• About
  • Blog (Ext.)
  • Books
  • Contact
  • Education Resources
  • News Links

PERRIN LOVETT

~ Deo Vindice

PERRIN LOVETT

Tag Archives: Constitution

Robot Road Warriors

09 Friday Sep 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Robot Road Warriors

Tags

America, cars, Constitution, Donald Trump, election, freedom, government, idiots, republic, robots, Ron Paul, The People

Every week I read about some dude dying because his Tesla or other “self-driving” car ran into a tree or under a truck. Right now, you get what you pay for (and foolishly accept). Tomorrow will be different. Tesla, Mercedes and Google are working out the bugs. The robot car is here to stay.

I predict in ten years they will have a significant portion of the motoring market. In twenty years they will be the majority of the vehicles out there. Some are worried about a decline in road etiquette.

I certainly agree though I can see a distinct benefit. I drive a lot and estimate 75-90% of American motorists are utterly incompetent. Proof of a benevolent God is in the fact that there are not 30 million traffic fatalities every year.

What is there to possibly lose? Right now the robots aren’t much better. But they are a little better. I know I could out drive any computer on the road today. Most people can’t. And they know it deep down inside.

Thus, in a few years they will welcome the car that drives for them. In fact, they may have no alternative.

Tesla is flooding the markets with their dealerships. Traditional “knock their heads off” dealers are not happy. Too bad. The traditional car market is about to start dying the death of the old publishing industry.

The problem for dealers is that not only will people in the future not drive, they won’t even own the self-driving cars. Uber is about to go driverless. (So are buses, trains, and ships. Planes won’t be far behind.) The idiot of the future who wants to go somewhere will think about it. The computer in his head will call for a car. The car will drive itself up and off they go. The trip will be debited, via computer, to the passenger’s account.

The Uber fleet companies of the future will all buy from the manufacturers. Bye, bye, dealers. Insurance companies are going to have to figure out a new way to rob people too.

For me personally, I look forward to trading vast swarms of slow, erratic clovers for slow, erratic robots. I’m already in the market for a new battering ram.

14224702_1312768835400218_7860521209569139133_n

“Move Over” painted in reverse on the grill, eh?

My biggest concern about all of this is that sooner or later the government will mandate robot cars. My love of V8 power, speed, and simplicity, coupled with my hatred of lights, beeps, buzzers, and talking computers already has me out of the existing new car market. All I’m left with is old trucks. I imagine those will be illegal in a decade or so.

So, my whole point of this is … does anyone know of a good, reliable, used Baron G58 or similar small twin-prop at a good price? A few more best sellers and I may be in the market. Y’all have fun with the robots on the road.

kingair_bb-1156_mg_4815banner

Textron. That’s a 200, I know.

***

In slightly related news, dealing with the death of the way things were:

Donald Trump says he is the last chance to elect a Republican. He’s right about that. It is now or never for my conservative friends.

What he really means is he is the last chance to have another four – eight years of talking about getting America back. At the same time he would probably hold the line slightly against the third-world slide.

I’ve said again and again that the only way to get back to the “good old days” of a responsible Constitutional Republic is to elect Ron Paul in 2008 (not in 2012 – too late). You missed that chance. Now, Trump offers a chance for an extension of the bitching about going back.

After that, after this presidential cycle is over (maybe once it begins), the party is over. It’s been over for a few years now but some of the guests are still reluctant to leave. Maybe when they finally go home they can ride in a robot car!

 

 

Weaponized Taxation

04 Sunday Sep 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Weaponized Taxation

Tags

America, bill of attainder, Constitution, crime, ex post facto, freedom, government, IRS, law, power, taxes

“The power to tax involves the power to destroy.” John Marshall, McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819).

Last week Apple felt that power from abroad. The EU decreed Apple owes $15 Billion in back taxes. The imposition is seen as retaliation for Apple’s sales success in Europe. Economic success warrants retaliation in the twisted mind of government.

Here in America, Congress is desperately seeking similar retaliation. It has been suggested that American tax power may be weaponized to strike hard at European companies. While they’re at it, they may want to strike at you as well.

The past decade has seen a massive increase (1,000% or so) in Americans attempting to flee the ruins of the old Republic in efforts to preserve what they have created (and to preserve their own freedom). Fleeing the Land of the Free for freedom. Odd.

Mark Nestmann explains:

But just to make sure expatriates know “who’s the boss,” in 2012, Senators Schumer and Bob Casey (D-PA) introduced legislation to retroactively punish them. The “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy Act,” or Ex-PATRIOT Act, would punish wealthy expatriates by forbidding them from ever reentering the US. The proposal would apply to anyone with a net worth of $2 million or more at the time of expatriation. It would also be retroactive for the 10-year period prior to enactment of the statute.

The Ex-PATRIOT Act didn’t pass in 2012, or in 2013 when Schumer reintroduced it as an amendment to another act. But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it reappears in 2017. It’s hard to see how someone like Donald Trump, who bashes everything non-US, could oppose this bill. And Hillary Clinton has long slammed corporations that move their base of operations from the US to save on corporate taxes. It’s not a huge jump to conclude that if elected, she’d sign the Schumer-Casey proposal into law.

A retroactive law is known legally as ex post facto (after the fact). Such laws were viewed for centuries, rightly, as unfair. They are forbidden not once but twice in the Constitution: Art 1, § 9 and § 10. Such a deliberate targeting of the successful is known as a Bill of Attainder – also prohibited by the Constitution, again in Article I, Section 9.

 

The U.S. abandoned the ancient abstention of retroactive prosecution in 1945 and has not looked back. The Constitution is abandoned. “Constitutionalists” may say what they like but saying doesn’t stop the doing. And it’s all done anyway.

Anyone who deals with the IRS knows Washington wages an everyday war for power. It is more about showing the commoners “who’s the boss” than the money.

Remember Jim Bakker the 1980’s televangelist? His affairs left him with a $500,000 tax bill. Thirty years later the debt has grown (with interest and penalties) to around $6,000,000. Bakker will never pay that off. The government doesn’t expect him to. They are most happy lording over him for life; the money is a side issue. His freedom, otherwise redeemed by the passage of time, is destroyed by taxation. Marshall was on to something.

51+uJUXv1QL

Everyone makes mistakes. Many pay for them. Some have to pay and pay and pay … forever. God forgives. The IRS does not.

The future looks to hold much of the same. Schumer is still trying to ram his pet (illegal) law through Congress. The IRS terrorizes millions. Do not look for help from either presidential candidate.

Trump has already announced an intention to use selective confiscation for his benefit. He wants to seize drug cartel funds and use them to construct his wall. Remember that such programs grow over time, usually to encompass more targets than originally stated. Remember too any wall that can keep Mexicans out can also keep Americans in.

God help you if Clinton is elected. She views all of you as servants and the government as a giant tool for her personal gain. IRS persecution of anyone deemed even slightly anti-Clinton is a given. Worse, she may use tax records (And she didn’t know they were classified! Honest.) to compile a hit list. You know, for more of those “suicides”.

Tomorrow is Labor Day – the day for celebrating productivity in the workforce. Ponder for just a moment, between the burgers, beer and football, that you have a silent partner at work. Whatever you do, your partner takes 20%, 40% (honestly much more – maybe 60-70% in totality) of every dollar you earn and produce while contributing absolutely nothing. Your silent partner uses taxes as a weapon to keep you in line or, at the least, to rob you.

Jim Bakker. Tammy Faye? The makeup??

In Government We Trust: The Shadow Lengthens

31 Wednesday Aug 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on In Government We Trust: The Shadow Lengthens

Tags

America, Constitution, corruption, election, evil, false flag, government, Homeland Security, immigration, IRS, law, taxes, The People, voting

Just yesterday morning I followed up on the bumbling attempts by Washington to explain electoral system security breaches. I pondered whether the FBI actually found said breaches as part of an investigation or if they had created them as part of some false flag scheme for control. Today, we may have part of an answer.

I woke up (late) to this headline at Drudge:

nimbus-image-1472645099779

Hussein Obama elaborates on his golf handicap at NASA; Jeh Johnson looks on.

Drudge likes a little shock value. It should read: DHS to take charge of election security. That’s what they’re planning to do.

Even before the FBI identified new cyber attacks on two separate state election boards, the Department of Homeland Security began considering declaring the election a “critical infrastructure,” giving it the same control over security it has over Wall Street and and the electric power grid.

The latest admissions of attacks could speed up that effort possibly including the upcoming presidential election, according to officials.

“We should carefully consider whether our election system, our election process, is critical infrastructure like the financial sector, like the power grid,” Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said.

…

Johnson also said that the big issue at hand is that there isn’t a central election system since the states run elections. “There’s no one federal election system. There are some 9,000 jurisdictions involved in the election process,” Johnson said.

Or, there were 9,000. Decentralization of power is a long-standing paper theme in America. I say “paper” because though we cut ties to centralized authority (King George III) in 1776, we reinstituted them in 1787 with the federal Constitution. Still, with something like elections, it’s probably preferable to have 9,000 separate authorities rather than just one. That makes corruption 9,000 times harder. Or, it did.

A related topic was raised in a U.S. News article today:

“There’s nothing in the Constitution which requires a popular election for the electors serving in the Electoral College,” says John Nagle, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, meaning the body that officially elects presidents could convene without the general public voting.

“It’s up to each state legislature to decide how they want to choose the state’s electors,” Nagle says. “It may be a situation in which the fact that we have an Electoral College, rather than direct voting for presidential candidates, may prove to be helpful.”

Both major parties do have rules for presidential ticket replacements, however, and Congress has the power to change the election date under Article II of the Constitution, which allows federal lawmakers to set dates for the selection of presidential electors and when those electors will vote.

But Congress would be up against a de facto December deadline, as the Constitution’s 20th Amendment requires that congressional terms expire Jan. 3 and presidential terms on Jan. 20. Though it’s conceivable to split legislative and presidential elections, they generally happen at the same time. And if the entire general election were to be moved after Jan. 3, Congress effectively would have voted themselves out of office.

While I would be happy as a clam if Congress voted itself out of office I suspect many others would not. “There’s nothing in the Constitution which requires a popular election…” – that doesn’t jive with all that “democracy” and “you’re vote counts” business so popular today. But, it’s true.

Your vote, your participation in the election is not needed. It is only an illusion. At best it provides the real state electoral system with suggestions. If someone wanted to tamper with your suggestion box, it would be better for them (worse for you) to do so from a singular point (as opposed to 9,000 little points all over the place). Thus, my suspicion of DHS’s power grab.

Oddly, DHS isn’t necessary either nor is it found in the Constitution. With the brief and partial interruption in the scheme from 1861-1865, the federal system operated without DHS from 1787 until 2002 (2003 really). It was a gift of the wooden, horse-like, Greek variety from our dear friend Jorge the Dimmer. (Miss him yet?) It was instituted after another false flag event. (Thanks for that recent admission, Rudy!)

I’m really close to 700 posts on this site and at least about 600 of them deal with the evil nature of government. You simply cannot underestimate the state’s capacity to do harm. Yesterday I mockingly rattled off but a few of the known recent depredations from D.C. Here’s a new one:

Those hard-working, just like us, only trying to better their lives while hiding “in the shadows” illegal aliens have stolen 1,000,000 of our social security numbers. What’s more, the IRS has known about this for about FIVE YEARS and has done nothing! They haven’t even notified the victims. A can of worms this is.

Social Security isn’t in the Constitution either, apart from just being another tax. The IRS is happy to collect taxes from any source it can. If illegals pay in, great. They care nothing about you and your identity theft claims.

As for the illegals, some say there is no such thing as an “illegal person”. This is where I part ways with the open borders libertarians. Is there now no such thing as an illegal identity thief?

We are not the world, nor are we children.

Even if the IRS cared (they don’t), they would have a very hard time sorting all this out. Likely they have no idea how to solve this problem. Their position is partly defensible mathematically: in just a few short score of years both the illegals and the identity victims, every last one, will be dead – thus, no problem in the long run to worry about.

Back to DHS, they have a short but growing history of doing a whole lot of nothing. Nothing except for taking control – of anything they can. That helps boost their budget numbers. A few of you may recall how DHS took control of the West Virginia situation in the novel Republic and the ensuing hilarity.

By the way, and on a concluding note, pursuant to the deficiencies discovered in Republic those you in WV might want to go ahead and stock up on AAA and SAMs.

The Constitution: Laughable Mention

01 Monday Aug 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on The Constitution: Laughable Mention

Tags

America, Constitution, Democrats, Donald Trump, election, government, politics, Republicans

Amid the uproar about Donald Trump and the family of a dead Muslim (U.S.) soldier, I caught a flippant mention of the Constitution.

Khizr Khan, angry with Trump, stated and asked: “Donald Trump, you are asking Americans to trust you with our future. Let me ask you: Have you even read the US constitution? I will gladly lend you my copy. In this document, look for the words liberty and equal protection of law.”

He held up a pocket-copy of the old parchment as an exhibit. The donkey crowd cheered wildly. This, at a convention for people who regularly brag about flouting the Constitution and make fun of those who attempt to hold the government accountable under it. (“Are you serious!?”).

_20160801_111215

Khan’s may have been the only mentions of “Constitution” and “liberty” during the whole days-long affair. I wonder if his speech was preceded by a trigger warning?

Trump may or may not have read the Constitution. He may or may not know or care why it was adopted or what it means (used to mean…). The rest of the Democrats and Republicans might know too but they obviously don’t care. It’s a moot point anyway at this late hour. Still, for a moot point it was pretty funny.

How To Lose An Election

25 Monday Jul 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on How To Lose An Election

Tags

America, Constitution, Democrats, election, firearms, freedom, gun control, Hillary Clinton, Second Amendment, The People

As if the emails, fundraising, felony-dodging, Jew-bashing (was that just part of the Bernie bashing?), terrorist courting, and other shenanigans weren’t enough, a Hillary delegate pretty much admitted that the Democrats want an outright ban of firearms and a deletion of the Second Amendment. She also admitted they think the people are stupid.

“Saying you want to ban guns altogether, that’s going to piss everybody off,” the Clinton alternate delegate, Mary Bayer, told a Project Veritas reporter.

Instead, Bayer revealed, Democrats use “moderate” language when it comes to guns to obscure their true purpose, a complete elimination of the Second Amendment.

“You have to take that sort of moderate… ‘We just wanna have common sense legislation so our children are safe!’” Bayer told the reporter, adding, “You say shit like that, and then people will buy into it.”

At least she called it what it is – “sh!t” that’s going to p!ss everybody off. Just tell lies and the people will buy it…

For the record, I don’t think Hillary gives a flip about the Second Amendment one way or the other. There’s no bribe …er… nothing in it for her. It’s some of the carnival sideshow nuts in the party that keep pushing gun control (you know, “sh!t like that”).

oowrestling.com.

The DNC knows it is in deep trouble this cycle. Come November the diehards and the gun grabbers are in for a rude awakening – something akin to what the Trump supporters will know in a few years.

Just remember, the Second Amendment was included in the Constitution to protect the people against this exact breed of political low-life.

Firearms Ownership: A Universal Right

18 Monday Jul 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

America, Constitution, Dred Scott v. Sandford, firearms, freedom, government, gun control, guns, law, Miller, rights, Second Amendment, The People

The elites and the gun grabbers are desperately counting on racial and other divides in order to exact more gun control, more people control, on the population. The problem, for them, is that we are not so divided as they would like.

Gavin Long, the racist who killed three police officers in Louisiana this weekend had a history of hating “crackers”. However, that did not seem to stop him from shooting and killing black and white officers alike. Even he wasn’t divided; he just saw blue targets. Some would surely love to pounce on these murders to further freedom controls. Hussein Obama wants the police to admit they have a problem. Gersh Kuntzman blames the “gun nuts”. Many will suggest, other issues aside, that blacks (and whites) simply are not safe in our culture of firearms. Facts failing them, they will resort to emotional appeals related to the spate of statistically insignificant but culturally damning shootings of late.

Their problem here, and it is a wonderful problem, with blacks and guns is that blacks have adopted the gun culture. Once upon a time firearms may have been the province of white males in the rural parts. Now, it’s everyone. Men, women, all races – everyone is carrying.

Many blacks astutely recognized the importance of gun ownership years and years ago. In 1867 Frederick Douglass hailed firearms ownership as one of the three hallmarks of a free man and his rights (“the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box”).

From local and state regulations in early America through the Gun Control Act of 1968, many control and prohibition laws were aimed at disarming blacks. One racist strategy was to limit the availability of cheaper guns, “Saturday night specials”, as these were frequently the only arms economically obtainable by blacks (and other groups of lower socio-economic status).

Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court went so far as to list the carrying of arms as a right blacks were not entitled to (as they were not considered citizens). In relegating blacks to either second-class or chattel status, Roger Taney reasoned:

More especially, it cannot be believed that the large slaveholding States regarded them as included in the word citizens, or would have consented to a Constitution which might compel them to receive them in that character from another State. For if they were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which they considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State.

Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393, 416-417 (1857)(emphasis added).

The grabbers and the intellectually lazy of the legal education profession for decades overlooked this enumerated right in Scott and as set forth similarly in other cases in favor of a simplistic reading of Miller (1939). I recall reading once in a Constitutional Law book a footnote – the only mention given the Second Amendment – that stated Miller was the only Second Amendment case in history. As the Court did not expressly affirm absolute firearms rights therein, the 2A didn’t confer an individual right and was barely a part of the Constitution.

My reading of Miller, as poor an opinion as Scott, always led me to believe the Court had affirmed an individual right to keep and bear military-grade weaponry. The gun Miller possessed, a saw-off shotgun, was determined to be of no military value despite the use of such guns, martially, for centuries. The short-barreled shotgun has continued to see combat since – most notably perhaps in the tunnels of Vietnam.

It also struck me as interesting that people could lawfully possess weapons of war but might be precluded from possessing “ordinary” arms. If one has a right to a battlefield rifle or a machine gun, what was the harm in owning a bird gun or a .22 plinker?

shotgun-3-1245333-639x360

George Gardner.

Subsequent rulings, this Century, have definitively settled the matter though in a shaded fashion which leaves open the possibility of state meddling.

They want to meddle and they want it badly. Evidence and sound logic ever eluding them, they continue to exploit instances of misfortune and fickle public sentiments. It is a joy and a wonder that their efforts are failing as more and more people wake up. Black, white, yellow, red – all are universally entitled to universal rights, which the left hates and opposes with universal fury.

An armed society is a polite society – for everyone.

The Dallas Aftermath: Obama’s Storm-trooper Corps?

09 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on The Dallas Aftermath: Obama’s Storm-trooper Corps?

Tags

America, Constitution, crime, DOJ, freedom, government, law, Obama, police, politicians, The People

Hussein Obama’s final term in office is winding down. America lazily awaits the next pathetic resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue – likely a Big Club, elite, insider and megalomania or, perhaps, a coughing, psychopathic, unconvicted felon.

All big politicians make grandiose promises. Trump wants to build a wall. Hillary … I’m not sure what she’s promising. Maybe to stay on this side of the prison wall? Anyway, once elected, they all do the exact same thing: more of the same. They continue to grow the size and scope of federal power while raising taxes, and/or massively increasing the debt, keep a few pointless wars going, and make sure the banksters are fat and happy.

Hussein had his list of promises. ObamaCare might be the big one though it really just falls under general government growth and a tax increase. One he hasn’t gotten around to is his previously stated desire for a national security force (vaguely stated) comparable in strength to the regular, standing military. He hasn’t really done much towards that goal – yet.

He’s been a busy man. He had a debt to grow, golf, a nation to fundamentally transform, vacations, wars to pour money and lives into, taxes and higher pay for insurance executives, the Federal Reserve cabal to appease, ISIS to fund, attack, defend, and import into the U.S., more vacations, etc. Very busy. Now, at the end, he may be ready to launch his national whatever force or at least lay the groundwork.

Obama may be a lot of things but he is NOT a Muslim. FoxNews/DailyMail.

Last night, in Poland of all places, Obama said he wanted a nationalized police force. More to the point, he wants uniform, federal standards for state and local police – the federal takeover will come later. “I want to start moving on constructive actions that are actually going to make a difference,” Obama said when asked about how he planned to take advantage of the Dallas police shootings and general civil unrest.

Obama began touting the panel’s recommendations in March 2015. The report, titled “President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Report,” was published in May 2015.

The report urges the federal government to federalize police training and practices, via the use of federal lawsuits, grants and threats to cut federal aid. So far, Obama’s deputies have cajoled and sued more than 30 police jurisdictions to adopt federal rules in a slow-motion creation of a national police system, similar to the slow-motion creation of a federal-run health-sector via Obamacare.

Because ObamaCare worked out so well. Same number of uninsured as before but with higher taxes and higher insurance premiums (for those with insurance) and a dwindling supply of doctors. If you like your sheriff, you can keep your sheriff. I’m not sure how insurance companies and banks will profit from this; rest assured they will, otherwise it wouldn’t be happening.

Here’s the Panel Report, issued by the Department of Justice [SIC] – the people that brought you Waco and an unindicted Hillary Clinton. I don’t recommend actually reading it unless one suffers from near-terminal insomnia.

Ah, another government report on ways to help the people, especially young black people – from an agency that keeps 2 Million young black people behind bars now for selling plants. Hypocrisy at its most psychotic.

Law enforcement standards and procedures from the feds, similar to those used by the FBI and ATF. They have such a stellar record a justice, everything is bound to be just fine – Waco, Ruby Ridge, Wounded Knee, Elian Gonzales, the BLM massacre, out of control false flag manufacturing operations like the Boston Marathon and the Pulse Club, prosecuting Martha Stewart but not Hillary, and on and on. What could go wrong?!

As I said, Obama is about out of time to fully implement this scheme. Herr Hillary has expressed interest in the same though that may be from a personal desire to control the police in an effort to stay out of jail herself. Anyway, the ball is rolling now and state balls only ever grow, gathering mass and speed as they careen towards the people.

Let’s just assume you like in a town with a draconian police force. They’re out to get everyone, corrupt, and they’re really, really bad. They need to be stopped but do you really think the feds are the ones to do it? To me, going to the feds to complain about the local police is much like Br’er Rabbit running to Br’er Bear to report on Br’er Fox. The problems won’t be solved – just shifted and worsened.

Troubles from laws and law enforcement are not solved by more laws and law enforcement. Nevermind that the federal government has no authority whatsoever to do any of this – they are, in fact, prohibited. The Constitution being dead, the law really doesn’t matter anymore. They will get what they want. You and I will get the shaft. More laws, less justice.

The Collins Amendment: I Don’t Buy The Gun-Fly Lie

30 Thursday Jun 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on The Collins Amendment: I Don’t Buy The Gun-Fly Lie

Tags

America, Congress, Constitution, crime, due process, Europe, firearms, freedom, government, gun control, law, lies, Lindsey Graham, Second Amendment, Senate, Susan Collins, terrorism, The People

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) has proposed the Terrorist Firearms Prevention Act of 2016, popularly known as the Collins Amendment. Who could possibly be against such a thing? I am, for one. Her proposal is similar to Diane Feinstein’s S.551 and several other meaningless measures floating around the septic tank of Congress. Her’s is the one in the news today having passed a procedural vote 52-46. Here’s the majority of the Amendment (click the picture for the whole thing):

nimbus-image-1467305366319.png

Collins Amendment. Senate.gov.

The vote had to be of the unrecorded, oral variety as I can’t find reference to it. Congress frequently avoids such disclosure. Why would anyone want to readily know how his Senator voted on something anyway? There are reasons a rational man would oppose such a “common sense” law. Anyway, support for this version of gun control is being hailed as some sort of crack in the GOP/NRA wall against a safer America.

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is a co-sponsor of the Act so we can assume he was among the 52. His explanation of its provisions highlight the problems with the Amendment and various other government projects. Per the Times story:

Republicans find it much easier to explain enacting gun restrictions to constituents devoted to the Second Amendment if they can frame their position as an act against terrorism.

“The Constitution’s a sacred document, but it is not a suicide pact,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a gun owner. “This is not hard for me. Due process is important, but at the end of the day, we are at war.”

Graham clarified in a press release:

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement after voting in support of the Collins amendment to prevent terrorists from buying guns.

The amendment survived a procedural vote, 52-46, and remains eligible for a final vote.

Graham said:

“At the end of the day this really is about counter-terrorism, not gun control. We are a nation at war against radical Islam and under increasing threats both here at home and abroad.

“President Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure and helped give rise to the very threats we face. I have long argued we must do more to counter the threat abroad. However, it is also important we take steps here at home to protect ourselves as well. It’s why I supported the Collins Amendment.

“Simply put — I don’t want anyone who is too dangerous to fly on a plane to buy a gun.

“To be on these lists today means there is reasonable suspicion and credible evidence that the individual in question is involved with or in support of terrorist activities. There are about 109,000 people on these lists and 99% of them are foreign nationals, not U.S. citizens. There are only about 2,700 Americans who could be impacted by this measure.

“I believe in due process and I was insistent the amendment contain provisions to ensure those who should not be on these lists can clear their name. We put the burden of proof on the government to show the individual is a danger and should not be allowed to purchase a gun. If the government fails, the individual’s rights are upheld and the government will pay their legal tab.

“This debate will continue and I will continue to work to find common ground that both protects the rights of law-abiding citizens and prevents terror suspects from purchasing guns. The differences between the competing approaches are narrowing.

“I will continue to strive to be a senator that can bring us together and find common ground in times of great threat.
####

He’s right about continuing to strive to be a senator but all wrong beyond that.

The Act isn’t about counter-terrorism or about gun control. It’s just another law and another burden on the people.

Graham is correct that Hussein Obama’s policies have only made the threat of terrorism worse. To be fair though, Hussein Obama has only continued the disaster of a policy put in place by Bush 43. And Graham’s proposals on the subject, whenever he spouts off, are always of the kind which would make things EVEN WORSE.

At home he says there are 109,000 people on the watch lists. Of those only 1% or 2,700 are U.S. Citizens (closer to 2.5% by my math). If 106,300 foreign nationals are on the lists of suspected terrorists, why the hell are they not rounded up and deported immediately?

Neither Graham nor any other Senator really cares about Due Process. This proposal, like S.551, has a huge loophole to allow the Attorney General carte blanche authority over who goes on the list and allows the government to ultimately assert national security as an end-around to avoid due process in court. By Graham’s math that means 2,700 Americans right now could be out of luck; the list would surely grow if the Act passes into law. Don’t look for any of the foreigners to go home; in fact, more and more will just keep coming.

Graham’s position may be summed up as: “We’re at war (with an enemy we created and brought home). Therefore the Second Amendment and due process of law can go out the window.”

The saddest part of all this (as if it isn’t sad enough) is that the whole thing is pointless. Gun control does not work to stop gun violence. Period. None of the criminals and terrorists Collins and Graham feign interest in stopping would be subjected to any provisions of the Act. The University of Chicago “just discovered” that criminals don’t buy guns the legal way (surprise, surprise!). So much for soft gun control controlling crime. Even hardened European gun control does next to nothing to stop gun violence. When it comes to government gun control it’s all about the state controlling citizens and about perception (image over substance).

Then there’s the issue of bombs…

All this shows again and again you cannot trust the people who created the problem to know how to solve it. Don’t buy the gun-fly lie.

Senators propose more burdens on the People. NY Times.

Judging Judges and the Law

28 Tuesday Jun 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

America, Antonin Scalia, Constitution, Courts, government, Harvard Blue Book, judges, law, law school, lawyers, Richard Posner

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.” Matthew 7:1 (KJV). If being a judge means proclaiming judgment, then would it be judgmental to judge judges? You be the judge of that.

Federal appellate judge Richard Posner, the veritable father of “law and economics” is accustomed to passing judgment, in and out of court. He recently told Slate his views on the demise of modern American law schools and of the Constitution, one in conjunction with the other.

He warned that law school faculty is out of touch with the actual practice of the law. They are. Says Posner, “I think law schools should be hiring a higher percentage of lawyers with significant practical experience.” He’s right and continued:

And on another note about academia and practical law, I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries—well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments). Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21st century. Which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments (including the 14th), do not speak to today.

He’s right there too. Other than paying it lip service no-one in government – not judges, not Congress, not the President, certainly not the bureaucracy – none of them heed the Constitution whatsoever. I may disagree with Posner’s interpretation approach to the subject but we can agree with the end result. Nino Scalia was the last man to hold the Constitution in awe and he is gone. It’s just what you eventually get from a strong central government, like that one birthed by the Constitution.

However, Posner need not worry about the academic nuances of Constitutional study. That just doesn’t exist anymore. As I noted back in 2013 the one thing left out of Constitutional Law in law school is … the Constitution. To the academics it’s just a list of inexhaustible government powers and a few, pet privileges they call “rights”. It is what it is, what it has become, what it was.

In fairness to Posner, he’s fair across the board when condemning tradition. He’s been trying to abolish reliance on Harvard’s Blue Book for a generation. That one, unlike the Founder’s scribbles, is strictly observed in law school or was when I was there (been a little while). True to disjointed form, almost no practicing lawyers and fewer and fewer trial judges actually observe Harvard’s citation system – they just cut and paste from screen to screen. It makes sense; if the Constitution is out and the laws are never far behind in obsolescence, what’s the point in properly noting them?

One thing is certain – U.S. law schools and the legal system need a severe overhaul soon. On that, we can pass judgment.

Gun Control: The Great Divide (Over Nothing)

17 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Gun Control: The Great Divide (Over Nothing)

Tags

America, anarchy, CIA, Congress, Constitution, crime, evil, freedom, government, gun control, Gun Control Act, guns, H.L. Mencken, Hitler, ISIS, law, National Firearms Act, Natural Law, Obama, politics, Second Amendment, statism, terrorism, The People, War, Washington

Mass shootings, terror attacks, and assassinations always prompt a heated national “discussion” on the matter of firearms and firearms control (the private ones, mind you). As with any important issue there are many competing ideas and angles though there are two predominant groups that get attention – pro-gun control and anti-gun control. While I am solidly in favor of the private ownership and use of firearms, my anarchist disposition gives me a unique, almost outside view.

As I see the current debate one side, the gun controllers, really want a complete ban on all private firearms though they present their ideology in terms of “responsible”, incremental measures designed only to ensure safety. The other side, the NRA side, nominally defends the Second Amendment while agreeing to many of the same incremental controls sought by the other side. I see both groups ultimately seeking to use the power of government to advance their own agendas and the agenda and existence of the government itself. They are both allied with the state. I have no use for any of them.

Some of the gun grabbers are blatant about their ultimate aim – Rolling Stone called for the repeal of the Second Amendment. Other grabbers pretend to agree that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms while insisting that those arms never be used for defensive purposes.

The main problem with the notion of self-defense is it imposes on justice, for everyone has the right for a fair trial. Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights. In addition, one’s mental capacity is a major factor in deciding whether a man or woman has the right to have a firearm.

The author of this insane Huffington Post statement wants to alter, rather than abolish, the 2A in order to nullify it. The author takes into account only those relatively few crimes committed and lives lost to the illegal use of guns. Considered in totality, privately owned guns save far more lives every day and every year than they take. Then again, by this man’s standards, each such lawful defensive usage constitutes a deprivation of the original aggressor’s right.

The only thing I can think of to attempt to justify this kind of logic is that this fellow obviously worships the government as a god and regards laws as a religion. Like a Natural Law theorist, he seeks to conform all positive law to the designs of and the adoration of his god. He would happily place the primacy of the state over the lives of human beings. He is a statist’s statist. Some on the other side do a good job of refuting this nonsense:

We have a government here that is heedless of its obligation to protect our freedoms. We have a government that, in its lust to have us reliant upon it, has created areas in the U.S. where innocent folks living their lives in freedom are made defenseless prey to monsters—as vulnerable as fish in a barrel. And we have mass killings of defenseless innocents—over and over and over again.

How dumb are these politicians who want to remove the right to self-defense? There are thousands of crazies in the U.S. who are filled with hate—whether motivated by politics, self-loathing, religion, or fear. If they want to kill, they will find a way to do so. The only way to stop them is by superior firepower. Disarming their law-abiding victims not only violates the natural law and the Constitution but also is contrary to all reason.

All these mass killings have the same ending: The killer stops only when he is killed. But that requires someone else with a gun to be there. Shouldn’t that be sooner rather than later?

The NRA is the poster child of the pro-Second Amendment movement. They are vilified by the New York Times:

What makes the legislative inaction all the more maddening is that there is general public agreement in favor of attempts like these to reduce the bloodshed. An overwhelming majority of Americans — including gun owners and even N.R.A. members — support universal background checks, while strong majorities want to block sales to suspected terrorists and ban high-capacity magazines.

And yet the N.R.A. rejects these steps, even though it says that terrorists shouldn’t be able to get guns. Instead, it clings to the absurd fantasy that a heavily-armed populace is the best way to keep Americans safe. That failed in Orlando, where an armed security guard was on the scene but could not stop the slaughter.

There is no truth to any of this dribble from the fallen Gray Lady. The worst of the lies is that the NRA is complicit with terrorism and that it blocks those “common sense” gun control measures. It does not. The NRA seems more than happy with the bulk of the existing gun control measure – all of them unconstitutional. While the NRA backs lawsuits to overturn various local measures, they roundly accept the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act. Both of these laws treat all Americans like criminals and bar the easy or economical possession of the type of weapons actually protected by the Second Amendment.

The NRA also agrees with the opposition regarding the expansion of watch lists – to exclude terrorists from the gun pool of course, and no more… Their own words on the matter:

Fairfax, Va.— The executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement regarding terror watchlists:

We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA’s position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.

This statement places the NRA (and Donald Trump by association) in the same position regarding gun control as Senate Democrats and the Obama administration – though the Executive seems a little at odds with itself as to how the proposed list measures would be (will be) implemented. Proposals to expand the “no-fly” list to cover firearms purchases has even drawn the ire of the ACLU as the list procedures (as they exists and as proposed) violate fundamental due process.

The NRA, Donald Trump, Hussein Obama, and their friends are all wrong. There is no due process at all concerning these controls. The new Senate proposal, S.551, mentions due process protection and then negates it in the same paragraph.

The government really has no dog in this fight as it is the primary creator and enabler of terrorism today. If not for the unceasing meddling and misadventure of the state there wouldn’t be any terrorists in our nation to worry about and no need for any lists nor for gun control.

A former CIA agent admits the government and the elites are the problem:

A former CIA counterterrorism agent has said it is time to talk about why terrorism really happens, and to address the “misguided narratives” that lead to oversimplification of the situation and continued war.

Amaryllis Fox worked on counterterrorism and intelligence in the CIA’s clandestine service for ten years. She told AJ+ that the beliefs surrounding terrorism are “stories manufactured by a really small number of people on both sides, who amass a great deal of power and wealth by convincing the rest of use to keep killing each other.”

Fox says the current conversation about Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in the US “is more oversimplified than ever.”

“Ask most Americans whether ISIS poses an existential threat to this country and they’ll say yes. That’s where the conversation stops,” she said.

Her observation echo what H.L. Mencken said about the government’s imaginary hobgoblins a century ago. Hitler concurred that terrorism (real or manufactured) is the best way to keep people panicked and, therefore, controlled. Gun control is about people control. Terrorism, war, and government in general are about creating and maintaining power for a few. It’s that simple. That’s what they’re working towards.

And, they are working hard. After Washington stirs up an already volatile region in begins to import the angered locals into America. Some really are hapless refugees. Others are terrorists – as the CIA admits. Oddly … or not, many of the recent notable terror suspects in America have had some ties to the CIA. This should raise serious questions and red flags about the state’s motives and how those motives negatively affect the rest of us – but it doesn’t. The bulk of the discussion put forward by either side of the political divide or by the government itself is: what else can the government do?

What they are doing is just more of the same. The people keep seeing their freedoms chipped away. The elites keep amassing power. The useless laws grow. The attacks, foreign and domestic, continue. They unvetted “refugees” keep pouring in – over 400 from Syria alone – since the Battle of Orlando this past weekend.

The horror and the comedy of the divide is how pointless it all is. Until the ridiculous, blasphemous, and hellish cult of government is dealt with, none of it matters.

Google.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Perrin Lovett

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

From Green Altar Books, an imprint of Shotwell Publishing

Perrin Lovett at:

Perrin on Geopolitical Affairs:

Archives

  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • June 2012

Prepper Post News Podcast by Freedom Prepper (sadly concluded, but still archived!)

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Join 42 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • PERRIN LOVETT
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.