Government

Unimpeachable

From commenter D, we get this comment:

The state sees cops as “unimpeachable witnesses” meaning whatever they say is gospel unless you can prove otherwise.

For this reason, I will always side with my fellow citizen and give him or her the benefit of the doubt.

When I was in the Navy, we had a commanding officer who was incredibly authoritarian, Captain Macke. He was a douche, but retired after getting his fourth star. More on that in a minute. Why was he a douche? He would hold Article 15 (Captain’s Mast) like this:

They would put all of the accused on an aircraft elevator at the hanger deck level, maybe 20 or 30 of them, and the Captain would be standing behind a lectern on the flight deck. They would raise the elevator to the flight deck, and the Captain would say: “You all must be guilty, or your officers wouldn’t have sent you here. I find you guilty as charged. You are hereby reduced in rank one paygrade, fined one half pay for two months, restricted to the ship for 45 days, and 2 hours of extra duty every day for 45 days, to be served under the duty master at arms. Dismissed.” (This is the maximum punishment he can give without a courts martial)

The reason that this is important is that Macke believed that officers were absolutely unimpeachable. One of the things he used to say was, “If I have 100 enlisted men with 100 video cameras that show me 100 videos of something taking place, and I have one officer who tells me that isn’t how it happened, I will believe the officer every time.”

Of course, it’s also telling that he retired after being investigated by the Defense Department inspector general for allegations that he used military aircraft for personal trips and improperly fraternized with female subordinates while he was CINCPAC. They dropped him two paygrades for that. His new civilian job appeared to be using his military contacts and influence to arrange funding and lucrative government contracts. So much for unimpeachable officers. The best thing that I can say about the hypocritical sunovabitch is that he died last year.

So you’ll excuse me if I don’t buy into the “unimpeachable officer” trope.

By Divemedic, ago

Checks and Balances, Regulation

Pro-gun people have been making a statement remarkably like this for years:

The phrase “well-regulated militia” had a distinctly different meaning in the 1700s and 1800s. It would translate today as “well-provisioned” or “well-supplied” militia.

I could find absolutely no historical support that “regulated” meant well supplied when the Bill of Rights was written in 1791. Using the dictionary found here, specifically  An Universal Etymological English Dictionary by Nathan Bailey (1775), the word regulate means:

  • to set in order, to govern, direct, or guide; to frame or square; to determine or decide

Likewise, in A Dictionary of the English language in which the Words are deduced from their Originals, explained in their Different Meanings, by Samuel Johnson (1792) the definition of regulate is:

  • To adjust by rule or method; to direct

I cannot find a single reference from that period that suggests the meaning of that the term has anything to do with supplies.

So “well regulated” in terms of a militia would mean a militia that was well governed, directed, or guided. In other words, it was in opposition to an irregular military force, which would be one that was not well directed or guided. Regulation has nothing to do with a force being provisioned or supplied.

Officers in 18th century militaries were generally made up of aristocrats. That was why the colonies were so despised for their tactics of hiding behind trees and rocks where they would target and kill the officers.

This is why I was so impressed with Penn and Teller’s interpretation of the wording of the Second Amendment. The framers of the Constitution were well aware that standing armies could be used as a tool of oppression, where a Federal government could use that Army as a bludgeon to control the states. That is why there were so many safeguards against the Union maintaining an Army.

To counterbalance this, the states had the ability to maintain a militia. It is, as the Amendment points out, necessary to a free state. The problem here is that the state can also use that militia to control the people. So the people maintain the ability to keep and bear arms.

The Army is the power of the Federal government. The militia is the states’ check and balance to that. An armed citizenry is the people’s check and balance to the militia.

That is the genius of Penn and Teller’s position.

By Divemedic, ago

ALERT: Universal BG Check EO Coming

From the GOA and from Breitbart news: President Biden is set to announce a new rule going into effect. Universal background checks will be going into effect for ALL firearms transactions. Any firearm that changes hands will soon require a background check, per a soon to be issued executive order from Biden.

How can Biden do this? A unique reading of changes made to 18 USC 921 that were made by the “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act” when Biden signed it into law on June 25, 2022. Yes, the word “bipartisan” is actually in the law’s title. The Republicans sold gun owners down the river. The law’s sponsors were none other than Florida’s Marco Rubio and Rick Scott.

Here is what the law did:

Section 12002 of the BCSA amends a subparagraph of the GCA definition of “engaged in the business” as it pertains to federally licensed firearms dealers, by striking the language “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit,” and replacing it with “to predominantly earn a profit.” As amended, the definition at
18 U.S.C. §921(a)(21)(C) reads as follows:
[“Engaged in the business,”] as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), [means] a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business to predominantly earn a profit with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his collection of firearms.

(text that was added is in bold, text eliminated is struck through)

By choosing to interpret it in a way that is most restrictive, this EO will direct the ATF to consider anyone who sells a firearm for more than they bought it for as being an unlicensed dealer. In one fell swoop, they have virtually eliminated all private sales. This also explains why the ATF has such a hard on for kitchen table dealers as of late. Read the entire thing here. (pdf warning)

An article released by the New York Times today is reporting that, “The regulations required to put the new law into effect — expected to be released soon — would require anyone who earns a profit from selling firearms to obtain a federal license and conduct background checks. Previously, dealers were required to join the federal system only if they derived their chief livelihood from selling weapons. Failing to register carries a penalty of up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines.”

This is huge. In one fell swoop, the Biden administration has enacted the most sweeping change to gun control law in decades. The rules will be backed up by a renewed push to prosecute businesses that refuse to register by accessing bank records, storage unit leases, and other expenses associated with running an off-the-books gun business.

Make no mistake- if this is in fact the case, we are looking at a national firearms registry, and the only real purpose for registration is confiscation. It’s plain that the left is looking to completely circumvent Congress and will simply use executive orders and the administrative rule making process to create whatever laws and regulations that they wish, and in this case they were helped out with the help of Republican Senators.

I have said it plenty of times before- Just because the Democrats are your enemy doesn’t make Republicans your friend. Again and again, we see that Republicans only SAY that they are pro Second Amendment during election time, but then sell us down the river once they get our votes. Now they have figured out that the way to stay in power is to do what you are told. All Republicans care about is staying in power, and the writing is on the wall- play music to the tune dictated by the Left, or they will make sure you are gone. So Republicans are selling us out.

Things are going to get a lot worse before they get even worse. The year 2024 is going to be a cast iron bitch.

By Divemedic, ago

Remote Control

The EU has a law that takes effect next year- it would mandate that cars made after June 2024 have installed in their innards a device that allows the government to remotely limit when, where, and at what speeds the car can be driven.

The State of New York is proposing similar legislation, calling it a “safety measure.” New York City is also proposing that the devices be added to the vehicles of people with older cars who are caught speeding.

The limiting device, once installed, would bar vehicles from traveling no more than 5 mph above the posted speed limit. The devices would have to be installed in cars caught six or more times by an automated speed camera.

Now go back and refer to my post about updates to electronic devices being updated and changed without your permission before you proceed with this post.

This isn’t about speeding. New York makes far too much money from speed cameras each year. $100 million each year, in fact. There is no way that they are getting rid of this income stream. No, this is not intended to stop speeding. It’s obviously for another reason.

How long do you think it will take before this device has been expanded to limit or stop people from driving to a political protest? Or from preventing anyone who doesn’t vote for Democrats from driving? Or even disable the cars of Republicans on election day? This is a way for the government to remotely control the people.

By Divemedic, ago

They Wouldn’t Dare

One of the things that I keep hearing from the right is how the military and police won’t shoot at or go door to door, because many of them have ties to the community. I have been telling people “don’t be too sure about that.” It’s because Federal law states that only U.S. citizens can serve as police officers and deputies.

It turns out that Illinois has found a solution for that particular problem. They have passed a law that permits non-citizens to become police officers. It only makes sense- illegals can become doctors, nurses, and can join the military. So why not carry guns and arrest you for violating the law? So governor Pritzker signed the bill into law on Friday. The next time a cop pulls you over in Illinois:

It’s a great way to ensure the cops will do whatever you want- they are already familiar with how third world cops act, and don’t give a shit about the constitution.

By Divemedic, ago

Pencil Pusher

The new CNO for the Navy is a diversity hire pencil pusher whose only real qualification is the possession of a vagina. Let me illustrate: She was assigned to no fewer than 9 seagoing ships and command groups during her 38 years in the Navy, but has only received 2 Sea Service Deployment ribbons. The rest of her decorations are bullshit awards for being good at ass kissing her superiors.

the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, Distinguished Service Medal, Defense Superior Service Medal (two awards), Legion of Merit (five awards), Meritorious Service Medal (five awards), Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal (four awards), and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal (two awards).

I was only in the Navy for six years and received three sea service deployment ribbons. My opinions on:

By Divemedic, ago

Constructive Possession

Remember when ATF ruled that ice wine is only wine made from grapes that froze while still on the vine, and that wine made from grapes frozen after they were harvested were not legal to sell as ice wine? Or in 2004, when they ruled that possession of a semi auto rifle and a shoestring was constructive possession of a machine gun? Is possession of grapes and a freezer considered to be constructive possession of ice wine?

That is what the ATF (and other administrative agencies) do- they rewrite definitions to grant themselves more power. Administrative agencies have become the fourth branch of government. They make more laws and have more power than any of the other three branches.

By Divemedic, ago

Taking Our Profits

In the Fall of 2021, I saw the financial problems coming and promptly got out of the stock market. It crashed just a couple of months later. I posted about it at the time, but I can’t find the post. That meant for 2022, we had no Capital gains because we weren’t in the stock market.

Anyhow, I bought back into the market last July, at my wife’s insistence. She bought 450 shares of Royal Caribbean (Symbol: RCL) at $32 a share. Total cost was $14,400.

Today, RCL announced their Q2 profits, and they went from a $500 million loss for Q2 2022 to a $450 million profit for Q2 2023. The stock price skyrocketed to $112, which put the stock price near its pre-pandemic price. The value of those 450 shares was $50,400 when we sold, which is a $36,000 profit. A return rate of 350% for the year.

My other stock buys haven’t done as well. I bought 100 shares of Smith and Wesson last December at $9.82, and it is only selling today at $13.09. I own a few shares here and there, but they are sitting flat. The market may go up from here, but I am not looking to be greedy. Still, I think this is a good time for profit taking on stocks.

Still, we have done well in the market during the past year, having made just shy of $40,000 in capital gains. That will mean we owe $6,000 in capital gains taxes, but that is still less than what we would have paid in taxes on a second job. My wife knows far more about investing than I do, and that’s why I let her make the calls on that.

By Divemedic, ago