Government

Late to the Party

I can’t believe that I missed this story, but better late than never.

At first glance, you would not think that Nikki Fried would be suing the Florida Department of Law Enforcement because the FDLE declared that a woman was ineligible for a Florida CCW. After all, Fried is a notorious antigun asshat. But sue the Florida Department of Agriculture did.

It all started when a woman, identified by her initials of M.S., tried to get a concealed weapons permit. In Florida, it is the Department of Agriculture that issues the permits, but it is the Florida Department of Law Enforcement that does the background checks. So FDLE did the background check and declared that M.S. has items in her criminal past that would make her ineligible to receive a CWP. The woman did what any of us would do and appealed the decision, demanding to know why she was denied. That’s when things went sideways.

In preparing for the appeal, the Dept of Agriculture asked FDLE to list the specific disqualifying offenses, but FDLE replied that her offenses must be kept secret due to Federal Law. Since Florida case law is explicit on this- if the Dept of Agriculture can’t list the specific disqualifying events, they must go ahead and issue the CWP.

I fully support this. If the government wants to take action against someone, they have to provide the evidence. If the providing the evidence is counter to the government’s interest, then they have a decision to make- release the evidence, or respect the rights of the citizen. There should be no “Open your mouth and close your eyes, you can trust us” stuff going on with regards to citizen rights.

At any rate, Fried’s department wanted to deny M.S.’s permit, so they filed a lawsuit against the FDLE, intending to force them to release the evidence. Now that Fried is out of office, that lawsuit has been settled out of court. I certainly hope that M.S. got her permit, or at least was able to see why not. A people cannot be free when they are subject to secret courts, hearings, laws, and decisions.

By Divemedic, ago

Thoughts on ATF rule

Correia for the Win

This next one is the truth. I am a life member of the NRA, but mostly because I paid for it almost 20 years ago. I haven’t had faith in them in at least 10 years. Shoot, last month they sent me an email asking me to renew my membership, which shows you how with it they are.

I wasn’t convinced by gun manufacturers or the NRA that I need military weapons. I was convinced by asshats like you making statements about wanting to eliminate me.

By Divemedic, ago

Cops Harassing People

Falling asleep on a park bench will get the cops to check up on you. Ok, I’m fine with that. Then they decided that he wasn’t giving them the information they wanted, so they decided to arrest him. This sort of thing is why police immunity should be conditional on whether or not the police were acting within the law, within department policy, or at least making an attempt to do so.

Sometimes I wonder if we would be better off getting rid of the cops and handling criminals ourselves.

By Divemedic, ago

SB Tactical Gets Pwned

A company that makes pistol braces gets its customer database breached. There are four possibilities here:

  1. ATF was doing a little illegal sneak and peek so they know whose dogs to shoot
  2. ATF had one of their partner informants do it for them
  3. A freelance SJW is planning on outing everyone
  4. Criminals are just doing what they do

I am betting that the incident is either 2, above. Some lefty is going to anonymously notify the ATF that they have a list of lawbreaking owners of SBRs. Since the new rule outlawing unregistered pistol braces was published today, you have 120 days to register your (now) SBR or become a felon. Isn’t that a sweet little coincidence?

The miscreants got away with each user’s credit card number, expiration date, CCV code, cardholder name, address, phone number, and email address. If you have ever done business with SB tactical, you should consider all of that information as being compromised and in the possession of people who mean to steal your money, your life, or your freedom.

We know that the feds are now enlisting people in the private sector to do their unconstitutional dirty work. It can’t be too much longer before the informers are everywhere and people become vzyali.

On a side note, as of today I will no longer be in possession of a pistol brace equipped firearm. I am not registering shit.

By Divemedic, ago

Eat Your Gun

The Uvalde Police Chief was interviewed the day after the school shooting. During that interview, he admitted that – well, you can read it for yourself:

When I opened the [school] door, I saw the smoke,” he recalled, saying “shots started firing” again as he and a colleague started nearing the classroom where Ramos was holed up with kids and teachers. “Obviously, I backed off and started taking cover,” the lead officer said, which CNN noted was in clear defiance of training that insists officers risk their own lives to “neutralize” active shooters.

“I know there’s probably victims in there and with the shots I heard, I know there’s probably somebody who’s going to be deceased,” he acknowledged of the room he backed away from.

But he felt the “priority” was the “preservation of life” of those not under the “immediate threat.”

“Once I realized that was going on, my first thought is that we need to vacate” the rest of the school, he said, telling arriving officers that “we’re taking [other] kids out first.”

You know what else would have saved the lives of those who weren’t under imminent threat? Enter the room and shoot the murdering bastard in the fucking face!

If he had any scruples at all, he would eat the barrel of his service pistol. Then again, if he had any scruples at all, this would never have happened.

Sorry, but cops are seldom heroes and when push comes to shove, they back out and hope someone else will take care of it. Parkland, Uvalde, and others have proven this to be the case.

By Divemedic, ago

Violence at Work

I firmly believe that no employee should have to sit at work and be threatened with physical violence. While at work, I am threatened with violence against my person and family several times per week. Since I was suspended for the patient’s accusations the week before Christmas, I have been threatened at least three more times.

  • A Baker Act said that she would follow me home to see where I lived, then return to my home while I was at work to murder my entire family. She kept saying “you just wait until I catch you out in public.” I demanded that management call the cops. They did, but the police did nothing but take a report. That’s fine. At least there is a record if I have to smoke the crazy bitch at the end of my driveway. I carry nearly everywhere when I am not at work. “Catching” me outside of work and attacking me would be a critical, terminal failure in her victim selection process, but still expensive and time consuming for me.
  • The very next day, a patient came in with a complaint that aliens mutilated his genitals and he wanted them removed. When the Doctor discharged him, he said that if I didn’t let him stay, he would kill me. I had security remove him. He came back in 3 hours later and security refused to do a thing about it. Finally, four days later, he was Baker Acted and sent to a mental health facility.
  • Later that same night, a man came in and demanded to be permitted to see his wife, who had been brought in by ambulance and was off at radiology getting an X ray. I told him that she would be back in about 10 minutes, but he wanted to be taken to her NOW. I told him to have a little patience, and he replied that if I didn’t take him to her, we were gonna have a problem. I told him that if he wanted to issue threats and cause a scene, I would have security remove him. He kept yelling, so I had him tossed out.

One of the nurses that I work with told me that I have too short of a fuse when it comes to threats, and I need to understand that most people are just venting and don’t really mean it. I agree that most people don’t mean it, but how do you really tell the difference? Why should I have to? If a person has so little impulse control that they can’t stop themselves from issuing threats of death or physical violence every time something doesn’t go their way, when does it stop?

My hospital, like most employers, doesn’t permit concealed carry for employees. So what happens when one of these people who doesn’t mean it comes in and decides that they DO mean it? The one who pays the price for misjudging the idiot’s ill intent is me, but certainly not my employer.

It’s the attitude displayed by this fellow nurse that results in no one saying anything when a mass shooter turns out to have been saying all sorts of disturbing things, and people inevitably say “Why didn’t anyone report this before he snapped and killed half a dozen people?”

That’s my problem with the cop who threatened to kill me before physically attacking me. The police wouldn’t press charges because they said that the man had a medical problem and was delusional, therefore wasn’t responsible for his actions. OK, I can see that. But then why does someone who isn’t and can’t be responsible for their violent actions still permitted to carry a weapon under LEOSA because he is a retired cop?

It isn’t just my employer, it’s most employers. They have taken the attitude of “the customer is always right” to the extreme, and now we see attacks and threats by customers becoming commonplace. Why is that? Because our legal system absolves employers of liability for customers’ actions while at the same time punishing employers by making them liable for the actions taken by employees in self defense. It sets the stage for making employees more easily and cheaply being replaced than violent customers.

By Divemedic, ago

Illinois Makes All Semiauto Rifles Illegal

How did they do that? Because of the overly broad wording of their new assault weapons ban (edited to clean up the text to make it more readable, but not change the wording):

(3) "Assault weapon" means:

(snip of irrelevant sections A and B)

(C) A semiautomatic rifle that can accept or can be modified to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:
(i) A folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock.
(ii) Any grip of the weapon, including a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other stock, the use of
which would allow an individual to grip the weapon, resulting in any finger on the trigger hand in
addition to the trigger finger being directly below any portion of the action of the weapon when firing.

emphasis added

Now picture any semiauto rifle you can think of. Now tell me which one, if any, sees the pinkie finger of the trigger hand not being below the action of the rifle.

Thus, all semiauto rifles in Illinois are now legally defined as assault weapons and are thus illegal to possess, transfer, or own.

By Divemedic, ago