How to cause anarchy by telling people what the law actually says

Since the story came up on Facebook, I thought I’d fire up the microphone and tell you all about the time I told all my high school peers how to beat a traffic ticket in California.

It’s not like they get better

Prison is a punishment. It really isn’t something that cures people of their urges.

Police on Friday accused a Raleigh man of an attempted sex offense with a seven year-old child.

He’s been to prison for this before

Suspect (Bonus: his sex offender profile)

And for a bunch of other things.

#NRA’s Billy Johnson imagines a world where guns were treated like other rights Gun control fanatics freak out

I’ve long thought that the bulk of anti-gun activists are emotionally challenged individuals. It appears that they are mentally challenged as well. How else do you explain the virulent reaction to what is really an innocuous video?

 

 

 

 

Oh dear! What did the NRA say now? Are children going to be forced to carry AR-15s in class? Are we finally becoming Margaret Atwood’s totalitarian Christianist theocracy, with children being forced to be the revolutionary vanguard?

Well, not exactly. It seems that Billy Johnson, of NRA News and Amidst The Noise has asked us a simple question. Why does US “gun policy” start from the  strange position of assuming that it is a good government position to limit access to a fundamental Constitutional right? Billy asks why guns aren’t treated like every other thing our government calls a right.

Watch the video and see for yourself.

You see the part where he says we should force all children to carry guns at school? Me neither.

Billy asks some good questions. Whenever something is considered a “Right” by our government, the Left goes out of their way to insist that the government not only allow people that right, but pay for it. Or force others to pay for it. Education? It’s a “Right” and so schools are free. We’ll leave aside for now the discussion of what is and is not a right. Go talk with Kevin Baker if you want to know the difference between a “Right” and “something that people have decided is important and so try to call a ‘Right’ but actually isn’t.”

Billy is correct. Since gun ownership is a fundamental Constitutional right, why is the government going out of its way to make it as difficult as possible to exercise that right? Why does the Federal government tolerate some states in their attempt to make it extremely difficult to “keep” arms and almost impossible to “bear” them? Would they tolerate a state which treated your right to free speech the same way?

If the Left was consistent, they would insist that the Second Amendment be treated just like the First. But no one actually expects the Left to be consistent. So instead of acknowledging the arguments made by Billy, they misrepresent his statements, freak out publicly, and insist that he is some sort of crazy lunatic for even opening his mouth. You can always tell who the Left thinks is a danger. The ones they attack the loudest are the ones they know are hurting them.

Well, Billy, you’re taking flak. That means you’re over the target.

There’s nothing they won’t try to ban

If you’ve ever wondered what it was like to deal with Carrie Nation and her band of obnoxious anti-alcohol crusaders, try to have a conversation with the gun ban crowd. There is nothing they won’t try to ban. For the Children™

Via email:

On Tuesday, June 17, we alerted you that the North Carolina House will consider bill HB1250 called “AMEND DEFINITION OF DANGEROUS FIREARM.”

That bill was dropped into the Senate Rules and Operations of the Senate Committee. It has now been revised and added to another bill HB 369, Criminal Law Changes and will be discussed in that committee tomorrow, July 23.

The new wording of the referenced portion of the bill reads:

‘PROVIDE THAT AIR RIFLES, AIR PISTOLS, AND BB GUNS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF “DANGEROUS FIREARMS” FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES IN THE FOLLOWING COUNTIES: ANSON, CLEVELAND, HARNETT, STANLY,AND SURRY

SECTION 10.(a) G.S.14-316 reads as rewritten:

Ҥ 14-316. Permitting young children to use dangerous firearms.

(a)It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly permit a child under the age of 12 years to have access to, or possession, custody or use in any manner whatever, of any gun, pistol or other dangerous firearm, whether such weapon be loaded or unloaded, unless the person has the permission of the child’s parent or guardian, and the child is under the supervision of an adult. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.

(b)Air rifles, air pistols, and BB guns shall not be deemed “dangerous firearms” within the meaning of subsection (a) of this section except in the following counties: Anson, Caldwell, Caswell, Chowan, Cleveland, Cumberland, Durham, Forsyth, Gaston, Harnett, Haywood, Mecklenburg, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Union, Vance.”

This section becomes effective December 1, 2014, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date.’

The “certain purposes” are not spelled out but, most other countries, including the Czech Republic, Croatia and Kuwait, define these guns as “dangerous firearms” and restrict their use to children 18 and older. Most restrict velocity and some restrict pellet size as well. New Jersey and Rhode Island define all non powder guns as firearms, which generally ensures that all non-powder guns are kept out of the hands of children (absent direct adult supervision), and that felons and other individuals prohibited from possessing firearms are similarly barred from possessing non-powder guns

The current NC law,
SECTION 1.
G.S.14-316 reads as rewritten:
7″§ 14-316. Permitting young children to use dangerous firearms.
(a)It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly permit a child under the age of 12 years to have access to, or possession, custody or use in any manner whatever, of any gun, pistol or other dangerous firearm, whether such weapon be loaded or unloaded, unless the person has the permission of the child’s parent or guardian, and the child is under the supervision of an adult. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have compiled national data on non-powder gun injuries which illustrate the inherent danger of these weapons. Between 2001 and 2011, non-powder guns injured 209,981 people nationwide, including 145,423 children age 19 or younger. In 2011 alone, 16,451 injuries – including 10,288 injuries to children age 19 and younger – resulted from the use of non-powder guns. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, BB guns and pellet rifles cause an average of four deaths per year.

In 2011 two North Carolina children were killed within a week of each other from injuries sustained from pellet guns. And a 7 year-old was charged with two felonies for shooting at passing cars with a BB gun in 2013.

Because non-powder guns are designed to discharge projectiles, often at high speeds and with significant force, they should not be confused with toy guns. Both non-powder and toy guns, however, are often designed to appear almost indistinguishable from actual firearms, and may be mistaken for firearms by law enforcement or others. According to a New York Times investigation, “In recent years, dozens of police officers in Texas, California, Maryland, Florida and elsewhere have shot children and adults armed with what they believed were handguns but that were determined later to be BB guns or other types of air pistols.”

Kids injured and killed with Airsoft pellet guns-

1-year-old Georgia toddler
15 year-old Pennsylvania boy
5 year-old Kansas boy
10 year-old California boy
9 year-old Alaska boy
10 year-old Michigan girl
12 year-old New York boy
7 year-old West Virginia boy

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics -
The range of muzzle velocities for non powder guns overlaps velocities reached by traditional firearms.
Non powder guns pose a serious risk of injury, permanent disability, and even death.
Non powder guns (BB guns, pellet guns, air rifles, paintball guns) are weapons and should never be characterized as toys.

Stop this dangerous portion of the bill!!
Please contact as many members of the Senate committee as you can tonight or before 9am tomorrow and urge them to keep these non powder guns designated as dangerous weapons!

NCGV

http://www.ncgv.org/

A little background. There are currently 17 counties (out of 100) in North Carolina which deem air rifles, air pistols, and BB guns to be “Dangerous Weapons” for the purpose of allowing children to use them unaccompanied.

  • Anson
  • Caldwell
  • Caswell
  • Chowan
  • Cleveland
  • Cumberland
  • Durham
  • Forsyth
  • Gaston
  • Harnett
  • Haywood
  • Mecklenburg
  • Stanly
  • Stokes
  • Surry
  • Union
  • Vance

In these counties, and not in the other 83, it’s a Class 2 misdemeanor to allow your child to shoot a BB gun in the back yard unless you’re standing right there. We can debate whether or not this is a good idea, but it’s not exactly a crime worthy of 3 months in prison and a $500 fine. It’s not the same thing as Assault, which is also a Class 2 misdemeanor.

The reason that they are only removing 5 from the list of 17 is that in North Carolina there have something called a “local bill.” That is a state law that will only apply in certain counties. The most recent example of that was the Durham firearm registration that got overturned. It was a local bill that only applied in Durham. The limit on any given local bill is 5 counties. So the sponsors of this bill had to stop adding counties at 5. There is some talk that some legislators are miffed that they didn’t run a general bill and eliminate all 17.

So this is the hill that the new NCGV leader (and Bloomberg puppet) has chosen to die on. She wants to keep it a crime equivalent to assault for you to let your child shoot a BB gun without direct supervision. If you check out their webpage, they want to see the law changed to make it a crime to allow anyone under 18 to use BB guns unsupervised.

NCGV’s Position- NCGV opposes unsupervised use of these devices by children. We would rather see this law strengthened as it is in most countries to prohibit unsupervised use until 18 years of age.

I think it’s because they know that children raised around firearms won’t grow up to be irrationally afraid of guns when they grow up. They know that they have to make children fear and hate guns so that they will have some members when the current crop of old white gun haters die.

How long until we see these strange women attacking gun stores and Walmart BB gun displays with hatchets?

Japete lying more than usual

I’m not going to link to Brady Campaign board member and all around lunatic Joan Peterson’s blog. I had to stop reading her blithering maunderings a long time ago. There’s only so much crazy I can deal with, and she’s over the line. But Weer’d Beard reads her so I don’t have to.

I have been writing about things that can go wrong when the wrong people are able to get their hands on loaded guns. But it’s not just the wrong ( prohibited buyers) who do bad things with guns and bullets. It’s sometimes those who can legally buy guns who have no intent to kill anyone but do anyway in a moment of anger, depression, jealousy, during a relationship separation, after too much alcohol, or while believing, sometimes falsely, that another is out to harm them. Occasionally a shooting is justified to save one’s life. But most of the shootings in America are not for that reason. The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other( pg. 10)

Link is safe, it goes to Weer’d.

Let’s discuss the last statement, and the unwarranted inferences she draws.

The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other (pg.10)

She links to this Bureau of Justice Statistics PDF. In addition to mischaracterizing it as a chart on “Gun Deaths™,” she fails to take into account is this statement at the bottom of the BJS chart.

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. The percentages of victim/offender
relationships are based on the 63.1% of homicides from 1980 through 2008 for which the victim/
offender relationships were known. The percentages of homicides involving multiple victims or
offenders were known for 69.1% of incidents.

That’s quite an omission, isn’t it? They’re leaving out the more than one third of single victim/single offender relationship data.

Let’s go to the source. The FBI’s Crime in the United States 2012. I took the top line data and made a pie chart to show the victims in each category of relationship,

VictimOffenderRelationship2012Whoops.

Look at the first three largest categories of relationships. “Unknown,” “Acquaintance,” and “Stranger.” We can even see, by process of elimination, what the FBI considers an “Acquaintance.” The FBI defines “Acquaintance” as a person who is not a “Stranger,” but is also not a

  • Husband
  • Wife
  • Mother
  • Father
  • Son
  • Daughter
  • Brother
  • Sister
  • “Other Family”
  • Friend
  • Boyfriend
  • Girlfriend
  • Neighbor
  • Employee
  • Employer

So it’s basically someone who you’re not related to, not friends with, don’t live near nor have some employment relationship with, but you still know. Somehow.

You know who comes to mind when I try to come up with a person who is none of the things above? Drug dealers. Rival gang members. Criminal associates. Not related, not friends, not neighbors, and not in some sort of employer/employee relationship.

Clearly, “Acquaintance” is a very broad category of people you don’t really know all that well, but just don’t happen to be perfect strangers. And when you add up all the “Unknown,” “Stranger,” and “Acquaintance” murders, they represent 79.65% of all murders in the US during 2012. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the myth that it’s just family members murdering each other in a fit of pique.

Moving on, let’s look at the unwarranted inference Joan Peterson draws from this data.

Occasionally a shooting is justified to save one’s life. But most of the shootings in America are not for that reason. The majority of gun deaths are among people who know each other.

So in Joan Peterson’s tiny little mind, the fact that people involved in homicides (sort of) know each other means that using a gun to defend your own life against a person you (sort of) know is wrong.

Does that even make sense? Is that even rational? This is what I call the “Reverse Rumplestiltskin Defense.” In Rumplestiltskin, the woman gets hauled off to a dungeon and forced to spin straw into gold, which, of course, she cannot do. Rumplestiltskin offers to do the spinning for her in exchange for her first born child. Later, after marriage and now that she’s pregnant, she resists. Rumplestiltskin, for some reason, offers her a deal. Figure out my name and I’ll give up my claim to your child. On her third guess, she gets the name and Rumplestiltskin vanishes, without taking the child. Joan’s view is the exact inverse of the story.

In Joan Peterson’s view, it might be OK for me to shoot a perfect stranger in self defense. But as soon as I know the guy’s name (or, as is probably the case in most of the murders, his “street” name) I’m not allowed to shoot him? Is that even sane?

What we’re dealing with here is the same thing that causes the gun haters to come out of the woodwork to decry guns after school shootings but to refuse to acknowledge the common everyday killings. They know that if they went on TV and talked about Ice Dog shooting Ray-Ray, no one would ever call them back. The reality is that most murders are among and between criminals or are criminals killing family members. It’s rare that those murders leap out into what we might call “polite society.” We tend not to care if criminals kill each other. As long as they are killing each other, they’re not bothering us. It’s cold, but true.

Joan misuses incomplete statistics to draw an unwarranted inference. And that, plus her enormous lack of sense, is why I stopped reading her.

Drunken getaway driver

Some people can’t help themselves. They just seem to attract trouble.

An officer responding to reports of a disturbance early Sunday morning ended up filing multiple charges against a 45-year-old woman, including being the getaway driver in an armed robbery.

When you’re breaking the law, try not to cause enough of a disturbance that someone calls the cops on you.

Suspect

She’s got a track record of causing problems.

Stealing dresses

Not all crime is violent, but it takes a certain kind of person to be a criminal.

Police took a Knightdale woman into custody over the weekend after she was accused of conspiring with someone to steal 25 women’s dresses from a Belk’s store at The Streets at Southpoint shopping mall in Durham.

Most people don’t like to take what isn’t theirs.

Suspect

Others, however, will rob you blind and probably won’t even feel bad about it.

Careful how you choose a babysitter

Watching your child is the biggest responsibility you can give anyone. So how do you choose a babysitter? Not like this.

A 15-month-old remains hospitalized with first-, second- and third-degree burns after she was scalded by hot water in a bathtub.

THIRD DEGREE BURNS? From a BATHTUB!?!?!? Something isn’t right there.

Sgt. Myron Shelor with Gaston County Police said (Suspect) had on headphones, listening to music and playing games on the computer when she was supposed to be watching the children.

(Victim) climbed into the bathtub and turned on the hot water, burning herself, police said. It wasn’t until a family friend came home and heard her cries that she was taken from the tub, according to family members.

And who was this paragon of babysitting prowess?

Suspect

Perhaps not the best choice to supervise your child.

And while you’re thinking about it, make sure your hot water heater isn’t set so high that you can give your baby third degree burns.

Two wheels good, four wheels bad

There is likely to be a bit of salty language in this post. Consider this your official naughty language warning.

————————————-

Have you noticed that assholes always seem to find each other? My series on Felons Behaving Badly should have pointed that out to you a long time ago. But it also works on among what you would call “normal” people as well. Case in point…

Out in rural Orange County, where the roads are two lanes, winding and narrow, a war of the wheels has been going on for years.

Read the whole thing. I’ll be here when you get back.

Back? OK. Let’s point out some things that should be obvious, but apparently aren’t discussed in polite newspapers. Bicyclists can be real assholes. As a guy who rides a bicycle, I don’t even except myself in this generalization. We can be real assholes sometimes. We don’t strictly follow all the rules of the road. We ignore stop signs and stop lights if we feel like we can do so. We take up space that we shouldn’t take up, and because any mistake will injure or kill us, we act like it’s always the asshole in the car that’s at fault.

Auto drivers can be real assholes too. They can pass too closely. Get impatient and pass when it’s not safe. Blow their horns for no earthly reason. All kinds of stupid crap that gets people hurt, killed, and frightened half to death.

Here’s the thing. When you get a critical mass (I’m not talking about Critical Mass, a group of assholes who probably should be sterilized with a chainsaw) of cyclists in one area, you start to see things that are completely outside the experience of auto drivers. Double Pacelines come to mind.

To cyclists, this is just basic sensible riding. It saves a lot of energy. To automobile drivers, it’s a bunch of assholes on bikes hogging the road. There’s nothing for this but to educate people on what’s going on. Oh, and to tell cyclists to stop running double pacelines on unsafe sections of road. That whole reciprocal responsibility is a bitch, isn’t it?

Another thing that cyclists could do that would make them at least emotionally more stable is to start taking count of the good things that happen while they are riding. I ride alone, so I don’t really have the issues associated with group riding. I occasionally get a guy being a jerk, but he’s so vastly outnumbered by the people being excessively cautious that it’s actually noteworthy that someone was a jerk. I’m out riding and I’ve got a crowd of people in cars being Southern polite and all of a sudden some idiot shows his ass. It’s jarring. But it’s jarring because it’s so far outside the norm that you wonder what planet he came from.

I ride in southern Wake County and northern Johnston County for the most part. Now unless the people in those areas are vastly different than the people in Orange County (Chapel Hill and the surrounding area for people not from around here) then the problem is one of what the riders are bringing to the experience along with some history of conflict. Here’s some things riders can do to make their world a better place.

  • Don’t hog the road. Ride as far to the right as practical. Don’t ride in the dirt, or do something dangerous to yourself, but don’t wander about the lane either.
  • Take ownership of the ground underneath you. Wishy washy people get run over, both metaphorically and literally. It’s yours, make people see that.
  • Don’t blow stop signs or signals unless it’s completely safe to do so. You violate someone else’s right of way and YOU are the asshole. We all know that bicycles will not trip lights. Don’t be stupid about it.
  • Use (polite!) hand signals to indicate to the cars what you expect them to do. I frequently signal cars that it’s OK to pass. I can see over hills before they can, and I have a better idea of how long it takes to pass than they do. I’ll hold them in place and then set them free when it’s safe.
  • Wave. No, seriously, wave at people. A friendly wave to people who’ve met the minimum politeness requirements when dealing with you will bring many benefits later. It also makes you feel better. The automobile driver thinks, “Hey, I’m a good person for being polite. I’ll do that to the next rider too.”
  • Take the lane if necessary. Sometimes it’s better to physically block a car with your bike than allow a situation to develop that will end up badly. Make sure to convey to the car your thanks for his cooperation after you’re done.
  • Remember that cars mostly have no idea how to interact with you. They don’t know what you’re facing. They don’t know what you’re likely to do. They don’t know why they should have to put up with you. Convey your intent and then reward compliance.

Here’s what cars can do to make it easier on bicyclists.

  • Stop blowing your horn at me. I know you’re there. I don’t need you to scare me with your horn right before you pass me. Please stop that.
  • Pass with care. But get it done in a hurry. I don’t want you next to me any more than I want to delay your drive.
  • Wave. Be friendly. A good attitude is contagious. Catch one and spread it around.
  • Keep in mind that you might get a scratch on your paint. I might get dead. That doesn’t excuse me being an asshole, but slow your roll, Turbo. I’m doing my best to get out of your way.
  • Come join us. It really is as much fun as it was when you were a kid.

I’ve had people scream at me. It’s bizarre. It’s like a completely different universe intruding on the one you normally live in. In my universe, people are really polite. They give me at least 4 feet of clearance while passing, many give me the whole lane. I have actually seen a VW New Beetle stare down an oncoming Dodge 2500 dually towing a trailer. The Beetle got all four wheels into oncoming traffic and accelerated at the Dodge. You could see that his attitude was “My lane now, Bitch! I’m passing a bicycle! Slow down or get rammed!” The Dodge, wisely in my opinion, slowed down to allow the pass. I waved my thanks at the Dodge. He waved back. Nice people here in North Carolina.

To a less spectacular extent, I see the same thing every time I go out on my bike. Friendly people everywhere, all doing their part to avoid running over the fat dude on the funny looking bike. I have to wonder, if your experience is different, what are you bringing to the encounter that changes things?

And yes, I carry a gun while I ride. It’ll come out if it’s necessary. But for the most part, I deploy waves and smiles more than the average Prom Queen and I’ve never even considered pulling the gun.

Suspicious man gets visit from police

He was wandering around where he shouldn’t be, so they called the cops.

A break-in at a Wake Forest home was thwarted Friday afternoon thanks to an alert neighbor who called police.

“We were just sitting out back and saw the guy walk around,” said the Good Samaritan, who didn’t want to be identified. “We just kept an eye on him and saw what was going on and called and the police who were very quick to get here.”

And who did they catch?

Suspect

Good work, neighbor!