American Elephants


Feinstein Tries To Ban 150 Types of Guns; Public Rushes to Buy Them! by The Elephant's Child

DianneFeinsteinGuns

(click to enlarge)

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has introduced a bill to ban more than 150 types of weapons; they are calling it the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2013,”so of course members of the public are rushing to gun dealers to purchase weapons. Investors suggests a better name for the bill would be “Second Amendment Violation of the Century.”

Included in the exhaustive list are all types of AR-15s. It was, as everyone knows, an AR-15 that was used in the Newtown, CT and Aurora, CO shootings.  The AR-15 is a scary-looking semi-automatic hunting rifle that is no different than a more conventional rifle except that it has some military-looking cosmetic styling.

The number of homicides caused by rifles is falling. Only 323 Americans were killed by rifles in 2011. The number of homicides caused by knives, blunt instruments and the human body itself is Nine Times as many. AR-15s have been used to save lives several times since the Sandy Hook shooting. There is nothing in Feinstein’s bill that would have prevented the tragedy of Sandy Hook or Aurora. .(click to enlarge)

Feinstein-Weapons-Ban-e1359047805173

Some have suggested that Sen. Feinstein is simply trying to improve her’ legacy.’ She tried an Assault Weapons ban once before, and it was a colossal failure, changing nothing, nothing at all. It isn’t the guns fault, nor is it the bullets fault. Limiting magazines suggests that one would just need carry more magazines, for it only takes seconds to change one. She is, of course, attempting to play on public emotion, and all who are infected with the “do-something disease.” Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech gunman used two sidearms, a .22 caliber Walther P22 and a 9mm Glock to kill 32 of his fellow classmates. Neither of these weapons are on Feinstein’s list.

Real Assault weapons are already illegal.

The popularity of the AR-15 has exploded in recent decades. The AR-15 has become mainstream among shooters. Millions of Americans are using ARs for hunting, target shooting, competition, and home defense. It is light and easy to use. And most Americans have no plans for mass shootings, now or ever.

Obama proclaimed “If it saves the life of just one child” — the worst kind of pompous pandering. Obama’s campaign organization, now “Organizing for Action” a 501(c) 4 lobbying group, fired off emails immediately following the inaugural speech demanding calls made to Congress to ban guns, which produced no interest at all.

Michael Ramirez explained accurately the instruments used in violent assaults. Pay attention to the numbers. It is a different picture than the gun-grabbers would have you believe.

ADDENDUM: Do take the time to watch this video from the Australians, recounting their Government’s gun ban. Their results:Armed Robberies up 69%. Assaults with Guns up 28%. Gun Murders up 19%. Home Invasions up 21%. People cannot defend themselves or their homes, the police cannot protect them.



The Founding Fathers Understood Bureaucracy Better Than Today’s Liberals. by The Elephant's Child

The story of the Taylor family, just below, is an excellent example of Statism, Progressivism or just bureaucracy in general.  Centralized government, by its very nature is one-size-fits-all government. All goes well until your case is a little different, until the one-size doesn’t fit you. Centralized government runs by regulation, and making regulations for over 315,000,000 people just isn’t going to fit a significant number of people.

The Taylor family’s only hope to avoid FEMA regulations is by getting Congress to pass some kind of exception to the regulations. How would you like your future dependent on getting Congress to pass a law just for you. It happens, but for some Congress cannot rescue you.

The Founding Fathers understood this. Their regulations came from the British government 3,500 miles away, with the fastest communication by sailing packet. And the British government was not shy about regulating. Americans got fed up with bureaucratic regulation that had no real understanding of the realities in the colonies. So the colonies revolted against the crown. The American people’s distaste for bureaucracy is real and longstanding.

In 1651, long before the Revolution, England began passing a series of Navigation Acts to regulate the trade of its American colonies. John Steele Gordon explained:

These acts restricted the colonies to using ships built, owned, and manned by British subjects. The Dutch, far more efficient merchant mariners than the English in the mid-seventeenth century, were able to profitably ship the tobacco of the Chesapeake to Europe for as much as a third less than English ships could. But as the English merchant marine grew and as New England became a major shipping center in its own right, shipping costs declined even without Dutch competition.

The Navigation Acts also required that certain commodities exported by the American colonies could be shipped only to England. Many of these commodities —tobacco, rice, sugar, indigo, furs, copper, and naval stores, tar, pitch and turpentine —were reexported to continental Europe. This assured both that these commodities passed through English customs and were taxed, and that English merchants handled the trade with Europe. Other colonial exports, such as flour from the middle colonies and pig iron, could be exported by the colonies directly to whatever markets could be found.

Third, the Navigation Acts required that European goods imported to America had to pass first through England, and of course, English customs, except for certain products of southern Europe that England didn’t produce in the first place, such as wine from Spain, Madeira, and the Azores. The main purpose of this legislation was to protect the American market for British manufactures. But as Britain quickly became the most efficient producer of these goods in Europe, British manufacturers almost always offered better prices anyway.

Those who are placed in a position of power can seldom resist the temptation to tell everyone else what to do. And that is a pleasant power. What fun to be able to arrange  things to suit yourself. The colonies remained dependent on the mother country to provide those goods and services which they could not provide for themselves. All well and good, but British law effectively forbade the establishment of banks in the colonies, and forbade the export of British coinage from Britain to protect its own money supply. Money speeds up transactions in a barter economy, and its lack is beyond inconvenient.

With the prohibition on export of British coins, the colonies had to find some other source. In 1652, Massachusetts began making its own coins, the pine tree shilling. People had to bring in their own silver and have it assayed before being made into coins. That was illegal, but successful, and the Massachusetts economy prospered, so the British didn’t interfere. The rest of the colonies turned to the Spanish dollar, which accounted for about half the coinage in the colonies. It was chopped into eighths or ‘bits’ from whence came the designation of our quarter as ‘two bits’, but since nothing much costs a quarter any more, the term may be completely unfamiliar to our younger citizens.

That’s just a small sample of the bureaucratic complications of being a colony of a mother country intent upon maintaining America as a colony. America got fed up with regulations coming from 3,500 miles away, and communication that took as long as three months.

Those progressives that are so sure the Constitution is outdated, not up-to-date enough for modern people like themselves may assume that the Declaration and the Constitution, dusty old documents, were dashed off by old white men with no understanding the needs of truly modern men, and a modern age. But the Founders understood centralized government and bureaucracy probably better than we do. They understood human nature, and did their best to set up a government with checks and balances that would prevent or at least slow down its excesses. Pity that the Progressives have so little understanding of history and so little respect for its lessons.



FEMA Won’t Let Us Rebuild Our Home by The Elephant's Child

The Taylor family lives in the Natomas community in Sacramento, California. On August 24, 2012, Brad and Jennifer were driving home with their two young children when they saw smoke in their neighborhood. As they got closer to home, they realized that their house was on fire. Jennifer jumped out of the car to get the family’s elderly dog and two cats to safety while Brad drove the kids to their grandmother’s house down the street. Though shaken, both Brad and Jennifer were relieved that no one had been hurt. “It’s just a fire,” Brad said. “It can all be replaced.”

Little did they know that, thanks to regulations created by the Federal Emergency Managment Agency in the wake of Hurricane Katrina — which hit land thousands of miles away from Sacramento — their rebuilding nightmare was just beginning.

To learn more, go to the Taylors’ Facebook page, Burned OUT in Natomas: http://www.facebook.com/BurnedOutInNatomas




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,716 other followers

%d bloggers like this: