An Open Letter to Professor Steven P. Grossman

TO: Steven P. Grossman (sgrossman@ubalt.edu)
CC: newstips@baltimoresun.com, OGPA@ubalt.edu
SUBJECT: An Open Letter to Professor Steven P. Grossman

Sir,

Regarding your opinion column:

The right to bear arms is not absolute
https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/op-ed/bs-ed-op-0217-second-amendment-right-to-bear-arms-20200217-wjekvvhasvfntmutnyaospgrmq-story.html

You should be ashamed of yourself. Deliberate false equivalence in a professor should be grounds for a university investigation of whether your anti-rights position has colored your actions as dean.

Do you think it is permissible to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater in order to create a panic? How about whether it is legal to speak to a crowd and tell them to go out and shoot the first police officer they see, or homeless person or teacher?
[…]
While virtually everyone accepts such a common sense limitation on the First Amendment, there are those who argue that anyone who proposes limitations on the possession of guns is an opponent of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms.

I see what you did there. When an ignorant layman does that, I’m willing to consider the possibility that it is attributable to mere… ignorance. When a law professor equates MISUSE/ABUSE of a right to simple, lawful, and harmless exercise of right, I know it’s purely malicious.

You pretend that lying and threatening are the First Amendment equivalents of the Second Amendment right to POSSESS a tool.

Before you wrote that despicable screed did you fill out a federal form and ask permission from the government to buy the computer on which you composed the column? Did you undergo a prior restraint background to prove your innocence before even obtaining the inanimate tool you used to exercise your First Amendment right to voice that opinion? Did you use a 1980s Intel 80286 computer limited to 768K RAM, because only the military needs a high speed, high capacity Pentium with 8 GB?

Did you get a license to possess your mouth, just in case you might lie to a student — or Baltimore Sun readers? Did you undergo a background check to possess your typing fingers?

Do University of Baltimore School of Law students undergo background checks before purchasing textbooks, or writing class papers?

Yes; threats, lies, incitement to violence are abuses of free speech rights, and we punish people for that. Likewise, assault and murder using firearms are abuses of the right to keep and bear arms. As a law professor I would expect you to know that those are also unlawful and we punish those offenders.

Buying and possessing a firearm differs not from buying and possessing a computer, telephone, megaphone, pen, or pencil. The ABUSE that must be controlled is not the same thing as possessing a tool with the potential to be abused.

Reasonable laws limiting the possession and sale of certain guns are clearly not violative of the Second Amendment. Such laws include but are not limited to those banning weapons, such as the AR-15 designed for combat…

If you believe that modern AR-pattern semiautomatic rifles were designed as military weapons (despite the fact that no nation on the planet generally issues semiautomatic rifles to its regular troops), then how do you square banning them with the precedent of U.S. vs. Miller, 1939, in which the Supreme Court found that short-barrel shotguns could be regulated because they had not been shown to be a weapon used by the military? The Court specifically said that the Second Amendment does protect the possession of military arms. An honest law professor would know and admit that.

Your disdain for basic, constitutionally protected human rights disgusts me.

Sincerely,

Carl “Bear” Bussjaeger

Speaker “Alzheimers” Pelosi: Brazen Criminal

Last night, Speaker of the House Pelosi indulged in a bit of petty political grandstanding. She methodically ripped up the State of the Union report which Trump had handed her prior to his address.

 

Most folks seem to see this as either dissing the Prez, or standing up to the Orangeman Bad, depending largely on party affiliation. I see it as a violation of 44 U.S. Code § 3106. Unlawful removal, destruction of records.

A lot of people forget that the SOTU address isn’t the real Constitutionally-required SOTU report. It’s just a speech. Presidents didn’t even do the speech until Woodrow Wilson decided it would be a great PR move. The formal report is the document Trump handed her.

Some may wish to argue that the papers were merely a transcript of the speech and not the report. But that was still a formal document presented to Congress by the President of the United States, a public record. She destroyed it. That’s a crime.

Best case for Pelosi is that she’s too far gone mentally to understand that she’s not supposed to destroy records. In that case, she needs to be removed from office for mental incompetence.

If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in my tip jar. I could really use the money, what with ISP bills, and general life expenses. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Troll: Grandmaster Level

Folks are going nuts over Trump’s tweet yesterday:

ally

Yeah, it’s basic the Star Fleet seal. I see screams about copyright infringement, royalties, law suits…

Pretty much everything but the fact that he tweeted this on his personal account, not the official POTUS account. There’s nothing about it anywhere on the White House web site.

Nor is the seal on the actual Space Force web site. No seal, no press release, no news links. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

Trump just trolled the world. Again.

If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in my tip jar. I could really use the money, what with ISP bills, and general life expenses. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

No, the VA Dems did not file a bill to criminalize criticism of politicians

That story will not die. It just keeps popping up like a whack-a-mole.

VA Legislators Introduce Anti-Free Speech Bill to Criminalize Online Criticism of Government Officials
After Virginia’s recent anti-second amendment legislation was successfully passed, the state legislature is now going after the first amendment. Virginia House Bill No. 1627 was introduced on January 16 which could effectively make it illegal to criticize government officials anywhere in the state.

The bill everyone refers to is HB 1627. Let’s see what the relevant portion says.

§ 18.2-152.7:1. Harassment by computer; penalty.

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

The strike-out is language removed from existing law and the bold is language added. And what is that existing law? Code of Virginia § 18.2-152.7:1. Which currently reads:

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

See? “coerce, intimidate, or harass” is already there. HB 1627 simply adds court venue to § 18.2-152.7:1. Currently, if someone should “coerce, intimidate, or harass” someone using a computer, the trial would be held where the crime occurred; at the harasser’s location or the victim’s.

This bill merely states that if the victim of actual coercion, intimidation, or harassment — not just First Amendment protected criticism; it would have to rise to a criminal level — is the governor or other specified government officials, the trial can be held in Richmond, instead of the harasser’s or victim’s locale.

That’s it. Chill out. Those idiot Dems are actually infringing obliterating  enough rights for real to get distracted by this.

If anyone has a valid analysis otherwise, let me know. If I agree, I’ll acknowledge that.

ETA: And should anyone care to whine about the lack of definitions for “coerce, intimidate, or harass,” guess what.

If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in my tip jar. I could really use the money, what with ISP bills, and general life expenses. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Aesop loses his shit

…because the VCDL Lobby Day rally didn’t.

In the lead up to the January rally, Aesop spilled a great deal of virtual ink on ridicule laced with gratuitous profanity all over the incipient rally attendees. He was absolutely sure the rally would devolve into mass violence due to moles, false flag operators, and Pantifa. Certain.

He even believed the news reports that The Base dipshits busted in Maryland were going to the rally to shoot people. Aesop should have read closer. What the FBI actually said is that they were concerned that the Nazi wannabes might go because they’d discussed it once. And their apparent “leader” seems to have been a CI.

Aesop should have read the warrant affidavit which made no mention whatsoever of the rally.

I had concerns about the rally myself. But I saw that it was inevitable; the rally was going to occur even if VCDL called it off and convinced Virginia members to stay home. So I made some specific suggestions for how to try to keep things under control.

Whether it was coincidence, good sense, or Van Cleave happened to read my column, what I suggested is what they did. Video showed a few people who tried to stir shit up, but the sane attendees locked it down. As of this morning, the mainstream media is sadly reporting the tragedy of exactly zero violent incidents. I saw one report of one Pantifa idiot arrested for wearing a mask.

So we got a large rally — the lowest mainstream media estimate I’ve seen was 22,000 — that went off, basically, without a hitch. Bearing in mind that it wasn’t much about actual lobbying by that point (pointless with the VA .gov thoroughly controlled by anti-rights Dems), sane people would call it a success. Media coverage showing gun owners to be a whole lot of nice people who don’t go on mass murder sprees.

Aesop, who has sacrificed any respect I once had for his opinions, disagrees. In his imaginary alternate universe, the rally was only peaceful because the attendees were Paul-Reubenesque sheep who passively allowed themselves to be caged, where they were protected by 2,000 cops who bravely protected them from themselves.

Bull fucking shit, Aesop. As I suggested, the vast majority of rallyers never entered the fenced area; based on several images, I figured 20% or less were inside the fence. The other 80% or so packed the perimeter blocks deep. Aside from one arrest of the Pantifa pisswit, every incipient incident I’ve seen was controlled by rallyers, not the police.

Dems being what they are, it’s unlikely this was a lobbying success (but I’ll wait to see if maybe some sense got scared into anyone). But…

The media, carefully watching for gratuitous violence to drive ratings and clicks, were forced to show peaceful assembly by a huge number of dedicated freedom lovers who tolerated even the leftie idiots trying to start shit. The media was tricked into showing gun owners as decent people who don’t start shit, but are ready — and equipped — to stop it.

Success.

If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in my tip jar. I could really use the money, what with ISP bills, and general life expenses. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)