Dean Weingarten has a good find at Ammoland.
Judge Eduardo Ramos, the U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, has issued an Opinion & Order that a ban on stun guns is constitutional. A New York State law prohibits the private possession of stun guns and tasers; a New York City law prohibits the possession and selling of stun guns. Judge Ramos has ruled these laws do not infringe on rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Let's briefly…… [read more]
Report and video here. I don’t think she was chasing the big cat at all. I think she was running around out of her head screaming.
The dog is fine.
If it had been my Heidi-girl, a 90 pound Doberman, the cat may not have gotten out unscathed even if she had caught my girl. I’ve seen Heidi run other aggressive dogs down, catch up with them, slide underneath them (like she was sliding into second base), and then come up with a bite grip on the dog’s neck with the aggressive dog about to go down and out for the count.
Fortunately, I was able to save the other dog and we didn’t have to make a police report.
I’m sure she would have tried to do the same thing to the big cat. She may not have been completely successful against a cat of 130 pounds and she may have died, but she would have made the cat regret tangling with her and it wouldn’t have been a good day for either one of them.
The big cat probably wouldn’t have seen her as food anyway. From what I understand, they are predators of opportunity. Small dogs are on the menu.
If I lived in that area, I wouldn’t let my dog out without being there with a pistol.
Two rescuers reached the hiker around 2 a.m. Friday and found the person was “immobile due to an impalement of the foot by a tent stake,” Burke SAR wrote on Facebook.
Rescuers and EMS crews “slowly and safely” helped the hiker down the mountain and got the person out of the woods by 10:30 a.m., officials said.
How on earth does one impale their foot by a tent stake when camping? Anyway, don’t do that.
In truth, any “reign of terror” being perpetrated there stems from humans’ ubiquitous war on wildlife.
Banks concedes that human housing has invaded the coyotes’ natural habitat. Yet she villainizes them for adapting to our trespass.
Any “unrepentant hoodlums” are the residents who have dispossessed the coyotes; any “scourge” she perceives was wholly foreseeable, not “unpredictable.”
Rather than demonize coyotes for being coyotes, Banks should keep in mind that they aren’t able to earn a living by writing newspaper columns.
Sandra Perez, Santa Maria
Her view is irrational and inconsistent. Let me prove it to you.
Her view is likely the one of an evolutionist. Upon her view, men are animals and the Coyote is just another animal. We must all learn to live together in one gigantic utopia and men are the dastardly ones waging war on other animals.
But you see, upon the evolutionist view, there is no such thing as evil, and thus if men are just animals, men are behaving like animals when they kill other animals, as a lion would in the Serengeti desert. She has no business complaining. She’s watching nature in action.
This is what Professor Alvin Plantinga would do. He would explain how the naturalist view is self referentially incoherent and self defeating.
The proper view if that God created man in His image and gave him dominion over the animal kingdom. Dangerous animals who kill men are to be put to death, and animals who destroy your property are thieves – and your property includes your beasts as well.
Even dogs are smarter than her. They figured this out a long time ago, and they and men are friends.
The Ontario Provincial Police said in a statement it launched an internal investigation into the incident, adding it “raised concerns about professionalism and depicts opinions that are not in line with the OPP’s values.”
“We recognize that views expressed by the member has caused public upset,” the OPP wrote in a statement on Twitter. “The OPP does not condone current illegal activity.”
It added: “Officers must maintain the highest standard of conduct, integrity, and ethical behavior.”
The gang can’t be seen agreeing with the poors and peasants, can they now?
The Canadian government is fighting back the only way they can, i.e., sending in the cops to arrest, tow and imprison people). It has been all over the news this weekend. Some locations are standing firm.
Others are in a bit more trouble. When the cops arrest the main actors and tow their trucks, there isn’t much that can be done about it. Or is there?
At Coutts, they have changed tactics up a bit. I’m not sure what this was about, but I’m guessing that a way around the roadway was being planned by the government, and the farmers figured out a way to circumvent those plans. The farmers and tractors have supplemented (or in some cases fully supplanted) the truckers. Everyone needs sleep and has to go home at some point.
And this brings me to the analysis. At the Ambassador Bridge, after the arrests and truckers finally leaving, the line of protestors formed in a different location, while still blocking access.
The tactics are going to have to be malleable and evolving. When one trucker drives away, he should be replaced by another. When one protester leaves, another should come along to take his or her place. When arrests begin happening, reform the line elsewhere. When more arrests occur, truckers can jam up traffic by moving slowly or “strategically” running out of fuel right beside another trucker to which that also happens. When the truckers tire, the farmers can take their place.
It looks like much of this is already happening.
This can be done, but it will require determination and evolution of tactics, techniques and procedures.
