Wednesday, March 31, 2010

And now, a few words from the Register

At the Des Moines Register, Lawmakers approve bills for concealed guns, I-JOBS

From the sky is falling crowd, Rep. Mary Mascher, D-Iowa City:
"...this kind of reciprocity, I think, is a formula for disaster."
From the bonehead status quo section:
Rep. Bruce Hunter, D-Des Moines, argued for retaining the discretion of sheriffs to deny permits for any number of reasons.

Hunter contended that it's rare for sheriffs to be overprotective and wrongly deny gun permits. And if that's a problem, voters can oust the sheriff, he said.
I guess he hasn't lived in Des Moines, Louisa or Johnson counties. Or maybe Benton county, where you can only carry while hunting.

But another view:
"This bill is a first step forward toward restoring true constitutional rights to carry a weapon," said Rep. Dwayne Alons, R-Hull.
We will have to keep him at his word and take the next step. Too bad he didn't persuade a few of his cohorts in the legislature to pass the amendment to eliminate the whole permit process.

And the obligatory NRA reference:
The bill's passage is noteworthy in part because it marked the re-emergence of the powerful National Rifle Association on the Iowa political scene. Quiet in Iowa for years, the gun advocacy group made a major push for the bill. (Not to mention their work on the disarmament bill they helped write - ed)
As if Iowa Carry or Iowa Gun Owners sat on their hands and needed the professionals to swoop in to save us.

Iowa gun shows for April 2010

April 10-11, Odebolt, IA
April 9-11, Des Moines, IA at the Iowa State Fairgrounds
April 16-18, Council Bluffs, IA at Westfair
April 23-25, Adel, IA at fairgrounds

Found at Gun shows USA

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

What could have been for Iowa

For a true reflection of what the politicians think your right to carry a firearm without a permit, this is the tally for the amendment that would have eliminated need to obtain a permit. Although there was wording that would allow the permit process for reciprocity similar to Alaska law.
On the question “Shall amendment H–8652 be adopted?” (S.F. 2379)

The ayes were, 45:
Alons, Anderson, Arnold, Chambers, Cownie, Deyoe, Dolecheck, Drake, Forristall, Grassley, Hagenow, Heaton, Helland, Horbach, Huseman, Huser, Kaufmann, Koester, Lukan, May, Miller, L. Olson, S. Paulsen, Pettengill, Quirk, Raecker, Rants, Rayhons, Roberts, Sands, Schult,e Schultz, Soderberg, Sorenson, Steckman, Struyk, Sweeney, Thomas, Tymeson, Upmeyer, Van Engelenhoven, Wagner, Watts, Windschitl, Worthan

The nays were, 52:
Abdul-Samad, Bailey, Baudler, Beard, Bell, Berry, Bukta, Burt, Cohoon, Ficken, Ford, Frevert, Gaskill, Gayman, Hanson, Heddens, Hunter, Isenhart, Jacoby, Kearns, Kelley, Kressig, Kuhn, Lensing, Lykam, Marek, Mascher, McCarthy, Mertz, Miller, H. Oldson, Olson, D. Olson, T. Palmer, Petersen, Reasoner, Reichert, Running-Marquardt, Schueller, Shomshor, Smith, Swaim, Taylor, Thede, Tjepkes, Wenthe, Wessel-Kroeschell, Whitead, Willems, Winckler, Zirkelbach, Mr. Speaker Murphy

Absent or not voting, 3:
De Boef, Olson, R. Wendt
My rep is counted among the ayes and I must give her credit and thank her.

Monday, March 29, 2010

New and "improved" concealed carry bill passes

SF2379 passed the house 80-15 after they gave up on their own bill.

Updated for final vote in the house:
On the question “Shall the bill pass?” (S.F. 2379)

The ayes were, 81:
Alons, Anderson, Arnold, Bailey, Baudler, Beard, Bell, Berry, Burt, Chambers, Cohoon, Cownie, Deyoe, Dolecheck, Drake, Ficken, Ford, Forristall, Gaskill, Gayman, Grassley, Hagenow, Hanson, Heaton, Helland, Horbach, Huseman, Huser, Kaufmann, Kearns, Kelley, Koester, Kressig, Kuhn, Lukan, Lykam, Marek, May, McCarthy, Mertz, Miller, H. Miller, L. Olson, R. Olson, S. Olson, T. Palmer Paulsen Pettengill Quirk Raecker, Rants, Rayhons, Reasoner, Reichert, Roberts, Running-Marquardt, Sands, Schultz, Shomshor, Smith, Soderberg, Sorenson, Steckman, Struyk, Swaim, Sweeney, Taylor, Thede, Thomas, Tjepkes, Tymeson, Upmeyer, Van Engelenhoven, Wagner, Watts, Wenthe, Whitead, Windschitl, Worthan, Zirkelbach, Mr. Speaker Murphy

The nays were, 16:
Abdul-Samad, Bukta, Frevert, Heddens, Hunter, Isenhart, Jacoby, Lensing, Mascher, Oldson, Olson, D. Petersen, Schueller, Wessel-Kroeschell, Willems, Winckler

Absent or not voting, 3:
De Boef, Schulte, Wendt

Sunday, March 28, 2010

A private sale between (new) friends

I did the unforgivable yesterday (at least from the Brady Bunch perspective.) I purchased a firearm from a private citizen without a background check. At a gun show. And I wasn't immediately compelled to go out and mow down a bus load of kids despite their literature that says otherwise. I valiantly resisted that temptation.

Between my screeds to my state representatives regarding the bills in the statehouse, I made a trip with a neighbor to the gun show in Cedar Rapids. We saw quite a few guys bringing in guns to sell and we saw this trend at Marshalltown the previous Saturday.

One older gentleman brought a rifle in and showed it to a Cedar Rapids police officer to be tagged (that's the policy). A rifle that I would purchase if the price was right. A rifle that would scare Rep. McCarthy from New York even without its barrel shroud. My neighbor and I were paying our entrance fee when I noticed the man and the gun.

By circumstance or random chance, we kept crossing paths a few times, or maybe I was subconsciously "lurking", I don't know. I would be looking at a dealers' wares and he would be offering to sell to the dealer. Each time the gentleman walked away with his rifle.

After almost an hour later, I was waiting for my neighbor in the south addition of the Hawkeye Downs building and the man walked by with his rifle still on his shoulder. So I asked him if he was interested in selling it. His reply was what that no one wanted to give him what he had in it. So I asked him if I could examine it closer and how much his price was. It was less than new and auction price.

Apparently, each dealer wanted to make a couple hundred dollars markup from what I got from him. He told me the story behind his getting the gun, how he traded his shotgun for it and felt ripped off. He just wanted to recoup what he thought he had in it and not to make a profit. His asking price reflected that, because he certainly could have been asking more.

We made the deal and I wished him well.

Later, back in the show, I saw him purchasing a Taurus PT-22 with some of his newly traded for cash. I, on the other hand, only had $5 left in my pocket.

More importantly in my eyes, I had a newly acquired rifle in a caliber that Brady wants to ban (isn't that all of them, BTW) in a transaction between two free Americans using a method that politicians cannot trust.

It was a good day.

For my Montana readers

For Bawb and other Montana readers he sends my way, here is Montana's gift to the nation regarding Obamacare
"Too often, much of late, the last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind," he said. "Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America." Sen. Max Baucus
We got one of those too. His name is Tom Harkin.

There are other things going on in Iowa

Ben at Cold Hard Cashner points to Rober Fowler at Roberts Gun Shop and more specifically to Robert's work for an upcoming 2nd Amendment March in Des Moines.

As Robert says:
I hope that all of the people that believe in the Constitution will join us on the 19th of April at the capital. It's time we showed our representatives that they work for us. They are not there to lord over us like we were a bunch of subjects. As they say, With guns, you are citizens, without them, you are subjects. Second Amendment March questions and answers

(Updated the title - I need English lessons, sometimes)

SF2379 Concealed carry bill update 3/27/10

Yesterday, the state senate introduced an amendment S5371 that failed along party lines. This would have given the state the Alaska type of carry we wanted and Sen. Hartsuch should be commended for the attempt. My senator, Sen. Kapucian, did vote for this amendment.
On the question “Shall amendment S–5371 be adopted?” (S.F. 2379), the vote was:
Yeas, 20:
Bartz, Hahn, Kapucian, Reynolds, Behn, Hamerlinck, Kettering, Rielly, Boettger, Hartsuch, McCoy, Seymour, Dandekar, Houser, McKinley, Wieck, Feenstra, Johnson, Noble, Zaun
Nays, 28:
Appel, Dotzler, Horn, Schmitz, Beall, Dvorsky, Jochum, Schoenjahn, Black, Gronstal, Kibbie, Seng, Bolkcom, Hancock, Kreiman, Sodders, Courtney, Hatch, Olive, Stewart, Danielson, Heckroth, Quirmbach, Ward, Dearden, Hogg, Ragan, Wilhelm
Absent, 2:
Fraise, Warnstadt

The final senate vote for the bill:
On the question “Shall the bill pass?” (S.F. 2379), the vote was:
Yeas, 44:
Appel, Feenstra, Kapucian, Rielly, Bartz, Gronstal, Kettering, Schmitz, Beall, Hahn, Kibbie, Schoenjahn, Behn, Hamerlinck, Kreiman, Seng, Black, Hancock, McCoy, Seymour, Boettger, Hartsuch, McKinley, Sodders, Courtney, Heckroth, Noble, Stewart, Dandekar, Hogg, Olive, Ward, Danielson, Horn, Quirmbach, Wieck, Dearden, Houser, Ragan, Wilhelm, Dotzler, Johnson, Reynolds, Zaun,
Nays, 4:
Bolkcom, Dvorsky, Hatch, Jochum
Absent, 2:
Fraise, Warnstadt
Many traditionally anti-gun politicians were among those voting in favor of this bill. It was sent to the house where it looks like they will consider it on Monday.

I thought amendments are supposed to make bills better

Where do I start regarding Amendment H8619 for the house bill HF2528? The bill that the Iowa ACLU is against.

Section 724.4, Subsection 4
Paragraph a. It rewords how a person carries on their own property as only "for any lawful purpose". How is that defined?

Paragraph f. strikes the ability to transport a handgun

Paragraph g. no longer able to carry at a range
Section 724.9 strikes the "only one" requirement to get a certificate of training completion.

Section 724.11 strikes the training renewal waiver, making it possible to have to re-train in order to renew your permit.

But there is reciprocity and a permit is for 5 years.

Remember, NRA lobbyist Rager said this is how your "right" to carry is defined.

(Update and clarification) Further reading of this amendment would strike the concealed carry provisions, but still allow the permit process for reciprocity with other states. If taking out the carrying portion of the bill, then maybe my criticism/concerns with paragraph f. above needs to be re-thought. Could it be similar to other states where having a loaded weapon in your vehicle is legal?

This is a mess when states define what a person can do legally and defining what your rights are.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

How legislation and sausage is made

The Iowa Senate passed SF2379 concealed carry bill 44-4 and sent to the House. They have not published the details of the vote.

Looking through the amendments, it would require re-qualifying and testing before a renewal. That's new.

Gives clairvoyant powers to sheriffs:
Probable cause exists to believe, based upon documented specific actions of the person, where at least one of the actions occurred within two years immediately preceding the date of the permit application, that the person is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or in such other manner as would endanger the person's self or others.

Friday, March 26, 2010

What should be the end of the NRA in Iowa

If the following be true (and I have no reason to believe otherwise), any bit of respect for the "largest 2nd Amendment group" is gone. From an Iowa Gun Owners 3/26/10 alert:
Our bill sponsor, Representative Kent Sorenson is now being threatened, politically, by those very people in the Capitol who are pushing compromised and watered down carry language - and you are not going to believe where this threat came from.
Rep. Sorensen, one of the staunchest supporters we have in the statehouse, was told regarding the current carry bill HF2528,
either help us [NRA] with our bill (and we will make you a hero in Iowa) or we will help your opponent in the upcoming election.
The common perception is that the reference is to Sen. Stacy Appel (for more background of Appel and her husband, go to: Staci Appel Is Costing Taxpayers A Lot Of Money Appel is one of the most liberal POS politicians in the state, second to Gronstal (the only politician whom the NRA gave money to). Neither of the pukes are friends of gun owners.

The NRA told one of the most vigorous and loyal 2nd Amendment politicians in the state that they would back his opponent in the 2010 election if he wouldn't sit down, shut up and quit offering stronger pro-gun-rights amendments to their pet bill. Yeah, that's politics.
That's right, an NRA lobbyist said that he was going to try to defeat a pro-gun Representative like Sorenson because he's

And, the opponent that Sorenson has in his upcoming election is a notorious anti-gunner!!!

So the NRA is willing to support an anti-gunner over pro-gun Representative Kent Sorenson just because he does not like the details of the NRA bill.
Listen to an interview between Steve Deace of WHO radio and Rep. Sorenson

That's why the NRA should be kicked out of Iowa

More at The case against the NRA

State29 is back?

State29 looks to be back in business.

One of the most irreverent but informative blogs I've seen that covers Iowa politics. I read him for years and was disappointed when he stopped blogging a couple of years ago.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Something's amiss?

Besides me?

I haven't been able to get into the Iowa legislature's website this evening to check in on them and find out how much damage they've done today.

I'm usually the joy-kill at any party, but I can't seem to get into the party.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Wisdom of Patrick Henry

"They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of (Washington) Boston! The war (For the soul of the Republic) is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

Patrick Henry
Found at Green Mountains Homesteading who kindly sends a few readers my way each day. Thank you.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

What should a free man do?

Found at Borepatch, this tongue-planted-firmly-in-cheek response is for this evening's crap-fest in DC. (You can get yours at Cafepress/Borepatch) But the question remains: "What should a free man do?" Being a pessimist by nature, it's easy for me to proclaim the sky is falling and with the current GOP dead elephants, how is that a stretch? Capitulation on "Crap and Trade" and immigration is their expected response in the coming weeks despite their rhetoric. I've decided to "PISS" on Congress 1. Prepare my heart, my mind, and my soul for the coming battles 2. Insist that this flaming turd bill gets stopped by any legal means 3. Saturate the mail, phone, internets to promote individual freedom and liberty 4. Struggle to get freedom-loving candidates to replace these criminals And I'm going to "CRAP" on the statehouse 1. Contact my rep and senator (again) and work to replace if necessary 2. Research and collect as much information on the issues I'm passionate about so I can: 3. Argue my point to any collectivist/socialist/whatever "ist" 4. Provide whatever future I can for my family despite these political hurdles Please join me or suggest any replacement acronym. I'd love to hear it. I think the democrats over-played their hand tonight but if their end-game is to stay in power, they may be aiming to never hold another election.

Do not go gentle into that good night

I decided to add my silent protest to my ignored vocal protestations. I display this as a neighborhood declaration of sorts before the next step:
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
The whole Dylan Thomas poem:
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on that sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Coordinated Illumination's ruminations on healthcare

And do you honor the oath, or follow the laws?

Damn them for forcing that choice upon the nation.
From Coordinated Illumination

Find out the choice he is talking about The greatest health care system in the world - Destroyed.

My congress-crook refuses to hear from anyone dissenting from his opinion. During the summer he shut down any town-hall meetings after they weren't going his way. Then he declared that he traveled his district and everyone he heard from wished for this steaming pile of crap. That's because he only listens to people who agree with him.

The healthcare "vote" today

Alcee Hastings and the rest of his crooks in Congress should be careful what they wish for. David Codrea writes:
Here's the thing: the rules don't just protect us as citizens. They also protect the government.

If we throw out rule of law and replace it with rule of men, no one will be protected.
The felon Alcee Hastings has this thing down pat. What if gun owners played by Alcee Hastings' rules?

The political class is listening?

The lawyer advocating a group home in a Fargo neighborhood for convicts on probation and sex offenders wants police protection at a meeting Monday when he asks for the proposal to be reconsidered.
This bozo is pushing a group home for perverts and the neighbors don't what it. He keeps pushing and the neighbors may well push back (or at least imply that something might happen).
Ritchie was traveling Friday and could not be reached for comment. In a letter he wrote appealing the denied permit, he asked for police protection at Monday’s City Commission meeting.

“We make this request because those present used rhetoric relating to people having guns and words to the effect that there would be ‘people shooting first and asking questions late, and sure as h—- someone was going to get killed …,” Ritchie wrote, referring to comments last month before the Planning Commission.
The citizens have told him to peddle his snake oil somewhere else and he isn't getting the message. Now he wants police protection to be heard.

Lawyer seeks police guard

Friday, March 19, 2010

Thank you to Sam

Today's thanks goes to True Blue Sam who also has been sending readers this way.

This week's Weekend Steam puts me in a mood to get back in the fields. Head over there to see some power of a more simpler time. More at Sam's Steam

I grew up too late to work with these machines, they were used in my dad's generation. I used to rake hay and cultivate corn and beans with a two-row Farmall C and I drove a "Johnny Pop" John Deere A bringing in hay wagons.

These days I thrash my head on the keyboard trying to keep my disk shelf up and running. It's not the same.

Thanks for bringing back memories of watching these great steam engines at work.

The Long Train of Abuses...

Today we'll touch on Excessive Fines.

At the Coralville Courier, we see that Democrat leaders at state want more of your money.
State Representative Jeff Kaufmann, Republican, voted NO and did so for several reasons. First, the average percent increase of 92% is not reasonable. Those increases, in his opinion, had nothing to do with deterrence or public safety but rather the generation of revenue. That is not good public policy.

During the debate one legislator quipped that, “The Highway Patrol is not in the Department of Revenue.”
The reference is this Increases in fines report

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Thank you, Karl

Karl at The Rifleman's Journal has been sending a lot of people my way (like I have something to say). So I'd encourage my one or two regular readers to give him a read.

Head over there, where he has a good roundup of sites he visits everyday. Like this John Locke quote:
"... whenever the Legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence. ... [Power then] devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty, and, by the Establishment of a new Legislative (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own Safety and Security, which is the end for which they are in Society." John Locke, State of War
His current month's journal is March 2010 Rifleman's Journal

I think he's earned the term Rifleman

History poster

From Hope and Change Cartoons

Bawb reports what's going on 3/18/10

Bawb gives us his state of the union for today.

Regarding the Constitution and the feds fulfilling their duties under it:
It does say they're supposed to deliver the mail, and we all know how that's turning out.
And regarding the 10th Amendment (one I think is dear to his heart):
Unfortunately, nobody on Capital Hill seems to give a fat rat's ass about "...the States respectively, or...the people." We need to remind everyone of this at election time.
Mild? Yes, but read more at: BIG BROTHER IS ALIVE AND WELL

Let the amendments begin, statehouse news

The state house bill for the democrats' concealed carry "reform" bill HF2528 was introduced on Tuesday and today, amendments were filed.

One amendment, H8466, requires sheriffs to destroy any gun information they may have of a citizen's weapon. Many sheriffs require a make, model and serial number of the handgun a permit holder will carry and then limit the permit to only that gun. A defacto gun registry.

Also, this amendment prevents sheriffs from collecting fingerprints of permit seekers.

No news regarding the senate version, SF2379

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

The human costs of big government

President Obama recently informed a crowd of young people — to thunderous applause — that under his health care plan, they could stay on their parents' coverage till age 26. Voters 18-21, of course, went for Obama by a 2-1 margin, but given that he is a 'post-partisan' president, we can't chalk that up to politics, now can we?

Obama-care proponents contend that his proposal is only an option and not a mandate (though a handful of states have enacted mandates). But then so are junk food and cigarettes, and no one hesitates to address their dangers. Under our Constitution, whether or not parents choose to provide coverage for their grown children is not the concern of President Obama. As columnist Mark Steyn has noted, however, the details of Obama-care pale in importance next to the overall concept of nationalizing yet more of our private lives. Forget the minutiae for a moment and consider our culture.
Teenage girls in Seattle recently beat one of their own senseless while a group of security guards watched. Where was law enforcement, everyone asked, when the pertinent question was where were the MEN?

Read more from David Bozeman, former Libertarian Party Chairman at
The human costs of big government

Anti-gun democrats revive concealed carry bills

Traditionally anti-gun democrats at the state house have revived the NRA concealed carry bill on Tuesday. (Details here: IGO, Attack on REAL Right-to-Carry)
The proposal died early this month after failing to clear a “funnel” deadline for progress in the Legislature. However, it was revived this week by Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. The new bill numbers are Senate File 2379 and House File 2528. Proposal to ease gun-permit process resurfaces
You can remind yourself of Gronstal from an earlier post, What Gronstal thinks of some Iowans
Gronstal said his decision was not the result of pressure from gun-rights lobbyists.
That's because Gronstal is an opportunistic, POS, politician, who wants to get re-elected and is not influenced in any way by a gun-rights group like Iowa Gun Owners. (See above post)

A key gun-control lobbyist chimed in:
Chris Rager, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, said his group continued to push for the proposal after it appeared to die earlier this month. He said the issue is about basic freedoms. “It isn’t a privilege to defend yourself and your family. It’s a right,” he said.
If one has to beg for a permit, I don't think this perfumed prince of Fairfax understands the word.

According to this putz, "It's a right," but you have to go to the sheriff, and get training, and pass tests, and pay an indeterminate fee, and be of a certain age group, and get fingerprinted and then ask again five years later.

But... "It's a right."

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Police shoot dog, threaten neighbors

Ottumwa, IA police officer shoots a dog while it's on his (the dog's) owner's property. A crowd builds and grows angrier accusing the officer of shooting a non-aggressive dog. Other officer's arrive and threaten to arrest the neighbors.
“They’ve never done anything, then you come up and shoot this dog? I was mad,” she said. Olson [neighbor] accused police of being “out of control.”

Neighbors are mad about the shooting, but what happened next has them even angrier. They say [Officer] Vose’s supervisor, Sgt. Rick Jones, arrived and behaved aggressively toward the people who had gathered. Accounts from neighbors are consistent and say Jones repeatedly threatened to arrest anyone who did not go back into their homes.
Controversy over police shooting of dogThrow everyone in jail is the answer to everything.

Monday, March 15, 2010

“If you want to keep your guns, don’t beat your wife"

From the flippant quote that state Sen. Tom Reilly gave Saturday, to the dishonest:
“I have no interest in taking your guns,” [Rep. Eric] Palmer said.
Which is exactly what S.F. 2357 does.
The only persons who would give up their gun rights would be convicted domestic abusers, he said.
Wrong again, a person only has to have a restraining order against them. Where's the "convicted" part of that?
Also, this law does nothing new — it just takes a federal law and makes it a state law, which will allow for better enforcement of the measure, he added.
Since there are two lawsuits running at the federal appeals courts right now that could overturn the federal law in this matter, let's just put it granite at the state level. High court looks at state, local gun control laws Then we have to go through the courts all over again.

Thanks, NRA:
Palmer said there was a bipartisan effort on the bill, and the National Rifle Association also weighed in on the bill.

“The NRA registered ‘neutral’ on the bill. They think it’s a good bill too,” Palmer said.
Read more from the comedy team of Reilly and Palmer: Public safety issues takes stage at Eggs & Issues

Sunday, March 14, 2010

The case against the NRA

Their meddling in Wisconsin: Why NRA is nuts to expand background checks

Their lying:
(Speaking about Wisconsin, again, but can apply anywhere) The NRA is second to no one in wanting to keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals, but the NRA can't support new restrictions on lawful firearms owners and retailers at gun shows across the state. Anti-gun politicians trying to save face by offering a "compromise" won't find a receptive audience among NRA members. The gun-banners were wrong to block Right-to-Carry in the legislature, and they're wrong to say their lukewarm support for Right-to-Carry is contingent on new gun-control laws being passed as well. - Wayne LaPierre
NRA: Final 2 States Without Right-to-Carry Gun Laws Will Fall
This is the claim, but they helped write and pushed for compromise laws that expand gun control in Iowa and takes rights away from citizens. They "compromise" all the time.

Find more examples at

Find more Wayne LaPierre lunacy at: Gun Owners Alliance for a No-Compromise NRA

The NRA should be kicked out of Iowa

I think many of us would agree that the NRA has good programs like Eddie Eagle and their efforts to involve more women can be commended. But for them to represent themselves as 2nd Amendment group puts them in a lie.

Found at Iowa House bans guns after domestic abuse convictions, According to a lobbyist for Commission on the Status of Women, Rachel Scott, Tom Miller's attorney general's office worked with the NRA so that S.F. 2357 could get passed. The NRA lobbyist gave an "undecided" response, which means they submitted their "I don't care" view on this bill that removes due process in Iowa and sat on their hands.

If true, they are in collusion with a government agency to confiscate guns from people.

Without due process.

With only an accusation.

The NRA is a gun control group. Period.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

What is and is to come, (again)

Keeping with a pessimistic theme that I've had for about 40 years or so, I've found this over at Coordinated Illumination:
In case you missed it:
21% believe the Government has the consent of the Governed.
32% believe in Alien Abductions.

Only the most delusional still believe in our our government.
Part history lesson with a smattering of quotes, like:
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."- Thomas Jefferson
He gives us a glimpse of the future by using the past, specifically throwing in Thomas Cole's "The Course of Empire" paintings to illustrate where we are headed in good ol' USA.

Consent of the Governed? Don't Fool Yourself.

SF2357 headed to the governor

S.F. 2357 passed the amended version (with the "only Ones" exemption) and now needs governor Chester's signature.

In other news: pro-gun bills haven't moved out of committee.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Tom Miller: repeats the 111 gun deaths

Iowa attorney general Tom Miller repeats the 111 gun deaths in domestic abuse events in his plea to pass the Disarm Iowans bill.
This bill will save lives. It will help prevent women, men and children from being terrorized, maimed and killed by violent abusers. More than half of Iowans killed in domestic abuse murders since 1995 (111 of 205) were killed by firearms. Pass firearm bill to keep Iowans safer
How many of these deaths were committed before a restraining order was set? - Don't know.

How many of these deaths would have been prevented if this new bill would be in effect? - Don't know.

How many of these deaths are the direct result of a person defending themselves against an abuser? - Don't know.

We don't know because no one has a chance to dig deeper and go beyond the rhetoric.

"This bill will save lives" - the tragic part of this whole mess is that someone intent on harm is not going to worry about what law is on the books. If a firearm is not available, then they could use a knife, club, or the always subtle poison.

Oh, and this bill is constitutional [sic] because Tom Miller says so.

SF2357 passed the house

On the question “Shall the bill pass?” (S.F. 2357)
The ayes were, 73:
Abdul-Samad, Anderson, Arnold, Bailey, Beard, Bell, Berry, Bukta, Burt, Cohoon, Cownie, Dolecheck, Drake, Ficken, Ford, Frevert, Gaskill, Gayman, Hanson, Heaton, Heddens, Hunter, Isenhart, Jacoby, Kaufmann, Kearns, Kelley, Koester, Kressig, Kuhn, Lensing, Lukan, Lykam, Marek, Mascher, May, McCarthy, Mertz, Miller, H. Miller, L. Oldson, Olson, D. Olson, R. Olson, S. Olson, T. Palmer, Petersen, Pettengill, Quirk, Raecker, Reasoner, Reichert, Running-Marquardt, Schueller, Schulte, Shomshor, Smith, Steckman, Struyk, Swaim, Taylor, Thede, Thomas, Tjepkes, Upmeyer, Van Engelenhoven, Wenthe, Wessel-Kroeschell, Whitead, Willems, Winckler, Zirkelbach, Mr. Speaker

The nays were, 25:
Alons, Baudler, Chambers, De Boef, Deyoe, Forristall, Grassley, Hagenow, Helland, Horbach, Huseman, Paulsen, Rants, Rayhons, Roberts, Sands, Schultz, Soderberg, Sorenson, Sweeney, Tymeson, Wagner, Watts, Windschitl, Worthan
This passed with the "Only Ones" exemption.

I guess due process died a little more today.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Here we go again

Flood stage is 20 feet.

The legislature is busy

Looks like many amendments have been introduced for SF2357. I don't know if it's good or bad on a couple of them, but it looks like the state house is putting a little more effort to "improving" the bill, if for no other reason, than to get re-elected. (Isn't that why a politician does anything?)

The SF2357 Bill History lists 6 amendments filed in the past two days, one that would penalize someone for filing a false or misleading report to obtain a no-contact order (H8367) and another to restore a person's gun "rights" after a period of time (H8388)

Keep those calls to the state house, it's working.

Monday, March 8, 2010

What is and is to come

Borepatch reveals the evil that is Massachusetts' gun control:
In Massachusetts, anyone who does not have a valid Firearm ID (FID) card or License to Carry (LTC), and who possesses empty (expended) cartridge cases is in violation of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 269, Section 10(h)(1). This is a felony, punishable by not more than 2 years in prison or a fine not to exceed $500.

Not for having live ammunition, which might almost make sense. For having ammunition components. It might even make sense if it were unexpended ammunition components: bullets, primers, propellant. But the "common sense" law on the books goes further, to include expended (and therefore harmless) bits like shell casings. Common Sense Gun Control
And Mike Vanderboegh gives us a glimpse of the evil that awaits us:
Doubling down on disaster, Lindsey Gramnesty and Chuck "Shithead" Schumer, have decided to make us all get biometric cards in order to insure that we won't get "another wave" of illegals. What about the last five waves they've done nothing about? I know some of you libertarians are all for open borders and don't mind amnesty, but is THIS what you had in mind?!? My old pastor would say, "Here comes the mark of the beast." How Lindsey Gramnesty and Shithead Schumer intend to sell us amnesty.
Growing up, we raised cattle. Not a large herd, but enough to keep us busy. We identified the cows according to who owned them with ear tags.

Is this what they have in mind?

National ID Information

Maid-Rites are made wrong

At least according to the state.
An iconic Marshalltown restaurant, Taylor's Maid Rite [sic], may be forced to close its doors after the state takes issue with the way it has prepared meat for the past 80 years.

The restaurant opened in 1928 and has been booming ever since.

Three years ago, the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals said it needed to change the way it prepared meat.State Orders 80-Year-Old Iconic Restaurant To Change
Maid-Rites are a prolific little restaurant in Iowa with several of these mom and pop restaurants throughout the midwest. There are less of them now than when I was a kid and looks like another business will bite the dust.

Because the state knows better than everyone else and they have the force of law behind them.

Whenever the neighbor and I go to the Marshalltown gun show we stop off at Tama's Maid-Rite for one of these greasy, tasty, beauties and a piece of pie. It's a tradition that has continued for years with us and part of the reason we make the trip.

I'll make a trip to one this weekend before the state shuts them all down.

Yesterday, all my troubles seemed....

Yesterday's post was not a reflection of self-pity on my part as it was an explanation of my minimal postings over the past week.

I try to post something once a day for my few regulars and I don't want to let you guys (and any gals who read this) down.

There's a lot of crap going on in this state and I'm going to try to keep people informed while at the same time do what I can on a personal level.

It's hard to do that and hold a job that occupies more time than what I had originally bargained for.

And, as it was rightly pointed out to me, it could be worse.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Work, work, work

Alternate title: I picked the wrong week to quit drinking.

Been having trouble with a vendor software system that stops its database... in the middle of the day... while people are entering in patient data. You know, serious information.

At first the blame was a bad sector on a hard drive - sorry, but with a RAID array (I know that's redundant, but the whole idea is redundancy), it's kind of hard to have one bad sector and louse up the whole thing.

Next, it was "blame the memory" - ran an offline diagnostics that revealed everything was fine. Also ran the diagnostics against the CPUs, hard drives, controllers.... NOTHING

What sticks in my back-side is that this software company is wasting time finding the problem by blaming hardware. They can sit on the sidelines because they aren't the poor schmuck taking the servers off-line and running this crap in the middle of the night, ending up working a week in a couple of days.

The other issue I have is the "we know it all" factor. It seems they don't listen to people unless they are "experts" in their crappy software or their fringe database management system. I told them it wasn't hardware but they wouldn't listen and I had to put in extra hours (at night) to rule out what is obvious to anyone who has any sort of troubleshooting skills.

"It's good to rule it out" - Bull-loney.

From what I can determine, the code as written, doesn't do a good job of error-trapping when executing a commit to the database. They let the database management system handle errors and that system will shut down if there is a record locked.

Good job, guys.

Every diagnostic is showing hardware is running like a top. Next they'll blame the phase of the moon.

Is it waxing or waning? I don't know cause I haven't slept much this week.

Friday, March 5, 2010

SF2357 passed House committee

SF2357 passed in the state house with an amendment H8350

I'll call it the "Only Ones" exemption:
b. This subsection shall not apply to the possession, shipment, transportation, or receipt of a firearm, offensive weapon, or ammunition issued by a state department or agency or political subdivision for use in the performance of the official duties of the person who is the subject of a protective order under U.S.C. { 922(g)(8).
If you are an "official" something-or-rather and possess a firearm issued by the state (private firearms would still have to be turned in apparently), this law wouldn't apply to you while in the performance of your official duties.

In other words, if you are a LEO and beat up your wife, you can still hold your job.

Don't start about "innocent until proven guilty" in defense of LEO's because this law isn't about due process. If this is to apply to the common serf, then it better apply to a law enforcement officer.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Does Stranded hate women?

With all of my criticism of SF2357, it was pointed out to me: "You must hate women."

I would like to point out a few things. I have a lot of respect for women. My mother raised 11 kids (that's right eleven). I watched my wife give birth to a 9 pound 6 ounce son with no anesthetic. True women are the tough, no-nonsense get-the-job-done with a tender-touch of the species.

Although there are some I despise (Nancy Pelosi) and some I really can't stand to be around very long (a sister or two), I don't hate women.

I gave my wife a pistol for Valentine's Day a few years ago. I don't know what says "I Love You" better than "Please protect yourself."

Which brings me to this incident that occurred years ago: A local "womens' group" was collecting old cell phones to give to battered women so they could call 911 if a former spouse or boyfriend showed up. My suggestion was to offer the group money if they would provide firearms and training to these women. Their reply was shock, horror, and a rejection to my idea. My response was that they really weren't interested in protecting women. It went downhill from there.

I've known women that have been on the receiving end of abusive relationships and in situations where the guy didn't quite "get it" when she left. The only thing that thugs recognize is force, either by her or by friends.

I also lost a friend a year ago when her ex strangled her and then burned the house in a botched attempt to cover up his crime.

What's attorney general Tom Miller say to her family then? No gun was involved.

He and these "anti-violence" groups don't realize that a piece of paper doesn't stop crime. If someone is intent on committing an act of violence, they will find a means to that end, regardless of the tool involved. Gun, knife, hands, gasoline...

The will and the means to stand up to these pukes will stop the violence. Especially when a few of these thugs are removed from the gene pool.

Iowa Gun Owners Alert 3/2/10

Over at AmmoLand (Iowa Disarmament Act of 2010) Aaron Dorr had this to say:
(Regarding SF2357) This bill still:

* allows you to lose your gun rights, for years, without ever having been convicted in criminal court of anything;
* allows an anti-gun court to decide who is qualified to take possession of your guns;
* incorporates the Lautenberg Amendment (brought about by Sarah Brady of Handgun Control Inc.) into Iowa code whereas current Iowa law does not recognize this anti-gun language;
* gives the anti-gunners one more foothold into your rights; if misdemeanor domestic violence is grounds to lose your gun rights then what other misdemeanor crimes will be grounds for losing your gun rights?

All this can be done to a person who has not been convicted of anything in a court of law. And again, there is not a guarantee that you can be present at the hearing, or bring legal counsel, or have time to prepare a defense.
Iowa State Senator Kibbie disagrees:
Some who have contacted me think that the bill would allow a person to lose their gun rights based on the accusation of a mere acquaintance. Thankfully, the bill does not allow that. A person would only lose their gun rights if they are the subject of a permanent domestic abuse protective order after they’ve received notice, a hearing and the right to be heard. In addition, a domestic abuse protective order cannot be sought or obtained by persons who are “mere acquaintances.”

The law is very specific about who may apply. Iowa Code Section 236.2 defines the types of relationships that would qualify for domestic abuse protective orders. None of these include “mere acquaintances.” There must be a demonstrable relationship between the parties.

No temporary order would be issued requiring a person to give up their firearms. As I indicate above, that could happen only after notice, a hearing before a judge and your right to be heard. In addition, when the domestic abuse protective order expires, an individual would be able to possess firearms once again. Under Iowa Code Chapter 236, the duration of a protective order is generally for one year.

Sen Kibbie newsletter
What the senator doesn't dispute, is that a protective order can be based upon an accusation, not a conviction. One person's word against another.

That will be all it takes to remove someone's gun rights.

One person's word.

Monday, March 1, 2010

SF2357 update, 3/1/10

With NorthBridge at Iowa Patriots and Ben at Cold Hard Cashner lending voices regarding SF2357 I found today's introduction into the state house as I would of news of the next snowstorm; I expected it.

HSB46 has been sitting in the house committee for awhile with no action and is similar in language to SF2357. If this language is passed, then they would have to reconcile with the senate version (I'm sure in full public view) and then we get to see what master version comes out.

According to the Floor Action on the Iowa General Assembly website:
"The House adjourned at 9:19 p.m. until Tuesday, March 2, 2010, at 9:00 a.m."

They've been working their tails off, poor souls.

And it doesn't look like they've got everything updated on the site regarding the number of freedoms they mashed today.

From the bill history:
March 1, 2010 Read first time, referred to Public Safety. H.J. 745.
March 1, 2010 Subcommittee, Berry, Baudler, and R. Olson. H.J. 773.
This bill is in the same "Public Safety" committee as the gun rights bills that failed to get out of committee before the "funnel" day.

(Picture is January 4, 1904, statehouse fire)