“circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy”

I will admit to being thrilled by the archaic language of the Declaration of Independence. One of my favorite words in the Declaration – beyond that of independence – is the word perfidy.

per·fi·dy[pur-fi-dee]

noun, plural per·fi·dies.
1.
deliberate breach of faith or trust; faithlessness; treachery: perfidy that goes unpunished.
2.
an act or instance of faithlessness or treachery.

Origin:
1585–95; < Latin perfidia faithlessness, equivalent to perfid ( us ) faithless, literally, through (i.e., beyond the limits of) faith ( per- per- + fid ( ēs ) faith + -us adj. suffix) + -ia -y3

From the list of  injuries and usurpations and other sources of aggrievement submitted to a “candid world” comes this one:

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat
the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of
Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally
unworthy of the Head of a civilized nation.

Jefferson did have a way with words.

It Only Makes Sense To Me

Today is Independence Day and Tuesday, July 1st was Canada Day or, as I still call it, Dominion Day. The former celebrates our birth as a nation and the latter celebrates the British North America Act of 1867 which united the provinces of Canada (Ontario and Quebec), New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia into the Dominion of Canada within the British Empire.

Roberta X makes the very sensible suggestion of celebrating the days between July 2nd and 3rd, as Co-Dependence Days.

I’ll be excoriated for this, but the inhabitants of U.S. and Canada ought to celebrate July 2 and 3, the days between Canada Day and Independence Day, as “Co-dependence Days,” in which we consider all that we love and loathe about our neighbor. We share the longest border in the world without armies watching one another over it, about 2/3 of a common language and all manner of customs, habits and entertainments — and we share them about the same way fraternal twins between the ages of seven and twelve share the back seat of car over the course of a day-long excursion.

I’ve always liked Canada and Canadians. The country has a spectacular beauty in many places. As to the Canadian people, they are a likeable people with perhaps the sometimes exception of the Francophones in La Belle Province. Perhaps I hold a rosier view of Canadians as my first girlfriend was Canadian.

Still, I could see this joint holiday working.

Placating The Harpies

Target released a mush-mouth statement yesterday to placate the harpies at Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors. Their interim CEO John Mulligan who, by the way, has only held the job for less than 2 months, issued a Starbucks-like statement that said, in part:

As you’ve likely seen in the media, there has been a debate about whether guests in communities that permit “open carry” should be allowed to bring firearms into Target stores. Our approach has always been to follow local laws, and of course, we will continue to do so. But starting today we will also respectfully request that guests not bring firearms to Target – even in communities where it is permitted by law.

That placated the harpies who proclaimed “VICTORY” in a big banner headline on their website.

Later yesterday afternoon, a spokesperson for Target clarified the statement put out by Mulligan saying, “It is not a ban,” she said. “There is no prohibition.” In other words, nothing changes.

It’s time to remember a few things about Target. They really only care about one thing – money. They have seen sales drop for the last six quarters (oops!) and are desperate to regain their footing. They think that by placating the Shannon Watts of the world that sales might rise. What they forget is that these oh-so-trendy “moms” think Walmart is icky and don’t have any other discount chain at which to shop anyway.

The other thing to remember about Target is that they don’t give a damn about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The only parts that they care about is the First Amendment protection for commercial speech and possibly the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. The Second, Fourth, and all the rest? While they might not say it out loud especially on the eve of Independence Day, they do not care. They care about the bottom line. It’s time we remember that.

UPDATE: The Stupidity and Hypocrisy of Gun Control Advocates Facebook page nails it here. I read it earlier today and then spent an hour or so looking for it again.  Bob Owens and Tam are not far behind in their snarkiness.

I really do like Bob’s rewrite of the Target statement:

How the heck did we get caught up in this mess? All we want to do is sell cheap foreign-made stuff to hausfraus who feel they’re too good to be “people of Walmart.” We don’t want to be involved in gun rights politics at all.

But thanks to some grandstanding long-gun open carry yahoos in Texas who can’t figure out basic muzzle discipline, and the response of some shrill harpies in Indiana taking orders from a bitter under-sized billionaire in New York, we’re screwed through no fault of our own.

We really don’t want any part of this… so how can we make it all go away, so we can go back to trying to make money for our shareholders?

I know! We’ll send out a non-committal yet carefully crafted press release that sounds like it’s saying something, while we actually change nothing. The little Moms Demanding Action From Illegal Mayors group will claim victory and come back to buy zinfandel and Xanax, and the retards who never passed range safety will stop muzzling each other’s feet in our parking lots and will go back to playing Call of Duty and leave us alone.

Heck, it worked for Starbucks.

Independence Eve?

The people who brew Newcastle Brown Ale have some smart Geordies in charge of their ad campaigns. They are pushing July 3rd as a new holiday called “Independence Eve”. They also have a new hashtag campaign called #IfWeWon explaining how things would be different if the Brits had won the American Revolution.

Along with the fake holiday and hashtag campaign, Newcastle Brown Ale is releasing a series of YouTube videos. I particularly like this one contrasting the language differences between American English and British English.

Armed With Children?

Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors decided to hold a little protest at a San Antonio, Texas Target store. Jamie Addams, the San Antonio regional ambassador for the gun control group, said “they were armed with clipboards and children” but were still asked to leave.

Armed with children? Isn’t that what warlords in sub-Saharan Africa have been accused of doing with their child soldiers? Hasn’t this become an issue for UNICEF?

Rebels in Mozambique started the use of children in the early 1980s. As the New York Times notes in a story about child soldiers, they are the perfect weapon. Children are “easily manipulated, intensely loyal, fearless and, most important, in endless supply.” Could that be the reason Everytown Moms uses children as “arms”?

The real story here isn’t that the Target store manager told the Everytown Moms to move along which was nice. Rather it is the comments of the Everytown Mom’s “regional ambassador” regarding the organization’s use of children as tools in their war on civil rights. Children should not be used as tools or props or weapons.

UPDATE: The picture below is from an Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors protest outside a Target store in Pennsylvania. I count four “child warriors” in the picture with (what appears to be) a fifth on the way. Tell me that any of those kids is old enough to articulately explain why they are there and why they are protesting Target’s policy of abiding by local laws. While the Catholic Church may consider the “age of reason” to be 6 or 7, I doubt you could extrapolate that to protesting for gun control.

If I had to guess, the woman who is standing second from left is the leader of this little group. I wonder if she is being paid with Bloomberg money. Does anyone know who she is?

I Can Recommend These

Blogger and writer Marko Kloos (pronounced “close”) has two of his books featured as part of Amazon’s Kindle Daily Deals. They are Terms of Enlistment and Lines of Departure. The books are part of his Frontline series. They are $1.99 today. You can see them here.

I will admit that I’m not the biggest fan of sci-fi fiction preferring to read history and period mysteries. That said, I enjoyed reading both of these books and would highly recommend them. They feature a dystopian world where the North American Commonwealth has had to colonize space due to over-population and pollution on Earth.

If the name Marko Kloos doesn’t ring a bell, perhaps you might recognize the mythical “Major L. Caudill, USMC (Ret)” who penned the essay “Why The Gun Is Civilization”. They are one and the same. The essay itself has over 200,000 hits on Google. It even has a well-done dramatic reading on YouTube.

For Those Who Don’t The .380 Auto Isn’t Powerful Enough

If you don’t think the .380 Auto aka 9mm Browning isn’t a powerful round, show me another pistol cartridge that was used to start a world war. For it was with a FN Model 1910 chambered in .380 Auto (or 9mm Browning to be more precise) that Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife Sophie, Duchess of Hohenberg 100 years ago today in Sarajevo.

Princip did it in the name of Yugoslav nationalism. He was a Bosnian Serb. As a result of the assassination, the Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on Serbia a month to the day after the Archduke was assassinated. A few days later Germany which had declared support for Austria then declared war on Russia and the rush to war spiraled out of control. Barbara Tuchman describes this spiraling out of control in her book The Guns of August.

Princip’s FN Model 1910 is now a part of the permanent display at the Museum of Military History in Vienna, Austria. How it got there is a story unto itself.

So while the cartridge debate rages on as to which cartridge has enough power, none save the .380 Auto can say they helped start a war, let alone the War to End All Wars.

The Second Amendment Foundation Returns To North Carolina

The first case brought after the win in McDonald v. Chicago extended the Second Amendment to the states was in North Carolina. Bateman v. Perdue challenged the state’s law that restricted possession of firearms and ammunition outside the home during a state of emergency. Bateman was brought by the Second Amendment Foundation (among others) and was ultimately a win. Citizens of North Carolina are now allowed to protect themselves during states of emergency.

The Second Amendment Foundation has now returned to North Carolina to challenge the state’s restriction of  Concealed Handgun Permits to US citizens. Felicity Todd Veasey is an Australian citizen and legal permanent resident living in Butner who is married to a US citizen. Mrs. Veasey has lived in North Carolina for the last 10 years and wishes to obtain a Concealed Handgun Permit. Named as the defendant in the case is Sheriff Brindell Wilkins, Jr. in his official capacity as sheriff of Granville County. North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permits are issued by the sheriffs of the respective counties.

This case follows on the heels of winning cases challenging state restrictions of firearm permits and concealed carry permits to only citizens. Alienage is a suspect class under Constitutional precedent and the state must show a compelling governmental interest in restrictions concerning citizenship. The Second Amendment Foundation has won similar cases in Nebraska, New Mexico, Massachusetts, and elsewhere while the ACLU has brought similar winning cases in South Dakota and Kentucky.

Veasey v. Wilkins seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction against this provision as well as a declaratory judgment stating that it is unconstitutional. The case is being brought on the grounds that the provision violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and that it violates Mrs. Veasey’s rights to keep and bear arms under the 2nd and 14th Amendments. The lead attorney in the case is David Sigale of Illinois who has served as lead attorney in a number of similar cases.

You can read the Second Amendment Foundation’s release on the case here. As Alan Gottlieb of SAF notes in the release, “we seem (to)keep finding such laws on the books and we have to challenge them.”

The full complaint is located here.

UPDATE: As Sean’s comments indicate, the North Carolina General Assembly was urged to change the citizenship requirement but blew it off. Now it is going to cost the state time, effort, and money to correct their error. If they were smart, they’d fold immediately, pay SAF a reasonable amount for legal fees, and change the law.