You Can't Silence Us

Felons and Guns

The left is all in a lather because the DOJ under Trump has restored the gun rights of 22 people who were convicted of felonies- including one they call a “fake elector.” The so-called “fake elector” was pardoned by Trump, so I don’t see how he can be a prohibited person in the first place.

The entire issue is the law allows for people who have been made into prohibited persons being able to apply to have their rights restored.  Congress blocked the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from using federal funds to review individual applications, citing the fact that the program was expensive and took dozens of staff to run. Since when do we judge how expensive it is to seek justice? One could easily make the case that supplying lawyers free of charge is too expensive and only serves to let criminals go free, but that isn’t how we operate as a nation.

This blog has long been opposed to the whole “prohibited person” category because we have redefined “felony” to mean some pretty silly things. For example:

  • In Texas, it is a felony to own more than 4 sex toys (chapter 43). 11 of the 2,324 acts that the Texas Legislature thinks are worthy of being called felonies, making you so dangerous as to prohibit your ownership of firearms, have to do with acts that you can commit with or to an oyster. Here is the entire list of felonies for Texas.
  • In Utah, it is a felony to go whale hunting in a rented boat.
  • In Colorado, incest is a class 4 felony, punishable at the maximum by life in prison. If either participant is under 21, it becomes a class 3 felony. What does that have to do with gun ownership?
  • In Montana, it is a felony for a wife to open her husband’s mail.
  • In Florida, it is a felony to access WiFi without permission. There was a man who was convicted in 2005 of using a man’s WiFi without permission. It’s also a felony to sell oranges on the street near the beach.
  • In Alaska, it is a felony to wake a bear for a picture
  • In Georgia, it is a felony to allow your chickens to cross the street.
  • In California, it is a felony to set a mousetrap without a hunting license.
  • in Tennessee, it is felonious to share your Netflix password.

The reason that the left is pissed is because Trump is using the rules to his advantage. Pam Bondi is claiming that the underlying power to grant relief now rests with Attorney General Pam Bondi, not with the ATF, which neatly sidesteps the Congressional rule against Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) using federal funds to review individual applications.

Dru Stevenson, a law professor at South Texas College of Law Houston who has written about gun rights restoration, said, “The budget rider doesn’t say the federal government can’t do this. It only says ATF can’t. So this is a very lawyerly, splitting-hairs workaround.”

A law resulting from the Enron accounting scandal criminalizes the destruction or concealment of “any record, document, or tangible object” to obstruct a federal investigation. Prosecutors actually brought a federal criminal case against a fisherman under this law when he threw back 72 grouper to supposedly avoid being caught with undersized fish. Prosecutors were trying to convince the Supreme Court that a grouper is a “tangible object” under this law. This crime has a 20-year maximum sentence. In the highlight of the oral argument Justice Scalia noted the potential for 20 years and asked “what kind of mad prosecutor” would use that law in a case like this one? The government lawyer weakly responded that the prosecutors had not asked for a twenty-year sentence against the fisherman. The Court ruled for the fisherman, but the lesson remains: stupid laws and barely restrained federal prosecutors remain a danger to all who love liberty. So if you catch a fish that is too small, Federal prosecutors would allege that you did so to obstruct a Federal investigation, and you are therefore subject to up to 20 years in prison and a lifetime of being denied a key Constitutional right.

Two 16 year old children from North Carolina were facing a total of 14 years in prison for taking nude pictures of themselves and sending them to each other. They were charged with producing child pornography, transmitting child pornography, and possession of child pornography- of themselves. Each of these crimes is a felony, and would earn the children a lifetime label of “sex offender,” meaning that they would not be permitted to be near children, and could only live in communities that are filled with sex offenders. That is how we are protecting children, by convicting them of the crime of looking at themselves while nude, and then forcibly placing them in communities where they will live with actual sexual predators.

The most egregious part of this whole thing is that the law charged them as adults for taking pornographic pictures of themselves, who are legally considered to be children. This means that they are considered to be both adults and children simultaneously. We will call this Schrodinger’s pornography.

That’s why I remain opposed to prohibited person laws. If a person can’t be trusted with their rights, they can’t be trusted to live among the rest of us. I hardly view a person who took a nude picture of themselves being handed a lifetime ban of their rights as being justice, nor is it protecting anyone beyind the paychecks of overzealous prosecutors.

People who have read this post: 146
By Divemedic, ago

Tired

Talking to people on the Internet, especially on social media, wears you down. Sometimes you get to the point, where you just tire of talking to the morons on there, all of whom are experts on things like military tactics and strategy, finance, police tactics, the law, the Constitution, and medicine. A couple of cases from my recent experience:

Finance

In a discussion of my recent post on the couple with the 538 FICO being charged 20% interest on a car, there was the guy who told me the law should cap interest rates at 6%. When I pointed out to him that this would force banks to stop loaning money to anyone with a FICO of less than 650, and would likely force them to require 50% down for those from 650 to 700. After all, with a 28% chance of default within a 12 month period and a cumulative 41% chance of default over 36 months, people with low FICO scores are poor risks for credit.

He told me I was wrong, then claimed to have received a Nobel prize for his work with Grameen Bank, when that bank saw an increase in repayment rates of 1000%. I pointed out to him that mathematically, it would be impossible for any bank to have such an increase unless their repayment rate was 10% or less before the change. He told me I need to educate myself. Then pointed out that a bank who has a repayment rate of 1 in 11, then sees the other 11 people begin to repay just had a 1000% increase in repayment. Never mind that this would mean 12 of the 11 customers are now paying, thus making it mathematically impossible. Not only that, but the Grameen bank is making loans of an average of $100, and is charging 20% interest on those micro loans. The bank does have a repayment rate of 95%, but it does this through local peer pressure.

This is how the bank works: A peer group consists of 5 people who live in the same village. Each of them individually receives a loan, but if any one of the five defaults, the others in the peer group are no longer eligible to receive any loans in the future until the delinquent account is brought current.

Borrowers must contribute to group savings accounts, and the savings accounts take the place of collateral. Rather like a secured credit card, the borrowers are essentially borrowing their own money at 20% interest. I don’t understand how that is worthy of a Nobel prize.

That’s the system he wants to emulate? Not to mention the fact that he clearly can’t do simple arithmetic. At the end, he accused me of being stupid in supporting billionaires who are earning profits through usury, and said I probably had a 450 credit score. Whatever.

Medicine

Then there was a story about a woman who was traveling at a high rate of speed and running red lights, and was spotted by police. The police tried to pull her over, but she refused to stop, instead turning on her flashers and waved out the window at them. After giving her several warnings on the PA, they performed a PIT maneuver. The woman stated she was driving like that because her mother was having stroke symptoms and she was taking her to the hospital.

I pointed out in comments that the cops don’t know that, and failing to pull over for the cops was a bad idea. After all, there is a non-zero chance of them hitting someone, they may not even be heading to a stroke center, and this would actually delay the mother’s care.

This mental midget came on and tried to explain to me that they weren’t headed to a stroke center, but to a hospital, or even an emergency room. I pointed out that I am a board certified ED nurse, paramedic, and certified stroke nurse. She said “So of course you will support calling an ambulance, so you can make an extra $2000 for an ambulance ride, and that’s the problem with US healthcare. They don’t need a stroke center, an emergency room will do just fine.”

I then pointed out that not every ED is equipped and staffed as a Comprehensive Stroke Center, so depending on the type of stroke the mother was having, they may not be able to deal with it, which would require that the ED call an ambulance to transfer her to the proper facility, thus delaying care (perhaps even past the window), whereas calling an ambulance to start with would have seen the mother taken to the proper place to begin with.

She then told me that I was wrong, and don’t know what I am talking about. She said “No emergency room will turn you away.”

A great example- my previous ED was a primary stroke center. The nearest comprehensive stroke center was an hour away. We had a Labor and Delivery department, but two nearby hospitals didn’t. We had a Level II cardiac cath lab, the next three closest hospitals didn’t. Every hospital and ED has different levels of what they can provide. The local ambulances know who can provide what services, and they take patients to each facility accordingly.

When you drive a person to the hospital, you likely don’t know that. If the person needing care has a problem that is beyond the capabilities of that hospital, care will happen, but not the best care. The best care for that person will happen after the person is transferred to a higher level of care. Few and far between are hospitals that are the best at everything. It’s expensive and difficult to staff every specialty doctor and the equipment they need, and many hospitals don’t have the patient volume to be able to do so.

In Person

Even in person, it’s no better. I was recently at a pineapple farm, and some idiot next to me actually told the friends he was with “I don’t understand why the put in all of this effort when they can just buy pineapples in the store for five bucks.”

Sigh. Some days, talking to the idiots just makes me weary. Talking to people is generally useless, and I just get tired of doing it sometimes. They don’t know what they don’t know, but are happy to beat you over the head with their ignorance. The older I get, the less I like people

People who have read this post: 439
By Divemedic, ago

Litigation Tourist

A German tourist came to the US and filed lawsuits against US businesses.

  • A $100,000 suit against a Mexican restaurant because the salsa was too spicy
  • A $10 million lawsuit against Walmart because it required a US phone number for its WiFi service
  • A $10 million lawsuit against NYPD because the officers couldn’t call him on his European cell phone

Ridiculous. A judge dismissed the taco lawsuit. The others are still pending.

People who have read this post: 356
By Divemedic, ago

Maryland and Tips

Maryland is probably going to raise minimum wage to $25 per hour, and at the same time will eliminate the provision allowing employers to lower their rates for tipped employees.

Tipped employees are opposed, because they make far more than $25 per hour in tips. This will kill many jobs and cause prices to skyrocket, which will force places to close. Want to know why a hamburger at McDonald’s costs $12? This is why.

Expect that price to rise.

People who have read this post: 493
By Divemedic, ago

Tax Season

It’s tax season. That means car dealers are about to sell some cars to morons getting huge IRS payments.

A 538 FICO score, trying to get himself a Mercedes with what I presume is his IRS check. The finance guy says $8k down is the minimum to get approved for 19.99% interest and $700 payment for 4 years.

Thing is, there is a roughly 40% chance of a default within the next 3 years with that FICO score. The interest rate has to reflect that.

People who have read this post: 573
By Divemedic, ago

Washington

The Washington state legislature just passed a law making it a felony to possess digital files that can be used to make any part on a CNC or a 3d machine that could potentially be used as a part of a firearm.

Not only impossible to make work in any practical or Constitutional sense, it opens a huge can of worms.

People who have read this post: 564
By Divemedic, ago

Imports

Import the 3rd world, become the 3rd world. Commit an obviouly preplanned ambush and murder, then claim you thought he was molesting a child.

Yeah, that’s the ticket.

The US isn’t built on magic dirt. Third world savages don’t become part of US culture merely because they touch our soil. Immigrants CAN be great Americans, but you have to be selective in who you allow in, or this is what you get.

People who have read this post: 460
By Divemedic, ago

That’s Some Soviet Shit

Remember when the left got their panties in a bunch when Florida prohibited teaching about gay sex? Papers were written, and the left’s chorus were all claiming it was a First Amendment violation. (pdf warning- not hosted here)

Proving once again that, if it weren’t for double standards, the left would have no standards at all, Virginia has passed a law that defies belief. It is now a crime in Virginia for a school to “state, suggest, or present as credible a statement or suggestion that there was extensive election fraud that could have changed or actually changed the results of the 2020 presidential election.” 

Not only that, but the same law says that school instruction must “Describe the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the United States Capitol as an unprecedented, violent attack on United States democratic institutions, infrastructure, and representatives for the purpose of overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election.”

Not only is this law egregious, but CBS’ reporting of it is as bad. The reporting here would have made Goebbels or Zhdanov proud. First lie is in the headline:

Virginia passes legislation prohibiting schools from teaching falsehoods about Jan. 6 riot

Read the money quote:

The White House posted a series of lies about Jan. 6 on an official federal government web page on Jan. 6, 2026, including a bogus claim that police bore responsibility for the attack.

So is telling teachers to teach only one side of a story propaganda, or not? A First Amendment issue, or not? Wouldn’t it be better in a politically charged case like this one, to present both sides and let students decide for themselves? Are we teaching students how to think, or what to think?

  • “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”
  • “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
  • “All propaganda is lies, even when one is telling the truth. I don’t think this matters so long as one knows what one is doing, and why.”

People who have read this post: 593
By Divemedic, ago

Who Said That?

“The president had the constitutional authority to direct the use of military force because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest.”

The next liberal who complains about the Iran conflict, ask them if the above quote is an accurate description of Presidential powers. If it isn’t, what should happen to the President making this claim?

Then point out that the above quote was from Obama.

People who have read this post: 500
By Divemedic, ago