Friday, January 25, 2013

Fort Drum brass destruction threatens reloading supply and more


 Without this, a freedom utility rifle is just an expensive club, something the Obama administration and its allies have made no secret of preferring.

A report received yesterday by Gun Rights Examiner indicates at least one military installation is still destroying expended ammunition brass, despite a furor raised in the gun community a few years back that resulted in two senators intervening to stop the practice and allow for its resale for reloading. The Dec. 2012 Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan for Fort Drum, N.Y., marked “Revision 1,” describes its policy for brass and expended munitions as part of its installation recycling program, which includes rendering expended ammunition brass unsuitable for anything but scrap.

“Brass from expended ammunition/munitions is recycled,” the report advises. “Expended munitions must be free of any explosive hazard or residue and be crushed, shredded or otherwise destroyed prior to public sale.

“At Fort Drum, brass from expended ammunition is processed through a brass deformer machine located at the transfer station,” the description continues. “The deformed brass is purchased by a scrap metal vendor who reports the weighed amount to the QRP [Qualified Recycling Program] Manager. The proceeds from the sale of the scrap metal are deposited into the designated QRP account.”

This is a reversal of an understanding given to Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester after they wrote a letter expressing legal concerns to the Defense Logistics Agency in 2010.

More @ Examiner

Federal Judge Rules that ICE Agents have Standing in Lawsuit Against Federal Government

Via dixieconvert

Federal District Court Judge Reed O'Conner has ruled that 10 ICE agents and officers have standing to challenge in Federal court the so-called Morton Memo on prosecutorial discretion and the DREAM directive on deferred action. The agents filed their complaint in October, charging that unconstitutional and illegal directives from DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE Director John Morton order the agents to violate federal laws or face adverse employment actions. This is a major first step for the ICE agents in their case against the administration.

In his 35-page decision, Judge O'Conner found that the ICE agents and officers have standing, but that the State of Mississippi does not. He has not yet ruled, however, on the agents' motion for a preliminary injunction to halt implementation of the DHS directives.

The primary impetus for the lawsuit came last June, when Secretary Napolitano issued a memo offering deferred action and employment authorization to illegal aliens under age 31 who meet certain criteria similar to those outlined in the DREAM Act, which has failed to pass Congress on three occasions.

More @ Numbers USA

Rand Paul on the Life at Conception Act

Via Timothy

Rand Paul: Stop "Card Check"

Via Timothy


After spending an estimated $1 BILLION to re-elect Barack Obama and mainatin control of the U.S. Senate, the union bosses expect PAYBACK.

And they're wasting no time demanding passage of the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill as payback.

If "Card Check" passes, it will strip workers of the secret ballot so union thugs can intimidate workers one-on-one -- or three-on-one -- into signing so-called "union authorization cards."

That's why it's vital you sign the petition below DEMANDING your Congressman and Senators OPPOSE Big Labor's Card Check Forced Unionism Bill.  When you sign your ZIP CODE, your petitions will be directed to the appropriate Representative and Senators.

After signing the petition, I hope you will agree to contribute to the National Right to Work Committee to moblize more Americans to defeat Card Check Forced Unionism.

California Councilwoman: You Can Be Shot By An Unloaded Gun

Feds: Colorado man made bombs, wanted to trade them for cocaine

Via Tom Stedham

 A Colorado man who lived near a park crafted explosives he claimed could kill everyone within 20 meters, hoping to trade the bombs and other weapons for cocaine or cash, authorities said.

Special agents with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives arrested Richard Sandberg, 35, on Thursday morning as he was heading to work, said Jeffrey Dorschner, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Colorado.

In the afternoon, he appeared in federal court, where he was ordered held without bond until at least a detention hearing Tuesday.

His arrest followed an undercover sting that revealed the suspect had an arsenal of "homemade" improvised explosive devices and military-grade grenades in his suburban Denver home, according to an affidavit filed by an ATF agent in federal court.

The investigation began a week ago, when a Denver police detective alerted an ATF agent about a claim from a "reliable" informant.

The informant had gone to Sandberg's house and saw "numerous hand firearms and hand grenades" the suspect "wanted to trade ... for cocaine," according to the affidavit.

That night, an undercover ATF agent talked over the phone with Sandberg, who said he was a former member of a Marine special operations unit.

He claimed to have 18 M67 grenades -- which are available only in the military -- that he said he'd sell for $300 each, the ATF agent wrote.

According to the affidavit, Sandberg said he'd built some explosive devices with items available at hardware stores. He said you'd need a "formula" to know how to make them blow up -- and they had a "kill zone" of 20 meters and a "hurt zone" of 60 meters.

More @ CNN

"A lot of folks want to wear the beret, but only a few want to carry the rucksack."

Via Carl

Colonel AJ 'Bo' Baker as a Captain

Rahm Emanuel: You never want a serious crisis to go to waste

Via Ryan

College student identified as southside Savannah homicide victim

Ryan's cousin

 Rebecca Foley

A 21-year-old Savannah college student was shot to death in her car outside her southside apartment complex Monday evening.

Savannah-Chatham police investigators Tuesday identified the victim of the city’s first reported murder in 2013 as Rebecca Lorraine Foley, said police spokesman Julian Miller.

Foley, a student at Savannah State University, was inside her Volkswagen Beetle near her residence at Colonial Village at Marsh Cove off White Bluff Road when she was fatally shot about 7 p.m., Miller said. He indicated Monday evening officers had found her on the ground outside the vehicle but they were uncertain how she got there.

Police released no other information, but Miller said violent crimes detectives Tuesday were continuing to investigate the shooting and were working to identify anyone who may have been in the area when it occurred.

Foley had moved to Savannah from Summerville to attend college, said Mitchell Bush, her employer for nearly two years at the Bush Insurance Agency.

Bush described her as a happy person who was trying to find her life’s calling.
“She was a sweet, lovely child,” Bush said. “She had a gorgeous smile that you’ll never forget. She was just a very bright, hard working, focused person who got along with everyone.

“I’ve never known her to have any problems, you know. Why someone would take her life is just beyond comprehension.”

Court: Obama Appointments Are Unconstitutional


President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.

The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions.

The ruling also throws into question Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray's appointment, also made under the recess circumstance, has been challenged in a separate case.

Obama claims he acted properly in the case of the NLRB appointments because the Senate was away for the holidays on a 20-day recess. But the three-judge panel ruled that the Senate technically stayed in session when it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called "pro forma" sessions.

GOP lawmakers used the tactic — as Democrats have in the past as well — to specifically to prevent the president from using his recess power. GOP lawmakers contend the labor board has been too pro-union in its decisions. They had also vigorously opposed the nomination of Cordray.

The Obama administration is expected to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, but if it stands, it means hundreds of decisions issued by the board over more than a year are invalid. It also would leave the five-member labor board with just one validly appointed member, effectively shutting it down. The board is allowed to issue decisions only when it has at least three sitting members.

More @ Newsmax

Dem Rep: Women should serve in combat, but shouldn’t use assault weapons

Via NC Links


Another brilliant statement from a gun expert........

On the very same day that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta lifted the ban on women serving in active combat zones, a Democratic congresswoman from New York argued that assault weapons are actually difficult for women to handle and should therefore be banned.

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy — a strong proponent for women serving in military combat roles — appeared on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight Thursday to make the case for Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s assault weapons ban.  To that end, McCarthy argued that women should use traditional rifles rather than assault rifles because the former would would be “easier for a woman” to use. 

More @ The Blaze

Reviewers screw with Obama's drone toy

Via Ryan

 Maisto Fresh Metal Tailwinds 1:97 Scale Die Cast United States Military Aircraft - US Air Force Medium Altitude, Long Endurance, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) RQ-1 Predator with Display Stand (Dimension: 6" x 3-1/2" x 1")

 This is the best toy ever. Finally, I can pretend that I'm a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize!
It's like I'm sitting right there in the White House with my very own kill list!

 My son is very interested in joining the Imperial forces when he grows up. He says he's not sure if he wants to help police the homeland or if he wants to invade foreign countries. So I thought a new Predator drone toy would be a nice gift for him. These drones are used both domestically and internationally, to spy on people and assassinate them at the Emperor's discretion. He just loves flying his drone around our house, dropping Hellfire missiles on Scruffy, our dog. He kept saying that Scruffy was a terror suspect and needed to be taken out. I asked him if Scruffy should get a trial first, and he quoted Lindsay Graham, Imperial Senator: "Shut up Scruffy, you don't get a trial!" I was so proud. I think I'll buy him some video games that promote martial law for Christmas.

 You've had a busy play day - You've wiretapped Mom's cell phone and e-mail without a warrant, you've indefinitely detained your little brother Timmy in the linen closet without trial, and you've confiscated all the Super-Soakers from the neighborhood children (after all, why does any kid - besides you, of course - even NEED a Super-Soaker for self-defense? A regular water pistol should be enough). What do you do for an encore?

That's where the US Air Force Medium Altitude, Long Endurance, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) RQ-1 Predator from Maisto comes in. Let's say that Dad has been labeled a terrorist in secret through your disposition matrix. Rather than just arrest him and go through the hassle of trying and convicting him in a court of law, and having to fool with all those terrorist-loving Constitutional protections, you can just use one of these flying death robots to assassinate him! Remember, due process and oversight are for sissies. Plus, you get the added bonus of taking out potential terrorists before they've even done anything - estimates have determined that you can kill up to 49 potential future terrorists of any age for every confirmed terrorist you kill, and with the innovative 'double-tap' option, you can even kill a few terrorist first responders, preventing them from committing terrorist acts like helping the wounded and rescuing survivors trapped in the rubble. Don't let Dad get away with anti-American activities! Show him who's boss, whether he's at a wedding, a funeral, or just having his morning coffee. Sow fear and carnage in your wake! Win a Nobel Peace Prize and be declared Time Magazine's Person of the Year - Twice!

This goes well with the Maisto Extraordinary Rendition playset, by the way - which gives you all the tools you need to kidnap the family pet and take him for interrogation at a neighbor's house, where the rules of the Geneva Convention may not apply. Loads of fun!

More @ Amazon


Via Ninety Miles From Tyranny


Via Ninety Miles From Tyranny

Unsavory Prelude to Preserving Lee’s Arlington

  General George Washington Custis Lee

Mary Anna Custis was the only surviving child of George Washington Parke Custis, George Washington’s step-grandson and adopted son and founder of Arlington, and Mary Lee Fitzhugh Custis. One of Mary’s early suitors was Sam Houston, and husband Robert E. Lee was the son of Col. Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee and nephew of Richard Henry Lee, the signer of the Declaration of Independence who wrote the famous sentence, “That these Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States.” Lincoln’s military seized their home, Arlington, for remaining loyal to their State.

Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"

Unsavory Prelude to Preserving Lee’s Arlington:

“Following closely the model offered by the Mount Vernon movement, preservationists in the South attempted to make museums out of buildings associated with famous men. The first important post-Mount Vernon preservation in the South was “Arlington,” sometimes called the Lee Mansion. Instead of being the focal point of a [historic] preservation drive, this building was really a spoil of war.

In May of 1861, shortly after the last private owner, Robert E. Lee, had cast his lot with the South, federal troops occupied the mansion and the grounds. An old friend of the Lees used the house as his headquarters, apparently hoping to protect some of the Lee furnishings that remained. Within a year the building became a residence for other Union officers and their families.

Murray Nelligan, historian of Arlington Mansion, believes that Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton determined that the Lee family should never occupy their home again. He placed a hospital on the grounds, along with a freedmen’s village for Negro refugees from the South. Not stopping there, he had a tax levied on the property which required payment by the owner in person. A relative of Mrs. Lee offered to pay the tax, but the authorities decided that such a procedure did not fulfill the letter of the law, so the estate was put up for sale at public auction on January 11, 1864, in Alexandria, Virginia.

Bidding was anything but spirited, because many people suspected that the confiscation and the sale of the mansion might be illegal. The direct tax that had been levied on the Lees might be declared unconstitutional, or the tax commission might later be found guilty of rejecting payment by a relative. Once the sale had ended, the title given to the government might have been considered invalid because the Lees had not been paid the balance of the purchase price.

In spite of these uncertainties, the government was the highest bidder and paid itself $26,800 for the property. Even the sale did not satisfy Stanton’s resolve that the property should never fall into the hands of the Lee family again. Through his urging, a national cemetery was established on the grounds in May of 1864. General [Montgomery] Meigs, representing the War Department, made sure that some graves were located near the house itself.

Mrs. Lee, now a widow, petitioned Congress in 1872 for some form of compensation for the loss of her estate. Her effort failed, but a few years later a new figure took up the battle for control of Arlington. General George Washington Custis Lee, son of Robert E. Lee, tried another line of attack. In April of 1874 he argued that his claim to Arlington was a just one, and then he offered to convey the estate to Congress in return for a fair settlement. Congress did not need to reply to his offer, for possession was indeed nine-tenths of the law. Lee’s friends persuaded him to turn to the judiciary.

The Arlington case moved up through the courts, reaching the Supreme Court in the 1880’s. On December 4, 1882, the Supreme Court decided that George W.C. Lee was the rightful owner of Arlington and that the United States Government had been trespassing. Fortunately, Lee was still willing to settle for a fair price, rather than to force the government to move Arlington National Cemetery!

Congress hastily appropriated $150,000 to pay General Lee for the property; and on the fourteenth of May, 1883, twenty-two years after the Union Army had seized it, the federal government acquired undisputed title to Arlington.

Further proof that the federal “preservation” of Arlington had been an act of revenge was the fact that the first real attempt to furnish and restore the mansion did not come until 1921. Not until 1924 did Congress pass a bill authorizing restoration of the house as it had been at the time of the Lee occupancy. Thus, largely by accident, and for an unsavory purpose, the federal government came to own its first historic house.

(Presence of the Past, A History of the Preservation Movement in the United States Before Williamsburg, Charles B. Hosmer, Jr., G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1965, pp. 63-65)

Filibuster Deal Restricts Senators’ Rights to Debate Judicial Nominees

 Needs to go

This afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced a potential filibuster deal that, among other problematic provisions, limits post-cloture debate on federal district court nominees (and non-Cabinet-level officials).

Senators currently have up to 30 hours of post-cloture debate on the merits of a district court nominee; the new rule would permit only two hours. This proposal would seriously undermine the rights of sitting senators to call attention to problematic district court nominees and, as a consequence, would enable the President to make more philosophically questionable and professionally unqualified nominations in the future.

Providing advice and consent to judicial nominees are critical, constitutionally-enumerated responsibilities of U.S. senators. Those confirmed to a federal judgeship retain their job during “good behavior” (virtually for life), and can only be removed by House impeachment and Senate conviction with a 2/3 vote. If the merits of a cabinet secretary are worthy of 30-hours of debate, then any judge appointed for life should be also.

More @ The Foundry

County in Indiana plans to fight possible gun control restrictions


Number Of Nation's Sheriffs Refusing To Enforce Unconstitutional Gun Laws Snowballs

From Florida to California, a growing number of the nation's sheriffs are standing up to gun control measures proposed by both the administration and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
Many law enforcement officials have written letters to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden voicing their concerns over what they believe is an effort to infringe upon the Second Amendment.
In New Mexico, 30 of the state's 33 county sheriffs have reminded state lawmakers that they are under oath to support the U.S. Constitution, and that includes the Second Amendment. previously reported that 28 of the 29 sheriff's in Utah sent a letter to President Obama stating that they will not enforce any new gun laws they believe to be unconstitutional.
A host of Oregon sheriffs have said that they will not comply with any new unconstitutional gun regulations:
Sheriff Craig Zanni wrote, "I have and will continue to uphold my Oath of Office including supporting the Second Amendment," in a letter to Coos County citizens.
Douglas County Sheriff John Hanlin said he would refuse to enforce any new Federal gun law he believes is unconstitutional.'


Comment by gowngup on GNRC's Guide To Candidate's Views On Guns 

"Senator Kinnaird:

Please diligently help to stop all legislation banning weapons of any type including high capacity magazines and assault weapons, and any management of ammunition. The move that the president and other colleagues of yours to push the ban through as quickly as possible is a clear attack on our 2nd amendment and the constitution!

Jay Anderson

Picture of Eleanor  Kinnaird
 Useful idiot

Thank you for your message against gun controls. I appreciate the information you provided. My objection is that there are virtually no controls on the millions of guns that get into the wrong hands - kids in city ghettos who have no moral standards and respond to impulse and bad environments. Or guns in homes where they are accessible to children who shoot them by accident, or even use them on their own family members; accidents in which adults shoot children, or use them to kill children, or the easy killing by suicide with guns. In countries where guns are not available to the general population, there are very, very few such tragedies. Just look at the statistics. The greatest number of gun violence is not from mass shootings by mentally ill people, but just the sheer numbers of carelessly or malevolently used guns.

As to the Second Amendment. I believe that was wrongly decided by the U. S. Supreme Court. First, it overturned 100 years of gun decisions that it is not a personal right to bear arms, but only a right of the Militia, which is a military branch -- along with the land and naval forces. I cite the following: Article I, Section 8, 15. "The Congress shall have power: . .. To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions"; Section 8, 16. "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, . . .according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."

This is in the same section as Congress' authority over the army and navy.
Amendment V: ". . . except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia when in actual service . . . "

Finally, is the Supreme Court ever wrong? Yes and in big ways. It upheld slavery in the Dred Scott decision, and in Plessy v. Ferguson it enshrined segregation.

Senator Eleanor Kinnaird



Picture on the fridge

Via Teresa Sue

My hunting rifle and Katyn forest.


"Maybe they ought to re-think that whole concept of not being afraid of the hunting rifles."

I own many rifles, but I only hunt with one of them. Feinstein's latest effort to disarm Americans would ban it. It would ban that entire shape of rifle (bullpup) as well as that entire category (semi-auto with a box magazine). So the whole claim that hunters are unaffected is a lie.
I own many rifles, but only one of them is my choice for home defense. It's the same rifle - there's no time to re-learn different controls under stress. I hunt once a year, but self-defense is a full-time need. So the same proposed legislation would also rob me of that. Classy.
How did we ever get the "compassionate liberals who love nature" to take the view that hunting is OK in general? Hunting for food has been largely regulated out of existence, but they claim to approve of hunting for fun. "Your hunting rifle is safe," they said. How did a recreational activity become more important than saving human lives from predators?
We all know that hunting rifles are offensive devices. With them, we can bring down an animal from a distance. All the high-profile assassinations of the 20th century done with long guns were effected with the common hunting rifles or nearly identical military surplus bolt actions. So we know the congressional creatures who want us disarmed are more worried about weaker, shorter range but faster handling defensive arms. In other words, they don't expect Americans to take the initiative and go after them personally with a bolt 30-06 or a lever 30-30, but they do want us stripped with the ARs and AKs suitable for fending off freelance or government criminals. They view us as prey and themselves as meta-predators.
Politicians are by and large meta-predators. Many of them do not rape, rob or murder with their own hands but send others to do it for them. Gun control is the main way to make their minions more effective at subjugating the population. They aren't worried about the population taking the fight to them. They haven't been very wrong so far.
If they do succeed in disarming America, we would have a short window of opportunity to even the score. That would require bypassing all the enforcement organizations and going directly after those who give the orders. Maybe they ought to re-think that whole concept of not being afraid of the hunting rifles.
And maybe we should re-think the theory that we can give up our defensive arms and survive. The threat to the enemy isn't the guns themselves but the trained and motivated people who know how to use them. Enough of the weapons will remain in circulation for retaliatory action, and their motivation would have been supplied by the actions of the disarmers of people themselves. At that point, it would matter little if an AR or a single shot break action or a box with ANFO gets used - people who wish to make a point usually find a way. So the threat to them aren't the horns or hooves of the uppity citizens but their determination to remain independent. That puts us at much higher right Risk After the confiscation of the Firearms and Fighting Makes a Choice safer than complying. Katyn Is not just a village West of Smolensk.
PS: Australia Provides us with Another Glimpse of the Endgame: an Effort to Ban even single shot Rifles . (I did verify the data on Infowars site and found it correct.)