For The Record

I try to stay civil about most things.

Unlike my more demented detractors (you know who you are), I try to argue issues, not personalities.

So with that in mind, some take umbrage when I call the sides in the gun control debate “Real Americans” and “orcs”.  It’s really fairly simple; either you support the Bill of Rights, all ten Amendments of it, the Second and Tenth along with the First and Fourth, at the very least in terms of their intent, or you might as well be a North Korean kommissar.

Anyway – the Minnesota State Senate yesterday voted on a resolution upholding the Second Amendment.

And the DFL voted against it – voted against the Second Amendment – on a straight line party vote.

What this means is that the Senate DFL wants you to know that “we’re not coming for your hunting rifles and shotguns – yet.  We just want to leave our options open”.

This photo needs to be sent to every outstate, exurban and second-tier suburban household in districts with DFL Senators.  To the DFL, the Constitution is just a series of means to their ends, and “liberty” is a quaint hindrance.

18 thoughts on “For The Record

  1. As despicable as they are, do not forget that they are accurately representing the people that voted for them. They are the face of the faceless barbarian mob. These barbarians say they *love* America, but in fact what they love is the freedom to destroy America as we know it, and wish to replace it with a 21st century version of Gomorrah…with bicycle trails and latte.

    These are the people that have inserted perversion into the government school curriculum, and hired perverts to teach it to the kids; these are the people that support and participate in the butchery of children, and these are the people that facilitate the fraud necessary to tip the poll count in their direction.

    I congratulate Mitch on his ability to remain civil with these people, and gracefully allow them to soil his blog with their stupidity and filth. I hope he understands, just a little more than before, why many of us can’t and don’t.

  2. Oh, I totally understand, Swiftee. The idea of moving to Texas gets more seductive every day.

    But bailing isn’t an option at the moment. So fighting back is my only choice.

    do not forget that they are accurately representing the people that voted for them

    In the Metro? Maybe. For now.

    Outstate? This is going to cost them, if I have anything to say about it.

  3. I posted this pic on FB yesterday, and Marianne Stebbins commented “Dumb question, but do they take an oath to uphold the US constitution, or just the state constitution?”

    The answer is: Both.

    Sec. 8. Oath of office.

    Each member and officer of the legislature before entering upon his duties shall take an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state, and to discharge faithfully the duties of his office to the best of his judgment and ability.

    As does the governor:

    Sec. 6. Oath of office of state officers.

    Each officer created by this article before entering upon his duties shall take an oath or affirmation to support the constitution of the United States and of this state and to discharge faithfully the duties of his office to the best of his judgment and ability.

    Every single DFL senator violated their oath of office with that vote, and it’s on record forever.

    A few weeks ago, on the morning talk show on the OTHER talk station, Rep David Dill (D-03 (iron range)) said he would absolutely vote no on any gun control bills that came to a vote in the house, and he had personally received guarantees from 3 other DFL iron range reps that they would as well. In light of this vote from the senate, I am now of the opinion “I’ll believe it when I see it”.

  4. I’m sure that those so inclined were swayed by the old bearded law professor who pretty much dismissed the Second Amendment yesterday at the capitol, and took a bathroom break when Joe Olson briefly spoke his piece.

    Their beard seemed to think that the Second Amendment did not apply, particularly to “commerce” related to firearms, which I assume, meant to him the exchange of firearms between non-FFL holders (which is already regulated). A great set-up for background checks …

    Mike Freeman also seemed quite interested in “felons” possessing firearms, and juveniles possessing handguns and “assault weapons” although there are major exceptions to those provisions. Overheard in the hallway, he was quite animated about a “North Dakota Model” which seemed to relate to whatever he is up to.

    Glad I went, wish I could have stayed longer.

  5. I emailed my Metrocrat senator. Her response? “I voted to have the Senate abide by its own rules and have the resolution 339 heard in committee. We should not minimize the importance of such issues to folks like yourself by bypassing our orderly process.”
    Yea, I’m sure that “Respect Roe v. Wade” resolution will get a thorough review a in committee, too, before getting a “real” vote.

  6. “This is going to cost them, if I have anything to say about it.”

    They’re going to be shocked at the number that will have something to say about it. I guess they’re just blind to the huge number of 2A folks that have been showing up at their hearings.

    A pox on all their houses!!!

  7. NW, Regarding the camel, how about “kill it, and grill it”!

    “ The flesh of the camel is dry and hard, but not unpalatable. … In Barbary, the tongues are salted and smoked for exportation to Italy and other countries, and they form a very good dish.” – The Curiosities of Food – by Peter Lund Simmons

  8. Scott, you’ve got it slightly wrong. They’re not blind to all the 2A folks that have showed up to the committee meetings and hearings.

    They just don’t care.

    Now that they have congress and the governor’s office, they are going to ram EVERYTHING thru that they can get before 2014.

    We just have to hope that the rural outstate DFLers value their elected office more than the agenda. If they don’t and all this stuff passes, we have to hope the GOP can get back in power and undo these laws.

    I’m not holding my breath on either count.

  9. They love this country! And they are moderates!
    But there is nothing about America that they do not wish to change, from its borders, through its constitution, to its ethnic makeup.
    Other than those things, and a few million more, they love America!

  10. I suspect that you’re right. The only time gun control would have a chance to pass is if something like Newtown happened in October of an election year.

    But even if they did do a suicide mission, it wouldn’t matter anyway since it wouldn’t pass the House. The best case and really the only possible scenario in the current legislative climate is to get a mild agreement for universal background checks and shared gun databases.

  11. The ‘universal background checks’ can have a lot of leverage, Emery.
    If transfer is verboten if the background check says ‘no’, or can’t be obtained in a reasonable amount of time, you have essentially given the Feds a veto over non-FFL weapons transfers.
    And of course the Feds have an incredible amount of power over FFL holders. They might, say, insist that the Feds have a right to a warrantless search of an FFL holder’s property, not just annually, but whenever they decide to do it, as often as they decide to do it. That would drive a lot of casual FFL hobbyists/small businessmen to give up their licenses.

  12. I tried the oath of office and rule of law arguments on “e-Democracy” concerning St. Paul’s sanctuary city ordinance.

    They don’t care.

  13. @[redacted]:
    Are you serving cheese with that whine?


    Mitch adds: Emery, there are not a few people in this forum who, for one reason or another, asked to remain pseudonymous. Others – like you – write under pseudonyms without having asked. Fact is that if I could go back and start over, I’d do this blog pseudonymously; the left if full of depraved rage-addicts with dismal senses of proportion and consequence.

    I’ve respected the wishes of those who ask to remain pseudonymous – everyone from “Dog Gone” to “Nachman”. I have two conditions: I won’t take any abuse (and as you’ve seen, I have a pretty lenient definition of “abuse” – very unlike leftybloggers from “Bluestem Prairie” to “Penigma”, who censor their comment sections very tightly), and I won’t fight subpoenas arising from other peoples’ behavior.

    Got a bone to pick with Nachman? Pick it elsewhere.

    That is all.

  14. If only a conservative Bloomberg type could finance an informational TV ad in the 218 area code viewing audience. Probably out of a Duluth station.

    Name the office holders and show their anti Second Amendment vote, then provide a bit of an overview of the issue. Many of these candidates, particularly in the northern reaches, have never experienced this and conduct business as usual, year-in year-out. It would really shake them in a way they’re not used to.

    As well as provide a public service to the voters who typically aren’t too involved.

    Easily said, I guess …

  15. Joe’s right, Saxhaug, for instance, would have a profoundly uncomfortable time explaining his vote to Itasca county – but currently the media up there very effectively runs interference for him.

  16. /I have a pretty lenient definition of “abuse”/

    So true.
    One only has to read the comments of Tom Swift in order to appreciate the truth of your statement. I had to use Google to get a ‘better’ appreciation of who ‘swiftee’ really is. I wasn’t disappointed

    Quite frankly, the ‘truthiness’ of many of the claims made here by you or your commenters is more opinion than fact. I don’t believe you have anything to worry about on the legal front, but I suppose it suits your purpose as a nice straw-man

    Mr. Krasnoff makes similar comments elsewhere. Perhaps he should “try” a little harder to be more anonymous if that is his goal…..

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.