What are your plans/goals/resolutions for 2009?

New Years Resolutions… | The Noble view

Ok, this is just too stupid NOT to share...

Cops: Man tries to pay for meal with pot - Criminal weirdness- msnbc.com

Add to all of this the legislation that is being put forward to "Serialize" and/or "MicroStamp" ammunition in several states.

These legislative moves are designed to remove ammunition from legal and licensed weapons holders, and make home reloading illegal. It would also require those who own ammunition that is NOT serialized, to destroy it at their own cost, and loss.

Not only would these impending laws remove sport shooting from our country, due to the fact that ammunition would then be "regulated" and therefore more expensive to obtain, but it would not allow the competition shooters to reload their own ammunition to save money. Lastly there would be an amazing shortage of ammunition for the general populous, the police forces, and the military.

Check the list below to see if your state is pursuing this legislation...

As of today's date the following States have put forth this legislation:

Arizona House Bill 2833
California Senate Bill 997 (Carried Over from 2007)
Hawaii House Bill 2392
Hawaii Senate Bill 2020
Hawaii Senate Bill 2076
Hawaii House Resolution 82-07 (Carried Over from 2007)
Hawaii Concurrent Resolution 104-06 (Carried Over from 2007)
Illinois House Bill 4258
Illinois House Bill 4259
Illinois House Bill 4269
Illinois House Bill 4349
Illinois Senate Bill 1095 (Carried Over from 2007)
Indiana House Bill 1260
Maryland House Bill 517
Mississippi Senate Bill 2286
New York House Bill 6920 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York House Bill 7300 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Senate Bill 1177 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Senate Bill 3731 (Carried Over from 2007)
Pennsylvania House Bill
Tennessee House Bill 3245
Tennessee Senate Bill 3395
Washington House Bill 3359

2007 Legislation
California Senate Bill 997
Hawaii House Resolution 82-07
Hawaii Concurrent Resolution 104-06
Illinois Senate Bill 1095
Maryland House Bill 1393
New York House Bill 6920
New York House Bill 7300
New York Senate Bill 1177
New York Senate Bill 3731

Courtesy: GOAL Post 2008-4, Legislative Update from Olympia 8 February 2008

RE: Supreme Court upholds 2nd Amendment [PDF]

Decius wrote:

Arnold has failed to distinguish how the search of his laptop and its electronic contents is logically any different from the suspicionless border searches of travelers’ luggage that the Supreme Court and we have allowed.

Its clear that there is a difference. The court may decide that the difference is not constitutionally significant, but it is not helpful for the court to pretend that no difference exists. This is a sort of ignorance that allows the court to reach a comfortable decision without addressing the substantive question...

My rant on today's decision.

See the related article on SecurityFocus:

http://www.securityfocus.com/print/columnists/469

RE: Re: The Volokh Conspiracy - Ninth Circuit Allows Suspicionless Computer Searches at the Border:

Never before has the court system faced a situation wherein people are regularly transporting all of their worldly information with them every time they cross a border. That is not just like luggage. It is a fundamentally different situation, and the court ought to address it specifically, and explain why searches of all of this information are presumptively reasonable.

The Washington Post has already reported on corporations that have instructed their employees in response to this policy to maintain a special "travel laptop" which is not their normal computer, and is just like luggage, in that the information copied on to it prior to travel is only the information required on that trip. It seems perverse that in a "free society" people would be forced to go to the trouble of keeping a special laptop on which they place carefully selected scraps of information for no other reason than so that they can bring it through a legal black hole in which they are subject to nearly unconstrained searches.

The 4th amendment is intended to avoid creating situations wherein normal people have to act like criminals out of fear that a government fishing expedition will root through their property and all of their correspondence and find some reason to hang them. That is precisely what this policy does, and that is precisely why I think that these searches are not reasonable. The court system might disagree, but it is not responsible for them to do so without giving the matter due examination.

Note the "The Washington Post has already reported on corporations that have instructed their employees in response to this policy to maintain a special "travel laptop" which is not their normal computer, and is just like luggage, in that the information copied on to it prior to travel is only the information required on that trip."

I can't wait to see the business community weigh in on these added costs to keep their corporate data private, away from the prying eyes of the federal government.

Re: The Volokh Conspiracy - Ninth Circuit Allows Suspicionless Computer Searches at the Border:

Why most suicide bombers are Muslim, beautiful people have more daughters, humans are naturally polygamous, sexual harassment isn't sexist, and blonds are more attractive.

As seen from Slashdot... just thought I'd crosspost...

Psychology Today: Ten Politically Incorrect Truths About Human Nature

unmanaged wrote:

June 21, 2007

Dear Mr. Groce,

Thank you for taking the time to contact my office to share your concerns about S. 1105, the upcoming hate crimes legislation. Your input is important to me, and I appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts.

As you know, S.1105 was introduced in the Senate on April 12, 2007. This bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. If S. 1105 should come before the Senate for a vote, I will not support it.

Thank you again for your letter. I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me over the next six years.

Sincerely,

Bob Corker
United States Senator

Seems to me that these 2 day a week, piles of puke dont have the best interests our country in mind. Looks like another person who supports violence and inequality, FYI Republican Party...

Sorry, I'm not a republican, but having just finished reading the text of the proposed law, doesn't really do anything to help, but would instead enable lawyers to continue to make new defenses for "perceived" offenses under the law. I actually agree that this law is poorly written, and should NOT be passed.

Read it for yourself here: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h1592_rfs.xml

We don't need more laws for hate crimes, we need the death penalty back. If you kill someone, REGARDLESS of the reason, you should die too, and do it with Texas's motto, with an express lane.

If you think about murder, what part of it isn't a hate crime? We already have this covered, no?

RE: Corker FUD on Matthew Shepard Act...

OMG...

In my own "backyard" as it were...

Yeah lady... like that's the reason we have school shootings... You and your damned "witch hunts"... literally...

'Ban Harry Potter or face more school shootings' | the Daily Mail

Decius wrote:

"Talking" CCTV cameras that tell off people dropping litter or committing anti-social behaviour are to be extended to 20 areas across England.

They are already used in Middlesbrough where people seen misbehaving can be told to stop via a loudspeaker, controlled by control centre staff.

About 500,000lbs/sterling will be spent adding speaker facilities to existing cameras.

Shadow home affairs minister James Brokenshire said the government should be "very careful" over the cameras.

Just when I think my country is driving over a precipice jolly old England is there to remind me that it could be a hell of a lot worse. Thanks, guys.

Without a doubt, the dumbest waste of money I've seen in quite a long time... Instead of actually having people be responsible, Great Britain is going to badger people into throwing things away... for over $1 Million Dollars? hell, hire the homeless to badger them to give up their trash, so they have some paper for insulation, and cans to collect for recycling... oh, and give them the $$ too...

RE: BBC NEWS | UK | England | 'Talking' CCTV scolds offenders

Palindrome wrote:

Gov. Charlie Crist persuaded Florida’s clemency board Thursday to let most felons easily regain their voting rights after prison, saying it was time to leave the “offensive minority” of states that uniformly deny ex-offenders such rights.

The change is a major step for Florida, which bans more people from the polls than any other state, but it did not go as far as Mr. Crist had hoped. Two of his fellow Republicans on the clemency board rejected his original plan to grant speedy restoration to everyone except murderers and sex criminals.

Under the new rules, the roughly 80 percent of ex-offenders whose crimes were not considered violent will win automatic rights restoration after the state makes sure they have paid any restitution to victims and have no pending criminal charges.

Florida has as many as 950,000 disenfranchised ex-offenders — far more than any other state — the vast majority black. Other states have repealed or scaled back similar bans in recent years, but roughly five million felons remain barred from the polls nationwide.

So, let's change everything, and let criminals help guide the legislation... what a great idea.

I think that a felon that has stayed out of jail for 7 years, without re-offending should have their rights granted them, but if they continue to offend, they shouldn't get any rights... when you break the laws, you shouldn't get the ability to change the laws... that's a bit of the wolf watching the hen-house.

RE: Florida May Let Felons Vote