"Hygienic Fascism"

Hygienic fascism: Turning the world into a 'safe space' — but at what cost? | TheHill

Author Aldous Huxley once said, “A thoroughly scientific dictatorship will never be overthrown.”

Even as we try to battle the COVID-19 pestilence, we may be contracting a more dangerous virus — hygienic fascism. This involves a process when our political leaders defer to a handful of “experts,” amid what Dr. Joseph Ladopo, an associate professor at the UCLA School of Medicine, describes as an atmosphere of “COVID-19-induced terror.”

Ideologically, hygienic fascism is neither right nor left, nor is it simply a matter of taking necessary precautions. It is about imposing, over a long period of time, highly draconian regulations based on certain assumptions about public health. In large part, it regards science not so much as a search for knowledge but as revealed “truth” with definitive “answers.” Anyone opposed to the conventional stratagem, including recognized professionals, are largely banished as mindless Trumpistas, ignoramuses, or worse.

I must confess, I was surprised, most of the articles I've seen at The Hill.com tend to be more on the Big Government/Social Justice Snowflakery end of the spectrum than in Rugged Individualism's neighborhood, although it is very true that I don't go there enough to be able to say that my impression of their material is conclusive.

But there they are running this article, too: Facial recognition: The other reason we may need a face mask | TheHill

Don’t get out of the hard-learned habit of covering your face, even if you live in a place that will soon no longer require it. Long after the pandemic recedes, we may still need our N-95 respirators, surgical masks and DIY bandana coverings. Marking the triumph over COVID-19, when it finally happens, should not include a bonfire of masks. This symbol of the coronavirus fight may prove just as crucial against a different foe altogether.

Also spreading fast, but largely outside of global health debates and meaningful scrutiny, is facial recognition. We’ve had Apple’s handy Face ID since 2017, of course, with its 30,000 invisible facial dots that coalesce into a phone-unlocking faceprint, but potentially more perturbing applications are already here or around the corner. Face-Six wants to reduce medical errors and fraud by promising to help hospitals “identify patients whenever necessary, conscious or unconscious.” ISM Connect has scanned crowds at Taylor Swift’s concerts to weed out stalkers and generate tour promotion metrics. Clearview AI has been used by over 600 law enforcement agencies to solve cases from shoplifting to murder. So private it listed a fake Manhattan address as its business location, Clearview AI sold a product that allows users to take a picture of someone they are curious about and obtain links to public photos and sites pertaining to this person.

The power that such apps must bestow is suggested in another purveyor’s name, iOmniscient. Its site boasts of clients in 60 countries and over 30 industries, including retail, where it measures customers’ footpaths, visit frequency and dwell time. iOmniscient “excels in uncontrolled environments with non-cooperative individuals,” which would explain its suspected use during Hong Kong’s 2019 pro-democracy protests. In response to the potential surveillance, demonstrators toppled smart lampposts believed to house the technology, destroyed CCTV cameras, hid themselves under umbrellas -- and donned face masks.

These pieces are from the Opinion pages of TheHill.com,  not "news", but still, I'm surprised.

Maybe there's hope after all.

Did NOT see this one coming!

DHS Says Firearms Retailers, Manufacturers ARE ‘Essential Businesses’: BREAKING NEWS

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- Under the Trump Administration's guidance, the Department of Homeland Security has declared firearms manufacturers and retailers “essential businesses,” possibly driving a spike through the heart of various state and local “emergency powers” declarations that had classified gun stores to be “non-essential” during the current Coronavirus panic, and had ordered them closed.

The reference to gun shops is found in a document released Saturday titled “Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce,” in the section dealing with “Law Enforcement, Public Safety, and Other First Responders.”

The document released by DHS simply says that “Workers supporting the operation of firearm or ammunition product manufacturers, retailers, importers, distributors, and shooting ranges” are considered essential.

Article quoted from Ammoland.com, emphasis in original.

The Quixotic Act of The Day 11/16/18

I think WhiteHouse.Gov petitions are about as fine an example of quixoticism as you'll find, but, still, that abortion of a ballot initiative passed, so wotthehell, as Mehitable said to Archie:

To abolish unlawful, unjust, and unconstitutional gun laws in Washington state (I-1639).

The great state of Washington, through fraudulent petitioning and tricky wording, has placed on the ballot and passed I-1639; one of the strictest anti-gun laws in our country. We The People therefor ask that our great President and our public servants, step in and abolish such laws restricting, infringing upon and/or otherwise limiting our right, that has been guaranteed to us within the 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights, and further protected and solidified through centuries of bloodshed and legal proceedings.


We The People humbly and gracefully plead for your helping hand Mr. President. Please put an end to the destruction of our freedoms and liberties by protecting our second amendment rights; here in Washington state and throughout the states of our great country.
Thank you.

I mean, I don't know what they think the President can do about this, beyond launching a Twitter campaign.

Still.

Note that there's no restriction on state of residence for signing this thing...

Cue the hysteria! -- Edit

CodeIsFreeSpeech.com

OK, I'm actually a few days late with the "Cue the hysteria!" title, still...

You may be aware that the US Government has lifted the restriction on the sharing online of files with instructions to 3D print firearms components.

This, of course, is merely the latest in a series of events which are going to kill us all.

The thing is...

There are many inherent issues with manufacturing a firearm, or firearm parts, using a 3D printer. For instance, the plastic used isn't exactly up to withstanding the pressures of a modern firearm cartridge being fired, which limits which parts of the firearm they are suitable for. In order for the firing pin to detonate the primer on a cartridge, it has to be made of metal, or possibly, I suppose, some other hard material, which would probably be so exotic as to be impractical.

But.

A fact which escapes those convinced that the availability of these files online mean the end of civilization is that it has always been legal to manufacture a firearm in your garage workshop, as long as you did not attempt to sell it.

Here, for example, is a thread about building a glorious revolutionary AK47 from a people's shovel, purchased for a whole 2 kopeks I mean rubles I mean capitalist pig dollars at an antique barn in Vermont: DIY: Shovel AK - photo tsunami warning! | Northeastshooters.com Forums

So, why (one might ask) was the distribution of files with instructions on how to 3D print firearms components banned? Well, the US State Department takes its responsibility (not to say authority) to control export of firearms and weapons technology seriously.

Now, this authority does extend to some information technology, namely, computer security/anti-virus files. (In an earlier job I had to help some sales reps for a local aviation firm process requests to Uncle Sam to let them take their laptops, with anti-virus software installed, overseas.)

But these are 3D printer files are hardly innovative in and of themselves, and cannot be seriously be considered a threat to national security.

What made the US State Department lift the ban on Internet distribution of 3D printer files is that the US State Department does not have a broad legal authority to ban the distribution of information.

That's right: The ability to download these files is a First Amendment issue, as well as a Second Amendment one. (Some would even argue that it is not a Second Amendment one at all.)

CodeIsFreeSpeech.com

Elsewhere, Roberta X addresses the issue in her post The Adventures of Roberta X: That's Not How This Works.

There is also an excellent Twitter thread that starts with this one:

Ok, on this, the eve of one of my favorite things ever - the #democratization of technology - let's have a serious, sober-ish conversation about this whole #StopDownloadableGuns / #Stop3DPrintedGuns hysteria by starting at the beginning and working forward (1/?)

— Jonathan (@CorrelA_B) August 1, 2018

(There is a Thread Reader version of the full thread here: Thread by @CorrelA_B: "Ok, on this, the eve of one of my favorite things ever - the of technology - let's have a serious, sober-ish conversation a […]" #democratization #StopDownloadableGuns #Stop3DPrintedGuns #guncontrol

EDIT: Meanwhile, a commie judge here in Western Washington has ordered Defense Distributed to shut down their site again: DEFCAD

Fortunately, the files are available elsewhere: CodeIsFreeSpeech.com

Text of HR 5087, new Federal "Assault Weapon" Ban

Text - H.R.5087 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): Assault Weapons Ban of 2018 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Institutes a 10 round magazine limit.

"Improves" upon the Clinton Ban by banning any semi-automatic rifle with one "Evil Feature". (Note: It even admits that a "barrel shroud" is a safety device, but still bans it...)

Co-Sponsored by The Usual Suspects. Including my own Representative, who was, at one time, rated B by the NRA.

Adds mandatory "safe storage" for grandfathered "assault weapons."

Includes a "by-name" list of banned rifles and shotguns...

...and an extensive "by-name" list of exempt rifles and shotguns, including not only semi-automatics, but pump, bolt, lever-action, break action, and even by-name list of "drillings and combinations."

(Nothing suspicious about that at all, right?)

But, hey, it lets retired Law Enforcement Officers keep their Large Capacity Feeding Devices upon retirement, IF they purchased them for on-duty use before retirement... 

Short read of the day: The Gresham’s Law of Law

Recently started receiving the daily digest from Law & Liberty, maintained by the Liberty Fund, same folks who do the Online Library of Liberty.

Here's an example of why:

 The Gresham's Law of Law - Law & Liberty

by Mike Rappaport

In economics, Gresham’s Law is the law that say “bad money drives out good money.” In law, there is a similar law – deviant or problematic lawmaking drives out orthodox or legitimate lawmaking. This occurs in both constitutional law and administrative law.

Let’s start with constitutional law. The law of the Constitution is supposed to be established through the constitutional enactment process and the constitutional amendment process. Yet, it is well known that the Supreme Court does not always follow this legitimate method of constitutional law making, and instead changes or updates the Constitution through judicial lawmaking.

It is sometimes thought that these two types of lawmaking can coexist, but it has become increasingly clear that this is not the case. Since the New Deal, and especially as the Court has engaged in more judicial updating, the constitutional amendment process has atrophied. The main reason is that a constitutional amendment can only pass if it is supported by a consensus of the country. And developing a consensus may take a long time and may require compromise.

And then there's administrative law. Just as Constitutional Amendments don't happen due to Supreme Court rulings, Congress leaves most rule-making up to unaccountable bureaucrats.

Go read the whole thing, like I said, it's short.

QOTD, Blast From The Past Edition

Going back through old posts and saw that, on Tuesday, March 9, 2010, Tamara won the Internetz again with this:

The problem is that the .gov acts like there was strong encryption on the Constitution and they don't have the right key to read it.

 Really, it's been her Internetz all along and she just lets us use it, too. 

The "Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection" acts

Full Title

A bill to provide that any executive action that infringes on the powers and duties of Congress under section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the United States or on the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States has no force or effect, and to prohibit the use of funds for certain purposes.

Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act (H.R. 4321) - GovTrack.us
and
Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act (S. 2434) - GovTrack.us

GovTrack says the two bills are identical.

It also says that HR4321 has a 1% chance of being enacted, and that S2434 has a 20% chance. These percentages are based strictly on "how many bill that made it 'that far' in the process were passed." (I.e, S2434 has been "reported out of committee", and about 1 in 4 bills that reach that stage are passed.)

S2434 is sponsored by Rand Paul and only has one co-sponsor; HR4321 is sponsored by Marlin Stutzman (R, IN-3) and has two co-sponsors. Generally speaking, the more co-sponsors the better the chances.

Write your congressional representatives. I say that knowing that writing my own legiscritters* is an exercise composition, and most likely will only result in my getting a letter from an aide on another issue entirely (assuming the aide hs been trained not to explain to the silly proles why they should let the adults talk), but if you don't play, etc., etc.


*Somewhat unfair, actually, as my Representative, Adam Smith, has gotten decent grades from NRA in the past. Not A+s, to be sure, but not too bad for a D from an urban area.

"Overruled" - Book report and commentary

Just finished reading Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court, by Damon Root. This is, essentially, a libertarian history of the US Supreme Court.

That Is, perhaps, a poor description, in the sense that it makes it sound simultaneously dry as hell and also written by a wide-eyed, sky-castle dwelling, dreamer.

Not so.

Amazon's synopsis:

Should the Supreme Court defer to the will of the majority and uphold most democratically enacted laws? Or does the Constitution empower the Supreme Court to protect a broad range of individual rights from the reach of lawmakers? In this timely and provocative book, Damon Root traces the long war over judicial activism and judicial restraint from its beginnings in the bloody age of slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction to its central role in today's blockbuster legal battles over gay rights, gun control, and health care reform.

It's a conflict that cuts across the political spectrum in surprising ways and makes for some unusual bedfellows. Judicial deference is not only a touchstone of the Progressive left, for example, it is also a philosophy adopted by many members of the modern right. Today's growing camp of libertarians, however, has no patience with judicial restraint and little use for majority rule. They want the courts and judges to police the other branches of government, and expect Justices to strike down any state or federal law that infringes on their bold constitutional agenda of personal and economic freedom.

Overruled is the story of two competing visions, each one with its own take on what role the government and the courts should play in our society, a fundamental debate that goes to the very heart of our constitutional system.

And it's actually quite interesting, or at least, I found it so.

I also found the  repeated use by the court of the reasoning expressed by Oliver Wendell Jones, Jr., in Blodgett v. Holden (1927), that

...as between two possible interpretations of a statute, by one of which it would be unconstitutional and by the other valid, our plain duty is to adopt that which will save the Act.

to be, well, shocking.

So, you're telling me that the Supreme Court is supposed to be predisposed to allow Congress run roughshod over the Constitution?

Explains a lot, doesn't it?

"Judicial Deference" they call it, "Judicial Restraint."

Appalling, I call it.

This, of course, is how the Roberts Court can rule that a tax is a fine is a tax, depending on the application, and therefore is, and isn't, subject to what the Constitution says on the matter of taxes. Also, how when a law refers to "The State" it acutally means "The government at any level."

And how previous courts can hold that  marijuana grown in the backyard of a person with a legitimate prescription can somehow be held to impact "interstate commerce."

As for the book: Root writes well, presenting difficult legal concepts and arguments in a straight-forward style, making them easy to grasp.

I can't help that note that we also seem to have entered an era of Legislative Deference, in which the tools in charge of the congress will work harder to please th Imperial President than to obey the Constitution.

One thing I was surprised to learn was that, when Alan Gura took the case that would become Heller v. DC, he was not yet working with the Second Amendment Foundation, but rather for The Institute for Justice. SAF came along later, after NRA had tried to convince IJ that Heller was the wrong case at the wrong time...

The Pledge

If the Government makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion, I will not obey those rules.

I'm see no reason to limit the Patterico Free Speech Pledgeto the Federal Elections Commission,or, for that matter, the Federal Communications Commission.

My greatest fear is that someone, somewhere, will find a way to interpret a simple statement of opinion as libel/slander or a "disclosure of national security information", and the next thing you know, it's off to the Lubyanka...

Not sayin' it's "decorate the lamp-posts" time, but, frankly, any politician, elected or appointed, who supports government control of the internet deserves the whole torch & pitchfork, tar & feather, stocks & pillory, ride 'em outta town on a rail treatment.

Look at me! I'm an activist!

At the "No on I594 Sign Waving" party.

Standing in a culdesac between a cabbage field and a boggy pasture, waving our signs at folks stuck in rush hour traffic on Highway 167.

Lots of waves and horn honking, but there is a suspicion that it's the strategic placement if the distaff sign wavers in the front.

OTOH, we just got a honk-and-a-wave from a woman in a Prius, so we have that going for us.

Constitution Day

Today is Constitution Day.

Constitution of the United States - Official

Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official Text

The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription (Printer friendly)


The Annotated US Constitution

Enjoy it while it lasts.

The numbers on I-594

In case anyone doesn't believe me that the 1% is fully behind Initiative 594, Barron points out that the Public Disclosure Commission has the numbers: I-594 contributions.

For those of you NOT in Washington State, who are celebrating because the New York Times has admitted that the assault weapons ban was useless, and Alans Gura and Gottlieb keep winning in the courts, consider what will happen when the 1% descends on you and gets legislation like I-594 passed, that will strangle your gun rights undfer color of "reasonable gun control."

Vote NO 594 | Initiative 594 | Details of a deeply flawed initiative
Initiative 594 is a universal handgun registration scheme being promoted by a very wealthy group of anti-gun elitists who have already raised more than $7 million to qualify and pass this initiative.  Although they describe it as a “universal background check” measure, it is not universal because criminals will never comply with the requirements.  It is, however, universal handgun registration. Under I-594, every time a handgun is transferred, the person receiving the handgun will have their name added to the government database being maintained by the state Department of Licensing.

• Under I-594, every time a handgun is transferred, the person receiving the handgun will have their name added to the government database being maintained by the state Department of Licensing.
• Virtually every firearm transfer - with very few and limited exceptions - would be required to go through a licensed firearms dealer under the provisions of I-594.
• I-594 will specifically regulate transfers, not sales.  Under the language of I-594, in virtually all cases, a person merely handing his or her firearm to a family member or a friend cannot do so without brokering the transfer through a gun dealer with the accompanying fees, paperwork, taxes and, in the case of handguns, state registration.
• I-594 also doubles the state waiting period on handgun sales from five to ten days and extends it to every private transfer of a handgun!
• The only thing that I-594 would accomplish is the creation of a government record of all lawfully transferred handguns in Washington, which would facilitate their future confiscation.

Here is the text of Initiative 594, courtesy The Washington Arms Collectors.

If you live in Washington, if you know anyone who does, please get the word out about this.

I'll be blunt, as much as I'd like to see Initiative 591 pass, I'd much rather see 594 go down in flames.

Well, isn't this an interesting development!

Alan Gura reports success inVictory in Palmer v. D.C.

The full decision is here, all 19 years of it, but here is what you need to know:

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.

(Emphasis added.)

IANAL, but... Constitutional Carry in DC! Seems appropriate, actually. Look for the Fed .gov to ban it in all Fed-controlled property. Cuz the Smithsonian should obviously be a No Self-Defense Zone.

"Voluntarily hand over your papers, bitte"

NHTSA's Voluntary Roadside Blood-And-Saliva Survey Heads To Seattle With A Much Greater Emphasis On 'Voluntary' | Techdirt

Although it's already been burned twice for its intrusive, not-mandatory-but-it-sure-looks-that-way "roadside surveys," the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) isn't letting a lot of bad press, a lawsuit and a Congressional investigation slow down its blood-and-saliva collections. After two straight debacles (Texas and Pennsylvania), the NHTSA is headed to Seattle in hopes of gauging the effects of newly-legal weed on the driving population.

I confess that part of me sees the point of seeing if Washingtonian hipsters are driving while baked, what with weed being legal here now, but still...

OTOH, in WA a "traffic checkpoint" is only legal if it stops every single vehicle passing through it. I can't see doing that to ask people to voluntarily submit to a breathalyser and a blood draw.

And I really doubt people will believe them when they say that no identifying information, including license plate numbers, will be collected.

By the way, a few years ago WA started requiring us to get new plates every 7 years, because older ones aren't readable by traffic cameras.

Operation Choke Point; EDITED

EDIT: (Original posted from work, on my phone. Stay tuned for edits after I'm home tonight.  Edited version follows.)
Here's a link to another post, this one on PowerLine Blog, about Operation Choke Point, the Department of Justice effort to squeeze banks to cut off funding/credit to legal businesses that might be politically incorrect:
Choking on the administrative state | Power Line
A couple of quotes:

Glenn Reynolds and Todd Zywicki have written most recently about the Department of Justice’s Operation Choke Point. Operation Choke Point is vaguely described as a Department of Justice initiative to starve disfavored businesses of financial services, but there is no official account of the program; it is shrouded in secrecy, to borrow Professor Zywicki’s description.

and

Professor Zywicki commends Tom Blumer’s helpful summary of what is known to date about the operation. He observes that the list of targeted industries is populated by enterprises that are entirely, or at least generally, legal: ammunition sales, escort services, get-quick-rich schemes, online gambling, “racist materials” and payday loans. “Quite obviously,” Professor Zywicki comments, “some of these things are not like the other; moreover, just because there are some bad apples within a legal industry doesn’t justify effectively destroying a legal industry through secret executive fiat.”

Question: Might this be the source of the current, ongoing, annoying, frustrating ammunition shortage? 

I dunno. I do find reports of agencies of the Executive Branch buying hundreds of thousands of rounds unsatisfying as explanations, though...

I originally described this as a "Joint DoJ/Treasury operations";  not really accurate, here's a couple of paragraphs that explain better:

{Glenn Reynolds} describes Operation Choke Point as a Justice Department program, but I suspect it is derivative of the administrative state in which our financial institutions are enmeshed, now more than ever. American Banking Association President Frank Keating’s Wall Street Journal column on the program (behind the Journal’s annoying subscription paywall) takes us a step further into the government’s maw: “Justice launched the effort in early 2013 as a policy initiative of the president’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, which includes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other regulatory agencies.”

Keating doesn’t mention the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, but it is the primary regulator of national banks and is also a member of the task force. The structure of the task force is posted here and a complete list of members is posted here.

Lately I seem to be reading a lot about administrative, bureaucratic, and/or autocratic states, in which there is no accountability, and tyrants petty and otherwise are free to use and abuse their powers in an arbitrary manner to punish their perceived political or social enemies.

I keep looking for evidence that we haven't devolved into such a state, but I'm having to look harder and harder, and evidence is becoming increasingly rare...

Imperial Overreach

So I've been referring to the current resident of the Oval Office as "His Imperial Majesty Barack Hussein Obama" from pretty much day one of his reign.

This mocking title was because of the way he--or his handlers--conducted his campaign: He definitely seemed to me to have a grandiose idea of himself, and what he could accomplish through his office.

Aside from the question of whether he is competent enough to accomplish much beside making a mockery of the office he occupies, I haven't seen anything to change my opinion of the man himself.

Today, through the NRA-ILA, I found an editorial in the Washington Times entitled Squeezing the gunsmiths, detailing how the

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) imposes the “high risk” label on any business making firearms, regardless of the company’s actual credit history. Coupled with the Justice Department’s Operation Chokepoint, the FDIC encourages banks to drop gun stores, suppliers and manufacturers and to refuse to process their online transactions.
It’s dressed up as fraud prevention, but many of the companies targeted have good credit histories and operate good and well-managed companies. Banks comply with Washington’s demands out of an understandable fear of the consequences of saying “no.” Conducting business with clients deemed “risky” would put them in jeopardy of audits and other harassment from federal agents.

So, let's make this clear:  His Imperial Majesty, Barack Hussein Obama I, and his minions, are using armed Government Agents to try and stifle businesses they don't like.
The fact that these businesses are part of one of the few, if not the only, sectors of the economy that is not only healthy but booming probably makes them -- that is, HIMBO and his minions -- even more anxious to suppress it.
The funniest part of this, or a part that would be funny if it were not, frankly, terrifying, is that, as the editorial points out, 

When he was an ambitious state senator in Illinois, Barack Obama despised White House power grabs. It was so Washington. “The biggest problem that we’re facing right now,” he said in 2008, “has to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all, and that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president of the United States of America.”

I've been doing a lot of historical reading lately, and one thing that has struck me is how, when The King  starts making unilateral, arbitrary, decisions like this, without any sort of review or control process, then eventually you wind up with smashed windows, gallows, bonfires and pitchforks, and the Jews/Nisei/Indians/Tea Partiers loaded on railcars.
Government is force.  Government is evil. There are things we can do better through a government, but it's a dangerous tool, and no single person would be allowed to wield it at his or her discretion.  That's the whole point of this "Checks and balances" thing we talk about.
It's about time, and past time, people outside the firearms business and the firearms rights community realize that "What they do to us they can do to you."

We thought it was a joke...(UPDATED)

...but Dave Workman reveals that there is, in fact, a gun control "playbook."

UPDATE:  Courtesy Shall Not Be Questioned, the document is here: Gun ViolenceMessaging Guide PDF-1.pdf.
Bitter analyses the document at Anti-Gun Communication Strategies | Shall Not Be Questioned

"On Profiling and Stand Your Ground"

On Profiling and Stand Your Ground | Monster Hunter Nation

In Which Larry Correia lays down the facts, and fisks the FREAKING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!

Long overdue.

Awesome.

Still valid

The graphic second from the top in the right-hand column of this blog.
 View From The Porch: The cradle and the grave of liberty.
The latest:  Cradle and Grave of Liberty, Part Deux...
The cousins Adams, John Hancock, and Thomas Paine, among others, are weeping.
UPDATE: More at Weer'd World: Anti-Freedom

UPDATE 2: TJIC has posted in comments at Tam's, and, "on advice of counsel", as they say, has gone "radio silent."
More at Police surround a former blogger’s house because he applied for a gun permit .