fps on others.
No, we didn't try them at 100. With the lower velocity and that wind decided wasn't worth it. Did try the rifle with some PMC ball and some handloads using the Hornady 123-grain softpoint; it liked both, when either of us did our part got sub-2" groups, which under the conditions I thought quite acceptable.
So if I wound up with a AR15 I know what I'd get it in. And I know the X-Treme bullets will do nicely for practice.
Oh, and Sarah Hoyt and Larry Correia? Yeah, they're legally Hispanic.
In fact, Sarah still has a Portuguese accent. So stop with
the "White supremacist" horseshit on Twitter. Neither one would be
allowed within 50 miles of a Klan gathering.
Once again, the "tolerant" "liberals" prove themselves to be racist, sexist and hypocritical.
But of course!
On these excuses for the LAPD officers who nearly murdered two women, I call bullshit.
...The department was all but paralyzed by the logistical demands of protecting all of the personnel determined to be at the greatest risk and their families. Beyond that, officers’ nerves were frayed by the thought that Dorner, tutored as he was on how the LAPD operates, and armed as he was with who knew how large an arsenal, might turn up anywhere in the city or even at an officer’s home and claim his next victim.
"We were stressed, we were scared!" And? Joe Citizen says that as excuse after nearly killing an innocent, you'd be throwing him in a cell. And planning his trip to prison.
But Chief Beck was surely aware that a harsh punishment would have been poorly received by his cops, most of whom would admit, if only to themselves, that they may have been just as likely to fire on the two women as those who actually did. Indeed, there were those within the LAPD who said that the shooting, though clearly mistaken, was forgivable under the unique conditions that prevailed during the Dorner manhunt.
"If I actually PUNISH them, a lot of the other cops will be all pissed! I can't do that!"
Then hand in that badge and vacate that office, you bastard. If you don't have the balls and integrity to do it, leave.
So, how did Chief Beck resolve the question? This month he sent a letter to the police commission, the civilian panel that oversees the LAPD, in which he made the case that the involved officers had violated policy when they fired on the two women. The chief thus stated that the officers would be subject to discipline, which news reports say will be minor. In taking this action the chief acknowledged that the officers were clearly in the wrong in that they failed to identify their target before firing, but that under the circumstances the mistake did not warrant termination, demotion, or a suspension.
In evaluating the actions of the seven officers and one sergeant who fired on the women, the chief in his letter said that officers “with similar training and experience would not have reasonably identified an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury based on the same facts and circumstances, even in consideration of the misidentification of the truck and prior knowledge of the threat Dorner posed.”
"So we nearly murdered two innocents. Big deal, the officers were REALLY stressed! That's enough excuse for these highly-trained officers for me to not give them any real punishment."
Screw you, Beck. You don't have the balls to stand up to the officers, so you make excuses for this disgusting mess. Or do you agree with the officers who'd 'poorly receive real punishment' and were just looking for a way to excuse yourself for slapping the guilty on the hand?
Excuses, excuses, excuses. And let's not forget the OTHER victim of these highly-trained panicky assholes: he had just BEEN CLEARED THROUGH A CHECKPOINT when some more officers of high-strung temperament rammed his truck and tried to kill him. More excuses:
"The circumstances of the incident known to the responding officers would have led a reasonable officer under normal circumstances — and these were far from normal circumstances — to believe that fellow officers were being shot at and that the vehicle traveling toward them posed a serious risk.
"In the split seconds available to them," the statement continued, "action was appropriate to intervene and stop the actions of the driver of that vehicle."
Bullshit. Piles of stinking stuff. But it's the excuse for not firing, or seriously punishing, these fools with badges.
They tell us they're the professionals. Us commoners don't need to carry guns because the PROFESSIONALS will take care of us. Or at least try to chase down the bad guys after the fact.
Of course, we're also excused from the consequences of really bad actions because panic and stress. And this...
The involved officers will soon return to field duties, this after receiving the sort of training they should have gotten before being sent on such an assignment.
If they weren't effing trained, WHY THE HELL WERE THEY ON THE STREET? This crap... you know damned well that in a, call it 'regular shooting' they'd have had the prosecutors lauding their training. Which apparently they were sent out without.
And the LAPD is going to have a lot more people considering them idiots immune from punishment for this kind of idiocy, and the brass will bitch and whine about the people not supporting them.
Once again, the "tolerant" "liberals" prove themselves to be racist, sexist and hypocritical.
But of course!
On these excuses for the LAPD officers who nearly murdered two women, I call bullshit.
...The department was all but paralyzed by the logistical demands of protecting all of the personnel determined to be at the greatest risk and their families. Beyond that, officers’ nerves were frayed by the thought that Dorner, tutored as he was on how the LAPD operates, and armed as he was with who knew how large an arsenal, might turn up anywhere in the city or even at an officer’s home and claim his next victim.
"We were stressed, we were scared!" And? Joe Citizen says that as excuse after nearly killing an innocent, you'd be throwing him in a cell. And planning his trip to prison.
But Chief Beck was surely aware that a harsh punishment would have been poorly received by his cops, most of whom would admit, if only to themselves, that they may have been just as likely to fire on the two women as those who actually did. Indeed, there were those within the LAPD who said that the shooting, though clearly mistaken, was forgivable under the unique conditions that prevailed during the Dorner manhunt.
"If I actually PUNISH them, a lot of the other cops will be all pissed! I can't do that!"
Then hand in that badge and vacate that office, you bastard. If you don't have the balls and integrity to do it, leave.
So, how did Chief Beck resolve the question? This month he sent a letter to the police commission, the civilian panel that oversees the LAPD, in which he made the case that the involved officers had violated policy when they fired on the two women. The chief thus stated that the officers would be subject to discipline, which news reports say will be minor. In taking this action the chief acknowledged that the officers were clearly in the wrong in that they failed to identify their target before firing, but that under the circumstances the mistake did not warrant termination, demotion, or a suspension.
In evaluating the actions of the seven officers and one sergeant who fired on the women, the chief in his letter said that officers “with similar training and experience would not have reasonably identified an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury based on the same facts and circumstances, even in consideration of the misidentification of the truck and prior knowledge of the threat Dorner posed.”
"So we nearly murdered two innocents. Big deal, the officers were REALLY stressed! That's enough excuse for these highly-trained officers for me to not give them any real punishment."
Screw you, Beck. You don't have the balls to stand up to the officers, so you make excuses for this disgusting mess. Or do you agree with the officers who'd 'poorly receive real punishment' and were just looking for a way to excuse yourself for slapping the guilty on the hand?
Excuses, excuses, excuses. And let's not forget the OTHER victim of these highly-trained panicky assholes: he had just BEEN CLEARED THROUGH A CHECKPOINT when some more officers of high-strung temperament rammed his truck and tried to kill him. More excuses:
"The circumstances of the incident known to the responding officers would have led a reasonable officer under normal circumstances — and these were far from normal circumstances — to believe that fellow officers were being shot at and that the vehicle traveling toward them posed a serious risk.
"In the split seconds available to them," the statement continued, "action was appropriate to intervene and stop the actions of the driver of that vehicle."
Bullshit. Piles of stinking stuff. But it's the excuse for not firing, or seriously punishing, these fools with badges.
They tell us they're the professionals. Us commoners don't need to carry guns because the PROFESSIONALS will take care of us. Or at least try to chase down the bad guys after the fact.
Of course, we're also excused from the consequences of really bad actions because panic and stress. And this...
The involved officers will soon return to field duties, this after receiving the sort of training they should have gotten before being sent on such an assignment.
If they weren't effing trained, WHY THE HELL WERE THEY ON THE STREET? This crap... you know damned well that in a, call it 'regular shooting' they'd have had the prosecutors lauding their training. Which apparently they were sent out without.
And the LAPD is going to have a lot more people considering them idiots immune from punishment for this kind of idiocy, and the brass will bitch and whine about the people not supporting them.
Tab clearing
'Progressive' male-hater abuses own child. This will not end well.
"We're going to be sensitive and politically-correct even if it kills us. All of us."
And with what's happening in Europe...
Officer Rojas, my first thought is you ought to be fired. At the least no pay for a while. Say, two months with no pay plus whatever charges the guy files.
"We're going to be sensitive and politically-correct even if it kills us. All of us."
And with what's happening in Europe...
Officer Rojas, my first thought is you ought to be fired. At the least no pay for a while. Say, two months with no pay plus whatever charges the guy files.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Monday, February 17, 2014
Bethards said in a text to the AP that he was surprised ATF let the violation go
without charges.
"I wonder if Joe Citizen would get that same opportunity?" he wrote.
We know the answer to that: "HELL no, Joe Citizen would be in a federal prison."
ATF spokesman Robert Schmidt didn't immediately return messages.
Anybody surprised?
Yeah, I noted this before; it's still pissing me off, though.
Why are gun ban advocates such violent-minded idiots?
Found at this page on bookface
And so farging stupid?
“Nobody needs a 15-round ammunition magazine unless they are a domestic terrorist or a gangster,” Miller said. “We expect the legislative leadership to get behind this and the governor to see some sense.”
Chances of him wanting cops held to this standard? Zero.
Of course, this one's from the Dark and Fascist State of New Jersey, but still.
The tea party philosophy goes international; EUnuchs panicked. "This threatens our control of the commoners!"
Something else from the show: a 1911 Flying Merkel
"I wonder if Joe Citizen would get that same opportunity?" he wrote.
We know the answer to that: "HELL no, Joe Citizen would be in a federal prison."
ATF spokesman Robert Schmidt didn't immediately return messages.
Anybody surprised?
Yeah, I noted this before; it's still pissing me off, though.
Why are gun ban advocates such violent-minded idiots?
And so farging stupid?
“Nobody needs a 15-round ammunition magazine unless they are a domestic terrorist or a gangster,” Miller said. “We expect the legislative leadership to get behind this and the governor to see some sense.”
Chances of him wanting cops held to this standard? Zero.
Of course, this one's from the Dark and Fascist State of New Jersey, but still.
The tea party philosophy goes international; EUnuchs panicked. "This threatens our control of the commoners!"
Something else from the show: a 1911 Flying Merkel
Definition of 'racial microaggression':
something for whiny little shitbrain grievance-mongering students to gripe about.
Hey, McGill University:
Hey, McGill University:
'Torture' is now defined-
by the miserable waste of oxygen in Norway- as not having an armchair.
From which to play the games HE chooses on the newest-generation console.
And he wants a computer for correspondence.
This pretty much covers it:
Perspective, punk. You’re in durance vile for shooting over 100 people and killing 77 of them. In more civilized, less inbred nations than your own you’d be fertilizer in the prison garden by now.
From which to play the games HE chooses on the newest-generation console.
And he wants a computer for correspondence.
This pretty much covers it:
Perspective, punk. You’re in durance vile for shooting over 100 people and killing 77 of them. In more civilized, less inbred nations than your own you’d be fertilizer in the prison garden by now.
Sunday, February 16, 2014
From the same people who insist we need to become their mascots
because "We will see that you're taken care of",
The effect of all this on the mascots themselves is not a big concern of the elites. Mascots symbolize something for others. The actual fate of the mascots themselves seldom matters much to their supposed benefactors.
So long as the elites have control of the public purse, they can subsidize self-destructive behavior on the part of the mascots. And so long as the elites can send their own children to private schools, they needn't worry about what happens to the children of the mascots in the public schools.
Other people who cannot afford to send their children to private schools can simply be called "racists" for objecting to what the indulgence of the mascots is doing to the public schools or what the violence of the mascots is doing to other children trapped in the same schools with them.
A hundred years ago, groups who are now indulged as mascots were targets and scapegoats of Progressive era elites, treated like dirt and targeted for eradication in the name of "eugenics."
There are no permanent mascots. As fashions change, the mascots of today can become the scapegoats and targets of tomorrow. But who thinks ahead any more?"
"Why can't you just accept the board decision, you haters!" Because you're corrupt bastards, maybe?
After requests from state Republicans, including Rep. Stephens, the state’s Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) convened a panel which supposedly conducted an investigation into the issue, but doubts were raised when DORA’s chief Barbara Kelley was unable to provide documents or detailed information on the investigation to reporters.
Reversing her initial decision to keep the members of the panel private, Kelley revealed in January that herself and three other Democratic officials compromised the “neutral panel.” She maintained that she’d kept no notes from the oral interviews that provided the basis of the investigation.
Yeah, why would anyone have a problem trusting this?
Apparently in San Antonio it's "We have zero-tolerance for reasoning, and no problem with wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money and our time on bullshit cases."
Awww, the socialist and the communist aren't getting along. Because the communist wants to be the Stalin of NYEffingCity.
The effect of all this on the mascots themselves is not a big concern of the elites. Mascots symbolize something for others. The actual fate of the mascots themselves seldom matters much to their supposed benefactors.
So long as the elites have control of the public purse, they can subsidize self-destructive behavior on the part of the mascots. And so long as the elites can send their own children to private schools, they needn't worry about what happens to the children of the mascots in the public schools.
Other people who cannot afford to send their children to private schools can simply be called "racists" for objecting to what the indulgence of the mascots is doing to the public schools or what the violence of the mascots is doing to other children trapped in the same schools with them.
A hundred years ago, groups who are now indulged as mascots were targets and scapegoats of Progressive era elites, treated like dirt and targeted for eradication in the name of "eugenics."
There are no permanent mascots. As fashions change, the mascots of today can become the scapegoats and targets of tomorrow. But who thinks ahead any more?"
"Why can't you just accept the board decision, you haters!" Because you're corrupt bastards, maybe?
After requests from state Republicans, including Rep. Stephens, the state’s Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) convened a panel which supposedly conducted an investigation into the issue, but doubts were raised when DORA’s chief Barbara Kelley was unable to provide documents or detailed information on the investigation to reporters.
Reversing her initial decision to keep the members of the panel private, Kelley revealed in January that herself and three other Democratic officials compromised the “neutral panel.” She maintained that she’d kept no notes from the oral interviews that provided the basis of the investigation.
Yeah, why would anyone have a problem trusting this?
Apparently in San Antonio it's "We have zero-tolerance for reasoning, and no problem with wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money and our time on bullshit cases."
Awww, the socialist and the communist aren't getting along. Because the communist wants to be the Stalin of NYEffingCity.
Remember all those 'Background checks do not lead to backdoor registration! You're being paranoid
and silly to worry about that!' lectures? Problem:
“But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law,” The Courant concluded, calling on the state to use the “background check database” to identify who has not obeyed, and to go and get them.
If ever there was proof that citizen disarmament demanders are lying when they scoff at legitimate fears that background checks provide a registration capability, this is it. And if ever there was further corroboration that they intend using that registration to enable confiscation, The Courant just removed all doubt.
Yeah, we can trust that those records are destroyed, sure, why would we doubt what they tell us...
“But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law,” The Courant concluded, calling on the state to use the “background check database” to identify who has not obeyed, and to go and get them.
If ever there was proof that citizen disarmament demanders are lying when they scoff at legitimate fears that background checks provide a registration capability, this is it. And if ever there was further corroboration that they intend using that registration to enable confiscation, The Courant just removed all doubt.
Yeah, we can trust that those records are destroyed, sure, why would we doubt what they tell us...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)