Friday, February 17, 2012

The Starbucks Statement



In a statement released Wednesday after this post was published, Starbucks reiterated that its policy is to comply with the law in the communities where its stores are. “As the public debate around this issue continues, we encourage customers and advocacy groups from both sides to share their input with their public officials," the company said. "We are extremely sensitive to the issue of gun violence in our society and believe that supporting local laws is the right way for us to ensure a safe environment for both our partners (employees) and customers."]

Santorum Attacks Romney

U.S. Immigration Officers Shoot it Out - 2 Dead



A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent is dead after gunfire at the agency's offices in a California federal building.

In the incident at the Glenn M. Anderson Federal Building in Long Beach, Calif., an ICE agent allegedly opened fire on two colleagues, leaving one wounded with multiple gunshots, another unharmed, and the initial shooter dead, ICE told ABC News.

Earlier, multiple published reports citing the Long Beach Police described a second agent dead and the third wounded, but those reports were mistaken, ICE said.

The incident began as an unspecified dispute between a supervisor and a subordinate.
This story is a perfect illustration of the problem which exists among lawful gun owners. Some of them are hidden time-bombs. It would be very difficult to identify them before something happens, but that is exactly what gun control is all about.

Through better screening and qualifying, many of the worst cases can be disarmed before they cause damage.  This applies to cops and civilians alike.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Good Cop, or Trigger Happy Bad Cop?

 I am concerned that when there are other police present, when there is no clear drawing of a gun on the officers or anyone else, when no weapon is found in the hands of the person who is shot, that this should NOT be considered a justified shooting.  While the article claims that the previous shootings were found to be justified, I'd have to add that I don't find that credible if the city was also paying off a settlement over the shooting in a substantial amount to avoid going to trial.
While the article states there were weapons in the house, it did not state these were ILLEGAL weapons in the house.
I particularly object to the shooting with the child in the man's arms being at risk, had the officer missed.  That, in view of the man NOT having a gun, was clearly NOT a justified risk.
Arizona appears to be have a gun culture which is far too quick to resort ot lethal violence.
They're not the only ones.


From MSNBC.com :



Grandpa-shooting Arizona officer has five previous kills under his belt 
The Arizona police officer who shot and killed an unarmed man while he held his baby grandson has been involved in at least five previous fatal shootings, police said.
The officer, James Peters of the Scottsdale police, was on administrative leave Thursday after he killed John Loxas, 50, with a single rifle shot to the head Tuesday. Loxas' 9-month-old grandson, who was in his arms, was unhurt.
"There were at least three officers in position to engage the suspect," Sgt. Mark Clark, a spokesman for the Scottsdale police, told NBC station KPNX of Phoenix. "At least one of the officers thought he saw something in the suspect's hands."
KPNX reported that Peters has now been involved in seven shootings in the past 10 years, six of them fatal. The Arizona Republic reported Thursday that the city of Scottsdale agreed to a $75,000 settlement in 2009 with the family of one of the people Peters had killed; the city denied liability.
New Times, a Phoenix alternative weekly, profiled Peters in 2010 under the headline "'Dirty Harry' in Scottsdale? Badass Cop Bags Four Bad Guys in 10-Year Career." 
Police said that as a former member of the SWAT team, Peters had been involved in the department's most dangerous assignments and that all of the previous shootings had been found to be justified.
In the incident Tuesday, police were called to Loxas' home after a call to 911 reported that he had kicked over a trash can and threatened the owner when he complained. The caller said Loxas was walking around the neighborhood with his grandson and a weapon. 
"We have a neighbor out here that pulled a gun on us," the caller said. "He's got a baby in his arms. He's got a gun, and he cocked it."
Loxas had returned home by the time police arrived, and he answered the door with the baby in his arms. Peters and another officer told investigators they saw something in Loxas' hand, and when he turned, Peters fired a single shot, killing Loxas instantaneously.
Afterward, detectives determined that Loxas wasn't armed. But they did find several weapons in the home, KPNX reported.

Speaking of Militias.........

Rebellion or Insurrection  - 18 U.S.C. § 2383
“Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

Seditious conspiracy  - 18 U.S.C. § 2384
“If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”

That sums it up.

Claiming you're a social club, while engaging in paramilitary training, and accumulating firearms and explosives, including illegal materials and weapons for the purpose of insurrection is not credible. It's stupid, and it shows how easily this lot of warrior wannabes cave in on their big talk when they're held accountable for it.

I have no great faith in their courage in combat if they are such lying chicken-livered woosies in a court room.

But it goes to the heart of the idiots who are so ill-educated and ill-informed as to fail to understand what a militia - a REAL militia is and is not.  It's been defined, in the constitution, in court decisions and in law, most notably the Militia Act of 1903.

It is badly misunderstood, including by delusional people who actually find it plausible that invading forces have turned tail in the face of the firearms held by Billy-Bob Tractor Cap and his idiot son John, to borrow a colorful phrase used by a friend of mine long ago in referring to the poorly founded assumptions of some of our less cerebral fellow-citizens.  From an earlier story in the NYTimes, linked in this story:
"The court filing said the group, which called itself the Hutaree, planned to kill an unidentified law enforcement officer and then bomb the funeral caravan using improvised explosive devices based on designs used against American troops by insurgents in Iraq.
“This is an example of radical and extremist fringe groups which can be found throughout our society,” Andrew Arena, the F.B.I. special agent in charge in Detroit, said in a statement. “The F.B.I. takes such extremist groups seriously, especially those who would target innocent citizens and the law enforcement officers who protect the citizens of the United States.”
The Hutaree — a word Mr. Stone apparently made up to mean Christian warriors — saw the local police as “foot soldiers” for the federal government, which the group viewed as its enemy, along with other participants in what the group’s members deemed to be a “New World Order” working on behalf of the Antichrist, the indictment said. "
Here is the story, courtesy of the great 'Gray Lady', the New York Times :
Michigan Militia Defended as ‘Social Club’ at Trial of 7

The Clayton, Mich., property of David B. Stone Sr., leader of the Hutaree, which officials say plotted to kill police officers.



Thursday, February 16, 2012

Should public policy be decided by Science Fiction?

"an armed society is a polite one"
That comes from science fiction writer Robert Heinlein's book Beyond This Horizon. One sub-theme of the book is the carrying and use of firearms. In the novel being armed is part of being a man; otherwise he wears a brassard and is considered weak and inferior. Women are allowed but not expected to be armed. Duels, either deadly or survivable, may easily occur when someone feels that they have been wronged or insulted, a custom that keeps order and politeness.

Is a work of science fiction one we should be modeling society upon?

Gun Permit

where I had the best laugh of the day. I suppose this means that tough-guy Gds doesn't ever disarm and will never submit to even the slightest restriction on his "rights."