Impeach the black robed tyrants

Impeach the black robed tyrants

The unelected and historically unaccountable government appointed lawyers of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals declared that a type of firearm that has never been used in any war is a “weapon of war”, and that Second Amendment protections of the preexisting right to keep and bear arms does not extend to weapons of war, or apparently to weapons never used in any war.

Never mind that our Founders’ muskets were weapons of war, or percussion cap revolvers and repeating rifles were weapons of war, or our grandfathers’ M1 Garands and 1911s were weapons of war, or that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the people’s right to keep and bear arms not just as a means of personal defense and preservation but as a final check and balance against government tyranny, the unelected and unaccountable government appointed lawyers of the 4th Circuit have declared that the people have no right to any arbitrarily defined “weapons of war” to resist government tyranny, nor do they define what exactly is the purpose then of the Second Amendment.

If it doesn’t make sense, it’s because it’s not supposed to.

The belief or idea that the judicial branch is politically neutral and independently reviews and interprets the constitutionality of laws is and has always been a fairy tale. Each side hopes to stack the court in their political favor, and in this case it’s the only power one side of the aisle has left.

They’ve lost the Presidency, the Senate, the House, over 1000 state and local seats, only hold 18 governorships with a mere 6 states having a majority in both state chambers and governorship; all they have left are the courts packed with unelected and unaccountable government appointed lawyers who can make up and interpret the law and the Constitution according to their personal policy preferences and political ideology. There’s a new term for this, it’s called “so-called judges”. We used to call them activist judges, legislating from the bench.

Paraphrasing and expanding upon Stalin’s “it doesn’t matter who votes, it’s who counts the votes that matters” – it doesn’t matter what the law or Constitution states, it’s who interprets what the law or Constitution states that matters.

This is the only muscle the political left can flex to institutionalize their agenda, whether their conduct, rulings, or opinions comply with the Constitution or not. They have no other power at this point, so we get rulings like this one out of the 4th Circuit.

They have violated their oath to support and defend the Constitution in favor of their personal political ideology and have used their power to violate the rights and liberties of the citizens of South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland. While these unelected government appointed lawyers may feel safe and comfortable in their black robes at their bench, and while they may historically be unaccountable, the political tides are changing.

And to be blunt, they just told a few southern states that comprise of 31.2 million people what kinds of guns they have no right to own.

Judges serve at the consent of Congress, and that consent ought to be revoked. Each of these unelected government appointed lawyers should rightfully be impeached, and if the Senate doesn’t currently have the votes to ensure this happens, then it’ll make a great 2018 campaign platform. Out of the 25 Democrat Senators up for reelection, 18 come from states that Trump won.

It’s time to clean out the judiciary of “so-called judges” starting with the 4th Circuit and continuing through the 9th Circuit. The usurpation of our rights, and the seizing of power that belongs to Congress, the President, and the people, needs to come to an end.

In the meantime, the people will have to brace themselves for the fallout of this decision, and we can hope for impeachments, or hope Congress passes a Second Amendment Protection Act stating what we have a right to, or hope this case goes to the Supreme Court where it can be overturned.

Whatever the future holds, the people’s rights exist whether a majority of unelected and unaccountable government appointed lawyers say they do or not. Just as a restraining order is just a piece of paper, the Constitution is just a piece of parchment. But it’s how we defend it that matters.

Brown and Newsom are deadly wrong about gun violence

Brown and Newsom are deadly wrong about gun violence

What reduces gun violence? No matter what side of the issue you fall on pertaining to guns or crime, everyone wants the same thing – to reduce not just gun violence, but all violence. It’s the methods in which we disagree, and being wrong has deadly consequences.

On Monday, February 20th, a police officer in Whittier, CA was shot and killed during what he thought was a routine traffic accident. The person whom this officer was trying to help just murdered his cousin, stole a car, and smashed into someone else.

If you followed the 2016 election and listened to Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom discussing his support of Proposition 63 (which banned the possession of +10rd magazines and created a license and background check scheme for ammunition) he stated, “We have significantly reduced the gun murder rate because of our progressive gun policy. [California has seen a] 56 percent decline in the gun murder rate since we started to step up and step in and lead the nation in common sense gun safety laws, background checks, restricting large-capacity clips and the like.”

And he had to repeat this talking point every time he had an interview:

“Since 1993, we’ve seen a 56 percent decline in gun-related deaths in the state because of California’s progressive gun safety measures.”

So just to make it clear in case his repetition hasn’t done that yet, Gavin Newsom believes it’s gun control that prevents criminals from getting guns and murdering people.

Then there’s Governor Jerry Brown. Also in the 2016 election, he threw his support behind Proposition 57, which he stated, “focuses law enforcement on serious violent crime, stops wasting costly prison space on non-violent people who can be rehabilitated, and directs savings to programs with a proven track record of stopping the cycle of crime.”

This isn’t Governor Brown’s first time supporting a prop that releases so called “non-violent” offenders onto society; he also supported Prop 47 in 2014. He also signed into law AB 109 which released a lot of “low level” criminals.

And a police officer was just murdered by a known gang member who was released early from prison, using a gun and ammo he was barred from possessing. Because as we know, criminals don’t follow the law.

“So what are you saying, there should just be no laws? Make crime legal because they’re going to do it anyway?” No, that’s the kind of thing Brown, Newsom, and apparently over 60% of Californians supported and voted for when they approved Prop 47 and 57, and look what it’s gotten us. That murderer’s cousin and that police officer are dead and another officer is wounded, and if anyone else besides the murderer is to blame, it’s Brown, Newsom, and the people who voted for them and these propositions. They set this habitual victimizer free on society to murder these two people.

There is only one way to reduce or prevent violent crime, and that’s to make sure people with a predisposition toward victimizing others aren’t loose among a civilized society victimizing them.

Newsom claims the dramatic decrease in the murder rate since 1993 is due to California’s strict gun control measures, but in reality (where Newsom doesn’t live) it was the people voting for Prop 184 in 1994, the “Three Strikes” law, that kept habitual victimizers locked up and not out among us committing violent crimes that was responsible for the decrease in the murder rate.

It was Three Strikes that reduced the gun violence, not gun control laws.

Unfortunately for CA, by the weakening the Three Strikes law with Prop 36 in 2012, and the overall reducing of sentences and penalties with Prop 47 in 2014 and Prop 57 in 2016 and the subsequent release of habitual victimizers, we’re going to see violent crimes back on the rise because those who are disposed to committing violent crimes will be out walking among us in greater numbers.

California will not learn this lesson and will continue to focus on making good gun owners into criminals for not giving up their rights and liberties, while registered tyrants like State Senator Bob Hertzberg and Assemblyman Rob Bonta put forward bills that seek to ease bail requirements because, currently, bail “keeps people locked up for being poor”.

It can be argued that crimes with no victims shouldn’t be crimes, and laws pertaining to those should be repealed. Legalizing liberty could go a long way towards easing the burden on our criminal justice system. However, crimes that do have victims should have harsher penalties, and these serial victimizers should be locked up longer so they can’t be out, say, murdering their cousin, stealing a car, crashing into someone else, and murdering a police officer.

States have no rights to deny rights

States have no rights to deny rights

Now that Donald Trump is President, Democrats in states like California have suddenly rediscovered their mantra of “States’ Rights”, in which they believe as long as they’re in the majority they can use “States’ Rights” to deny people who reside in “their State” of rights they disagree with, the way Democrats did in the pre-emancipation proclamation era, or the way Democrats did in the pre-civil rights era, or the way Democrats did in the pre-voting rights era, or…

Of course they’re not alone; denial of rights is a bi-partisan thing. But it’s “fun” to point it out when they did, and continue to do.

California has even hired the help of former U.S. Attorney General Eric “Fast and Furious” Holder at a whopping $25,000 per month to defend itself from an evil and oppressive Trump-run Federal government poised to exercise force against the delicate progressive utopian flower.

“Having the former attorney general of the United States brings us a lot of firepower in order to prepare to safeguard the values of the people of California,” said Kevin de León, the Democratic leader of the CA Senate.

A value Kevin de León believes needs safeguarding is the “state’s right” to deny its people the right to keep and bear arms… sorry, “enact common sense gun safety measures”.

The problem with “States’ Rights” is… it doesn’t exist.

“How can you say that?! Tenth Amendment! Tenth Amendment!!!”

Ok, repeating yourself doesn’t make something say something it doesn’t say, just like shouting “Separation of Church and State!” doesn’t mean the First Amendment says that either… but let’s keep our focus on so-called “States’ Rights”.

Here is your Tenth Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Notice anything missing? The Tenth Amendment was about delegation of power, not rights. It states that the United States, the federal government, only has specific powers that the Constitution gives it the authority to do and also denies it from doing, and that all other powers belong to the individual States or the people.

It’s not splitting hairs. Words have meanings, at least they used to. States don’t have rights; States have power, and the power of a State is also limited and controlled by each State’s Constitution. And every single State’s primary role is to protect the rights and liberties of the people.

States don’t have a right or authority to deny people their rights under the Tenth Amendment, because States don’t have rights – people do. Some of these rights are protected by the U.S. Constitution and State Constitutions, but as the Ninth Amendment also states:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

It doesn’t take a constitutional scholar to understand the meaning of these things, but maybe a modern interpretation is what’s needed: “just cuz we say people have these rights that we wrote down here, doesn’t mean they don’t have other rights too, and you can’t take those rights away either just cuz we didn’t write them down, bruh.”

States have the Tenth Amendment power to pass laws and enact policies to run their individual States the way they see fit to locally respond to the needs of its people, but not at the expense of the rights of the people. That is where the line is drawn, or is supposed to be drawn.

A power also delegated to the United States federal government is to guarantee a State doesn’t deny people their rights – the Fourteenth Amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875):

“The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a State from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, but it adds nothing to the rights of one citizen as against another. It simply furnishes an additional guaranty against any encroachment by the States upon the fundamental rights which belong to every citizen as a member of society. The duty of protecting all its citizens in the enjoyment of an equality of rights was originally assumed by the States, and it still remains there. The only obligation resting upon the United States is to see that the States do not deny the right. This the Amendment guarantees, but no more. The power of the National Government is limited to the enforcement of this guaranty.”

The right to keep and bear arms is a right that exists without any government stating that it does. If there was no government at all, if there was no Second Amendment, you still have a right to arms. This is what the Ninth Amendment conveys, but luckily the right to arms was recognized as important enough to write down. All our Constitution does though is state that the federal government can’t infringe upon that right, nor can a State.

But they both do, they have done, and, in California’s case, continues to do.

It is the duty of the United States government to make, enforce, and uphold laws against States that infringe upon our rights. It is not an unjust federal encroachment upon State power to do this. While some say they don’t want the federal government exercising power against a State because of the precedent it’ll make against “State’s Rights”, in their next breath they’ll want California gun laws overturned by the Supreme Court – which is as much part of the federal government as Congress and the Presidency.

There are constitutional ways for the legislative branch to make, and for the executive branch to enforce, laws that protect the rights of the people in States that infringe upon them. The people don’t have to wait for 5 out of 9 unelected government appointed lawyers to do so.

Right now, we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to federally protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It’s been nearly 90 years since the House, Senate, and the Presidency were held by Republicans, a party which purportedly touts their support of gun rights; it’s time they exercise their constitutionally delegated powers against States that deny people their rights under the false notion of “States’ Rights”.

Contact House 2A Caucus Members

Contact House 2A Caucus Members

House Republicans have formed the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus, headed by US Rep Thomas Massie.

“Caucus members will lead efforts in the House of Representatives to pass meaningful firearms legislation and protect Americans against infringements of the Second Amendment,” the group said in a statement.

Congress has the authority under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution) to pass Federal laws that preempt and supersede State gun control laws.

Contact these Congressmen and tell them to use their authority to stop states from infringing on our rights by passing Federal laws that protect our right to common and modern arms, AND to repeal federal gun control laws already on the books (NFA34, GCA68, FOPA86, Brady93).


Thomas Massie (TN)
Enter zip code: 41101 + 7663
Use his office address & phone #:
1700 Greenup Ave
Ashland, KY 41101
DC Office (202)225-3465
Ashland Office (606)324-9898
LaGrange Office (502)265-9119
North Kentucky (859)426-0080


Jeff Duncan (SC)
Enter zip code: 29625 + 1505
Use his office address & phone #:
303 West Beltline Blvd
Anderson, SC 29625
DC Office (202) 225-5301
Anderson Office (864) 224-7401
Laurens Office (864) 681-1028


Ted Yoho (FL)
Enter zip code: 32606 + 6593
Use his office address & phone #:
5000 NW 27th Court
Gainesville, FL 32606
DC Office 202-225-5744
Gainesville Office 352-505-0838
Orange Park Office 904-276-9626


Brian Babin (TX)
Enter zip code: 77536 + 2747
Use his office address & phone #:
203 Ivy Avenue
Deer Park, TX 77536
DC Office (202) 225-1555
Deer Park Office (832) 780-0966
Orange Office (409) 883-8075
Woodville Office (844) 303-8934


Paul Gosar (AZ)
Enter zip code: 85118 + 2902
Use his office address & phone #:
6499 S. Kings Ranch Road
Gold Canyon, AZ 85118
DC Office (202) 225-2315
Gold Canyon (480) 882-2697
Prescott (928) 445-1683


Mark Meadows (NC)
Enter zip code: 28792 + 5027
Use his office address & phone #:
200 N. Grove Street
Hendersonville, NC 28792
DC Office (202) 225-6401
Henderson Office (828) 693-5660


Ken Buck (CO)
Enter zip code: 80109 + 7548
Use his office address & phone #:
900 Castleton Rd
Castle Rock, CO 80109
DC Office (202) 225-4676
Castle Rock Office (720) 639-9165
Greeley Office (970) 702-2136


Alex Mooney (WV)
Enter zip code: 25301 + 1749
Use his office address & phone #:
405 Capitol Street
Charleston, WV 25301
DC Office (202) 225-2711
Charleston Office (304) 925-5964
Martinsburg Office (304) 264-8810


Justin Amash (MI)
1500 E. Beltline Ave SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49506
Office (616) 719-1935


Jody Hice (GA)
Enter zip code: 31061 + 6238
Use his office address & phone #:
3015 Heritage Road
Milledgeville, GA 31061
DC Office (202) 225-4101
Monroe Office (770) 207-1776
Milledgeville Office (478) 457-0007
Thomson Office (770) 207-1776


Dave Brat (VA)
Enter zip code: 23060 + 6743
Use his office address & phone #:
4201 Dominion Blvd
Glen Allen, VA 23060
DC Office (202) 225-2815
Glen Allen Office (804) 747-4073


Warren Davidson (OH)
Enter zip code: 45373 + 3282
Use his office address & phone #:
12 S. Plum St
Troy, OH 45373
DC Office (202) 225-6205
Troy Office (937) 339-1524
West Chester Office (513) 779-5400


Scott Perry (PA)
Enter zip code: 17325 + 1101
Use his office address & phone #:
22 Chambersburg St
Gettysburg, PA 17325
DC Office 202-225-5836
Adams Co Office 717-338-1919
York Co Office 717-600-1919


James Comer (KY)
Enter zip code: 42167 + 1548
Use his office address & phone #:
200 N Main St
Tompkinsville, KY 42167
DC Office (202) 225-3115
Tompkinsville Office (270) 487-9509


Fax Blast

(502) 265-9126
(859) 426-0061

(202) 225-3216
(864) 225-7049
(864) 681-1030


(202) 226-0396
(832) 780-0964
(409) 886-9918

(202) 226-6422
(828) 693-5603

(202) 225-5870
(970) 702-2951

(202) 225-7856

(616) 719-1943

(202) 226-0776
(478) 451-2911
(770) 266-6751

(202) 225-0011
(804) 747-5308
(540) 507-7019

CA legisexuals utterly shocked by their duties

CA legisexuals utterly shocked by their duties

It seems our representatives in the State Senate and Assembly need a reminder of their primary duties. Not that they care, but the people as their boss should.

It’s not that difficult to point out what these duties are either. For you Senators, it’s literally emblazoned above your Chamber:

The Senate’s motto. “Senatoris est civitatis libertatem tueri”, or if you’ve never had the curiosity to find out what those omnipresent words hovering above you translate to, “It is the duty of the Senators to protect the liberty of the citizens”.

Yes, it actually says that in the California State Senate Chamber, where liberty goes to die and is considered a dangerous loophole that must be closed. It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic; irony may have to take the week off.

Maybe the problem is that it’s in Latin; while it may look pretty and seem all enlightened, it’s completely meaningless to anyone else looking at it, like tattoos of Chinese characters that were so popular in the 90s. Perhaps the recent repealing of English Only education will offer an opportunity for Latin to make a resurgence, but I don’t think that’s what Latinos had in mind.

For you Assembly Members, your motto is, “Legislatorum est justas leges condere”, or “It is the duty of legislators to pass just laws”.

To us, the people who have never victimized anybody but can be arrested, prosecuted, and convicted of crimes we knowingly or unknowingly break everyday by exercising our rights and liberties due to laws you’ve passed, we can legitimately, categorically, and unequivocally state that you have utterly failed at your primary duties: protecting liberty and passing just laws. You haven’t just failed, you’ve actively taken it upon yourself to be openly hostile to liberty and justice. It’s proudly in your political platform.

And somehow you keep your job. I guess it says more about your boss than it says about you, but not much.

We’ve obviously just had an election in which the new State Senate and Assembly will take office December 5th. To our new Senators and Assembly Members, welcome! I’d like to take this opportunity to highlight and acknowledge a few of you.

Congratulations, CA 29th District State Senator Josh Newman (D), for defeating Ling-Ling Chang (R), a registered tyrant and backstabber. Tyranny knows no party, but I’d rather see a tyrant coming from the front than the back. I see that you’re a veteran and support veteran causes. I hope you’re sensitive to the fact that veterans really hate being told to fight and kill to protect our freedoms back at home only to see the freedoms they fought and killed for being stripped away by your colleagues. And you should already know veterans by and large like their guns. Be wise with your supermajority, follow the Senate’s motto, and you won’t earn a place on the Tyrant Registry like your predecessor.

A big congratulations to the registered tyrant formerly known as Assemblywoman Toni Atkins (D), who recently has identified as a State Senator, for coming out and being fully embraced and accepted by her constituents as a Trans-Senator. Your wife Jennifer must be very proud and supportive of your brave decision. Though we will refer to you by your new label “Senator” while you are transitioning, make no mistake, you are what you are: a registered tyrant.

By far, she isn’t the first openly Trans-Senator; Kevin de Leon also transitioned in 2010 from an Assembly Member to Senator.

As a matter of fact and opinion based on observation, most Assembly Members dabble with transitioning to Senator, but may not get the support, acceptance, or attention they’re craving. The biggest argument against term limits is these legisexuals jump in and start writing a bunch of laws as quickly as they can to make a name for themselves, so when they’re termed out they can transition to the next office and so on. We’ve seen a steady increase in gun laws since term limits were implemented in California, not to say term limits are the only reason for this but likely a contributing factor.

Finally, to Assembly Member Heath Flora (R), the newcomer who bested Ken Vogel (R) for the open 12th District seat… bro, do you even lift? You do? Well then… if you plan on working with your Democrat colleagues to “get things done”, be sure to limit your “doing” to things like building dams instead of “doing” us out of our rights and liberties. Your district of which I’m a citizen doesn’t support the policies of SF or LA, and I’d really hate to have a backstabber as my representative. If I seem a little overly hostile, it isn’t you; I’m just a “one bitten, twice shy” kind of guy. Good luck with the legisexuals and tyrants you’ll be surrounded by; hopefully it doesn’t rub off on you.

To the rest of you legisexuals and tyrants: at least attempt to recognize your duties. Tread carefully… not that your boss seems to care, but I do. And I’ll be watching.

Squandering a once in a lifetime opportunity for gun rights

Squandering a once in a lifetime opportunity for gun rights

With the election of Donald Trump and his potential appointments to the Supreme Court and lower appellate courts, gun rights supporters are overjoyed with the prospect that our rights will now be upheld, protected, and defended, at least at the federal level, for the next generation or so.

This is the part where I’m supposed to get excited that at least a simple majority of unaccountable government appointed lawyers may decide if I can keep my rights or liberties that have already been stripped by elected tyrants IF the right plaintiff with standing files suit against ONE out of the THOUSANDS of laws passed in states all over the country and federally, and ONLY IF those unaccountable government appointed lawyers even decide to hear the case at all, and then IF we can count on them actually ruling in the Constitution’s favor, Roberts.


Don’t get me wrong, it’s better than having a majority of Bad Girl Ginsburgs, Wise Latina Sotomayors, and Cropped Haired Kagans as Hillary Clinton no doubt would have appointed, but how many times have we been down this road? We believe we have true Constitutionalists on the court, only to get them rewriting the law from the bench, doing legal and constitutional gymnastics to push through an unpopular or unconstitutional policy preference, Roberts.

But not to worry. Not only will we now have a supposed majority on the Supreme Court and a supposedly pro gun and supposedly Republican President, but we also have a supposedly Republican majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate. They have two bills ready and waiting for President-Elect Trump to sign that are so pro gun rights that we’re nearly wetting ourselves in anticipation: the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act which will allow a carry license in one state to be recognized in all states, and the Hearing Protection Act which will remove suppressors from NFA restrictions.

So let me get this straight…

We control the Supreme Court. We control the Presidency and both houses of Congress for the first time in 88 years. We can literally do anything we want within the confines of the Constitution, and we’re circle-jerking to the prospect of us getting federal government permission to retain our state government permission for a revocable license to protect ourselves in another state while walking around outside, AND having the ability to put what amounts to a muffler on our guns so we don’t go deaf while defending our lives, which is already legal in 39 states with federal permission and a tax of $200 which will, thank God, be done away with if this bill is signed.

Yay! We’re saved! The Second Amendment lives!

We’ve waited nearly four generations for a moment like this, and we’re slobbering over chicken scraps thrown to us by our own servants.

I have to give it to Democrats, at least they know how to wield power for the limited time they have it. They crammed through 3000 pages of “you have to pass it to find out what’s in it” and tens of thousands of pages of rules and regulations to control 1/7th of our economy, and we’re now over here getting our bellies rubbed with a “there you go, good boy, look what we did for you, now keep licking our boots because who loves you more?”

Nobody knows how to squander an opportunity or a mandate like a Republican. There will never be another moment like this for probably another 90 years because they’ll screw this up somehow, and we’ll continue to say, “well, maybe next time our guys get elected we’ll get to do something about this.”

You say you support the Second Amendment? You give lip service to liberty and freedom? You say you have a mandate? Prove it. This is your moment, grab it like the Donald.

You had the time, energy, and lawyers to rewrite the National Firearms Act of 1934 to specifically exclude suppressors. That tells me you still want the rest of the NFA restrictions on our liberty in place. I guess that makes sense, after all it was under a Republican administration that a woman named Vicki and her 14 year old son Sam were shot to death during a siege over what was ostensibly an unpaid $200 tax bill for a barrel being shorter than the NFA allowed without government permission.

This is the same convoluted NFA that, when interpreted by the BATFE, defines this as a pistol:

And this as a short barreled rifle, subject to NFA restrictions that if not followed properly can earn you years in a federal pound-me-in-the-rear prison:

I’ll make this really easy for you Republican lawmakers: instead of just singling out suppressors, draw a line through the entire US Code that constitutes the National Firearms Act of 1934. That’s right, repeal it as if Obama signed it himself.

And while you’re at it, repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968, the Firearm Owners Protection Act (specifically the Hughes Amendment) of 1986, and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and abolish the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Every single one of these federal laws violate the rights and liberties of the American people. While the courts may rule whether a law infringes on the fundamental aspect of a right (meaning the law prevents the ability to exercise a right), it does nothing to address the overall liberty that has been denied by these laws. We either believe in liberty or we believe in government permission, and it cannot be denied that every federal law stated above violates our liberties.

The Miller decision occurred in 1938. It took 70 years for the Supreme Court to rule on another 2nd Amendment case. The Heller decision which upheld the 2nd Amendment as an individual right happened in 2008. The MacDonald decision which made the 2nd Amendment applicable to the states via the 14th Amendment was in 2010. How long does it take a state or the federal government to start recognizing our rights? I seem to remember homosexuals demanding government permission to get marriage licenses immediately after the Supreme Court gave them government permission to do so.

But what difference does it make? The only line of Scalia’s 64-page majority opinion on Heller that Democrats even read and can repeat verbatim is “The Second Amendment is not unlimited…. [it’s] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose” which they interpret as a green light to pass any gun control law they want, rendering the decision meaningless.

Start fighting for our 2A rights the way only you can, Republican lawmakers. You have the ability now to repeal every single one of these laws AND put into place protections against state encroachment. Call it the “Second Amendment Protection Act”. Make it apply to the states through the federal supremacy and preemption clause, or withhold federal funding to a state until they recognize the people’s fundamental right to arms.

“But we don’t want to look like extremists! We need to reach across the aisle and…” (insert meme of Batman slapping Robin across the face). Did the Democrats give a flying rat feces what you Republicans thought when they had power? How did Obama put it, “They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back”?

I can guarantee when the bill to deregulate suppressors is brought up, it’ll be attacked, demonized, and called extremist, that you’re giving assassins the ability to murder silently in the night. Rachel Maddow will go out and buy a set of pearls just so she can clutch them on live TV.

When are you Republicans going to learn that it doesn’t matter how much you try to NOT look “extremist” in the defense of liberty or how little of a bone you throw us, you will be attacked by Democrats and the entire media for doing so? Everything you do is going to be met with scorn, disapproval, and trumped up fake push poling. Everything.

Say it with me: “they’re going to call me a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe who wants puppies, kittens, and unaborted transgendered children to be mass murdered by machine guns, no matter what I do.” Repeat.

Since this is the case, give us everything we sent you there for. We won, they lost. Start acting like it.

To the rest of us peasants: House Republicans have formed the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus. Contact those members and push for a full repeal of federal gun control laws, and replace them with a federal supremacy and preemption bill regarding the protection of our right to arms.

And contact your own representatives. Share this article with them and anywhere else you can. Light this fire.

Unless Republicans really are just the other wing of the big government pigeon that dumps on us as it flies overhead, who believe they can simply run the existing tyranny better than the left wing, they need to fully support our rights and liberties, and start getting rid of these laws.

Punish the criminal misuse of all guns severely, like up to the point that the ACLU needs to file suit against you for violations of the 8th Amendment’s “no cruel and unusual punishments” clause, but decriminalize our rights and liberty. This needs to be our mandate.

CA voters, you went full tyranny

CA voters, you went full tyranny

My wife and I were out running errands for the first time since the election. We hit up one of our main spots, this little crunchy herbal granola hippie yoga gluten dairy cage free range vegan grocery store called Sprouts. Why, you might ask, would any self respecting Write Winger be caught in a place like this? As a good capitalist I’ve found their produce to be pretty cheap, and it afforded me the pleasure of seeing how depressed everyone was.

The moping I saw on that male employee’s face, the one with his long sandy blond beard and man bun done up as a French braid who was restocking the organic chia seeds, was priceless. The female employees with the stretched earlobes, multi colored hair, and wrist tattoos with their favorite slogans, all convinced now they’ll never make more than 76% of French braid man bun because of what happened just days before. The other customers, being so individual and non conformist, looked exactly like the employees; same beards, same hair colors, same tattoos, same depression. I enjoyed being there.

As I was checking out, the bagger asked, “Would you like to buy a reusable or recycled bag for ten cents?”

I then remembered that the plastic bag ban referendum had failed, and all my seething rage from Election Day came flooding back, ruining my joy in their pain, and it seemed for now that it was they who got the last laugh.

While the tree of liberty was being refreshed with the tears of Democrats and Socialists throughout America, in California we progressed a few steps closer to “utopia”.

In California, if someone personally doesn’t like something, they believe nobody else should be able to do it either, and there should be a law against it. The only freedom, liberty, and choice these people think anyone else should have is getting to put whatever drug, object, or body part in whatever or whoever’s orifice without responsibility or consequence… and literally nothing else. So naturally, the California public voted to make marijuana use legal and to keep Captain Stabbin’s sword unsheathed while filming, but let’s get back to the bag ban.

Originally, the legislature banned single use plastic bags you get for your groceries and such, because their fascism knows no limits in the name of environmentalism. If stores offered plastic bags, paper bags, and reusable bags, it meant people still wanted the choice. This is called the free market, the simple concept of people getting to decide what bags they use for their groceries. But in California, if you don’t make the approved decision according to those in power, they’ll make it for you.

But, if enough people sign petitions, the law can be put on hold until the public gets to vote on whether it should become law or not. They did. Fast forward to Election Day, the people democratically voted to uphold the ban. But that’s fine, from what I was told during this whole campaign, as long as it’s DEMOCRATIC enviro-fascism, it’s ok.

In a way, the rage I felt being forced to buy bags I didn’t want to buy and being denied the liberty or choice to use the bag of my choosing helped me cope with not getting the Veto Gunmageddon referendum on the ballot. If a majority of Californians hate the concept of liberty enough to uphold a ban on plastic bags, the likelihood of these same loyalists allowing the minority of people they disagree with to keep their arms and liberties thereof would be statistically zero.

Gavin Newsom paid $4 million dollars for a proposition that he named “Safety for All” because he knows a majority of Californians will say, “Safety for all, huh? I’m not against safety! Safety muh muh makes me hhhaaaaappy!”, Proposition 63.

Among many things, what it really did was confiscate magazines that hold over 10 rounds from people who have legally owned them for over 16 years and never committed a crime against anybody, and if they don’t comply they’ll be sent to jail for up to a year.

It also presumes you’re guilty until you pay the government to prove you’re innocent so they can give you revocable permission to exercise your “liberty” to buy ammo. It’s already a crime for a felon or other prohibited persons to buy ammo, but now you too will be treated like a criminal to make sure a criminal complies with their probation, which they won’t when they buy ammo from their drug dealer (except marijuana is now legal in California so maybe they’ll just make the easy transition to black market ammo and +10 round magazines).

Oh, and if you’re a victim of a burglary and your gun is stolen or lost, and you don’t report it fast enough, you’ll be victimized again by the State because that’ll also be a crime under Prop 63.

And California voters approved it.

In true schizophrenic fashion, you California voters also approved Prop 57 which reduces the penalties for “non violent” offenses, until you actually read the law and find out they’re anything but non violent (assault with a deadly weapon, battery with serious bodily injury, solicitation to commit murder, domestic violence, inflicting corporal injury on a child, first degree burglary, rape, sodomy, oral copulation of unconscious person or by use of date rape drugs, human trafficking involving a minor, hate crimes, arson of forest land causing physical injury, active participation in a street gang, and exploding destructive device with intent to cause injury).

You voted to reduce the penalties of criminals who have actually victimized others, and at the same time voted to created new penalties for otherwise law abiding citizens who don’t surrender their +10 round magazines or if they wish to continue to buy ammunition the way they always have. Owning a magazine or buying ammo victimizes nobody, yet you’ll have sentenced them up to a year in jail for doing so AND reduced the sentences of real criminals so they can be out among a less armed civilized society to commit more crimes.

You also voted: to take more money out of the paychecks of people you think earn too much to pay for things you want, to overturn a Supreme Court case that guarantees people the right to free speech if they come together and pool their resources to do so as a group, to go further into debt as a state, and to allow the further Balkanization of our state by overturning English only education.

Because I just used a big word, let me break it down for you: you know how your kid plays soccer with that other kid at school, but you don’t talk to his parents because they don’t speak any English? They play together because that kid was taught English in school. Now there will be no incentive for that kid to learn English because you just voted to require both languages to be taught, which in Realville means your kid will keep speaking English and the other kid won’t. They won’t be playing together as children nor interacting as adults. If you think there’s “other sides of town” now, in one generation there will be a complete separation because there will be nothing binding us together. And it’s by design.

You’ve confiscated people’s property and money, confiscated their liberty and sold it back to them as licenses and permits, denied their freedom of speech, sped up the racial, lingual, and identity division of the state, and set criminals loose on us… all by your choice, all by democracy.

At least when our elected tyrants vote for bad laws they can be held somewhat accountable, even if they never are. But when democracy votes for tyranny, who do you hold accountable? I can only hope those who voted for this will reap it while the rest of us can find a way to protect ourselves from it. We don’t deserve this, but about 60% of California does. Since most crime occurs in heavily Democrat populated areas, I may just get my wish.

But when democracy votes for tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote. You will not use the law or democracy to confiscate the rights of the people. We still have our rights, even if they’re not recognized by you or the state. We will not comply, and we will find liberty in the law.

True democracy, like California just proved, is tyranny. It’s almost as if our Founders were smart enough to put protections in place against the tyranny of the majority. But in California, when the legislature, the executive, and the judicial branch are collectively opposed to your rights, AND the majority of their loyalist voters will vote for and support their tyranny, what’s a free man to do?

The only hope we have now is to fight for our rights in the federal courts. We have to work from the outside to retain our rights and to keep these tyrants from criminalizing our rights and liberty. With the right cases, with the right Supreme Court, with the right Congress and President, if they don’t squander this federal mandate, there is hope. And we’ll just have to either move out of state or continue to exist here and do whatever it is we’re going to do.

So there I was, staring right back at the grocery bagger offering to sell me recycled or reusable bags for ten cents as now required by the law she likely voted for, and I told her “no”.

Being a California gun owner, I’ve learned how to find liberty in the law.

I stuffed all my groceries inside plastic vegetable bags that are apparently exempt from the ban, and while the enviro-fascist bagger and cashier were staring at me wide-eyed and wide-mouthed as I’m sure they spend most their evenings, I walked out of ground zero carrying my groceries in plastic bags.