“SUV Tires Fall Prey To Gen Z Eco-Activists” Or Something

By William Teach July 28, 2022 – 7:15 am

Yeah, it’s like no big deal to the UK Guardian. Hey, it’s like public shaming!

‘Like a public shaming’: a night with the eco-activists deflating SUV tires

On a searingly hot night in New York City, a group of mask-wearing activists grasping bags of lentils set out to stage the biggest blitzkrieg yet upon a new target for climate campaigners in the US – the tires of SUVs.

The group – a mixture of ages and genders – split up as midnight approached, heading down the streets of the Upper East Side, lined by some of the most expensive apartments in the world and a gleaming parade of high-end, parked SUVs. This type of vehicle is the second largest cause of the global rise in carbon dioxide emissions over the past decade.

The Tyre Extinguishers, as they call themselves, furtively hand around bags of lentils ahead of their raid (the legumes are jammed into a tire valve to release its air slowly overnight) and size up their quarry.

A hulking Land Rover, sporting a parking permit for a Hamptons beach, is an obvious initial target, but a loitering doorman from a nearby apartment complex unnerves the group. They scurry down the street, then double back and settle upon an Audi.

One of the group kneels down, unscrews the tire valve cap, stuffs a lentil inside and puts the cap back on. The tire immediately lets out a startled “pfft” noise, a leaflet is slapped on to the windshield and the group melts back into the night.

Huh. So, the UK Guardian reporter Oliver Milman was hanging with young folks engaged in vandalism? Yes, this is actually a violation of the law, even if the tires are not damaged, and could be on the hook for the costs to tow or fix the tires, especially since many won’t know what the problem is and have a shop check the tires, which costs money and takes time.

America has embraced large SUVs like no other country, even in liberal, walkable areas like the Upper East Side, so the activists face a steep task in attaching stigma to the supersized cars that now dominate US streets. But Tyre Extinguishers’ nascent US operation has been flooded with insults and even death threats. One message vowed to “deflate your lungs” while another critic, in a nod to the British roots of the campaign, wrote: “Damn you, Redcoats!”

It’s utterly not surprising that a left wing news outlet will support leftists acting in a criminal manner.

“The amount of damage from a flat tire is nothing compared to climate change,” said one member of the group as we moved away from the first deflation, Central Park looming into sight through the dark. “Why do you need an SUV, especially in New York? It’s a vanity thing. You have freedom of choice, sure, but you don’t have freedom from consequences.”

It’s going to get very ugly when these people get caught in the act by the vehicle owners.

“It is like a public shaming,” said Dana Fisher, a sociologist at the University of Maryland who has researched environmental protests since the 1990s. “The target of public shaming is very unlikely to change their opinion from the shaming, so the question is, what’s the point? It’s an innovative, simple tactic to take the air out of someone’s tires, it’s not harmful, it’s just annoying. It’s like the training wheels to something confrontational.”

See? It’s just shaming. And it’ll be fun and games until they are caught and charges are pressed that cannot be dismissed. Or, a homeowner beats the ever loving shit out of one of them. Or plugs them with a 9mm.

Read: “SUV Tires Fall Prey To Gen Z Eco-Activists” Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Senator Ernst Spikes Democrats Birth Control Bill

By William Teach July 28, 2022 – 7:00 am

It’s so horrible, right? It’s sent most of the Credentialed Media outlets into a tizzy

GOP Sen. Joni Ernst Blocks Bill Protecting Right To Birth Control

Democratic legislation that would protect the right to birth control and other contraceptives was blocked by Senate Republicans on Wednesday, a little more than a month after the Supreme Court reversed nearly 50 years of precedent and overturned abortion rights.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) objected to a request to pass the bill via unanimous consent. If any senator opposes such a request on the Senate floor, it is rejected.

Ernst claimed the Democrats’ bill “purposefully goes far beyond the scope of contraception” and said it could fund abortion providers and protect abortion-inducing drugs.

The House passed the Right to Contraception Act last week amid fears that the high court may come for reproductive health care next. Democrats pointed to an opinion from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas suggesting the court should reexamine precedent that guaranteed the right to contraception.

Well, see, it rather does attempt to make an end around States Rights regarding abortion

(Catholic News Agency) In a letter to Congress ahead of the vote, SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser cautioned against the bill that seeks “to bail out the abortion industry, trample conscience rights, and require uninhibited access to dangerous chemical abortion drugs.”

“The bill states that contraceptives include drugs, devices, or biological products intended for contraception, ‘whether specifically intended to prevent pregnancy or for other health needs,’” Dannenfelser wrote. “This could include noncontroversial applications of the drug but could also include the use of the drug to induce abortion.”

The bill also overrides the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The 1993 law clarifies the standards that should be used in judging religious freedom disputes involving the First Amendment’s free exercise clause. That clause says that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

The bill directly criticizes state conscience protections for health care providers who refuse to provide contraception.

Worth reading that whole piece. See, Democrats could have simply gone for a straight-forward, above board legislation, but, not, they tried to get all sorts of tricky. Back to the original piece

Ernst on Wednesday sought to pass her own bill that would expedite over-the-counter access to birth control. Democrats objected, saying it wouldn’t prevent states from restricting or even banning access to birth control.

“Her bill would not ensure access to birth control, and it fails to codify the constitutional right to birth control across the United States,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said.

Democrats do not want easier access to birth control, because then groups like Planned Parenthood would lose money. And then more women would use it, which is bad for the abortion on demand business.

Read: Senator Ernst Spikes Democrats Birth Control Bill »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

It’s A Cult: Tech Workers Quit To Fight Climate Apocalypse (scam)

By William Teach July 27, 2022 – 2:00 pm

The question not really asked: what are they doing in their own lives to match their Beliefs?

Why tech workers are quitting great jobs at companies like Google to fight climate change

electric vehicleTech workers are walking away from high-paying jobs with great perks to help fight what they believe is the greatest existential problem of our lifetimes: climate change.

In some cases, that has meant taking a pay cut. But Sandy Anuras, who recently joined home solar provider Sunrun as its chief technology officer, says a big paycheck sometimes comes with a price.

“The tech giants have had these huge compensation packages. And it’s hard to say no to a huge compensation package,” Anuras told CNBC. “You just realize there’s a little bit more to life than maxing out your comp package. And I think people are realizing that now — and especially with some of the decisions that their companies have made to prioritize profits over democracy, for example.” (snip)

That’s how it was for software engineer Tom Melendez, too. He worked at Google for five years before leaving in 2019 to take a job at MethaneSAT, an affiliate of the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, which processes satellite data to measure emissions of methane, an especially potent greenhouse gas.

“I was proud to be at Google. While I was there, especially in the beginning, I enjoyed the work I was doing,” Melendez told CNBC. But eventually he started to feel disenchanted. “At the end of the day, you can’t help but feel like the sole purpose of this is really just to make money. I am not making anything better — or not really. The metrics that I’m rated on are important to the company, but they’re not really important to me.”

Nope, nothing about the changes they made in their own lives. Huh

For example, since the climate jobs website Climatebase launched in June 2020, more than 600,000 people have used it, poring over more than than 40,000 job listings from more than 3,000 climate tech companies and environmental organizations, according to co-founder Evan Hynes. Climatebase has also had over 3,000 applications for an educational fellowship the company runs. (Disclosure: I was one of the fellows in the founding fellowship earlier in 2022.)

A Slack channel for job seekers called Work In Climate has more than 10,000 members, up more than fourfold in the last year, said the list’s co-founder, Eugene Kirpichov.

Seems like a scam. Other than jobs where they try and force their beliefs on Other People, what are they doing?

Kirpichov decided to leave Google to pursue work full time on climate and he shared the email he wrote to colleagues on LinkedIn:

“The reason I’m leaving is because the scale, urgency and tragedy of climate change are so immense that I can no longer justify to myself working on anything else, no matter how interesting or lucrative, until it’s fixed,” Kirpichov wrote. “I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I think others, who have the privilege of being able to do so, should follow suit. I like to frame the problem positively as ‘how much can we save,’ and every one of us can have a hand in saving something.”

Still nothing on personal changes to match the Beliefs. Anyhow, privilege?

Because he (Melendez from first excerpt) had earned a high Google salary for years and owned his home, he was financially able to take the step-down in pay that came with his move to MethaneSAT. Having a steady housing situation ends up being a key factor in whether people can move to a lower salary in exchange for work they find meaningful.

So, rich folks able to pretend to be climate warriors.

“I was thinking about my family, being from Thailand and Southeast Asia. We know Southeast Asia is going to get hit really hard with climate change. And so I’m really thinking a lot about folks who don’t have the privilege that I have, where I can say, ‘Oh, I’m going to be in Seattle, where it is so cool and climate change is not impacting us in such a severe way,’” Anuras told CNBC.

“As a privileged technologist, where should I be spending my life?” Anuras said. As she realized that Anuras realized she can use her skills to combat climate change, the answers to her own questions became increasingly clear.

“What problems do I want to look back and say I helped solve: One of the greatest problems humanity has faced, or I worked on selling some widgets in the metaverse? It just didn’t compute for me.”

Nope, still nothing on lifestyle changes. Just a big scam.

Read: It’s A Cult: Tech Workers Quit To Fight Climate Apocalypse (scam) »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 27, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is an Evil fossil fuels pump, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on a victim-selection failure.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

NYC Mayor Adams Seems Pretty Upset Over The Problems From Vast Amounts Of Illegal Aliens

By William Teach July 27, 2022 – 10:30 am

Eric Adams is, obviously, a big supporter of open borders, of not stopping illegals/migrants from entering the U.S. He’s just not OK with them being bused to NYC, as he learns all the problems unfettered illegal immigration brings

Adams admits NYC schools, health care ‘inundated’ by migrant influx, but blames ‘callousness’ of border states

double standardsNew York City Mayor Eric Adams admitted Sunday that public schools, the health care system and infrastructure are going to be “inundated” with the influx of migrants from the U.S.-Mexico border.

As illegal immigrants and other migrants arriving to the Big Apple on buses from southern border states stretch the city’s homeless shelters thin, Adams implored that all New Yorkers must welcome and fall in line with the city’s plans to house the influx of people, saying: “Everyone’s block is going to be impacted by this.”

“We’re looking at the potential of emergency shelters in hotels, in other facilities. We want to get our faith-based community involved. If there ever was an all-hands-on-deck moment this is it,” Adams said at an unrelated press conference, before criticizing the “callousness” of southern border states, instead of the Biden administration for its immigration policy.

“Our system was inundated with those who were seeking shelter because of the callousness of the states that pushed them out. We’re here. We’re receiving them, and everyone is going to have to be on board,” Adams said. “We can’t have the historical ‘I believe they should be housed, but just don’t house them on my block.’ Everyone’s block is going to be impacted by this.”

See, the border states are supposed to just suck it up, allow their systems to be overrun, to see spikes in crime, to deal with disease spikes, and everything else that comes with them. Same with all the places that the illegals were being bused and flown to by the Biden admin, which didn’t seem to be places like NYC.

“We have to add our advocacy with our ability to help our neighbors. And we need everyone on board with this,” the mayor said. “Because as I stated last week, our schools are going to be impacted, our healthcare system is going to be impacted, our infrastructure is going to be impacted. But we’re going to be willing to do our job – We’re going to do our job, and we’re going to need all New Yorkers to be with us.”

You can bet that the high toned and fancy to-do sections of the city will be exempt from all this, along with the area around Gracie Mansion, where the mayor resides.

VICTOR JOECKS: Blue city mayors channel Republicans on illegal immigration

It’s a lot easier to be supportive of illegal immigrants when they aren’t straining your city services. Just ask two of the most prominent Democrat mayors in the country.

Washington, D.C., mayor Muriel Bowser complained recently about the costs of helping those in the country illegally. For months, Texas and Arizona have offered illegal immigrants free bus rides to D.C. That’s significantly increased the number of undocumented immigrants there, and the city can’t handle it

This month, 10 City Council members sent the mayor a letter claiming those helping illegal immigrants are “burned out and overwhelmed.” The letter continues, “Migrants are being directed to existing district systems and resources intended for district residents. Without action, there is a risk of these systems being overwhelmed.”

“We are dealing with a federal issue that the District of Columbia won’t be able to bear,” Bowser said last week in response to the letter. She demanded a “federal response.”

D.C. and NYC are finding out the consequences of supporting unchecked illegal immigration first hand, and they do not like it. Now the border states need to export the illegals to other liberal cities. Sacramento has a ton: give them more. Send them to Portland, Seattle, Syracuse, Boston, and so many others. Especially Rehoboth Beach, where Biden spends most weekends.

Read: NYC Mayor Adams Seems Pretty Upset Over The Problems From Vast Amounts Of Illegal Aliens »

Posted in Democrats, If All You See | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Some Americans Say They’re Willing To Ditch AC To Reduce Their Carbon Footprint

By William Teach July 27, 2022 – 7:00 am

I’m sure some are willing to actually do it, particularly if they live in a place that barely ever needs it, but, come on, few are truly willing to do it. Just say it in polls and such

Some Americans willing to ditch air conditioning to reduce carbon footprint

st greta carTourists in the Big Apple shared whether they would give up air conditioning to reduce their carbon footprint amid a worldwide heat wave.

“You would never sleep again,” one man from Chicago told Fox News. “It’s just too hot.”

He said there are methods to reduce carbon emissions, but air conditioners are essential. (snip)

But one woman said she would give up her air conditioner.

“I have the windows down,” Blake, from North Carolina, said. “No AC needed.”

I bet she lives west of Winston Salem, up in the mountain areas, where it is cooler during the day, so, you could probably get away with that. I also bet she’s full of it. Even a place like Asheville will get plenty warm, in the upper 80’s, during the summer, and, that sun will beat down on a home much more than say in a place like NY. Since the nightly lows are in the 60’s, it’s tough to get the inside temps down

A Berlin-based writer, Paul Hockenos, highlighted in a CNN op-ed how Americans rely on air conditioning despite high energy usage and environmental implications. He suggested that Americans ditch the air conditioner units for renewable energy options.

Piss off. Mind your own business. I just replaced my almost 10 year old AC with a new one Tuesday, along with the furnace (which really didn’t need replacing, still worked great, but, it was the original one, there was a rust hole in the pan, and better and cheaper to replace everything. It also makes it a lot quieter. I can barely hear it all turn on, even upstairs under the attic portion). I asked about a heat pump, but, they aren’t recommended for a place like Raleigh. Pricing is about the same, but, they won’t last anywhere close to a dual heating/AC system.

“I can see how that would probably be making a big impact on the environment,” Allison, from New Jersey, said. “I know that it’s very detrimental.”

“I’d be fine with no AC,” Allison added. “I could survive.”

Prove it.

Harold, from New Jersey, said he could give up air conditioning to reduce carbon emissions with exceptions.

“On days like these honestly, I think it’s dangerous not to have it,” Harold said.

There would always be exception, eh? There are some fall and spring days where I will try and open the windows where it’s getting pretty cool at night after a warm day, get some fresh air, but, the heat of the Sun down here can keep the structure of the house warm.

One man visiting from Florida said air conditioner use should be based on location.

“It all depends on needs,” he said. He added that a mass effort would be needed to make a difference environmentally.

And who determines that? Government? Mind your business.

Read: Some Americans Say They’re Willing To Ditch AC To Reduce Their Carbon Footprint »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Introduce Bill To Have Term Limits For Supreme Court Judges Or Something

By William Teach July 27, 2022 – 6:45 am

I wonder if they really thought this through, because it will make quite a few people think “hey, how about term limits on Senators and Representatives?”

Democrats introduce bill to enact term limits for Supreme Court justices

A group of House Democrats introduced a bill on Tuesday to enact term limits for Supreme Court justices, arguing that the move will “restore legitimacy and independence to the nation’s highest court.”

The legislation, titled the Supreme Court Tenure Establishment and Retirement Modernization Act, would authorize the president to nominate Supreme Court justices every two years — in the first and third years after a presidential election. The justices who have been on the court the longest will be moved to senior status first.

If confirmed by the Senate, those individuals would serve a maximum 18 years on the bench. After their tenures are complete, the Supreme Court justices would retire from active service and assume senior status.

Justices on the bench at the time of the bill’s enactment would switch to senior status one by one as justices are confirmed to the bench in the first and third years after a presidential election.

Those senior justices would have no voice except when another justice leaves for some reason, then they would service till a replacement is found. It’s a cute little system, an attempt to circumvent the Constitutional provision of needing an Amendment to enshrine term limits, hence, if it even passes, it would be immediately challenged, which would be interesting, considering it would end up at the Supreme Court. Lower level judges across the nation would be striking this down all over the place.

Perhaps them being there for life, or, until they decide to leave, isn’t the best, but, that’s what it is, per the Constitution, and is meant to mean that they cannot be bought, told what to do, and are only concerned with the Constitution. As it is, the average length of time a Justice serves is….16 years. Democrats somehow think this will get them control over the court. What happens when Republicans are able to appoint a lot of Conservative justices? What will the Democrats complaint then be? They’re sore winners and sore losers.

Read: Democrats Introduce Bill To Have Term Limits For Supreme Court Judges Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Constitution, Democrats | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Causing Sharks To Come Closer To Shore

By William Teach July 26, 2022 – 2:00 pm

You had to know this was coming, right?

Scientists have an explanation why there is an increase of shark attacks off East Coast

Underwater creatures that have been dominating the oceans since before the dinosaurs roamed the earth have been causing quite a stir this summer with what seems like an increase in interactions with beachgoers.

An uptick in human-shark interactions has been occurring on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean off Long Island, New York — so much so that beaches have closed as surfers, lifeguards and swimmers alike suffer bites from curious sharks in search of food.

At least five shark attacks have occurred in the Northeast since June 30. Further south in Keaton Beach, Florida, a teen survived a shark bite after punching the shark in the nose. On Wednesday, a dead great white shark washed ashore on Kismet Beach on Fire Island, a barrier island in New York.

Wait, a shark attack in Florida? That never happens. Have the people at Good Morning America ever been to Florida (how many of them blew out of NY to escape the COVID restrictions?) and visited the beaches? I’ve been surfing there in several spots where sharks were around. I’ve seen the news taking overhead shots of sharks close to shore that people never notice. I’ve seen a nurse shark swim through some old folks off of St. Petersburg. The old folks, certainly locals, didn’t move. I’ve also had my board bumped off the Jersey shore, and it wasn’t by fish…well, you know what I mean, it was a shark.

Here is why there seem to be more shark attacks on the East Coast this summer, according to experts:

Global warming may play a factor

While there is no data to suggest climate change is responsible for pushing sharks closer to the shore, there may be other factors in which warmer waters cause sharks to venture near human beings, James Sulikowski, marine biologist and founder of Arizona State University’s Sulikowski Shark and Fish Conservation Lab, told ABC News. (red bold mine)

If your article says “there is no data”, then it is no story at all. It’s certainly not scientific. It’s cult scaremongering propaganda. Now, can it be correct? Certainly. It wouldn’t prove anthropogenic causation. If I’m looking at the water temperatures right now off the Jersey shore, they are higher than when I was growing up and surfing their in the 80’s and early 90’s at this time of the year. There are other factors that can contribute to this, and it gets into all sorts of things like offshore storms (which can dredge up colder water from lower levels), the temp of the south flowing flows just offshore, and others, besides simple warming from the sun.

Sharks tend to prefer cooler waters, the experts said, so it could be possible they are traveling farther north earlier in the year as they seek more desirable temperatures.

Yet, sharks proliferate in Florida, the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean, and other warm water areas. Now, here’s probably the reality, way down in the article

In addition, efforts to clear up waterways in major port cities like the Tristate area have led to cleaner waters and a rebound in marine life, Sam Muka, a professor of marine science history at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, New Jersey, told ABC News.

Up until about two decades ago, New York and New Jersey historically dumped its trash as far as 204 miles into the ocean, Muka said. There are theories that sharks are not so much moving northward because of climate change but rather returning to waters they previously frequented, Muka said.

Another reason why there may appear to be more sharks off the East Coast is due to an increase of conservation in the U.S., Heithaus said. While shark populations are still considered critical globally, marine biologists are beginning to see the effects of effective fisheries management, which is then leading to population increases across a number of species that provide food for sharks, Heithaus said.

Less garbage and better conservation means more sharks. I’ve seen the result of illegally dumping garbage, and medical waste, off the coast. That garbage, which can lower the fish counts and the oxygen of the water. There had been a huge dead zone off the coast of NJ from all the dumping. That’s rebounding. But, of course, the climate cult has to involved itself in everything, even with no data.

Read: Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Causing Sharks To Come Closer To Shore »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 26, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled engine, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Real Climate Science, with a post on the Green New Deal in Britain.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Florida Paper Recommends Banning All Semi-Automatic Firearms

By William Teach July 26, 2022 – 10:30 am

This is one of the reasons that supporters of citizens owning firearms for protection, hunting, and sport won’t give in even on policies they agree with: because we know that the gun grabbers will want even more. That their “common sense gun reform” is just a stepping stone to even more and more restrictions, more gun grabbing

Why all semi-automatic weapons must be banned on a national basis | Opinion

It is now more than evident that it is very dangerous for a society to allow for the widespread distribution and ownership of weapons whose sole purpose is to destroy human life.

There is no mention in the Second Amendment about an individual right to own and bear arms. The purpose of the Second Amendment was to placate those former colonies (and soon to be States), who feared the potential of a federal government acting like the King they just overthrew. The bulk of the military that fought the Revolutionary War was state militias (the modern equivalent of which is the National Guard) acting under the command of federal forces.

This is not dissimilar from the current structure of our military forces. Recent interpretations of the Second Amendment by the Supreme Court are simply mental gymnastics designed to achieve a political end desired by a very vocal but small minority. Further, firearms to protect against the federal government is one of the main reasons for the 2nd Amendment. The writer is blowing up his own argument. And the 2nd did, in fact, say “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms”.

Yeah, well, that’s the way the Supreme Court interpreted the 2nd Amendment, which is pretty simply to understand, done that way on purpose. It’s also the way the Framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights thought, especially after the British government attempted to confiscated the guns of the colonists. A good chunk of Revolutionary War fighters were just average citizens, who banded together to form militias, but, would have been nowhere without their guns.

Also, militaries tend to use automatic weapons, not semi-automatic, except for those who use specialized weapons, such as sniper rifles.

The single common factor in all the recent mass shootings was the use of semi-automatic weapons (fully automatic weapons have been banned for many years). All semi-automatic weapons, both rifles and handguns, must be banned on a national basis. It is self-evident that these weapons are not needed for either personal protection or for hunting. Restrictions on the private ownership of weapons are not prohibited by the Constitution. With the elimination of semi-automatic weapons, there should also be a ban on high-capacity magazines.

These prohibitions should be coupled with a national buy-back program of semi-automatic weapons, but the refusal to sell these weapons or magazines to the government would not itself be a crime. Rather, if a crime is committed using a prohibited weapon or magazine, the owner or immediate seller of such a weapon or magazine would be equally liable for any crime committed with such weapon or magazine, regardless of who pulled the trigger. Simple, if you keep these weapons, keep them safe and locked up.

Well, good luck with this. Does Tallahassee Democrat writer Bob Reid think they can just do this with a law? One that won’t be sued into oblivion the minute it was passed? Does he think that Red states won’t immediately tell their citizens that the state will protect them? Do they think that anyone will turn in their guns? Maybe old, junky ones. Many hunters do, in fact, use semi-automatic rifles that aren’t those scary looking “assault rifles.” Many women use small, semi-automatic pistols to protect themselves. What will be left with? Revolvers and bolt action rifles. How soon till the gun grabbers come for those?

The Constitution expressly allows Congress the right and authority to dictate the jurisdiction of the federal courts. To make sure the will of a majority of U.S. citizens are implemented, Congress could remove from the jurisdiction of the federal courts the ability to rule on the constitutionality of a ban of semi-automatic weapons (similar to the removal of jurisdiction over habeas corpus during the Civil War).

The same argument the far left is making on abortion. Which, even if allowed, would not preclude the Supreme Court ruling, but, wouldn’t be allowed, since the 2nd Amendment is specifically in the Constitution.

Really, what would happen after this would be doing the same with all the other guns. And it would mean that criminals would be the ones carrying firearms of all types out and about, while law abiding citizens would have no protection. Which would also be coupled with the Democrats soft on crime policies.

Read: Florida Paper Recommends Banning All Semi-Automatic Firearms »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 11 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove