Category Archives: Don’t piss off fat old men

I think my dad’s a bit upset

Dad (yes, this really is my father) is more than a little upset with the current anti-gun climate.

Dear American Citizen:

The time to fight is upon us. We must at this time decide, are we going to go to the slaughter like the proverbial lamb, or are we going to make a stand against tyranny and tell our elected officials to stand down. We have so many elected officials who are slathering themselves in the blood of innocent slaughtered children that they are sickening. Face it, we are governed by the largest collection of narcissistic sociopaths in the history of mankind. Diane Feinstein is the worst offender; she absolutely rolled in the blood of Moscone and Milk in San Francisco to garner support for her bid to federal office and no matter what she tells you, those two were responsible for pushing a man over the edge. Look it up but not in the San Francisco paper.

Read the whole thing.

Pennsylvania GOP served notice, Mom and Dad Sorrentino right in the middle of it all

The Erie County GOP, in Erie, Pennsylvania appears to have been cooking their books. They’ve failed to properly report their campaign financials for a long time and they just got caught.
Watch the video. Pay close attention to the signed document. The last two names are my parents.

(RSS readers, Click here for video)

Here’s a lesson for all you out there in political land. Play fair. Follow the rules. And if you get caught screwing everything up and you get told it’s time to step down, you should probably step down. A Sorrentino will not stay silent. We’ll burn the whole thing down rather than even tacitly support crooked politicians.

And you State GOP hacks? When you get a call saying, “remove these crooked people,” remove them.

Do you RSS? Don’t know what an RSS Feed is?
Save time and read all the latest blog news first.

Dad goes Open Carry

My father has been catching hell from one or two people who are politically active in his area of Pennsylvania. He has thrown in his lot with the Tea Party people, gotten himself appointed as a Republican Committeeman, is planning on standing for regular election as a Committeeman, and has announced his candidacy for County Republican Chair (Dad says the Bylaws prevent this). To say that he’s unhappy with the direction of the Republican Party in his county would be a vast understatement. My sweet and kind mother, a lady who came from Great (it still was, in those days) Britain in the 60’s, has gotten pretty militant about guns. From a woman who actually told my father that he only wanted a gun to make himself feel more manly, she has become a concealed carrying Second Amendment absolutist. She figures that if you want to take her gun, you probably want to do something nasty to her. She’ll keep her gun, thanks very much, and if you get nasty, you’ll find out why she is keeping her gun.
To that end, they are both getting organized for a Second Amendment rally in October. And they are going to Open Carry. Dad has been catching hell for this decision from a few people who are “concerned” about the “image” it portrays of gun owners.
I have been mulling it over in my mind; the arguments for and against openly carrying a gun.  Exercising my rights etc and believe me when I say this is not difficult for me.
Any right not exercised is a right lost.  If you do not speak out and address an injustice, you have abridged your freedom of speech.  If you fail to meet your friends for any reason except you don’t want to, you have abridged your freedom of assembly.  Let us say you refuse to file a complaint against a police officer who mistreats you because of fear of reprisal, you have given up your right against unreasonable search and seizure.  You get the picture.  
(Via email)
Sounds to me like Dad’s got the right idea.
Let’s talk about the nature of propaganda. We have been told that “people will be afraid” if they see a gun. We are good and decent people, so we naturally don’t wish our friends and neighbors to be afraid of us, so we rarely carry a gun openly. Now wasn’t that so much easier than trying to ban open carry?
If those who argue against gun ownership were successful in passing a law against open carry, they would piss off the open carriers, of course. But they would also piss off that much larger group of people who resent being told what to do. A whole raft of people who don’t care one way or the other about Open Carry would run out and buy the most obnoxious guns possible just so they could flout the new (and unconstitutional) law. So the opponents of guns are much stealthier. They try to convince you that you are alone. They try to convince you that if your neighbor sees you with a gun he or she will fear and loathe you. They try to convince you that you are the crazy person. In reality, none of that is true, but 50 years of TV news propaganda has convinced you that it is.
Here’s what I recommend. Get a gun. Learn how to use it. Check your local laws (PA is VERY lenient on OC) and Open Carry. Once you get over the initial nervousness, you will be bored out of your mind. Where are all the screaming neighbors? Where are the SWAT teams converging on you to prone you out and seize your gun? They don’t exist. They are all phantoms.
And give up on Open Carry being a bridge to teaching your friends and neighbors about gun ownership and law. Your friends and neighbors probably won’t notice. Let’s face it. One more black object stuck to your hip in this era of universal cell phone ownership isn’t much of a red flag. It makes it really hard to start a pro-gun conversation with a person who doesn’t even notice that you are carrying a gun.
What Open Carry does is teach the Open Carrier that guns are not universally despised in society. The few that notice will almost without exception be positive. They might be surprised, but after a quick question about the legality of it all they will wander off happy that one more law abiding citizen has a gun. I’ve done several Open Carry dinners, and the most common comment is “Anyone who robs this restaurant is in for a REAL surprise.” Think about that for a minute. A person you have never met sees you and your friends carrying guns and automatically classifies you as an ally. You see that often enough and you start to see through the web of lies you have been told.
You were told that your friends and neighbors would panic, scream, run, and call the cops. You were told that you, decent law abiding citizen with a gun, are a menace, a danger, and completely without allies in a hostile political environment. You were told that the cops would invite you to a pavement tasting contest while they arrested you and seized your gun. And none of this happened. Your “scaredy-cat” friends and neighbors either don’t notice the guns, or they don’t care. In fact, when pressed they seem downright friendly to the idea of law abiding citizens having and carrying guns. Suddenly you realize that that hostile political landscape is an out and out lie. There are so many people who are pro-gun that you start to wonder who, if anyone, is actually anti-gun.
The anti-gunners are the ones who are running the cameras. They are the ones who pretend that there is a serious anti-gun movement in the US. They tell us that our neighbors will be afraid. They tell us that we are isolated and alone. They tell us that Open Carry will start a panic.

So who are you going to believe? Them? Or your lying eyes?
Update: Arms are the Mark of a Free Man posts his Open Carry thoughts: The Boredom of Open Carry.

Do you RSS? Don’t know what an RSS Feed is?
Save time and read all the latest blog news first.

Senator Grassley is mad, and I don’t mean “crazy” (*Video*)

I don’t post much about Project Gunwalker, many others do a much better job. I post this one because in this video, Senator Grassley crosses the post-Watergate Rubicon. He has used the “What did they know and when did they know it” bomb. Once those words are spoken, it’s all over. Chuck Grassley has just promised to bring the Senate to a halt on all ATF/Justice Department related items. In the Senate, no one Senator can force any action to happen. One Senator can certainly bring everything to a halt though. If he wants to be that much of a jerk. Senator Grassley has just told everyone that he plans on being that much of a jerk.
Good for him.

Old friends make an appearance

When I used to live in Pennsylvania, I got my start in pro-rights activism with PAFOA. One of the local guys who cast a long wide shadow was Bill Grumbine, an open carry activist. He was well regarded, mostly because he was a great guy to be around.
Via Dead Man Dance comes this video where Bill makes an early appearance.

Heeding God’s Call is apparently an Astroturf group paid by Furious Mike’s Illegal^ Mayors Against Illegal Guns. They stand outside gun stores and make asses of themselves trying to force the owners to sign a code of conduct that is plainly illegal if followed.
1. Videotaping the Point of Sale for All Firearms Transactions. Participating retailers will videotape the point-of-sale of all firearms transactions and maintain videos for 6 months to deter illegal purchases and monitor employees.
2. Computerized Prime Gun Trace Log and Alert System. Mayors Against Illegal Guns will develop a computerized system that participating retailers will implement over time to log crime gun traces relating to the retailer. Once the program is in place, if a customer who has a prior trace at that retailer attempts to purchase a firearm, the sale will be electronically flagged. The retailer would have discretion to proceed with the sale or stop the sale.
3. Purchaser Declaration. For sales flagged by the trace alert system, participating retailers will ask purchasers to fill out a declaration indicating that they meet the legal requirement to purchase the firearm.
4. Deterring Fake IDs. Participating retailers will only accept valid federal- or state-issued picture IDs as primary identification. Retailers will utilize additional ID checking mechanisms.
5. Consistent Visible Signage. Participating retailers will post signage created by the Responsible Firearms Retailer Partnership to alert customers of their legal responsibilities at the point-of-sale.
6. Employee Background Checks. Participating retailers will conduct criminal background checks for all employees selling or handling firearms.
7. Employee Responsibility Training. Participating retailers will participate in an employee responsibility training program focused on deterring illegal purchasers. The Responsible Firearms Retailer Partnership will create an online training system based on Wal-Mart´s training program.
8. Inventory Checking. Participating retailers will conduct daily and quarterly audits. Guidelines will be based on Wal-Mart´s existing audit procedures.
9. No Sales Without Background Check Results. Participating retailers would prohibit sales based on “default proceeds,” which are permitted by law when background check has not returned a result within 3 days.
10. Securing Firearms. Participating retailers will maintain firearms kept in customer accessible areas in locked cases or locked racks.
#1 and #2 are just an attempt to make a parallel gun registry, and would require opening the Gun Trace records to MAIG, which violates the Tiahrt Amendment. #9 would allow the FBI to stop all gun sales in the US by turning off the NICS system. A lot of what they are demanding will have the effect of raising costs and making firearms retailers less profitable. For many gun stores, that means going out of business. For MAIG and HGC, that’s a feature, not a bug.

Mob violence and the Social Contract

John at Powerline Blog pointed out today, in reference to the London riots, that
This is more true that he can explain. He quotes another story which talks about the head of the Police union
This is the end of the government. Full stop. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
The purpose of a police force is to enforce enough order to convince the majority of the population that the government is living up to its end of the social contract. The social contract that we have with our government is that we will give up our right for private vengeance for public justice.
We have given up private vengeance, now the government has to provide public justice. What the ordinary Brits are facing is the realization that they have given up much more than private vengeance. They’ve given up self defense. They’ve given up any semblance of personal and property security. And yet still, the government has not provided them public justice.
If the police forces will not end the rioting, and if indeed they are in sympathy with “anarchists” protesting the withering away of the state, then what prevents the ordinary citizens from deciding that their social contract has been broken and they should no longer be bound by it? What stops counter-mobs from sweeping down on the “anarchists” and slaughtering them? What prevents mobs of angry Brits from seizing suspected criminals and lynching them? Most importantly, what prevents angry mobs of Brits from seizing the politicians who built this untenable state of affairs and hanging them from any convenient sturdy structure? That’s the thing to remember. Once the people decide that there’s no benefit any more to pretending that the social contract binds them they won’t stop until they are either dead or enslaved, or all their enemies are dead.
Here in America, the police aren’t that much better armed than the ordinary people. It’d be less hand to hand and more running gun battle. It’d be a mess. There never was an attempt to raise enough police forces to control the whole country. They only have enough people to keep the criminals well enough in check so that the screaming of the population doesn’t get too loud. They could not control an entire society out of control, nor even a significant portion that decides that the social contract is broken. If, as the police union leader in Wisconsin suggests, the police take the side of disorder even passively, it will get very ugly. Mobs cannot be allowed to trump actual voting.
I would sincerely recommend that the people in leadership here and abroad decide if they really want to allow mobs to enforce their will on the rest of us. They may agree with the mobs, but will they agree with the backlash? More importantly, do they agree enough to willingly share the fate of the mob? Once we start fighting, we won’t stop until it’s over. Completely over.
I’m willing to follow the laws when the laws are enforced fairly. I’m willing to vote when I’m confident that my vote will be counted and that the majority wins. I’m willing to be peaceful as long as the peace is kept by others. But if you give me no peace, unfair application of the laws, and my vote is nullified by an angry mob, why should I be peaceful? Why should anyone?

The danger of conservatives questioning authority (*Video*)

I’ve pointed out before that the tipping point in state/citizen relations happens when you piss off the fat old men. It’s a sad truth that when minorities complain that they are mistreated by police, or poorly served by other state agencies, we’ve pretty much discounted them. Things have changed. I credit the concealed carry movement. Nothing has forced ordinary citizens to consider the laws that apply to them like the legal hoops a concealed carrier has to jump through. Nothing points out the stupidity and inconsistency of the law like having to comply with the law or face jail. This leads to a serious reconsideration of state power, sometimes in unusual places.

Think about it. Have you ever asked an agent of the State if you are being “detained?” Where did this guy learn the legal term “detained.” I’ll tell you where I learned it, concealed carry. Until I started carrying a gun, I had no idea what the difference between casual conversation, detention, and arrest was. I had no idea that a police officer (or in this case, a toll booth worker) couldn’t just make you stay there until you answered their questions. Like most ordinary citizens, I assumed that if a cop asked you a question, you had to answer them. Now I know better.
Here’s the problem. As more people like me learn what is and isn’t legal for police and other state agents, how will they accept their diminished power? Will they take it gracefully? Or will they lash out?

It’s not jury nullification exactly. More like jury bitchslap.

The jury is out only 30 minutes before it comes back with a verdict. Charged with kidnapping, and felonious assault, Demrick McCloud awaits the jury’s words.
The prosecutor had the victim ID the accused. How could the case have gone so wrong?
Well, that’s a problem. What’s worse?
I don’t even know what to say.

Revolt of the fat old guys

Patriarchy is the way the United States runs. Well, at least if you listened to your Women’s Studies professor in that mandatory class you took in college. The world is run by men.

To a certain extent, they are correct. One of the few groups of people that is not generally found on the streets protesting things is the older, generally fatter, men. We’ve got jobs and families and responsibilities, so we really have no business overturning the social order. It’s hard enough to keep a job and pay the bills without getting arrested for rioting in the streets. That’s why the mobs are populated mostly with idiot teens dressed in black. They’ve no responsibilities, and are safe in their assumption that dad and mom will feed them after the riots. The old fat guys assume that life is set up mostly the way it needs to be in order for their needs to get met. They see the police as allies against criminals, and generally see Government as the least intrusive way to get the roads paved so that they can get to work in the morning. They see themselves as part of the system, not outside of the system.

Since I used to work customer service, I am a huge believer in the 90/10 rule. 90% of your hassles in life are caused by 10% of your customers. This probably holds true in politics. 90% of people just shut up and deal with the situation as they find it. Government is not set up to deal with anything worse than that. What happens if a significant fraction of that normally quiet 90% decides to stop being quiet? The system, which is set up to deal with the small number of troublemakers through either punishment or bribes, cannot keep up with the larger number demanding their share of the pie.

What happens when the old fat guys decide that the system is corrupt and the quiet 90% is being treated like milk cows for the troublemaking 10% and their champions inside the government? What happens when these ordinarily quiet men decide to challenge the system?

What I think is happening is that for 30 plus years we have been told to shut up and get along. At the same time we see the criminals, the lazy, and the morally repugnant prospering with the support of the Left. They get all kinds of rights, and freebies, and support, and we get to pay for it all. Now we have to decide if we want to continue supporting this system. Why does an out and out criminal thug get every Constitutional right that the Left can dream up, but the random old fat guy with a gun gets the shaft?

I think that’s coming to an end. The old fat guys have had enough, and with the internet, they have communication with all the other fat old guys who’ve had enough. They’ve realized that they are not alone, and that the system is rotten. They aren’t photogenic, but they’ve got numbers, and increasingly, nothing left to lose.

UPDATE: I just got an email from my father. He says “This old fat guy has had enough and I will not go quietly.  The way I see it is they not only pissed off us old fat “GUYS” they have pissed off a bunch of old fat ladies as well.”

The system is unable to deal with mass refusal to cooperate. What are you doing to expand your rights?