The power of III

Summum ius summa iniuria--More law, less justice

02 July 2011

Wyoming makes it official: No permit to carry open or concealed

James Wesley, Rawles _ Survival Blog
Hooray! Effective today, July 1, 2011, Wyoming will no longer require permits for concealed carry of firearms. Wyoming now joins Vermont, Arizona, and Alaska in recognizing the Constitutional right to unrestricted carry, both openly and concealed, without any permit. “Senate Bill 47 amends Wyoming Revised Statute 6-8-104 to allow anyone who has lived in the state of Wyoming for six months or more, and who meets the other requirements of the older concealed carry law (excluding the requirement that an individual demonstrate proficiency with a firearm) to carry a concealed weapon, without applying for or obtaining a permit.” I expect Idaho and Montana (both American Redoubt (see: *) states, like Wyoming) to soon follow suit. Freedom is on the march. A nifty animated GIF (see: **) over at Wikipedia shows the advance of the right to carry since 1986. Have a Happy 4th of July Weekend!

From the Laramie Boomerang:

SF 47 — Amendment to the concealed carry firearms and weapons laws

“I have had a lot of questions on that,” Bohling said of SF 47. “It’s really pretty simple.”

SF 47 amends Statute 6-8-104 to remove the requirement that a person obtain a permit to carry a concealed deadly weapon.

Bohling said nonresidents, convicted felons and others who are not allowed to conceal carry today will still not be allowed to carry a concealed weapon after July 1.

In addition, people will still not be allowed to carry concealed weapons in certain places such as bars, schools, churches and government buildings.

“You will be subject to all the restrictions and rules that govern people who get a permit,” Bohling said. “What this really was, was for those people who don’t travel a lot outside of the state and felt that it was a burden and an imposition on them to carry a concealed weapon and have to go through that permit process.”

Currently, Statute 6-8-104 requires that people prove they can handle a firearm with proficiency in order to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

“What the language of the statute says is ‘demonstrates proficiency with a firearm,’” Bohling said. “It has a long list of things, which includes completing a hunter’s safety course (and) taking an NRA-certified firearms course.”

Former law enforcement officers and military veterans can obtain a concealed carry permit if they can prove they receive firearms training.

But after July 1, people will no longer be required to complete a firearms training class to conceal carry legally. Bohling said this shouldn’t be a cause for concern, however, since the requirements to show proficiency were not strict in the first place.

“It’s, basically, just wanting to ensure that you know which end of the gun to point at the bad guy,” he said. “It’s not nearly as extensive as some folks think.”

UK opposition leader (Labor party): Without a teleprompter, I cannot memorize more than 4 sentences

Atrocious.  I still cant believe I just heard this. 

The current head of the British labor party, the head of the opposition.  Must've forgot his Ritalin that morning. Remember, if Labor beats the Conservative party in an upcoming election, this would be the next British prime minister.

01 July 2011

Ron Paul outraises everyone but Romney in Q2 fundraising

Rep. Ron Paul (R., Texas) has thumped former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and former U.S. Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman in second-quarter presidential campaign fundraising.
Ron Paul's Facebook page reported that the former doctor raised $4.5 million for the second quarter of 2011, which was better than the $4.1 million that Pawlenty's campaign announced and the $4.2 million figure that Huntsman's campaign confirmed toTheStreet.
Ron Paul still trails the estimated $20 million that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney reportedly raised in the second quarter, and the $18.3 million that President Barack Obama can carry over from his 2008 campaign.

The vanishing culture of gentility

Below is a letter written by a 60 year old British mother to her soon to be daughter in law, 29, after a recent visit to their home:

The tone of gentility that the woman expresses  reminds me of the old South that is no more;  
it reminds me of my grandmother, who tried and often succeeded in impressing rules of behavior like these upon me.  

Mostly, it makes me think of what the United States is not...disciplined and refined, especially in Yankeeland.  

Every generation from the time of the WBTS has experienced a degeneration in manners, degenerating borders of social intercourse, and degeneration of language.  

Honestly, as stiff as this woman may sound, I wish more people adhered to religious, moral, and ethical codes of behavior, guarded their tongues more, and were careful about encroaching on other peoples space, feelings, and property.  

That, I think, is the theme of what the mother in law is trying to impart on the daughter in law.  

While the mother in law still expresses hope that the younger woman might respond positively to the ideas in the letter, I am certain that she wont for two reasons:  

1. The younger woman is habituated to the language and behavior since childhood. 

2. Unless the younger woman sought out the older for this sort of advice, there is no way her intellect will receive this letter well.  Even the media commentators refer to the mother in law as a "monster in law".

Anyway, here is the letter:  

It is high time someone explained to you about good manners. Yours are obvious by their absence and I feel sorry for you.

Unfortunately for Freddie, he has fallen in love with you and Freddie being Freddie, I gather it is not easy to reason with him or yet encourage him to consider how he might be able to help you.

It may just be possible to get through to you though. I do hope so.

Your behaviour on your visit to Devon during April was staggering in its uncouthness and lack of grace.
Unfortunately, this was not the first example of bad manners I have experienced from you.

If you want to be accepted by the wider Bourne family I suggest you take some guidance from experts with utmost haste.

There are plenty of finishing schools around. You would be an ideal candidate for the Ladette to Lady television series.

Please, for your own good, for Freddie's sake and for your future involvement with the Bourne family, do something as soon as possible.

Here are a few examples of your lack of manners:
When you are a guest in another's house, you do not declare what you will and will not eat - unless you are positively allergic to something.

You do not remark that you do not have enough food.

You do not start before everyone else.

You do not take additional helpings without being invited to by your host.

When a guest in another's house, you do not lie in bed until late morning in households that rise early - you fall in line with house norms.

You should never ever insult the family you are about to join at any time and most definitely not in public. I gather you passed this off as a joke but the reaction in the pub was one of shock, not laughter.

I have no idea whether you wrote to thank [your future sister-in-law] for the weekend but you should have hand-written a card to her.

You should have hand-written a card to me. You have never written to thank me when you have stayed at Houndspool.
[Your future sister-in-law] has quite the most exquisite manners of anyone I have ever come across. You would do well to follow her example.
You regularly draw attention to yourself. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

It is tragic that you have diabetes. However, you aren't the only young person in the world who is a diabetic.

I know quite a few young people who have this condition, one of whom is getting married in June. I have never heard her discuss her condition.
She quietly gets on with it. She doesn't like being diabetic. Who would? You do not need to regale everyone with the details of your condition or use it as an excuse to draw attention to yourself. It is vulgar.

As a diabetic of long standing you must be acutely aware of the need to prepare yourself for extraordinary eventualities, the walk to Mothecombe beach being an example.
You are experienced enough to have prepared yourself appropriately.

No-one gets married in a castle unless they own it. It is brash, celebrity style behaviour.

I understand your parents are unable to contribute very much towards the cost of your wedding. (There is nothing wrong with that except that convention is such that one might presume they would have saved over the years for their daughters' marriages.)
If this is the case, it would be most ladylike and gracious to lower your sights and have a modest wedding as befits both your incomes.

One could be accused of thinking that Heidi Withers must be patting herself on the back for having caught a most eligible young man. I pity Freddie.

Quote of the Day 7/1

You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas!

--Davy Crockett


New York is abuzz with news that conservative TV talker Glenn Beck, who hosted his final show on Fox on Thursday, is moving to Westlake (Dallas Fort Worth area).

Icymi, Neighborsgo real estate blogger Candy Evans reported Wednesday that Beck will rent a 7,900-square foot estate in Westlake owned by baseball player Jorge Piedra and Swarovski heiress Vanessa Piedra.

He'll fork over $20,000 a month for the 7-bedroom, 7.5-bathroom home with four-car garage in Vaquero Estates.
Still unclear whether Beck -- the wipe-board loving, tear-jerking commentator -- will relocate his media empire to Texas, though he's already said he'll abandon New York City. And he's joked about running for Texas governor.

The New York Daily News, in a report citing Evans' intel about the Westlake rental mansion, says Beck recently sold a mansion in New Canaan, Conn., for $3.6 million -- $300,000 below the current listing price on the Westlake home, though he decided to rent, at least for now.
The story is making the rounds today thanks to Drudge.


30 June 2011

Peoples Republic of California implements law to tax internet sales

Corporatism in action: in bed with big box retailers against the little guys:

Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law California's tax on Internet sales through affiliate advertising which will immediately cut small-business website revenue 20% to 30%, experts say. 

The bill, AB 28X, takes effect immediately. The state Board of Equalization says the tax will raise $200 million a year, but critics claim it will raise nothing because online retailers will end their affiliate programs rather than collect the tax.

Amazon has already emailed its termination of its affiliate advertising program with 25,000 websites. The letter says, in part:

(The bill) specifically imposes the collection of taxes from consumers on sales by online retailers - including but not limited to those referred by California-based marketing affiliates like you - even if those retailers have no physical presence in the state.

We oppose this bill because it is unconstitutional and counterproductive. It is supported by big-box retailers, most of which are based outside California, that seek to harm the affiliate advertising programs of their competitors. Similar legislation in other states has led to job and income losses, and little, if any, new tax revenue. We deeply regret that we must take this action.
The new law won't affect customers, Amazon said, but added that the immediate termination of the affiliate program also applies to, and


Governments: They're really nice once you get to know them. <retching sound follows>

Quote of the Day, 6/30

It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings.

Where there’s service, there is someone being served.

The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.

--Ayn Rand

Arizona police laid bare by hackers, personal info dumped into 'net

Verbatim post,

AntiSec Slams Arizona Cops (Again) with Super Personal Data Spill

by Sam Biddle

As originally posted on: Gizmodo
June 29, 2011

Looks like
last week's "Chinga La Migra" strike against the Arizona Border Police was only part one—the sequel's landed today, and this time it's personal. Like, really personal: Anonymous is claiming social security numbers, girlfriend pics, and more.

The dumps contents—if they're authentic—will be a massive slap not only to the integrity of Arizona's state security, but the lives of its police force. Sayeth Anonymous, in "Chinga La Migra Communique Dos":

In this second bulletin, we're dumping booty pirated from a dozen Arizona police officer's personal email accounts looking specifically for humiliating dirt. This leak has names, addresses, phone numbers, passwords, social security numbers, online dating account info, voicemails, chat logs, and seductive girlfriend pictures belonging to a dozen Arizona police officers. We found more internal police reports, cops forwarding racist chain emails, k9 drug unit cops who use percocets, and a convicted sex offender who was part of FOP Maricopa Lodge Five.

We also hit the AZDPS spokesperson Stephen Harrison who been bragging to the news about how they are upgrading their security and how they will catch the evil hackers who exposed them. Clearly not secure enough, because we owned his personal hotmail, facebook and accounts and dumped all his personal details for the world to see. The same fate will meet anyone else who tries to paint us as terrorists in an Orwellian attempt to pass more pro-censorship or racial-profiling police state laws.

Like the first AZ attack, this one's equally politically motivated, angled against policies Anonymous considers racist and wrong. So what's the AntiSec endgame in Arizona? Anonymous says it'll continue to target

Police officers who lock people up for decades, who get away with brutality and torture, who discriminate against people of color, who make and break their own laws as they see fit. We are making sure they experience just a taste of the same kind of violence and terror they dish out on an every day basis. Our advice to you is to quit while you still can and turn on your commanding officers before you end up in our cross hairs next, because we're not stopping until every prisoner is freed and every prison is burned to the ground.

Dramatic! That last bit certainly isn't happening anytime soon, so expect more of this down the line.

Again, we can't authenticate the dump's contents at the moment, but if true, Anonymous is going to have some serious law enforcement ire pointed in its direction. [

29 June 2011

Remove your dignity

Riverside Research Institute

Whoever visited my site from the Riverside Research Institute this afternoon, please contact me directly at:

Would like a word with you.

New government roaming the streets of Philadelphia

(Philadelphia, PA)

The two young women were sitting at a window table inside the Max Brenner restaurant on 15th Street, near Walnut, sharing chocolate fondue after some shopping.
The streets were vibrant. The weather was nice.
"The city had a good vibe," remembered one of the women, Maria, who requested her full name not be printed.
But their night on the town was about to become frightening.

Heading their way was a pack of teens roving through Center City after leaving a North Philadelphia music festival.

They were part of about 100 or more young people who had left Saturday night's event, police said, committing a series of violent assaults and robberies, including one against Maria, 25, of North Philadelphia, and her cousin Cecilia, 29, of Havertown.

(emphasis added) Link to news article, via Drudge

Additional relevant commentary here.

Quote of the Day 6/29

"The reason that ideology is so vital to the State is that it always rests, in essence, on the support of the majority of the public. This support obtains whether the State is a "democracy," a dictatorship, or an absolute monarchy. For the support rests in the willingness of the majority (not, to repeat, of every individual) to go along with the system: to pay the taxes, to go without much complaint to fight the State's wars, to obey the State's rules and decrees. This support need not be active enthusiasm to be effective; it can just as well be passive resignation. But support there must be. For if the bulk of the public were really convinced of the illegitimacy of the State, if it were convinced that the State is nothing more nor less than a bandit gang writ large, then the State would soon collapse to take on no more status or breadth of existence than another Mafia gang. Hence the necessity of the State's employment of ideologists; and hence the necessity of the State's age-old alliance with the Court Intellectuals who weave the apologia for State rule."

--Murray Rothbard

28 June 2011

Best argument against waging non-defensive wars

It's the kids.

The Framers granted war making powers to the representatives of the people. There was a time that Congress did represent the people, or so I'd like to think. Not any more. The executive now arbitrarily decides where and upon whom to make war, without the consent of the people or their so-called representatives.

This government wastes our resources and creates international blowback on a scale that is difficult to conceive.  Do you feel more secure because of our military interventions?

What future do our kids have?