When Barack Obama told Sarah Brady he was pursuing gun control "under the radar," people began to wonder exactly what he meant. Now, we have a specific example of how a President can abuse his power, overstep his authority, and circumvent the system to enact his own special gun laws.
Under the Obama administration, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, commonly known as the ATF, has unilaterally passed a new rule that requires firearms dealers in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas to report to the ATF sales to an individual of multiple semiautomatic rifles, greater than .22 caliber, with detachable magazines during any five-day period. The stated purpose of this new law is to limit the flow of firearms from the Untied States to Mexico.
This new rule essentially amounts to a new federal gun-control law; however, it was passed without a single vote in Congress. Barack Obama knew he could never get this sort of gun-control law through both houses of Congress, so he just created the law through executive authority and got in through the backdoor.
One of the most problematic features of this new gun law is that is does not apply equally to all states. American citizens who live in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas are now subject to more federal gun restrictions than those citizens in other states. Since the federal government cannot impose federal laws on specific groups of people, this law is unconstitutional.
We may not have to spend a lot of time worrying about the uneven application of this law on the southern border states, however. If the ATF gets away with this law, they are bound to expand it to more states. Eventually, the Obama administration will argue the law was so effective in curbing illegal gun sales in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas that the gun smugglers have started using buyers in states like Colorado, Nevada, Oklahoma, Utah, etc. Then the ATF will expand the law to other states. Eventually, the law will probably apply to Alaska too. Do not be surprised if Barack Obama and the ATF start claiming people are buying guns in Alaska, putting them on boats, and sailing them down the Pacific coast to Mexico.
A ridiculous part of this new rule is the "greater than .22 caliber" clause. Nearly all firearms, except .22s themselves, are greater than .22 caliber. The ATF probably threw in this clause to give the illusion the ATF is concerned only with high-powered rifles. In reality, this law going after just about any rifle caliber. For example, the ATF has always been very aggressive about targeting, AR-15s, the civilian version of the M16. Standard AR-15s fire .223 (similar to 5.56 NATO). Even though the .223 round is only moderately powerful, when compared to most rifle rounds, the ATF probably set the power threshold so low for this law so they could include AR-15s.
Also note that the ATF is specifically mentioning "detachable magazines" and "semiautomatic" rifles in the rule. This is just code for "assault weapons." The ATF simply does not like people have assault weapons, and those are the first weapons they would abolish if given the chance. That is what they are pursuing with this rule. This rule is what will set the stage for eventually placing stricter controls on the types of guns the ATF does not like.
The most egregious element to all of this ATF reporting business is the hypocrisy. The Obama administration is claiming that too many firearms are ending up in Mexico, but the ATF's "Fast and Furious" program was deliberately allowing actual working firearms to be transferred to Mexican gangs. Obama and the ATF are out panicking everyone about how many US weapons are ending up in the hands of gangs in Mexico when our government was just caught intentionally allowing--and even encouraging--those weapons to flow into Mexico as part of a organized effort. You just can't make this stuff up.
Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts
July 7, 2011
TSA Searches Black Woman's "Poofy" Hair
Now the Transportation Security Administration is concerned with your hair, especially if it "poofs from the body." Actually, the TSA's official policy is apparently now to "examine anything that poofs from the body."
When Laura Adiele, a Black woman, attempted to board a flight at Sea-Tac Airport in Washington, she went through the TSA's full-body scanner. After accepting that dose of radiation, Laura Adiele was pulled aside for a pat-down. The TSA was not comfortable with her hairstyle (or perhaps they found it arousing) and they wanted to run their fingers through it.
Laura Adiele objected at first, but the TSA was not going to let her on her flight until they got to feel-up her hair, so she eventually complied. The TSA then spent some time rifling through the woman's hair. Of course, they found absolutely nothing, and Adiele got to board the flight and arrive at her destination with tussled hair.
So, even with all of their metal detectors, cameras, full-body scanners, explosive sniffers etc., the TSA cannot determine if a woman's hair is a threat to public safety or not without actually running their fingers through it. In reality, the TSA could have easily used their devices to rule out the woman's hair as a threat. When the TSA does stuff like this, they do not do it because they have to. The TSA does this because they can.
While the TSA was busy messing around in this unfortunate Black woman's threatening poofy hair, how many foreign nationals do you suppose walked right through TSA security wearing Muslim head-coverings?
When Laura Adiele, a Black woman, attempted to board a flight at Sea-Tac Airport in Washington, she went through the TSA's full-body scanner. After accepting that dose of radiation, Laura Adiele was pulled aside for a pat-down. The TSA was not comfortable with her hairstyle (or perhaps they found it arousing) and they wanted to run their fingers through it.
Laura Adiele objected at first, but the TSA was not going to let her on her flight until they got to feel-up her hair, so she eventually complied. The TSA then spent some time rifling through the woman's hair. Of course, they found absolutely nothing, and Adiele got to board the flight and arrive at her destination with tussled hair.
So, even with all of their metal detectors, cameras, full-body scanners, explosive sniffers etc., the TSA cannot determine if a woman's hair is a threat to public safety or not without actually running their fingers through it. In reality, the TSA could have easily used their devices to rule out the woman's hair as a threat. When the TSA does stuff like this, they do not do it because they have to. The TSA does this because they can.
While the TSA was busy messing around in this unfortunate Black woman's threatening poofy hair, how many foreign nationals do you suppose walked right through TSA security wearing Muslim head-coverings?
June 17, 2011
Mother Convicted of Felony for Spanking Her Own Child
Corpus Christi, Texas Judge Jose Longoria convicted Rosalina Gonzales of a felony for spanking her own child. Click below to read the story.
"Judge Has Harsh Words for Mom Before Sentencing Her for Spanking Her Kid"
"Judge Has Harsh Words for Mom Before Sentencing Her for Spanking Her Kid"
June 10, 2011
With No Other Concerns in America, Senators Target Lip-Synchers
We have wars going on in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. The housing market is in shambles. Gas prices are soaring. Unemployment is breaking records.
You would think The United States Senators would be occupied fixing these problems, but, apparently, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D) of Minnesota, Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas and Sen. Christopher Coons (D) of Delaware have decided to address more pressing concerns. They are pushing Senate Bill 978, which targets people who lip-synch to copyrighted works and publish the videos online. Violators can go to prison for up to five years.
What is wrong with the priorities of our Senators? With all of the problems going on in America right now, how do they possibly have enough time to worry about people lip-synching on the Internet?
If you live in Minnesota, Texas, or Delaware, maybe you should reach out to Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. John Cornyn, or Sen. Christopher Coons and make them aware of the more serious problems we are facing as a nation.
You would think The United States Senators would be occupied fixing these problems, but, apparently, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D) of Minnesota, Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas and Sen. Christopher Coons (D) of Delaware have decided to address more pressing concerns. They are pushing Senate Bill 978, which targets people who lip-synch to copyrighted works and publish the videos online. Violators can go to prison for up to five years.
What is wrong with the priorities of our Senators? With all of the problems going on in America right now, how do they possibly have enough time to worry about people lip-synching on the Internet?
If you live in Minnesota, Texas, or Delaware, maybe you should reach out to Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Sen. John Cornyn, or Sen. Christopher Coons and make them aware of the more serious problems we are facing as a nation.
May 25, 2011
Okay, Go Ahead and Mess with Texas
Apparently, the Texas Senate has an abundance of cowards. Already passed by the Texas House of Representatives, HB 1937 was going to make it a crime for a government worker to inappropriately touch a person without probable cause. HB 1937 would essentially bring an end to the most invasive aspects of TSA pat-downs.
In a clear demonstration that the Transportation Security Administration's power has reached much too far, John Murphy, the U.S. District Attorney for Western Texas, essentially warned the Texas Senate that Texas' ban on TSA groping could lead to a ban on flights in the state. Of course, this spooked the wimps in the Texas Senate, and HB 1937 has been effectively blocked.
What's wrong with these sissy Texas Senators? Texas had a real opportunity to exert its state's rights here. The TSA probably could have grounded all flights out of Texas. If they had done that, it would have created a spectacular setting for Texas to stand for her freedom. This could have been a watershed moment for American freedom. Instead, it is just another example of how governments disregard the people for the sake of ease.
Two parties need to be ashamed in this confrontation. The United States federal government should be ashamed for bullying a state. The Senators in Texas should be ashamed for allowing themselves to be bullied so easily. When Texans start backing down from a fight, times have truly gotten bad.
In a clear demonstration that the Transportation Security Administration's power has reached much too far, John Murphy, the U.S. District Attorney for Western Texas, essentially warned the Texas Senate that Texas' ban on TSA groping could lead to a ban on flights in the state. Of course, this spooked the wimps in the Texas Senate, and HB 1937 has been effectively blocked.
What's wrong with these sissy Texas Senators? Texas had a real opportunity to exert its state's rights here. The TSA probably could have grounded all flights out of Texas. If they had done that, it would have created a spectacular setting for Texas to stand for her freedom. This could have been a watershed moment for American freedom. Instead, it is just another example of how governments disregard the people for the sake of ease.
Two parties need to be ashamed in this confrontation. The United States federal government should be ashamed for bullying a state. The Senators in Texas should be ashamed for allowing themselves to be bullied so easily. When Texans start backing down from a fight, times have truly gotten bad.
April 30, 2011
Don't Mess with Texas' Junk - TSA Pat-Downs Could Be Criminalized
Texas State Representative David Simpson is sponsoring a bill in Texas (HB 1937) that would make it a felony for a security officer who grants access to public buildings and public transportation to touch a person's anus, sex organ, or breasts (under or over clothes) without probable cause. The bill also criminalizes any touching by a security guard that would be offensive to a reasonable person. This could effectively end the intrusive portions of TSA pat-downs in Texas.
Also, Rep. David Simpson is sponsoring HB 1938, which would outlaw full-body scanners in Texas. This legislation would impose fines of up to $1,000 per day on those who operate scanner that allow government workers to look at people's virtually naked bodies.
Finally, a politician is standing up for the basic human dignity of innocent people. Is it any wonder that Texas is the pioneer in this effort?
All of the sissies out there are going to start peeing down their legs and crying, "Oh, no! The terrorists are going to find out about this lapse in security and flood into the Texas airports. They are going to be hijacking planes out of Texas every week!"
If you have ever met a Texan, the last thing you would think to do is hijack a plane full of them. Texans are tough people and will not sit passively in their seats while someone tries to bring down their plane. If you ever visit Texas, you will learn that "Don't Mess with Texas" is not just a motto. It is a way of life.
 |
| Texas Flag |
Texas State Representative David Simpson is sponsoring a bill in Texas (HB 1937) that would make it a felony for a security officer who grants access to public buildings and public transportation to touch a person's anus, sex organ, or breasts (under or over clothes) without probable cause. The bill also criminalizes any touching by a security guard that would be offensive to a reasonable person. This could effectively end the intrusive portions of TSA pat-downs in Texas.
Also, Rep. David Simpson is sponsoring HB 1938, which would outlaw full-body scanners in Texas. This legislation would impose fines of up to $1,000 per day on those who operate scanner that allow government workers to look at people's virtually naked bodies.
Finally, a politician is standing up for the basic human dignity of innocent people. Is it any wonder that Texas is the pioneer in this effort?
All of the sissies out there are going to start peeing down their legs and crying, "Oh, no! The terrorists are going to find out about this lapse in security and flood into the Texas airports. They are going to be hijacking planes out of Texas every week!"
If you have ever met a Texan, the last thing you would think to do is hijack a plane full of them. Texans are tough people and will not sit passively in their seats while someone tries to bring down their plane. If you ever visit Texas, you will learn that "Don't Mess with Texas" is not just a motto. It is a way of life.
January 13, 2011
TSA Pays Settlement for Exposing Lynsie Murley's Breasts
Lynsie Murley, an attractive young Amarillo woman, is another brave individual standing up for the civil rights and dignity of innocent travelers. Murley sued the Transportation Security Administration for an incident in which the TSA pulled down her blouse and publicly exposed her breasts during a pat-down at Texas' Corpus Christi airport in March of 2008.
After the humiliating incident, TSA workers joked with her about it. One TSA worker, who had missed the incident, told Murley he was sorry he had missed the event and would have to watch it later on security camera footage.
Rather than face the lawsuit, the TSA paid off the woman in a settlement. Apparently, the amount was nominal. According to the lawyer, the settlement was "way less" than $100,000.
Regardless of the cash amount, Lynsie Murley got a little justice out of the TSA. Most importantly, Lynsie Murley did not passively take the abuse TSA is routinely dishing out to innocent citizens. If more people stood up to the TSA, this out-of-control agency would not be tormenting innocent people so flagrantly.
If the TSA abuses you, consider suing. You might get a little money. You might get a little justice. You might even help preserve the civil rights of other people.
What does the TSA care? They get to feel you up, and when you sue, they will pay you off with taxpayer dollars. Think of it as a groping lottery you get to play every time you try to get on a plane.
After the humiliating incident, TSA workers joked with her about it. One TSA worker, who had missed the incident, told Murley he was sorry he had missed the event and would have to watch it later on security camera footage.
Rather than face the lawsuit, the TSA paid off the woman in a settlement. Apparently, the amount was nominal. According to the lawyer, the settlement was "way less" than $100,000.
Regardless of the cash amount, Lynsie Murley got a little justice out of the TSA. Most importantly, Lynsie Murley did not passively take the abuse TSA is routinely dishing out to innocent citizens. If more people stood up to the TSA, this out-of-control agency would not be tormenting innocent people so flagrantly.
If the TSA abuses you, consider suing. You might get a little money. You might get a little justice. You might even help preserve the civil rights of other people.
What does the TSA care? They get to feel you up, and when you sue, they will pay you off with taxpayer dollars. Think of it as a groping lottery you get to play every time you try to get on a plane.
December 25, 2010
TSA Gate Rape Resistance Gets Claire Hirschkind Arrested
On December 22, 2010, Claire Hirschkind, a 56-year-old rape victim was arrested at Austin-Bergstrom Airport in Texas after refusing a TSA pat-down. Claire Hirschkind could not pass through the full-body scanner due to safety concerns about a pacemaker-type device imbedded in her chest.
Hirschkind told a female TSA agent not to touch her breasts during the pat-down. The TSA agent insisted she would touch the rape victim's breasts. When Hirschkind refused to have her breasts touched by the federal employee, she was forced to the ground and arrested.
The story probably has a few more details that will certainly add to the reasons behind this woman being pushed to the ground. Logic says there must have been some sort of additional resistance, but this is the TSA, so logic is not necessarily applicable. Thee fact remains, however, that an innocent, law-abiding rape survivor with a pacemaker-type device was humiliated, inconvenienced, and tormented because she did not want a federal employee to touch her breasts.
How many more places can you imagine this going on? Imagine trying to walk into Grand Central Station and an NYPD cop stops you and says, "I am going to have to feel your breasts and crotch before I let you in the building."
Don't worry. This sort of thing will not be happening for at least another few weeks. If it makes us feel a little safer, it's perfectly okay, right?
Hirschkind told a female TSA agent not to touch her breasts during the pat-down. The TSA agent insisted she would touch the rape victim's breasts. When Hirschkind refused to have her breasts touched by the federal employee, she was forced to the ground and arrested.
The story probably has a few more details that will certainly add to the reasons behind this woman being pushed to the ground. Logic says there must have been some sort of additional resistance, but this is the TSA, so logic is not necessarily applicable. Thee fact remains, however, that an innocent, law-abiding rape survivor with a pacemaker-type device was humiliated, inconvenienced, and tormented because she did not want a federal employee to touch her breasts.
How many more places can you imagine this going on? Imagine trying to walk into Grand Central Station and an NYPD cop stops you and says, "I am going to have to feel your breasts and crotch before I let you in the building."
Don't worry. This sort of thing will not be happening for at least another few weeks. If it makes us feel a little safer, it's perfectly okay, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)