The Stupid Is Strong In This One

We expect politicians to say stupid things. It is just the normal course of events. However, there are times when the stupid things they say just need to be pointed out.

Case in point is a Virginia legislator by the name of Joe Morrissey. Mr. Morrissey is a Democrat and represents the 74th District. This district is compromised of parts of Richmond, Henrico County, Hopewell, Charles City County, and Prince Georges County. According to his campaign biography, Delegate Morrissey is a graduate of U.Va., Georgetown Law, and Trinity College, Dublin where he obtained a Masters of Laws. In addition, he served for four years as a Commonwealth’s Attorney in Richmond. My point here is that he is a very well educated person and has front-line experience with criminal law as a Commonwealth’s Attorney.

Delegate Morrissey opposed the repeal of Virginia’s one handgun a month restriction which just passed the House of Delegates in a 66-32 vote. He made the following statement just before that vote:

“If this bill is passed, an individual can go into any gun store and buy an unlimited number of guns,” warned Del. Joseph D, Morrissey, D-Henrico moments before the vote.

“Let’s be clear what’s going to happen,” Morrissey added. “Some crack addict is going to be given half a gram of coke, he is going to be given a Virginia driver’s license…and he will go into a place and he will buy nine or 10 Glocks or 357s or whatever.…and we will return to the days where we are the gun capitol of the South.”

There are so many things wrong with this statement that I don’t even know where to begin.

I guess I will start with ATF Form 4473 where each false answer is considered an individual felony. Question 11.a asks whether the person is the actual buyer of the firearm. Then you have Question 11.e which asks if the individual is an unlawful user or addicted to a “controlled substance” which crack cocaine obviously would be.

After filling out the Form 4473, said straw-purchasing crack addict who has just committed two Federal felonies must have this purchase submitted to the FBI for the NICS check. This is assuming the dealer in question hasn’t already either refused the sale or called the cops. I would think a fake driver’s license from Virginia is going to come up as a red flag in the NICS database and the sale denied.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, multiple handgun purchases (more than one from the same dealer in any five business day period) are reported to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. A copy of Form 3310-4 is sent both to the National Tracing Center and to local law enforcement by the end of the same business day.

Finally, Richmond has been the location of a special cooperative project between the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office, the Richmond PD, ATF, the FBI, and the Virginia State Police called Project Exile. The goal of this program was to use the stiffer Federal law to prosecute criminals, felons, and drug uses in possession of a firearm. It has since been supplanted by a statewide state-run program called Virginia Exile. I find it hard to believe that any attorney in Virginia is not somewhat aware of this program and this is especially true of an anti-gun politician.

As I wrote earlier, politicians say stupid things but in this case it was really stupid. About the only people who are taken in by such rhetoric are the gun prohibitionists and other true believers.

Let’s Go To The Audio

North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue’s press secretary and her enablers in the press want to pass off her anti-democratic remarks yesterday as some sort of a joke. After listening to the audio recording of her statement, I think she was dead serious when she made that statement about postponing elections for two years.

Again, I have to question the mental capacity of any American politician who would make a statement so blatantly and obviously stupid and irresponsible as well as their fitness to remain in office.

It Isn’t Just Gun Rights Bev Wants To Suspend

In what has to be the stupidest political statement of this year or any year, Gov. Beverly Perdue (D-NC) suggested at a Rotary Meeting in Cary that the next Congressional elections be suspended for two years so that “so that Congress can focus on economic recovery and not the next election.”

Her full statement is as follows:

“You have to have more ability from Congress, I think, to work together and to get over the partisan bickering and focus on fixing things. I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that. The one good thing about Raleigh is that for so many years we worked across party lines. It’s a little bit more contentious now but it’s not impossible to try to do what’s right in this state. You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”

Chris Mackey, Perdue’s press secretary, later clarified that she meant it as a joke according to an email sent to The Daily Caller. Some joke.

While I don’t believe Gov. Perdue can be impeached as stupidity isn’t an impeachable offense according to § 123‑5 of the NC General Statutes which details the causes for impeachment, I do question her mental capacity to serve. The North Carolina Constitution speaks to that in Article III, Sec. 3 (4).

Mental incapacity. The mental incapacity of the Governor to perform the duties of his office shall be determined only by joint resolution adopted by a vote of two-thirds of all the members of each house of the General Assembly. Thereafter, the mental capacity of the Governor to perform the duties of his office shall be determined only by joint resolution adopted by a vote of a majority of all the members of each house of the General Assembly. In all cases, the General Assembly shall give the Governor such notice as it may deem proper and shall allow him an opportunity to be heard before a joint session of the General Assembly before it takes final action. When the General Assembly is not in session, the Council of State, a majority of its members concurring, may convene it in extra session for the purpose of proceeding under this paragraph.

That said, we all know the General Assembly isn’t going to a damn thing except huff and puff about it. If I were her opponent in the 2012 General Election, I would keep reminding the voters of that every chance I got so we can send the self-described “the coal miner’s daughter” back to New Bern.

Ace of Spades and Mike Vanderboegh both have some good comments on Perdue’s so-called “idea”.

UPDATE: JammieWearingFool  reports that more criminal charges are expected in an investigation of Bev’s campaign expenses. His suggestion to Bev – Maybe North Carolina’s Democrat Governor Beverly Perdue should suspend her re-election efforts while her campaign is under criminal investigation.

Or maybe she can just declare a statewide State of Emergency and suspend both elections and gun rights.

What Ever Happened To Thinking

The Chicago Public Schools have suspended Doug Bartlett, a second grade teacher at Washington Irving Elementary School, for “weapons possession” and “negligently supervising children”. From the charges you would have thought he was letting the little kids play with a loaded Glock. Instead he was doing a “show and tell” on tools for a learning module. The tools included wrenches, screwdrivers, pliers, and, horror of horrors, a 2.25 inch penknife. The children were just shown the tools and did not handle them. Mr. Bartlett stands accused of violating the school system’s zero tolerance policy. Zero tolerance policies should be renamed zero thinking policies!

Fortunately for Mr. Bartlett, his case is being taken up by The Rutherford Institute. Their press release is below:

8/24/2011

Zero Tolerance Alert: Chicago Elementary School Teacher Accused of Weapons Possession for Demonstrating Use of Tools in Classroom
CHICAGO, Ill. — In yet another instance of zero tolerance run amok, The Rutherford Institute has come to the defense of a Chicago public school teacher who is being charged with possessing, carrying, storing or using a weapon after he displayed such garden-variety tools as wrenches, pliers and screwdrivers in his classroom as part of his second grade teaching curriculum that required a “tool discussion”. Despite the fact that all potentially hazardous items were kept out of the students’ reach, school officials at Washington Irving Elementary School informed Doug Bartlett, a 17-year veteran in the classroom, that his use of the tools as visual aids endangered his students. Bartlett now faces disciplinary action and possible termination. Warning the school that disciplinary action under these circumstances could constitute a violation of Bartlett’s Fourteenth Amendment right to due process, Rutherford Institute attorneys are demanding that the school halt the disciplinary proceedings against Bartlett.

The Rutherford Institute’s letter to Washington Irving Elementary School officials in defense of Doug Bartlett is available here.

“The charges against Doug Bartlett are absurd—a gross overreaction to a simple teaching demonstration—and underscore exactly what is wrong with zero tolerance policies in the schools,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “School officials should know better than to impose such draconian punishments for innocent actions. Commonplace, basic tools such as wrenches and pliers used as part of a classroom exercise are clearly not weapons. Education truly suffers when school administrators exhibit such poor judgment and common sense.”

Doug Bartlett teaches second graders at Washington Irving Elementary School in Chicago. On August 8, 2011, Bartlett used several garden-variety tools he uses around the classroom, including wrenches, screwdrivers, a box cutter, a 2.25″ pocketknife, and pliers, as visual aids for a “tool discussion” which is required by the teaching curriculum. It is common for teachers to use such visual aids to help students retain their lessons. As he displayed the box cutter and pocketknife in particular, Bartlett specifically described the proper uses of these tools. None of the tools were made accessible to the students. When not in use, the tools are secured in a toolbox on a high shelf out of reach of the students.
However, on August 19, Bartlett received notice that he was under investigation for, among other things, “possessing, carrying, storing, or using a weapon,” and for negligently supervising children. If found at fault, Bartlett faces punishments ranging from a simple written reprimand to termination. Bartlett then turned to The Rutherford Institute for help. In coming to Bartlett’s defense, Institute attorneys point out Bartlett had no intent to use the tools as weapons. In fact, he has used some of the same tools for years without incident.

Institute attorneys are urging Valeria Newell Bryant, the principal of Washington Irving Elementary School, to immediately dismiss any and all disciplinary actions against Bartlett. “In an age where public schools face an unprecedented number of real challenges in maintaining student discipline, and addressing threats of real violence, surely no one benefits from trumped up charges where no actual ‘weapons’ violation has occurred and there is no threat whatsoever posed to any member of the school community,” stated the Institute in its letter.

Feinstein’s No Guns For Gulag Survivors Act of 2011

If one goes by the press release sent out the esteemed senior Senator from California, then any person convicted of a felony overseas for a crime that would also be a felony in the United States would not be eligible to own a firearm.

Opposition to an authoritarian state and agitating for democratic reforms is probably considered treason in countries like Cuba, the former Soviet Union, and others of their ilk. Treason is most definitely a crime in United States courts. So by Senator Feinsten’s reasoning, if you were convicted of treason and sent to the gulag for opposing a Communist state (and somehow survived), you were convicted of a felony in a foreign court thus are ineligible to own a firearm if you make it here as a political refugee.

I’m sure she and her fellow travelers would object to this example but unless she carves out an exception for political crimes then it would apply. Of course, what you have to do to be convicted of treason in the United States is not the same as what it would take in Cuba.

Feinstein: Prevent Foreign Felons From Obtaining Firearms

“Cannot continue to give foreign-convicted murderers, rapists and terrorists the right to buy firearms in the United States”

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today introduced legislation to close a loophole in current law to ensure that individuals convicted of foreign felonies and crimes—including domestic violence—cannot possess firearms in the United States.

Under current federal law, people who are convicted in the United States of violent felonies like rape, murder and terrorism are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, the law does not currently prohibit criminals convicted of these same violent crimes in foreign courts from possessing guns.

“America cannot continue to give foreign-convicted murderers, rapists and even terrorists the right to buy firearms in the United States,” said Senator Feinstein. “It makes no sense to have a law that forbids convicted Americans from possessing a firearm, but leaves the door wide open for foreign convicts to possess a firearm in our country. We must close this loophole before it is exploited by terrorists, drug gangs, and other dangerous criminals who threaten our communities.”

The No Firearms for Foreign Felons Act of 2011 would make it clear that if someone was convicted in a foreign court of an offense that would have disqualified them from possessing a gun in the United States, then they will be similarly disqualified from gun possession under American law.

This loophole for foreign convicts is the result of a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Small v. United States. In that case, the Court analyzed the 1968 Gun Control Act, which states that anyone who has been convicted of a felony “in any court” cannot possess firearms. The Court concluded the phrase only applied to American courts, despite the fact the Gun Control Act had routinely been applied to foreign felonies since 1968, the year it took effect.

As it is, many criminal offenses committed overseas including the ones that Sen. Feinstein specifies in her press release are a bar from even entering the United States legally. You cannot be given a visa for a whole host of reasons including having engaged in any terrorist activity, having been convicted of prostitution, and, of course, murder and rape. And that is just for visitors. Immigration requires an even higher bar to jump over.

Since this is the case, why introduce a bill that applies to virtually no one who is here legally? Could it be that Senator Feinstein is trying get more publicity for one of her pet causes, i.e, gun control? The multitudes of illegal aliens in her home state of California are already precluded from purchasing a firearm. In case she doesn’t realize it, that is one of the questions on the ATF Form 4473.

Sebastian at Snowflakes in Hell has more on Feinstein and “the foreign felon loophole hobby horse”.

From The Country Formerly Known As GREAT Britain

It is hard to believe nowadays that at one time the sun never set on the British Empire. In other words, that little island nation of sailors and merchants had grown into an empire that stretched around the globe. Of course it didn’t happen overnight and it certainly couldn’t have happened without men and women full of vigor and of stout courage.

They must be rolling in their graves now.

In a news report today from that nation formerly known as Great Britain comes a report that fire extinguishers are being removed from communal areas in flats (apartments buildings in American English) because they are considered a safety hazard. The hazard comes not from juvenile delinquents spraying the extinguishers in the faces of little children and old ladies. No, the hazard is that they will encourage people to use initiative and fight a fire.

The life-saving devices encourage untrained people to fight a fire rather than leave the building, risk assessors in Bournemouth decided.

There are fears that their recommendation, which has seen the extinguishers ripped out of several private, high-rise flats in the town, could set a national precedent.

Under the Fire Safety Order of 2005, fire assessments must be carried out to ‘eliminate or reduce risk as is reasonably practical’.

While private citizens have challenged this and residents are fearful of fire as a result of their removal, some are actually defending this move.

Dorset Fire and Rescue defended the move, saying: ‘Obviously, in some cases, an extinguisher could come in useful but, with new building regulations, every escape route should be completely fireproof.’

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents backed their removal because different extinguishers should be used on different types of fire.

 I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised at the creeping nanny-statism of the UK. After all, if you defend yourself against armed intruders with even a piece of wood, you’ll probably do more time than the intruder.

Rule No. 1 Violation

The Truth About Guns has a story today that will just curl your hair.

A guy in the Norfolk, VA area wins an auction on Gunbroker.com for a HK USP Compact. He has his local gunshop send the FFL to the dealer in Arizona who then ships it to Virginia.

Couple days go by and I am just sitting here waiting for a phone call to go and pick it up. When I received the call I was talking to the owner of the receiving FFL.

Supposedly the shop that shipped it, packaged it fully loaded.

When they realized this it was too late. Inadvertently the employee that was inspecting it ended up shooting himself in the hand. So now my USP is sitting in evidence and there is going to be an investigation.

So now the guy’s recently purchased pistol is now impounded as evidence because of one fool shipping a loaded handgun and one fool forgetting that all guns are loaded.

Read the whole story at the link above. It also looks like MSNBC has picked up the story from WAVY-TV in Norfolk.

Remember all guns are loaded even if you don’t think they are.

In News From The Country Formerly Known As Great Britain

A Canadian couple run afoul of airport security at Gatwick Airport recently.

It may be three inches long and made of plastic – but that didn’t stop a toy soldier’s gun being branded a “firearm” by zealous airport officials.

Ken Lloyd and his wife bought the “signaller crouching” figurine during a recent visit to the Royal Signals Museum at Blandford Garrison.

But when the box containing the figure passed through the scanning machine at Gatwick airport, security officials declared the tiny plastic rifle a “firearm”.

 Mrs. Lloyd eventually had to ship the 3-inch toy gun home by mail. However, before she could do that, the Royal Mail insisted that it be scanned by the X-ray machine. The Lloyds did receive the figurine’s SA80 rifle about 5 days after they returned home to Canada.

If these security officials ever get tired of working in the UK, I’m sure TSA has a place just waiting for them!

H/T Cam Edwards