tyranny

How I Would Be on the News

If I am standing on my porch more than 30 feet away from a cop that is making an arrest in my driveway, and the cop walks over to claim that I am interfering in his arrest to arrest me, we are gonna have a problem. However, that’s exactly what happened in 2019 in Vallejo, California.

First, he has a motorcyclist at gunpoint, but holsters his firearm before showing the motorcycle rider his back. I would argue that the cop never really felt that the rider was enough of a threat to justify pointing a gun at him.

Second, you come onto MY porch because I am filming your empty headed conduct from 30 feet away, then you try to arrest me? Things will not go well, and we are going to be on the news that night. Just because you are a cop doesn’t mean that you get a free pass to violate my rights in my house, and I don’t give a shit what court decisions you have that claim otherwise.

But Burrell says [the cop] told him that he would let him go because he was a veteran, thanked him for his service and let him out of the car.

Bullshit. This hotheaded cop realized that he was making a HUGE mistake and used the “you’re a veteran, so I am letting you go” as a way to try and correct his error.

Burrell said he then went to the hospital and was diagnosed with a concussion. He is still seeking treatment and says his fingers remain numb from the handcuffs.

This is 100% tyrannical bullshit. I am normally a “let’s fight it out in court” kind of guy, but once you are on my porch, that shit goes out the window. Is that a threat? You bet your sweet ass it is. Just watching this video pisses me off.

Officer David McLaughlin has also been involved in two shootings since joining Vallejo police. He and Officer Matt Komoda fired on a suspect who was allegedly driving at them before crashing into a parked car on Aug. 31, 2016. No one was injured.

If you shoot like shit, it’s not a good idea to be driving around acting like an asshole while you point guns a people. Sooner or later, someone is going to accept your challenge. He has already shot at two people in his ten years as a cop. Most cops go their entire career without shooting at anyone.

Similarly, if I wind up on a jury in a case like this, I am going to oppose whatever this miniature tyrant’s position is. In this case, the Marine veteran got paid $300,000 by the city.

By Divemedic, ago

Booty Patrol

A guy driving a truck marked like a Border Patrol vehicle with “Booty Patrol” emblazoned on the sides was given a ticket for $115 because it had red and blue lights on it. He paid it. Then police found his website, one where he was trying to get social media fame, then arrested him for impersonating an officer.

Now we all know that I am not a lawyer, but I of course have an opinion on the matter.

  • He was already convicted of the offence and paid his fine because of the red and blue lights. Arresting and charging him again for that is double jeopardy.
  • Unless there is a “Booty Patrol” police office, he isn’t impersonating any cops with those markings. A green strip isn’t enough for impersonation charges. These charges are bullshit.
  • To publicly admit that you only charged him after you saw his social media page should be admissible in court, as it is evidence that they are trying to infringe on his First Amendment rights.

Don’t forget the Florida case where a man was arrested for having an “I eat ass” sticker on his truck. A police officer saw it and demanded that he remove it. The man refused, and was arrested for resisting an officer and obscene writing on a vehicle. The charges were dropped, but so was the man’s lawsuit, with the judge citing “qualified immunity.”

Though it was supposed to shield government officials only from lawsuits without merit, it instead shields them from ones with merit, including the two-dozen cops who blew up an innocent man’s home during a SWAT raid on the wrong residence, a cop who conducted an illegal search and ruined a man’s car, and cops who stole hundreds of thousands of dollars. 

By Divemedic, ago

More ATF Changes

The ATF continues the war on gun ownership in general, and self made firearms in particular. Since they can’t get traction for changing the law through Congress, they are using the bureaucratic apparatus to pass new laws. If you don’t already have the means for making your own firearms, I would suggest you do so soon, or your window of opportunity will close for good.

Important Update Regarding ATF Regulations and Easy Jig Sales Due to recent changes in ATF regulations, 80% Arms and 5D Tactical can no longer sell or support jigs directly.
Support and Warranty Service: For all Easy Jig and Pro Jig customers, modulusarms.com will now handle support. Modulus Arms will honor warranty services, provide technical support, and offer replacement tools and parts for all Easy Jig and Pro Jig products.
Manufacturing and Sales: While Easy Jigs will continue to be manufactured by 80% Arms and Pro Jigs by 5D Tactical, all sales must now be conducted through their independent dealers to comply with the new regulation. They are no longer permitted to sell jigs or distribute manuals via their websites under these new ATF rules.
Legal Challenges: Both companies are actively challenging this government overreach in court. They are optimistic about a favorable ruling from the Supreme Court in 2024, as both the District Court and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled decisively in our favor.
Availability through Dealers: In the meantime, both jigs are still available through their dealers, despite the inability to sell them directly.
By Divemedic, ago

Let’s See Them Enforce It

The Supreme Court in June of this year ruled that the President doesn’t have the authority to forgive student loans, only Congress, with COTUS stating that all spending bills originate in the house, does.

Yesterday, another 813,000 people got letters in the mail, telling them that their student loans have been forgiven. To date, 3.6 million borrowers will have had $127 billion in student loan debt wiped out since Biden took office. The government isn’t even ensuring that the people borrowing the money are being truthful on their applications.

This President is simply ignoring the Supreme Court while his supporters are calling those supporting his opponents “fascists.” So what is fascism? The communists on the left have redefined it to mean a mass political movement that emphasizes extreme nationalism, militarism, and the supremacy of both the nation and the single, powerful leader over the individual citizen.

However, the guy who invented fascism, Benito Mussolini, had this to say:

Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics. There is scarcely anything to object to in it and there is much to applaud.”

Consider some of the components of fascist economics: central planning, heavy state subsidies, protectionism (high tariffs), steep levels of nationalization, rampant cronyism, large deficits, high government spending, bank and industry bailouts, overlapping bureaucracy, massive social welfare programs, crushing national debt, bouts of inflation and “a highly regulated, multiclass, integrated national economic structure.”

Tell me if this doesn’t describe the Democrat platform…

But instead, the left claims that they are a liberal democracy that supports individual rights, competitive elections, and political dissent, even while they cheat at elections, suppress dissent by deplatforming anyone who disagrees with them, and tosses their political opponents in prison.

The left claims that Trump and his supporters are fascists because they advocate for the overthrow of the existing system of government and the persecution of political enemies, even as they openly advocate for the same.

But now we have an Executive that simply ignores rulings of the Supreme Court when he finds it convenient to do so, and he is doing it because a Harvard Professor told him to back in June:

The central tenet of the solution that we recommend—Popular Constitutionalism—is that courts do not exercise exclusive authority over constitutional meaning. In practice, a President who disagrees with a court’s interpretation of the Constitution should offer and then follow an alternative interpretation. If voters disagree with the President’s interpretation, they can express their views at the ballot box. 

How can they express their feelings at the ballot box, when the ballot box is no longer a representation of the will of the people?

Stanley G. Payne, A History of Fascism 1914-1945, Madison: Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Press, 1995, p. 7.

By Divemedic, ago