Random Nuclear Strikes

I know I’ve been asking folks to do this a lot lately, but you really need to call or write your Senators and Representatives more often. I’m personally trying to work myself up to the point where, if their in session that week and I haven’t called them; I’m doing my job as a citizen.

In today’s case, Alphecca has found one blue-state type and two red-state type bills that will be introduced to the US HoR in the near future:

H.R. 73, the Bartlett bill, would protect the right to obtain firearms for security and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the legal enforcement of such right.

Any elected official who would vote against your right to purchase a firearm for protection deserves to be removed from office. This is not an extreme view and you should remind your elected officials of this. Voting against your right to protect yourself is the extreme view, as it shows contempt for your life.

H.R. 226, the Stearns bill, would set national standards according to which non-residents of a state who possess permits to carry concealed firearms issued by other states may carry concealed firearms in the state.

National Concealed Carry. Because you know you want that.

As for the blue-state type bill:

H.R. 96, by Congressman Mike Castle of Delaware. This bill, also referred to the House Judiciary Committee, would set up so many requirements for background checking and report filing in connection with the numerous gun shows which occur annually in the United States as to undermine or eliminate most or all of them.

Call today.

And no, I’m not going to make it easier for you by supplying a link to your elected officials. If you don’t know them off the top of your head/have their contact info in you “Favorites”, what are you doing calling yourself “An Advocate for Gun Rights”?

I’m not saying that you need to have them on speed dial, but you should at least know their names so you can Google it! Hell, you voted either for or against them just 60 days ago.

Didn’t watch the speech last night. Read it.

Overall, not bad. He finally admitted that it was a mistake to go in light. Unfortunately, the left doesn’t even want him to call for back-up. Too little, too late to help his approval ratings, not that I think he cares a whole lot about that.

20K probably isn’t going to be enough, I liked 32K better, but it is much better than the alternative the left is demanding; which can be summed up as “Let as many of those five-time-a-day praying brown people die as necessary so that our white soldiers don’t have to be in harms way.”

The Dems will cut funding. Thankfully for right-thinking idividuals, their media play in cutting the cash flow will not amount to the Boland Amendment they think it will be. While they don’t understand it, the American people do: Just as Iraq isn’t Vietnam, neither is it Nicaragua circa 1982. The American people may have certain opinions about the handling of the war, but they realize that there is a significant danger from people who are trying to kill US soldiers. The cutting of funding will bite the Dems in the ass.

Some on the left think he declared war on Iran and Syria last night. They are fools to think we should ‘ask them for help without demands’. Hear no evil, see no evil fools.

One of the hyper-partisan, underwhelmingly funny leftists made up a “visual aid” for Bush ala Ted “LadyKiller” Kennedy

Other folks cannot figure out that just because you self-describe yourself as a “Regan Conservative” doesn’t automatically make you one. Nor can they figure out that Godwin’s Law still applies, even if someone who calls themselves a “Reagan Conservative” compares Bush to Hitler.

That’s that and twat’s twat.

Via Craig at MTPolitics comes word of a very, very stupid anti-“price gouging” and anti-“hoarding” law making its way through their legislature.

(3) If a person did not offer for sale an essential good or service, at retail or wholesale, within an affected area during the 30 days before the declaration of the state of emergency or the finding of an abnormal market disruption, it is a prima facie violation of subsection (1) to charge a price that represents a gross disparity from the price at which the good or service was readily obtainable in the affected area during the 30 days immediately before the declaration or finding.

Craig then makes up a very good hypothosies about a private individual who is able to go to Spokane, WA, outside the “affected area”, and buys a load of plywood to bring back to MT and sell at a price folks inside the “affected area” are willing to pay, but is above the market price before the emergency.

This increasing of the supply to make a small profit (you know, the American Way of Doing Things) would be considered “price-gouging”.

A commenter posting under the name “Walter Greenspan” then goes and does what any right thinking individual should: Remind folks that the term “Price-Gouging” is a political term and not an economic one. I’m pretty sure the folks who visit here know which side of the political spectrum to congratulate for making it up.

As for the hoarding part of the bill; it seems pretty straight forward towards the actual interfering with the delivery of staple products for your own use, although Craig did manage to find quite the hole in it rather quickly:

If I have, say, 100 gallons of water that I’ve stored from my own well, in my own containers, is that hoarding an essential good?

If I have an above-ground diesel tank (as many farmers do), would it be considered hoarding if they didn’t make it available for sale? Hell, I know a guy who has a diesel genny that he keeps stocked with a month’s worth of fuel. What about him? Will he be punished for being prepared?

If I have a couple of spare bedrooms, and rent them out, does that constitute price-gouging, since I didn’t offer the service 30 days prior? Just to be safe, I don’t think I’ll let anyone stay at my home, and ask them to defray the cost of my preparedness.

Exactly. All this bill would do for those informed about it would be to stop one from helping their fellow man. Likewise, the overly litigeous who get helped by those uninformed about this law, could sue/threaten to turn the helpful in to the police.

Imagine that! Government making the helpful, criminal.

——————–

In other Montana Politics, Joe at the View from North Central Idaho reads this in the NRA News:

Montana’s Castle Doctrine bill also contains a provision stating that if companies forbid employees from legally and lawfully carrying a firearm, and an employee is a victim of a crime, then the employee can sue his or her employer for failing to protect him (or refusing to allow him to protect himself).

From one employee of a gun-bigot General Manager to everyone else who is probably in the same boat: Vewy Kuul!

——————–

Speaking of Joe; If you visit his place regularly, you know that you quite often get to see some of the interesting things that he finds in his referer logs.

Ben at The Reasonable Nut did the same the other day and found someone at the Neu Jersey US Customs office stopping by his place.

Ben is a very straightforward guy and his response to the visitor is exactly correct.