Articles by Herschel Smith

NEW: For the first time, we witnessed the TX National Guard close & lock a gate on private property at a major crossing area in Eagle Pass, denying entry to migrants who just crossed illegally & expected to be let in. Border Patrol then came w/ a key & let them in for processing. pic.twitter.com/S1fZaTJnEi

— Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) August 17, 2022

This is easy.  The governor of Texas could handle this with the stroke of a pen.

Issue arming orders to the Texas National Guard.  Tell them to monitor the passing.  If the Border Patrol follows orders from above and comes to open the passing, arrest them and put them into indefinite confinement along with arrested or detained migrants.

The same lack of will has occurred in Missouri where they actually have the tools to do their job but won’t use them.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has so far randomly audited 24 sheriff’s offices in Missouri in search of concealed carry weapon (CCW) details, but they all refused to comply, according to law enforcement authorities.

“None released anything pertaining to CCWs themselves, but some did partially comply by answering procedural questions on issuing CCWs,” said Moniteau County’s Sheriff Tony Wheatley.

Don’t do that.  Confiscate their weapons and seize their credentials, arrest them on the spot, and either take them to the state border and release them or throw them into jail.  Tell them never to come back.

This will get worse until the states stand up for themselves.

Source.

The World Economic Forum is trying to set guardrails for the future of augmented reality, and microchipping people is part of its vision for a “brave new world.”

“Are we moving towards a ‘brave new world’? As scary as chip implants may sound, they form part of a natural evolution that wearables once underwent. Hearing aids or glasses no longer carry a stigma. They are accessories and are even considered a fashion item,” reads the Aug. 16 blog post written by Kathleen Philips, vice president of research and development at the Belgium-based Interuniversity Microelectronics Centre. “Likewise, implants will evolve into a commodity.”

Philips also claimed there were “solid, rational reasons” – “like safety” and “security” – for implanting “your child” with a tracking chip. Yikes!

Alarmingly, implants apparently aim to mechanize certain aspects of human physical function, as exemplified by the slogan of Neuralink – described as a “brain-machine” interface to connect “humans and computers.” Sounds like dystopian technology coming straight out of Ghost in the Shell (2017).

Creepy transhumanism.

Sadly, some young parents, mainly trained in schools of communist ideology (i.e., most colleges these days), will trot their children out to receive the chip.

But this should all be seen as warfare on humans.

We’ve got some big, bad boys back East too.  Be careful in the bush.  Carry a large bore gun with you when you venture out.  I take it the only thing that stopped this fight was the fact that they were too winded to carry on.

Dean Weingarten.  Dean cites Bruen.

Respondents next direct the Court to the history of the Colonies and early Republic, but they identify only three restrictions on public carry from that time. While the Court doubts that just three colonial regulations could suffice to show a tradition of public-carry regulation, even looking at these laws on their own terms, the Court is not convinced that they regulated public carry akin to the New York law at issue. The statutes essentially prohibited bearing arms in a way that spread “fear” or “terror” among the people, including by carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.” See 554 U. S., at 627. Whatever the likelihood that handguns were considered “dangerous and unusual” during the colonial period, they are today “the quintessential self-defense weapon.” Id., at 629. Thus, these colonial laws provide no justification for laws restricting the public carry of weapons that are unquestionably in common use today. Pp. 37–42.

He goes on in citing Bruen to note that it didn’t take tyrants long to begin to press their tyranny.

In the early to mid-19th century, some States began enacting laws that proscribed the concealed carry of pistols and other small weapons.

This is yet another great commentary by Dean.  He concludes with this.

Thousands of gun laws across the United States have destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives and done untold economic damage. They were passed with lies and false promises. It is time to repeal most of them.

Yes, laws against barrel length, gun features, ownership stipulations, capacity, rate of fire, and on and on the circus goes.  I wouldn’t have stopped with the need for most of them being repealed.  I would have said all of them.

The exception would be manufacturer liability for bad products and poor engineering.  If a manufacturer fabricates and markets a firearm that harms the user because of poor craftsmanship or failure to follow SAAMI specifications, I believe they should be held accountable, both legally and financially.  I think this is in line with what I’ll call Christian libertarianism.

Outside of this single law, I’m at a loss to find another one with which I agree or believe should be kept.

H/T: Fred.

Source.

President Jair Bolsonaro has called on millions of Brazilians to arm themselves as soon as possible to fight against the tyrannical elites who want to enslave them. “Everyone should buy a gun, damn it! Armed people will never be enslaved,” Bolsonaro told a crowd of supporters outside his official residence, the Alvorada Palace, on Friday, Newspunch.com reports.

He acknowledged that guns “cost a lot,” but urged gun opponents to stop nagging people who are willing and able to pay to buy them, writes Rt.com.

During his campaign for office, Bolsonaro vowed to relax Brazil’s gun laws so citizens could protect themselves from the country’s rampant crime and violence. And he has kept that promise, issuing nearly a dozen decrees making firearms, including semi-automatic assault rifles, more readily available to the public. However, some of them were amended by the National Congress.

The president’s latest initiative in February allowed Brazilian citizens to possess up to six guns and removed the federal police and military from overseeing firearms possession. Those who have a hunting license can now buy 30 rifles, while marksmen can have up to 60. According to data obtained by law enforcement newspaper O Globo, the number of privately owned firearms in the country has risen from about 700,000 to more than 1.2 million since 2018.

I only agree that armed people will never be enslaved assuming the will to use them.

A man who doesn’t believe in slavery of his people wants them armed in order to defend against tyrannical elites.  Meanwhile, the elites in America are trying everything possible to disarm the public.

You see where this is going.

Source.

Across the United States, the deer population has ballooned in recent years to an estimated 30 million. Once a rare sight, deer have become something of a pest, spreading disease and causing fatal car accidents at an increasing rate. But for people like Arnow, who has a background in environmental science, the biggest issue is the impact of too many deer on the forest. With fewer bears and mountain lions around to keep their numbers in check, deer can reproduce with abandon and decimate the young trees and native plants that live beneath forest canopies.

“[If] we have a beautiful overstory of mature oak trees [but] zero oak saplings in the woods, there’s no future for the forest,” said Arnow, whose concern has turned into an obsession with herd management.

To protect these crucial habitats and carbon sinks in order to help keep climate change from spiraling further out of control, scientists say deer population density in much of the country must be drastically reduced. “For this thing to work, you have to drive the deer numbers down to a very low level,” said William McShea, a wildlife ecologist at the Smithsonian Conservation Ecology Center. “You can’t just have casual hunting.”

I don’t know if I agree with the superlative “very low level.”  But the point is that the proliferation of hunting regulations on bag limits, allowable antlered and antlerless take, time, season duration, etc., etc., has overdone it.

I agree with that.  It’s time to pull back on the overbearing regulations.

I think both bullets did their job very well.  I take it the Hornady round would be great for Eastern white tail, while the Buffalo Bore monolithic round would be great for defense against dangerous game.

I think he’s being a bit hard on his dog.  The dog can’t patrol everywhere all of the time, or the dog may be sick, or simply playing at the time (dogs need play time too).  Or the dog may be making a visit to the Vet that particular day and unable to patrol the grounds.  Having dogs is a wonderful thing, but we can’t place more on their back than they can handle.  And if a dog is wonderful, having more than one is great!

I get the issue of not wanting to carry a pistol on your person everywhere you go, or a phone for that matter.  But I also know a man who carries everywhere all of the time, and the only time he ever removes his backup pistol from his ankle is when he’s in the shower.

In the end, I consider the greatest failure to have been leaving children alone in an unlocked house.  Even if the house is on your property, you just cannot do that, especially if you live on a large plot in a rural area.  Men aren’t the only threats.  There are Coyotes, hogs, etc.  The children should either (a) go with the parents and learn to care for the chickens, or (b) understand that they have to stay home with the door locked. It’s sad that this is the state of affairs, and it might not have been so 50 years ago. But we are where we are today.

Of the two, I think (a) is the better choice.  Jesus taught us to teach our children by carrying them with us in our daily tasks.  It’s how He learned to be a carpenter.

By the way, as I’ve said before, I consider the shotgun to the be the best home defense weapon available.  I applaud his choice of weapons.  Also, if I’m not mistaken, he’s shown carrying a Beretta 1301 with an extended tube mag and red dot sight, my favorite home defense tool.

Dean Weingarten has an exposé on the status of Young v. Hawaii.  I knew this and had read the reports, but the interesting thing about this is that in the comments section, Charles Nichols drops by the make an extended comment.

I suspect that the Young v. Hawaii en banc panel would like to issue an opinion that says states can ban Open Carry in favor of concealed carry. However, there are a couple of jurisdictional problems with the en banc panel doing that.

The first is the Young v. Hawaii three-judge panel was bound by the Peruta v. San Diego en banc panel opinion and held that there is only a right to Open Carry. Neither side fled an en banc petition challenging either that holding of the three-judge panel opinion or the Peruta v. San Diego en banc panel opinion.

The State of Hawaii did file an en banc petition limited to the Open Carry holding of the three-judge panel, which was granted.

During the en banc oral argument, Mr. Young’s attorney (Alan Beck) was asked point blank if he was challenging the Peruta v. San Diego en banc opinion which held that there is no right to concealed carry. He said that he was not challenging Peruta v. San Diego, en banc.

Putting all of that together, the en banc panel does not have the jurisdiction to decide anything other than whether or not the denial of Mr. Young’s permit to openly carry a handgun violated the Second Amendment. And the en banc panel might not even decide that question because there were a couple of reasons given by the en banc panel, that were independent of the Second Amendment, for upholding the decision of the district court.

My California Open Carry lawsuit, Charles Nichols v. Gavin Newsom et al, does not challenge the Peruta v. San Diego en banc panel opinion either. My lawsuit is not limited to handguns. I challenge California’s bans on openly carrying loaded and unloaded rifles, shotguns, and handguns. I also challenge the license requirement.

My three-judge panel asked for supplemental briefing. The Young v. Hawaii en banc panel has not. Supplemental briefing was completed in my appeal on August 8th.

So if I read this right, Young was about open carry alone.  Peruta was about concealed carry alone.  The Nichols case is about open carry alone, and in California, not Hawaii (although presumably deciding for Nichols in California would be favorable to Young and vice versa).

The trouble is that Bruen didn’t decide open carry, and thus we are left with patchwork rulings and patchwork laws in states.

I continue to maintain that gentlemen, good citizens and men of fine upbringing don’t mind openly carrying their weapons in public.  It is for the good and peace of the country.