Once there is someone who actually understands individual liberty in the White House, and enough willing critters in the Senate, I propose lobbying for a new head of the ATF: Alan Gura.

In the nearly three years since I started this blog (though I’ll forgive my three readers if they think I forgot I had a blog), this is probably my first non-political post.

I recently bought an official Gunwalker T-shirt from Sean and just happened to receive it right before participating in the monthly Vintage Rifle Match hosted by Crosse Creek Rifle and Pistol Club. I figured I’d wear the shirt to the match and told Sean so in email and we then exchanged a few messages about the match. This is essentially one of those messages, edited and expanded.

The VMR match that Crosse Creek hosts is every fourth Saturday, come rain or shine, cold or heat. Though we don’t get subzero temperatures here in North Carolina, it can get a bit nippy for shooting. On the heat side, the summer months it can get into the high 90s and 100s. It was 102 when we left the range this last match on July 23. One of the guys said that even the bugs knew enough to take shelter. I quipped, “you mean to say we’s dumber than bugs?” “That’s exactly what he’s saying,” said another.

Most of those competing are former or currently serving military. I’m probably the only one who shows up regularly that doesn’t have any military background.

I’m not even a club member, but the guys who run it have no problem with that. I think that technically you have to be a member or a guest of a member, and there are usually enough members to offset non-members so that it makes no difference. And even if there are times when that’s not the case, no one cares.

They are much more laid back than, for example, most high power matches. We had one guy last year who made some comment about some of us ‘having a party’ when we were making too much noise for him. He hasn’t been back, and we’ve made a joke of the comment ever since. The decidedly military makeup of the group makes for some serious shooters, but we really are there just for the fun of it. We have maybe three official CMP matches a year, and we are even a little bit lax on the rules for those (though not too much, as we do want them to be official). And many of the participants also go to an annual match at Butner. I haven’t been to Butner, yet, but I suspect that’s where you may see a little more seriousness.

I’ve been going almost every month for the past year and half with a friend of mine from church who used to shoot black powder competitions there years ago. When I first started shooting the match, I was barely hitting paper with my M1 Garand. If five out of 10 of my shots even scored, I considered it a good string. But I was just a beginner at the time. So I kept at it.

And that’s key for anyone getting into this. Keep at it. Don’t get discouraged. Especially with modern firearms, it’s probably 90-95% mechanics. Learn the mechanics, and you will score well, eventually. Practice, practice, practice.

With these vintage rifles it can be a bit different. Due to the wear of age and/or heavy use, it can take time “get to know” your rifle, so to speak. And sometimes, there’s just no decent rifling left in the barrel and there’s no way to shoot it consistently without replacing the barrel.

Targets are at 200 yards. I don’t know the exact size of the targets, but I think they are official CMP 5-foot targets, with scoring rings of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and X, with the inner 9, 10, X rings being black and the outer rings being white. Each match consist of three strings of 10 rounds each, or 30 rounds per match. There are two matches on each match day. You can switch rifles between matches and there’s a 10 minute ‘sighting rounds’ string for those who want to zero their rifles. Assuming 10 sighters per match, that comes to 80 rounds for the day.

Both matches start with a slow-fire (10 rounds, 10 minutes) prone and end with slow-fire off-hand (standing). The first match, second string is rapid fire (10 rounds in 90 seconds) prone and the second match, second string is rapid fire, sitting or kneeling (your choice).

Most of the participants shoot custom loaded ammo, some of them even casting the lead bullets. I had been shooting mostly surplus stuff, but the last two matches I’ve been pulling apart some ’68 Lake City .30-06 and reloading it with 27.8 grains of SR4759 to reduce the recoil with my Remington M1903A3. It’s made the world of difference for me. Turns out that even though the recoil doesn’t bother me, per se, it was throwing me off quite a bit. This last match I shot a personal best of 241 in the second match. With the reduced recoil, I can now focus on the mechanics without the distraction of the recoil. As I improve on my score consistently, I can work my way back up to full loads.

Congrats to my buddy, Fran, who won the second match. On one of the strings in that match, he shot all black. The long time participants couldn’t remember the last time anyone did that at the VMR match. Fran used to win black powder matches all the time, and I think he said he has shot 1000yd matches, too. But part of the challenge has been getting used to the fact that with these old rifles, shooting a four inch group is actually acceptable.

All in all, it was a fun day. Probably the most fun I’ve had at this match, yet, given I’m finally figuring out some of the mistakes I’ve been making and I’m seeing marked improvement. I don’t doubt that I could probably benefit from an Appleseed shoot, but I’m kind of liking this way of learning. I’ve gotten to know the folks who attend these matches regularly and many of them are more than willing to help me improve my shooting.

In the nearly three years since I started this blog (though I’ll forgive my three readers if they think I forgot I had a blog), this is probably my first non-political post.
I recently bought an official Gunwalker T-shirt from

It’s been about four months since the illustrious Johnston County Board of Commissioners passed the Orwellian named Good Neighbor Firearms Ordinance. It was a quite a sight to see first hand. Sure, there were a number of citizens who spoke at the hearing, but it was clear that the commissioners were not interested in debate. They were not interested in facts. This entire process was simply to save face so that the commissioners could say, “hey, we listened.” They didn’t.

The vote was 7-0 for the ordinance and not a peep came from any commissioners other than Allen “Cradle to the Grave” Mims. Mims actually used that phrase during the February working group meeting. I wish I had recorded it. I’m sure one of the TV stations that was there has it recorded somewhere, but will probably never release it. I don’t remember the exact context, but Mims showed his true colors as a collectivist by implying that it was job of commissioners to take care of Johnston County citizens from the cradle to the grave. What better definition of the Nanny State than that?

We’ve got some time before the next election, but some of us are considering what we can do to at least make these commissioners work to keep their seats.

Tony Braswell in particular has got to go. Somehow, after submitting some of my comments via the form on the county website, I got included in a email thread where Braswell was blasting a citizen for daring to “misrepresent our actions as anti gun just because some special interest group says its true” and implied that if the citizen who challenged him was not a “veteran of a foreign war” and has “a son wounded in Afghanistan,” then he did not have a “right to criticize me and my board.” That’s right: Mr. Braswell actually tried to make the case that a citizen did not have the right to criticize the board unless he was a veteran and also that the board was his. Braswell included all six of the other commissioners in the list of recipients, so I challenged him publicly in email and then later at the hearing. I didn’t mention his name specifically or look at him during my testimony, but I did see him fidget in his chair, and since all the other commissioners saw both Braswell’s email and mine, they all knew who I was referring to.

He later sent me a non-apology apology. It amazes me that anyone would still think that anything that starts with “I am sorry you got involved in this email chain…” could be taken as an apology. It’s clear that he’s just not happy that he got caught and then called out in public at the hearing in front of his fellow board members.

This sad affair did not surprise me one bit. But I did get angry enough about it that I knew it wasn’t wise to post anything here at that time. I’m glad I waited. And despite this lost local battle, we are winning at the state and federal level in more ways than we are losing. As someone posted recently, I cringe when I hear that another state has passed a law (or is attempting to) to allow Constitutional Carry, when what is really needed is for all gun laws to be repealed save one federal law that is a restriction on the government rather than the people: the Second Amendment.

But I’ll take incremental victories where we can get them. After all, it took at least 75 years to get to where we are now, with gun rights, and at least 150 with several other unalienable rights.

I’m going to try and post a little more often, now. Really, this time. Now that I’ve had a taste of a bit of activism, I’m sorta hooked. And I’d like to document it a bit.

Sorry I’m not getting around to posting my summary of our meeting with Commissioner Jeff Carver until now. Tonight, the second meeting of the “Good Neighbor Firearms Ordinance” (how Orwellian of them) working group is scheduled to take place at 6:00pm, so I figured this would be a good time for another post.

Our meeting with Jeff Carver was civil, but the biggest concern I have is that the Board seems determined to pass something, anything, I think to save face. They were blind-sided by the opposition and instead of backing off, dug their heels in. Once, during our conversation with Carver, I started to say that, “sometimes the best thing for government to do is…,” and then he completed my sentence with “nothing.” I can’t get inside his head and figure out what he was thinking, but I got the impression that he had heard it many times before, but, yet, didn’t like hearing again.

I got the impression that a goodly portion of the calls the Sheriff’s office was getting were from new residents of the county who came from anti-gun bastions like New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California, who were uncomfortable with the sound of guns. I told Carver that, to be frank, whenever I hear the phrase “let freedom ring” it is near impossible for me to not think of the sound of guns. The sound of gunfire is the sound of freedom. He couldn’t disagree.

But he did indicate that it’s not just new residents moving in that have called. It’s also long time residents who don’t like what they are seeing regarding the number of new developments building up around them, closer than they are accustomed. They can live with it, but there are apparently people doing dumb things and shooting in areas where its clearly not safe. The claim is that the Sheriff’s office can’t doing anything about those calls. No one has said why reckless endangerment or disorderly conduct laws already on the books can’t be used. And there’s always civil action, as well.

Johnston County has kindly posted the contact information of all members of the working group, including the citizen members. Below is the email I just sent first to the non-commissioner members of the working group, and then later decided to send it to all seven commissioners again with an introduction.

I will be attending the meeting tonight and will post an update (eventually) on the results. FYI, Knitebane also posted on this and will be attending the meeting tonight as well.

(Oh, and before anyone points it out, yes, I’m aware of the logic mistake I made indicating that especially in winter the “one hour after sunset” rule limited low-light/no-light self-defense training. Doh. Of course, one hour after sunset is the same amount of time of darkness or near darkness, regardless of the time of year. Nevertheless, the point is still valid that one our of darkness is too restrictive.)

The message below was just sent to the non-commissioner members of the working group formed to discuss the proposed firearms ordinance. After re-reading it, I saw no reason not to send it to all the members of the Board as well.

I am opposed to this ordinance. And the name, in fact, is quite Orwellian. No matter how you modify it, I will not buy that it is not an anti-gun ordinance. Your own gun ownership or NRA memberships do not give you a pass.

Want to convince me you are pro-gun? You can start by removing the restrictions on where I can carry, openly or concealed, i.e.: Johnston County buildings and require the Sheriff’s office to remove the no-guns sign from its building. Oh the irony that in order carry concealed, I must obtain a permit from my local Sheriff (a state issue I hope will be addressed as it has been in Arizona recently) and in order to do it, I must enter a building where I am required to disarm.

I, and many people I know in Johnston County, will be watching how you vote on this and taking it into account in the next election. Follow the example of Lincoln County and kill this proposal now, before ever sees the light of a public hearing.

Here’s what I sent to other members of the working group:
===
To: Citizen members of the working group of the Johnston County “Good Neighbor” Firearms Ordinance

My original feedback to all seven Johnston County Commissioners can be found on my blog at https://wordpress.markofafreeman.net/2010/12/johnston-county-nc-attempts-to-ban-spit/.

Given the short time frame, since your next working group meeting is tonight, I wanted to get this out to raise at least one important question.

I’ve already spoken with Commissioner Jeff Carver on the phone and met with him face to face a few weeks ago about this. Our conversation was civil, but I’m still concerned about the intentions of the Board. Mr. Carver did indicate to me that every single person on the working group is ‘pro-gun’. For that I am grateful, but still not willing to just leave this in the hands of the working group and the Board and not continue to make sure my voice is heard.

My concern is that, as I made clear to Mr. Carver, sometimes the right thing for government to do is NOTHING. And if I read the summary of the last working group correctly, Alan Mims ‘clarified’ the intent of the working group. And that is to see if we can modify the ordinance to be acceptable to all parties. From my conversation with Mr. Carver, and that statement from Mr. Mims, I have to wonder if the Board is intent on passing SOMETHING, no matter what the cost.

As you can see from my blog post, I made it clear what that cost may be…the commissioners who vote yes may not run unopposed in the next election. Yes, that was regarding the original draft of the ordinance, but I’m a little more than miffed that this Board seems to want to pass *something* to save face. I have to wonder if this whole idea of a working group was for nothing more than to save face.

Johnston County should follow the example of Lincoln County three years ago (see here: http://www.lincolntribune.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8205) and kill this idea now.

Prohibiting shooting after one hour after sunset, drastically limits low-light and no-light self defense training, particularly in the winter. Other than noise after a much later hour, there’s no legitimate reason for a restriction like this, and a generic noise ordinance that specifically does NOT target firearms can deal with that.

The alcohol or controlled substance issue creates a problem for those on prescription medication or those who simply have a glass a wine with dinner and then, possibly, need to dispatch a pest out in the barn. For truly unsafe activity, existing drunk and disorderly laws can deal with that.

With the radical change from the first draft to the current draft of this ordinance, its clear that the Board cannot come to terms with the truth that they cannot define what the true problem is and that when you come right down to it, there is nothing that can be drafted that isn’t already handled by current Johnston County ordinances or state law.

What I think is going on here is the Commissioners want to give law enforcement yet another tool to enforce ‘neighborly’ behavior. Of course, if it’s forced, it’s not neighborly. Additionally, with all due respect for what our deputies do, none of my liberties are up for negotiation to make law enforcement easier. Law enforcement, when you have to honor the rights of free men, is not easy. No one can deny that the quickest way to make the job of law enforcement easy is to ignore the US Constitution. Does anyone considering this ordinance think that is a good idea? Is the true intent of this ordinance to make law enforcement easier?

For those who don’t understand the enemies of freedom, they forget that those enemies may some time in the future control the levers of the law (as they do in much of the country). If you want to craft a law, a good guiding principle is to consider that law in the hands of your worst enemy. Once you do that, the hope is that your enthusiasm for ‘passing SOMETHING’ should diminish. An Ayn Rand quote from Atlas Shrugged comes to mind here:

“Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.“

I am going to try to attend the meeting tonight and hope to get a chance to re-iterate publicly what I’ve written here if the points are not brought up. But please, use any of the content of this note to bring up the points yourselves to push the idea of passing NO ordinance.

Thank you.

There was an article I read a while back that I think was linked by David where a cop was quoted as saying, “officer safety trumps rights.” Interestingly, when I did a web search on the phrase “officer safety trumps rights” including the quotes, I came up with one match. I know that the officer.com forum in the past has been an, let’s just say enlightening peek into the minds of many of the “Only Ones” mentality. I am not all endorsing the killing of an officer during a routine traffic stop, but I do hope that no Johnston County deputies hold the view that their own safety on the job trumps rights. If they do, let it be known that I consider them oathbreakers and traitors of the republic.

How about you?

😉

I posted a version of this in the comments of SaysUncle‘s recent post regarding the GOA’s downgrading of Representative Deborah Halvorson’s (IL-11) grade from an A to a D in one year. The claim was that NRA’s scoring was at least understood, and the implication that GOA’s was not. I’d like to say that “understood != makes sense”.

So if the NRA makes the trains run on time, will that suffice for you NRA-can-do-no-wrong apologists?

I’m not a rabid GOA supporter, nor am I a rabid NRA detractor. I am a life member of both organizations. Some valid concerns have been brought up about GOA, particular in the area of the budget and what portion of it goes to executive salaries. And their effectiveness has also been called into question, though I haven’t really kept track of that. But I’m really not understanding how so many gun bloggers, when we are winning and have the truth on our side feel the need to cover for the NRA no matter what they do, even when it makes no bloody sense.

I’m so sick of seeing gun bloggers say things like “the R in NRA doesn’t stand for Republican.” I’d like to see evidence that those who are objecting to most of the NRA Democrat endorsements object because there’s a D beside each of their names. It’s tantamount to calling those who oppose our current president racists and it’s unbecoming of intelligent discourse.

What I object to in most of the Democrat endorsements and even some of the Republican endorsements is that this supposed single-issue organization* is ignoring some important strategic factors. When the NRA backs away from other issues extremely important to liberty, such as the Orwellian named DISCLOSE Act, it virtually guarantees that we will keep barreling toward socialism and it becomes more and more likely that those ‘Second Amendment remedies’ that Sharon Angle spoke of will be used. I am not advocating it, just stating that the more government bears down on the people, and not just regarding guns, the more likely that we will surpass the point where they will tolerate no more in the long train of abuses.

I’ll go out on a limb and say that it is monumentally stupid for the NRA to be absolutist in standing firm on being ’single issue’* because it completely ignores unintended consequences.

When I can name two Representatives that used to be considered somewhat centrist/blue dog Democrats just off the top of my head (John Spratt SC-5 and Bob Etheridge NC-2) who have become 97%+ Pelosi lock-step voters (and there are certainly more), there’s reason to be concerned about any Democrats being endorsed, especially when it’s so often about incumbency with the NRA. I realize that it’s not practical for the NRA to say this publicly, but the Democrats need to purge the Marxists from their leadership ranks before it makes sense to endorse any of them. At this moment, in this political climate, you help Democrats maintain their majority, you keep their Marxists leaders in power — for a long enough period of time — and then your precious Second Amendment rights are good for nothing except the last resort the founders understood, because you will have no other freedoms left.

If the NRA wants to continue to remain credible, they need to scrap their incumbent friendly policy and think more strategically. They need to do a lot more, to be sure, but this policy is beginning to look more and more ridiculous in these times.

It’s not a mystery, by the way, why GOA downgraded Halvorson. It’s quite easy to find the votes that the GOA considered in downgrading her, and she failed every one. Sure, none of them were pure gun votes, but were there any pure gun votes these past two years? None that I know of. You may not agree with GOA’s policy, but it’s not any more opaque than the NRA’s. It’s quite a mystery to me why they would only bump Reid from A to B based on his two votes for anti-gun Supreme Court nominees. That’s pretty egregious, as it has an effect for potentially a couple generations. The downgrade of Halvorson from A to D by the GOA would probably be mirrored by the NRA if it wasn’t for their incumbent friendly policy. Because the GOA does not have that policy, the four grade bump looks like a shocker, but makes perfect sense if you consider unintended (or intended, but poorly disguised) consequences, which the GOA apparently does.

The GOA absolutely has its flaws, but I really wish gun bloggers would stop attacking them when they do the right thing, which is more than some like to admit. To paraphrase someone I had a bit of a disagreement with a while back, when you do that, you stink up the tent (when referring Reagan’s Big Tent philosophy) much more than you claim open carry demonstrations or Threepers do.

Remember that it was the derisively named Fudds who attacked the EBRs before you deride us for calling them Fudds. Might not be the best behavior to return insult for injury, but do remember that it was them who threw us under the bus. In much the same way it was a Prag who attacked a Threeper before anyone knew there was difference and before either of them even earned their respective monikers. You want big tent? Stop attacking those of us basically on the front lines of what just happens to be a different front in the same war.

(Side note: Oh, the irony. The trend seems to be that the Prags will defend the anti-liberty, incumbent friendly NRA choices (even when said incumbents will vote for a Marxist Speaker and Supreme Court Justices) and virtually guarantee that we will have to use that precious Second Amendment right, because it will be the only right we have left. Yet the Threepers, who are consistently misrepresented, want to prevent a shooting war by explaining to the [faux] powers that be that continuing down this path of less and less liberty will eventually spark an armed conflict — and want you to know that to deter you from continuing down that road. You don’t negotiate with a homicide bomber. We’re dealing with the same mentality, here. As the sign says that I carried at the rallies at Gravelly Point Park, Arlington, VA on April 19, and Guilford Courthouse National Military Park, Greensboro, NC on August 14: “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” Government officials do not fear the people. If we are to agree with Mr. Jefferson, that needs to change.)

I’m not wishing the NRA would go away. I’m hoping to change it from within. As they like saying, “I am the NRA.” I’ve done more in the past two years politically than I’ve done all my life, previously, including calling Bob Etheridge’s DC office to register my opposition to the health control bill and calling the NRA to specifically tell them that as a life member I disapproved of them backing away from opposing (and thus giving tacit support for) the DISCLOSE act. I’m tired of NRA apologists treating the NRA leadership like elitists who just must know what they’re doing because, you know, they’re NRA leaders. Stop defending the stupid decisions (seemingly on the increase) they keeping making and get on the phone and call them to the carpet on it. Collectivist look for leaders to be their elitists who purportedly know better than the rest of us. Emulating them in that is not a good idea.

It’s tempting to give up on both the NRA and GOA and give my support to SAF. They’re a force to be reckoned with probably more so than both the others combined, given their key role in both Heller and MacDonald and their claimed 600,000 members. They are making the better strategic decisions.

But I don’t plan on resigning my membership from the two former. I’d like to play my part in influencing the NRA to be more principled regarding freedom as a whole, and the GOA to become more effective both financially and politically. I will probably join and give additional support to the SAF. Neither the NRA nor the GOA has received anything from me other than my initial, life membership fee. The SAF is beginning to show how much more worthy it is in that area.

* For a clear example of how the NRA is absolutely *not* a single issue organization, but only claimed that to save face during the whole DISCLOSE debacle, see the cover story of the October, 2010 issue of America’s 1st Freedom by Edmund Burke. If they want to claim they are single issue, they need to stop referring to themselves as “the oldest civil rights organization” in the US.

From Beck:

You have no moral standing to authorize the taking of someone else’s productivity for anything.

.

And from ESR:

…never, ever, ask permission to carry or give others an option to deny it – just do it and refuse to discuss the matter.

I hadn’t read ESR for a while, mostly because I was kind of out of the “Open Source” world at least from the perspective of reading related blogs and such. Linux and Free Software have already won in so many ways that I figured why should I bother? I haven’t had a job in years where I was pressured to switch to Windows. Times, they are changing.

My first reaction to his post linked above was, “WTH? You mean he wasn’t carrying until 14 months ago?” I didn’t grow up with guns. My Dad was in the US Air Force for 2 years and worked on base as a civilian for 35 years before retiring and as far as I remember was pretty anti-gun. Add to that the fact that we lived in the “cradle and grave of liberty” (as someone put it recently), Massachusetts.

Yet when I moved down to North Carolina 5 1/2 years ago, it wasn’t long before I was making up for lost time. It’s knitebane who finally encouraged me to go out and get my CHL (otherwise known as permission slip from busy bodies hoplophobes to exercise a supposed right … but I digress) and then to finally go out and buy my first firearm. I’ve been carrying for four years, now, everywhere I can. It kind of surprised me that ESR, who has never been shy about his advocacy for gun rights, has only been carrying for 14 months. But, no matter. Welcome, ESR, as you join those of us who see no reason to go about our business unarmed.

An important nugget of wisdom I take from his post is what I quoted above. But I would take it a step further. And my apologies to Breda, though I do think she will get it more than anyone and likely agree.

Imagine visiting a friend’s friend at his house for the first time. This friend’s friend doesn’t know you’ve been injured many years back and as a result, have a prosthetic leg. During conversation as you are sitting on the couch across from this new acquaintance, you go to cross your legs and he suddenly notices that you have a prosthesis. He interrupts himself and gets up and says something to the effect of, “You didn’t tell me you had a prosthesis! That’s very uncomfortable for me. You’ll have to leave that in the car and don’t come back with it next time.”

I know. Highly unlikely. But if someone said that to me about me carrying in his house, I think my reaction, now, would be the same. I am compensating for something. I am compensating for the fact that I’m not going to be high on PCP if I’m attacked by a thug who is. I’m compensating for the fact that I have a smaller build than most thugs are likely to have. I’m compensating for the fact that I’m getting older and more rickety as the years pass and have less of an ability to fight off an attacker hand to hand. And I’m also compensating for the fact that most attacks happen when and where you’d least expect and most people do not have the situational awareness, the survival mindset, nor effective tools to deal with those attacks.

My firearm is, quite simply, a prosthesis.

So if I am presented with a situation of someone asking (or demanding) that I come back without my firearm, there is really no response I can give them. Like ESR, I believe I should refuse to discuss it. The only questions I would ask someone making such an unreasonable demand would be simply, “Do you want me to leave? Do wish me to never return?” Don’t even mention the firearm. Consider it inseparable and don’t let a hoplophobe come between it and you. Make it clear to him that by rejecting your firearm, he is rejecting you and don’t let him squirm his way out of it. Every time he says something like, “I don’t want you carrying a gun in my house,” respond with a question like, “You don’t want me in your house, you say?” Do not let him get away with anything different than by rejecting the firearm he is rejecting you. Period.

I quoted Billy Beck as well (and do go read it all, as it’s a good rejoinder to those on the supposed ‘Right’ who don’t want to touch Social [in]Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) because the ‘no moral authority’ attitude applies here, too. No one has the moral authority to tell you that you must turn over your property to someone else who has not earned it from you nor to stop carrying your means of defense any more than he has the moral authority to tell you to leave a part of body at home before visiting.

Anyone think the Governess will make it at a higher priority to respond to this than to a violation of the diktat outlined in NC GS 14-288.7?

Didn’t think so. Go here to let her know what you think.

Via SaysUncle we have this gem of a bill. And by none other than the King of Corruption himself. Interesting note on the GovTrack page on the bill, though:

For context, Congressman Rangel has introduced this bill many times in the past. Each time, it has received very little support, and Rangel knows it has no chance of being passed. For more, see his press release.

And Obama and his allies want him to be able to leave with dignity? He never had any to begin with.

Oh, and remember this, if you have any questions.