Is this really still our Country?

Las Vegas shooting massacre

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Tue, 03 Oct 2017 17:28:00 +0000

The shooting massacre on October 1st 2017 was an awful display of hate and violence in America. Details of this will no doubt still be coming forth for some time. Without looking at the political implication of this shooting I would like to focus on one annoying factor I've seen portrayed by the main stream media. They are calling this the largest shooting massacre in American history. This is really not true, it's not even close. Even if you choose to remove war from the criteria, you still have some very heinous and violent massacres to choose from. The Las Vegas shooting is only the largest massacre of mostly white Americans in the modern area.

Let's look at two terrible massacres in particular;

The Wounded Knee massacre which occurred in December of 1890 resulted in the death of between 150 and 300 men women and children at the hands of the U.S. 7th Cavalry Regiment. This massacre was a result of the U.S. military deciding to disarm the Native Americans who belonged to the Lakota tribe. These Lakota did not wish to be disarmed. You might say their words and actions might have resembled something like "You can pry our guns from our cold dead hands". Of which the Soldiers responded with death and blood shed. 31 U.S. soldiers also died that day, all because of unfair and unconstitutional treatment of people who were not fully protected by our Constitution.

The Colfax massacre which occurred in April of 1873 on Easter Sunday no less, resulted in the death of over 100 mostly black Americans. This massacre was a result of the contested elections in Louisiana of 1872. A group of white Democrats armed with rifles and cannon overpowered the Republican freedmen and the black state militia who were protecting the Grant Parish courthouse in Colfax. Most of the freedmen were actually killed after they surrender. At least 50 were killed that night with deaths ranging anywhere between 63 to 150 with all but 3 of those deaths being black Americans. It was impossible to know the exact number of dead since the white Democrats threw most the bodies into the river.

So when discussing this awful massacre, please remember to put it into the proper context without taking away from others who have also suffered at the hands of great evil.

How the NFL #takeaknee protest is highlighting divide in the U.S.

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Sun, 01 Oct 2017 16:56:00 +0000

In the last few weeks I've made some observations that I believe need to be better understood by many people in this country. The #takeaknee protests which were arguable started by Colin Kapernick last year have be spreading in large part thanks to the progress made by BLM (Black Lives Matter). The NFL has tried to show unity by supporting their mission, but have now upset a large part of their main fan base by doing so. This is unfortunate because it goes to show just how ignorant much of it's fan base really is.

Now in the past I have not been a strong supporter of BLM and am still not a huge fan and here's why. At the heart of BLM is a sound message and philosophy however their practises, techniques and leadership are deeply flawed. The group unfortunately chose to throw support around the situation involving the death of Trayvon Martin and Mike Brown, and a few others with questionable character. If instead the group would have focused on Philando Castille and Tamir Rice and deaths which could have and should have been avoided, I think the group would have much better luck at gaining firm traction. In addition the practice of marching and stopping heavy traffic has done nothing but riled people up and polarized them against their efforts.

Now for those observations I mentioned;

The protest is against the idea of police brutality and injustice. This is a good concept, but at the heart of the protest is a focus on "the black statistics", which polarize and divide people. It becomes a whole other argument to many because there is so much information available showing that black on black violence is way up. Also, is the fact that Police and black violence is slightly down. What people then avoid looking at is that police brutality and injustice doesn't just effect black people. It effects everyone. Now of course, you're treading on that "thin blue line". How dare you!, right? Many people simply are incapable of wrapping their mind around the idea that Police Officers are not gods. They make mistakes and do horrible things sometimes. The "bad apples" need to be dealt with swiftly and definitively, but what ends up happening much of the time, is they get away with it, because Cops are hero's. To this day, some idiotic people still believe Philando Castille deserved to die, simply because they choose to believe a false story, that he might have been reaching for a gun.

People all around the country got really upset with NFL players for taking a knee during their special music (aka National Anthem) which plays while displaying their magic cloth (aka U.S. Flag). I don't mean to disrespect our flag, and by the way calling it "magic cloth" is my right. Our Soldiers fought and died so I could call it that, so don't be mad, OK. People don't understand or get that there is nothing disrespectful to the flag by taking a knee and the act of taking said knee has nothing to do with the flag. The act was meant as nothing more than a gesture of support to the protest. It does technically go against Code, or rather etiquette while playing the "National Anthem", but, that code is just that, it's etiquette and has absolutely no punishable action associated with it. And this is where it gets complicated. The NFL players were caught between a rock and hard place from the very moment they decided to protest. It would not have mattered if they took a knee, locked arms, sat down, or didn't show at all (like they used to prior to 2009 By the way), anything they did would have been construed as insulting or interrupting the special music or the magic cloth, so there was no way to participate that would have made the flag wavers and U S A!!! chanters happy.

Never in my life have I ever believed in the idea of "white privilege", until now. For the first time I think I am beginning to understand how it possibly works. So many middle and upper class white people who cannot even see the problem, they have no other recourse than to assume these NFL players are protesting the flag or the anthem or our nation or the troops. They can't believe that police ever do anything wrong, because after all, they are hero's in blue who "Serve and Protect". Every news story featuring a shooting or crime must be "their fault", right? I mean that's how all the cop shows and movies always portray it. They don't know anyone who has ever really been in trouble with the law so they have no context which to apply any knowledge or experience. All they know is that people follow the law and everything is OK, if you don't follow the law, then that must be when bad things happen. They never even stop to consider whether said law is just, or evenly applied, they simply look at it as a matter of black and white, white no shades of grey at all. Follow the law, your a good guy don't follow the law, your a bad guy, that simple.

Let me tell you. It is a completely different world on the lower end of the income ladder. Black or white, Brown or whatever it doesn't matter. Low income people have a totally different point of view because they are the ones who get to deal with most of the B.S. and many of those people are coincidentally people of color and mixed ethnic backgrounds. Let me tell you, if you're ever caught in one of those legal grey areas, being able to flex privilege, makes all the difference in the world. How else can you explain that almost 40% of the prison population is black even though blacks only make up 12% of our population? Back in 1980 more young black people were enrolled in college than were in prison but not anymore. More young blacks are incarcerated than are enrolled in higher education. Let that sink in for a few minutes...

Lastly, these protests have nothing to do with Islam. I cannot even count how many times I've heard that these protests are a result of Islams attacks on Christianity and "their" America. If you believe this, there is simply no hope for you.

So, basically this whole protest helps to highlight the divide in our nation between people who understand the oppression which exists and those who are so hopelessly enslaved that they actually believe they're free.

Why the healthcare and health insurance industry in the United States is screwed

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 23:00:00 +0000

A little more then 2 years since my last post, It's been a long hiatus but it's time to get back on the horse and blog.

Some of my best and most visited posts have been when I share personal experiences so that's what I'm going to do today. I want to share a healthcare service issue I've been dealing with for my two year old daughter. It's small potatoes as far as I'm concerned but I think it properly illustrates just how messed up our current health care/insurance system is and why we may all be better off without any health insurance at all.

My little one has had a couple of issues with her arm. I'm told it's commonly called nursemaid's elbow. Basically it's a minor dislocation of the forearm, really nothing major but it's painful and for a parent of a two year old it can be a little scary to see your child in pain. Her mother has had this issue with her once before so I was not completely unaware of what was going on, but seeing your child cry is still never easy so when it happened while we were playing I got nervous and took her to a walk-in health provider just a few block away from my house.
Upon arrival after checking in which took 10 to 15 minutes we were waiting in the waiting area for another 10 to 15 minutes before they called us in. Then after being shown to a room we waited again for about 10 minutes before we saw the doctor, the pediatrician. It took me about 5 minutes to explain the situation and her history and he began to rotate my daughters arm, at which point she stopped crying. Correcting this Nursemaids elbow "dislocation" is actually quite easy and if I had know this prior, I could have done it myself. The Doctor then spent about 5 minutes explaining to my how important it was to be careful while playing with a toddler and asked if she had any other issues, at which point I said no and he didn't think there was any reason for even an x-ray. He weighed her and checked her temp and sent us on our way. The whole time with the Doctor in total was about 20 minutes.

Now the real fun begins.

About 2 months later I get the first bill, from the wrong insurance company, because this health provider apparently submitted it to my old insurance, rather then the new insurance even though I gave them all the information at check-in. It took 5 months to get this part cleared up by the way... But more disturbing then that is the amount of money we are talking about. The Health Provider (Carle Clinic) is charging Blue Cross Blue Shield $97 for the visit, and $650 for what they are calling "surgery". I spoke to them about this, that I felt the amount seemed rather high and was probably inaccurate, but alas, this is the final determination. the $747 bill is correct and the billing code, "surgery" is what they call this type of service. They finally get the insurance billing part corrected so at least Carle is not coming after my ex-wife or I for $747, but now I am only responsible to pay $50. Remember I only spent 20 minutes with an actual Doctor and all he did, literally, was rotate her little arm. No x-ray, no medicine, no tests and certainly no cutting or stitching or anything like that.

Let's break this down, shall we. If a health care provider is billing $747 for each 20 minutes worth of work their doctors do. I'm going to be conservative and assume that the doctors are not spending 100% of their time seeing patients, so I'll assume a doctor is only able to see 3 patients an hour. Of course we all know that they probably see many more times this in a busy clinic or office, but let's keep the math somewhat simple. If a doctor is working an 8 hour day, they would see 24 patients in a day. That means they would be billing almost $18,000 for one doctor in one 8 hour day. Now obviously, some visits are going to be more complicated, but I can't imagine they would be less complicated then this visit. Again, he literally rotated her arm and we spent less then 20 minutes with him. I feel I should add, that he was really a nice man, and seemed like he was really a good doctor, but he spent 20 minutes of his time with us, and most of that time he was talking to me.

Let assume that Carle has 12 Doctors on duty in a day, I know they have more and less depending on demand, but on average this is probably pretty close. And they are open longer then 8 hours, but let's assume for the sake of argument that they only work a doctor for an 8 hour day, and they only see 24 people... (LOL) that would mean they are billing north of $200,000 a day just for regular visits. This doesn't include all the other services they perform. Sounds like a pretty good deal huh. Well no one ever said Doctors were poor right? After all they do deserve to make a good living, I'm not knocking them for that and Carle deserves to make a profit, after all they are paying the bills to have a clean and safe facility. And this is why we have insurance right? But wait a minute, what about the actual costs? I mean it's well know that Doctors make good money, but are they all millionaires and Billionaires? $200,000 a day means this little facility in a town of less then 30,0000 peps, is billing $72,000,000 (that's 72 Million to those who learned common core math) to insurance companies in a year, and remember this is a conservative number.

According to all the benchmarks Doctors make about $200,000 a year, on average, Obviously some make more and some make less, but this is taking all the listed areas and specialties on payscale and salary.com and does not include Boutique or emergency services and the like. Plain jane medical doctors, nothing more nothing less. Now let's look at what they could be making...

Remember I'm still responsible for $50 out of my own pocket, because insurance is a good thing right? Well imagine if instead of going to see Carle that day, I went to go see Doctor NiceMan, at his own private practice out of the living room of his own home and I paid Doctor NiceMan $50. Now let's assume Doctor NiceMan only works Monday through Friday and only works 8 hours a day and only sees the same 3 patients an hour. Doctor NiceMan would be working 260 days in a year and would be making $312,000.00 Not bad, over 100,000 over the national average. Now keep in mind Dr. NiceMan is really a nice man and he might not charge everyone $50, maybe he only charges $30 to some people or even donates some of his time to those less fortunate or takes trade for his services. Oh wait, that would be illegal according to our government overseers. Oh well...

So why do we have health insurance again?

Cheers,

Mike

Liberty in America is lost

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:42:00 +0000

The United States of America is the land of liberty it's also a land of laws. As of last night all of that is officially lost forever as we watched the police in California burn down a cabin hoping to catch Chris Dorner. Due Process for a "murder suspect" is no longer an expectation, now the police serve as Judge Jury and Executioner. No longer can you expect your day in court, if the state wants you, they simply label you a "domestic terrorist" and hunt you down in order to kill you.

2012 was the first time I personally felt sad to be an American, a I watched a crowd "Boo" Ron Paul as he suggested the Golden Rule. Now in February of 2013, I again feel sad. I actually believe some folks were eating pop corn while watching the cabin burn, hoping to see a glimpse of a dead Chris Dorner. No longer are we a nation of law, we are nation bent on retribution for those perceived to be enemies. Chris Dorner may very well be a murderer, but being hunted down like an animal is not what's supposed to happen in America.

Yesterday I even heard a radio talker rail on for about an hour in regards to Eric Holder submitting briefs in defense of the 9-11 terrorists, suggesting that this was the worst thing in the history of the world. He went further to suggest that we are seeing the same thing today for Chris Dorner. I see two major problems with this analysis.

First, Chris Dorner is an American Citizen accused of a crime, not a convicted criminal. It doesn't matter what facts the police think they have, they are meaningless until Dorner has had his day in court. No amount of explanation can justify the actions of the LAPD or the use of Drones and especially not burning down property in order to catch him alive. Are we witnessing the modern day version of witch trials?

Second, our founding fathers made it clear from a very early stage in our history, that even those guilty of heinous crimes deserve legal defense. John Adams (The first Vice President and second U.S. President) defended the British Soldiers who committed the Boston Massacre. There was no question as to their guilt, everyone present that day witnessed the shootings, but they were still afforded Due Process. John Adams himself lead their defense when no other Lawyer in Boston would take the case, he did so to ensure their ability to a fair trial.

He wrote the following.

"The Part I took in Defence of Cptn. Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested Actions of my whole Life, and one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country. Judgment of Death against those Soldiers would have been as foul a Stain upon this Country as the Executions of the Quakers or Witches, anciently. As the Evidence was, the Verdict of the Jury was exactly right. This however is no Reason why the Town should not call the Action of that Night a Massacre, nor is it any Argument in favour of the Governor or Minister, who caused them to be sent here. But it is the strongest Proofs of the Danger of Standing Armies."

-John Adams

Today however, many are sitting idle, watching as our government uses drones to watch our every move, as they classify us as "Terrorists", in order to hunt us down and kill us, whenever they perceive us as a threat to their control.

Where does this end?

Mike

Live by the Sword

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:18:00 +0000

I'm about to piss some people off, so brace yourself.

Snipers kill people, that's what they do, that's what they trained for and that's why they are called upon. It doesn't matter if all the "targets" (A.K.A. people) are really bad people, they are still people. It doesn't matter which government or President sanctioned the actions, the actions result in a person being dead. Yes, their following orders, but that doesn't remove the fact that people die. Being a sniper isn't a game, it isn't a status symbol, it doesn't mean you're a warrior of God, it means you kill people. When you do this for the government, you are called a hero, when you do it for pure profit, you're called a Hitman and a murderer. When you do it for the government and then come home and write a book and then profit, you become a household name. But that doesn't change the fact that you lived by the sword.

Where does live by the sword come from? The bible of course. I'm no theologian but I'm going to go out on a limb here and share what the bible says on this matter. In the Book of Revelations 13:10.

"He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints."

Now what does this mean? I'm not going to rely on my own personal interpretation for this I'm going to use a professional interpretation.

"Live by the sword, die by the sword" Prov. If you use violence against other people, you can expect to have violence used against you.; You can expect to become a victim of whatever means you use to get what you want.

That seems pretty clear to me. Now I don't claim to be model christian, I don't even usually chose to wear the christian monogram, but if I did I might choose as so many Christians do, to look and see what Jesus Would Do in situations like this. Mathew 26:52, describes a disciple drawing a sword to defend against the arrest of Jesus, but is rebuked by Jesus, who tells him to sheath the weapon, because "all who take up the sword will perish by the sword" Now this may seem confusing to some because the bible also teaches us that those who do not own a sword should sell their cloak and buy one, but this teaching only makes it clear that it's a benefit to have one in the case it is needed, and not that using it is always the preferred course.

Snipers use the sword, that's what they do. So to think that it's mean or hateful to say "live by the sword, die by the sword", when a sniper is killed, only means that you think the Bible is mean and hateful, which is OK, if that's what you believe, your entitled to your opinion, but don't hold the Bible up on a pedestal while cursing those who are simply sharing the wisdom from within it. If one is mean and hateful then they are both mean and hateful.

Cheers,

Mike

Did President Obama read the Afforable Health Care Act?

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:07:00 +0000

I'm a little Concerned about two of the Presidents recommendations in particular 16 and 17 which reads as follows.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to healthcare providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

Now I happen to know some health care providers have already begun asking these questions, but I just recently reviewed the AHCA (Affordable Health Care Act) and I'm forced to ask the question, has the Federal Government done something since the AHCA, to void section X of the Obama Care Bill? Because Section X, starting on page 2,037, line 23. “Protection of Second Amendment Gun Rights” States the following.

______________________________________________________________

‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.—
A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require
the disclosure or collection of any information relating to—
(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully
possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of
a firearm or ammunition by an individual.

‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None
of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an
amendment made by that Act shall be construed to
authorize or may be used for the collection of any in
formation relating to—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of
a firearm or ammunition;
‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATA
BANKS.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall
be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain
HR 3590 EAS/PP
records of individual ownership or possession of a
firearm or ammunition.

_____________________________________________________________________

It sounds to me like the AHCA, does in fact forbid this. If I remember correctly, this is what the NRA was bragging about being a win. So what gives?

Cheers,

Mike

Obama is not Hitler, but he does act like him

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:05:00 +0000

This morning President Obama addressed the country with the messages of our children, and facebook was set ablaze with the typical anti-Obama Hitler references. As usual, many people try to connect Obama's positions to Hitlers positions, and even use fictional quotes from Mein Kampf in a weak attempt to prove their points. The sad thing about this, is that there are plenty of parallels to be made between Hitler and Obama without the use of false information. I don't understand why so many people are quick to use a quote, without having any understanding of it's origin. If you use a quote, you really ought to know exactly where it came from, and I don't mean the site from which you shared it, I mean the literature or speech it was spoken or written.

To this day many still hold Hitler up on a pedestal as a gun grabber, a leader who took guns out of the hands of his people. This is simply not the truth. Adolf Hitler Was an anti-Semite of the highest order, of this there is no question. But he was a man of his time. Being an anti-Semite back then was normal and even expected. He did not see the Jews as his people, as Germans, even those born and raised in Germany. When he came to power he most certainly did see to it, that the Jews were disarmed. But he actually relaxed gun control to the citizens of Germany which had largely been disarmed through permit and registration requirements and limits prior to his rise to power. Many guns were already out of circulation by the statist polices prior to his becoming Fuehrer, through purely Democratic means.

Again, the firearms law enacted by Hitler's government enhanced the rights of "Germans" to keep and bear arms. There were no new restrictions added, many preexisting restrictions were relaxed or eliminated.

In the conclusion of World War 2, American soldiers occupying Germany were shocked to learn how many German civilians owned private firearms. Thousands of handguns were looted from German homes and brought back to the United States after the war. General Eisenhower ordered all privately owned firearms in the American zone of Germany confiscated, and Germans were required to hand in their long guns as well as any handguns which had not already been stolen. In the Soviet zone Germans were summarily shot if they were found in possession of even a single cartridge.

Now, to get back on point. Adolf Hitler did write Mein Kampf, and he did express many ideas and beliefs in that work, but he most certainly did not specifically say anything about controlling the Children. He also did not ban guns using the Children as a ploy, and as I've already addressed, he didn't ban guns unless you were a Jew. BUT, Hitler did most certainly understand the value of propaganda and using Children to persuade the population. There are many photos of Hitler surrounded by children, of course you also need to remember that Hitler was loved, he was not hated or feared, he was the most popular German leader of all time. He didn't hide behind bullet proof glass, he walked around in the open.

A quick scan of Mein Kampf reveals that he does mention Children over 40 times. So there is no question he understood the power of using Children to tug at the heart strings of his people, Just as President Obama does. President Obama is not Adolf Hitler, but he does keep acting like him. Also, I feel the need to point out that many of the actions which brought Germany crumbling, came before Adolf Hitler. Hitler was viewed as the man who was going to fix everything. (Do you see another parallel?) The actions of leaders prior to the Third Reich, mirrored our current U.S. System of government almost to the letter. They supported much of the same policies that the modern liberals support today. Economic Egalitarianism, internationalism and even a view of Cosmopolitanism that would suggest support of a one world government were common among both regimes.

And look were it lead Germany.

So, there are many things to compare and many things to be afraid of, but that doesn't mean that President Obama is Hitler. It also doesn't help the cause of liberty to manufacture things that aren't true. But most importantly, why would you want to, when there are so many genuine items to pull from.

Cheers,

Mike

Porn vs check out isle smut

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 01:07:00 +0000

Today while getting groceries and supplies I was forced to wait in line while the clerk and her manager tried to figure out how to make the Link Card in front me work properly. This provided me with the opportunity to read the cover of several magazines, well I'll admit what really caught me attention was the pretty little thing in her undies, but after that attracted my line of sight I decided to read the cover stories as well. This really got my mind running around in circles. While I was checking out I couldn't help thinking to myself how some people have the nerve to say porn is demeaning to women. Is Pornography worse than the smut pushed as an impulse buy?

People, mostly women, take off their clothes for the amusement of others, mostly men. This is a clearly defined practice which has ages and ages of history behind it. There are no misconceptions, the models take off their clothes and put their goodies on display. For this service they are paid, and paid well, generally speaking. No one is forced to do this against their will, at least not in commercially produced publications. But the smut on display at the grocery store is filled with unrealistic expectations. Perfectly toned, perky little hard bodies dancing around in their underwear with headlines like "How to give him mind blowing sex".

This stuff is peddled to the masses in quantities that I'm sure far exceeds pornographic magazines, and worse still is that it's put right in the reach of children. This fact really stood out to me as a soon to be father. I thought about the kind of questions children might ask and wondered how I might answer such questions from a child about these magazines. Can you imagine, a trip to the grocery store leading to a question like "Dad, what is mind blowing sex". Or a teenage daughter asking why it's inappropriate for her to run around in her underwear when the models on the magazines do it? These are questions some have no doubt already had the pleasure of dealing with, I don't look forward to that day.

All this leads me to the realization that I almost would rather see pornography on the check out isle shelf at the grocery store and the pop culture "smut" behind the counter. At least when my kid asks me why the girls on the cover are naked, I can turn it into an economic lesson. Simple supply and demand. There are plenty of girls with "daddy issues" and plenty of dirty old daddies willing to keep them employed. I would rather teach that lesson than taking all the time required to explain and teach about how some people make profit selling an unrealistic image to people who simply want to be popular.

Cheers,

Mike

Is posting satire acceptable? Not in New York city!!!

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 06:38:00 +0000

Essam Attia a 29 year old man posted some posters around New York depicting Drones dropping bombs on people, in at attempt to further the discussion on the use of military drones in U.S. airspace. The NYPD however did not find this amusing and tracked him down. They charged him with numerous felony counts but was released on bond. His arrest actually proves his point. If you become an enemy of the state, even if the state is the real enemy, they will find you.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."

-Thomas Jefferson. (Also stenciled by Essam Attia)

Audit the FED, destiny or pipe dream???

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 08:03:00 +0000

So I read somewhere that Senator Harry Reid needs to have a serious conversation with Ben Bernanke before he can allow a vote on the bill which would allow the Federal Reserve to be audited. This is the very same Harry Reid who once stood against the FED but now says that his frustration was against Alan Greenspan, who came from the same financial circle that produced Ben Bernanke. This is good old fashion political theater at it's finest.

I know that most Americans have no idea how central banking really works. What I fear more, is that I think we've reached the point where most don't care. I really wonder how many people would bat an eyebrow if it were all spelled out in exact words. I wonder how many would literally say "whatever", when being told how many trillions of dollars are being created from nothing and then loaned for interest on dollars which didn't exist prior to getting the loan in the first place.

Then you must consider good old fashion "Quantitative Easing" which seems to have found favor from both sides of the isle. In fact I've come into contact with people who claim to be on the right wing side, who think this is perfectly acceptable. People who think the Fed is OK, and not a problem at all. This is what really scares me while we wait on the precipice of this "Fiscal Cliff". I know John Boner is going to cave, he's going to give President Obama what he wants, hell he might even support this idea of giving the executive power to raise the debt as he sees fit. There is no telling how far this corrupt GOP might be willing to go. Some people actually believe the Republican Party still stands for something when in fact, they stand for pretty much the same exact principles the Democrats stand for, only they do it at Country Clubs instead of Union Halls.

Meanwhile, the Democrat machine is pushing more violence and hate in Michigan over "Right to Work", actually driving people to fight over whether or not a worker is FORCED to join a union. Does that make any sense??? If you want a job, you need to join a group that will take a portion of your earned income and use it as it sees fit in all kinds of political games that you probably don't support. Keep in mind the left accused the TEA party movement of violence many times even though no violence ever actually occurred, but here we have protesters actually throwing punches and no one hardly bats on eye.

What is wrong with our country???

Cheers,

Mike

Vermilion County Recorder

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:23:00 +0000

I don't like what I'm seeing in the race for Vermilion County Recorder. Why is Nikki Bogart attacking Tom O'Shauhgnessy? Mr. O'shaughnessy has stated publicly that he intends to make the Office of Recorder his top priority and a full time commitment. It's not like O'shaughnessy is the incumbent, with a record of slacking on the position, Nikki Bogarts attacks are completely unfounded. Mr. Oshaughnessy has a good reputation, if he says he will make it a full time commitment why shouldn't we believe him? It seems Bogarts whole campaign strategy is to discredit Tom O'shaughnessy. I don't like that and I think the voters of Vermilion County deserve better.

Cheers,

Mike

Romnesia

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:35:00 +0000

You know, maybe President Obama is right? Maybe Mitt Romney Flip Flops on his positions so often because he really does have a mental illness that prohibits him from remembering what his positions are. Maybe that's why he changes back and forth so often??? Maybe "Romnesia" is real and we're just now discovering it. Maybe this disease has a side effect which leads people towards political aspirations, which is why so many in D.C. and the State Capitals of our nation seem so filled with people who have this same problem.

I hate to give the President so much credit but can you imagine the first black President of the United States of America who was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize only 8 months after being inaugurated and only 17 months prior to authorizing the launch of 112 Cruise Missiles into Libya, might also have a shot at becoming the first black man and only 2nd man ever, to win 2 individual Nobel Prizes. If he has really in fact discovered this new debilitating disease now Doctors and Scientists can work hard in trying to find it's root cause and a cure.

President Obama could be single handily responsible for ending Romnesia. Once a cure is found to this disease the voters can rest assured that all future political leaders and candidates will have stable and solid messages just like Ron Paul. Never again, will we need to deal with people who run for office on positions that are completely different from the positions they supported just years earlier. This is the beginning of a whole new revolution in Democracy.

Thank you, President Obama. As it turns out, your Presidency is not a complete failure.

Cheers,

Mike

First Presidential Debate of 2012 is a huge success!!!

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 12:51:00 +0000

No matter if you love President Obama or Mitt Romney the first Presidential debate of 2012 was a huge success. Neo-Conservative news sites and blogs clearly marked Romney as the winner, while main stream media outlets and left wing sites and blogs tagged Obama as the champion. What does this mean to average voter? Simple, both choices are pretty much the same, as usual. It doesn't matter if you support government regulation or increased taxes, Either candidate will serve your needs. President Obama and Mitt Romney are contrasts within the same system while they don't challenge or change the system. This means they are not different at all. We as nation remain in the same direction under the same conditions. Even Reagan, who said many things which sound patriotic, still grew the system, which grew into the irreversible situation we have today.

I maintain that the only difference with these two party candidates is that they think they can manage big government better than the other and because of that we should be dedicated to fight the system until the end.

Next up, the kid from the Dairy State vs. Joe "Mr. Commuter Train" Biden.

Cheers,

Mike

Free enterprise in Danville, IL

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:32:00 +0000

I love how free market enterprise now includes getting money from the government, at least that's how it was portrayed during the city council meeting in Danville, IL. I understand the arguments made and I'll even go so far as to say that this might actually have been a good use of TIF funds, but it saddens me how it seems this is becoming the norm. Also, concerning is how rapidly these things seem to get done and pushed through. Seeing how the system works lately all one must do is call up the city give them a dollar amount and deadline a few days away and they'll vote to cut you check, it's really that simple, we all should be doing it.

Maybe this will end up being a good deal for the city of Danville, at least I hope so.

Cheers,

Mike

Proposed Amendment to IL Constitution on 2012 Ballot

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:07:00 +0000

In November there will be a proposed amendment to IL Constitution.

Here is the text of the referendum.

Upon approval by the voters, the proposed amendment, which takes effect on January 9, 2013, adds a new section to the General Provisions Article of the Illinois Constitution. The new section would require a three-fifths majority vote of each chamber of the General Assembly or the governing body of a unit of local government, school district, or pension or retirement system, in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system. At the general election to be held on November 6, 2012, you will be called upon to decide whether the proposed amendment should become part of the Illinois Constitution.

If you believe the Illinois Constitution should be amended to require a three-fifths majority vote in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system, you should vote YES on the question. If you believe the Illinois Constitution should not be amended to require a three-fifths majority vote in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system, you should vote NO on the question. Three-fifths of those voting on the question or a majority of those voting in the election must vote "YES" in order for the amendment to become effective on January 9, 2013.

Cheers,

Mike

Clint Eastwood vs Ron Paul

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:49:00 +0000

Clint Eastwood gets a cheer from the RNC,
(Even though it was Ron Paul, not Mitt Romney, who supports "bringing the troops home tomorrow." Was that a slip of the tongue or a planned mistake???)

Ron Paul says the same thing, and crowds boo him.. Maybe Ron Paul should have made movies instead.

Here is interesting story about the Clint Eastwood Performance.

Cheers,

Mike

GOP CHEATING TACTICS AT THE CONVENTION

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:05:00 +0000

The below is a summary from all the reported accounts from the Tampa Convention..

SUMMARY OF RNC CHEATING TACTICS AT THE TAMPA CONVENTION:

Below is a list of tactics implemented by the RNC to censor and prevent a nomination of Ron Paul (feel free to add to the list):

1. Illegally removed duly elected Maine delegates and replaced them with Romney “scab” delegates.

2. Stole delegates from Louisiana, Oklahoma and Massachusetts because they would not vote Romney.

3. Indefinitely detained Ron Paul delegates on buses using armed guards to delay and prevent them from voting on rules in the convention.

4. Indefinitely detained Morton Blackwell on a bus preventing him from filing a minority report opposing new oppressive rule changes.

5. Drove Virginia rules committee chairmen in circles around the convention center to prevent them from voting on rules thus allowing the RNC to vote in their stead.

6. Refused to acknowledge nomination papers from six states where a five state minimum was required

7. Changed rules on the spot from five state minimum to eight state minimum when they realized Ron Paul would be nominated

8. Denied Ron Paul a floor speech prior to the vote unless it endorsed Romney.

9. Declared unbound Ron Paul supporters as bound votes for Romney

10. Boehner ignored clear opposition to the rules vote that would prevent a Maine delegation from being seated.

11. Turned off microphones in the Ron Paul delegate section to prevent “division” or “point of order” calls from being heard even after 10 minutes of booing in protest.

12. Seated Ron Paul delegates in the nose bleed section to prevent them from being heard BEHIND territory delegates.

13. Passed rules allowing the RNC committee to choose and approve delegates rather than the states.

14. Refused video equipment in the convention center to allow undocumented cheating.

15. Ron Paul delegates were not allowed to bring signs, but Romney supporters were.

16. Cut off microphones anytime delegates cheered for Ron Paul

17. Called out votes for Romney as Romney votes, but called out Ron Paul as “other”.

18. When Ron Paul won the majority of delegates in Iowa ,Nevada and Minnesota, they only called out the few minority votes for Romney.

Ashamed of the GOP

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 02:09:00 +0000

I remember how proud I was the first time I voted in a major election. I also remember how great I thought it was in 2000 when GW won, for sure all the problems in this country would be solved I thought, boy was I naive. I've pretty much been a solid Republican my whole life, I've supported and volunteered for candidates in Congressional races and State races, always believing that the party was some how honorable.

In 2012 all that changes. Sadly I just took steps to become officially active this year and now I don't even know if I can stomach being called a Republican. I have not watched any of the Convention and don't know if I will, aside from a few youtube clips on facebook, I couldn't care less now knowing how the party I ounce believed to be honorable, will simply fix the rules any way they like to get the outcome they desire. I might as well be a Democrat if I just wanted to strong arm people into doing things a certain way.

Can it be that I've become too cynical? Perhaps, but I know one thing for sure. I am not supporting Mitt Romney. I've been saying that for months now as have many others and I think many people have just been turning a blind eye, thinking we all will come to our collective senses to support the GOP candidate. I actually believe that they think by taking over the process and forcing the Paul Supporters out, would make us just bow down to their flavor of tyranny. Well they are wrong. If Ron Paul doesn't support a full fledged write in campaign, I think I'm going to support Gary Johnson. I really want to write Ron Paul's name on the ballot, but if he doesn't commit to this intention it would be a truly wasted vote, whereas selecting Johnson, at least helps bring an established party closer to legitimacy.

Cheers,

Mike

Parent allows child to pull signs out of yard

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 03:39:00 +0000

So, for the last month or so someone has been yanking out our John Bambenek sign and our Ron Paul sign and throwing them on the ground in our yard. Not the end of the world, but a bit annoying. So we set up two security cameras and whoever it was stopped this juvenile behavior for a couple weeks but they struck again this afternoon. This whole time we thought the culprit was a

stupid teenage boy but it turns out that it's a little boy, probably 7 or 8 WITH HIS MOTHER. Seriously?!?! The boy comes right up in our yard and without even pausing yanks up the sign and throws it on the ground. He goes to the other sign, looking back at his mom for approval and yanks that sign up as well. And she just keeps walking like nothing happened. I would just like to know how a person gets to the point where they don't even bat an eye while their son continues FOR A MONTH to trespass into someone's yard and yank down a couple signs. I have to assume the parent actually encourages this behavior. What is wrong with people? Now my wife and I are cooking up some creative ideas to deter this behavior in the future.

Here is the first video.

Here is the second video.

Cheers,

Mike

Do Voter ID laws disenfranchise voters?

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:18:00 +0000

Do Voter ID laws disenfranchise voters?

Well, I can't get on board an airplane, open a bank account or buy a car, firearm, cold medicine, drain cleaner or lye or even cash a check, without Proper ID. But somehow verifying identity at the polls goes against my civil rights. Does that make sense to you?

Pennsylvania has just become the most recent state to enact strict photo id requirements in order to vote. The left has gone into full force trying to fight the spread of these kind of laws which only serve to verify the identity of voters before they vote in elections. Some actually suggest that many people won't be able to vote because they don't have id. Who doesn't have ID? Mostly today as far as I can tell, anyone who doesn't have id doesn't want ID because it's their intention to live "off the grid", which is fine, I believe people should be able to live their life how they wish, but in order to participate on the grid, I think it's reasonable to follow some basic rules, one of which is being able to verify who you say you are.

It's interesting if you take a look at at the map put together by the NCSL, and then look at a Red/Blue map of the nation. It's eerily similar, I wonder why that is?

Cheers,

Mike

Republicans just as corupt as the Democrats

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 04:23:00 +0000

I am an elected Republican Precinct Committeeman who is mad as hell at the Republican Party. 2012 the Year a Candidate with strong grass roots support was snuffed out by the establishment so another wealthy elitist can have the nomination. Not only was the Illinois state Republican Convention a completely staged event in which no Delegates were allowed to share any input at all, but now the RNC is using every trick in the book and even a few they invented to keep Ron Paul out of the mix in Tampa, FL later this month. In Several states, GOP establishment insiders who control the party have been doing everything they can to keep Ron Paul Delegates out of the process. Louisiana and Oregon are even attempting to replace anyone who openly supports Ron Paul from participating in the process. Now in Maine were 21 of the 24 unpledged delegates openly support Ron Paul are having their credentials challenged by the Mitt Romney Campaign state coordinator. This challenge would bar the entire delegation of 40 delegates from attending the RNC later this month. The Delegation was given a compromise to consider, which would essentially force them to support Mitt Romney but the entire group voted unanimously to reject the compromise. Why is the RNC burning precious resources on this if Mitt Romney is the Nominee? Because by the RNC’s own rules a candidate needs only have a plurality of delegates from 5 states and with Maine, Louisiana and Oregon Ron Paul has 7.

Quinn Attempts "Assualt" Weapons Ban!!!

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 20:30:00 +0000

Attention Illinois Gun Owners and all who believe in the 2nd Amendment for what it was intended for. The Governor has played a hand that you should be aware of.
He has added an Amendatory Veto Message to SB0681 attempting an all out "Assault Weapons Ban" You really need to read this.

July 31, 2012

To the Honorable Members of the Illinois Senate

97^th General Assembly

Pursuant to my constitutional powers as Governor of the State of Illinois, I hereby return Senate Bill 681 with specific recommendations for change. In doing so, I propose to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines in our state.

As Governor, it is my foremost duty to protect the citizens of Illinois, especially our children, from deadly violence.

I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution– the right to bear arms.

However, the proliferation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines undermines public safety and the right of personal security of every citizen.

Right now, anyone with a FOID card in Illinois is permitted by law to purchase an assault weapon. Illinois also does not impose any restrictions on the purchase or possession of high-capacity ammunition magazines, which automatically feed ammunition into a firearm chamber to allow the user to fire repeatedly without reloading.

Banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines will make Illinois a safer place to live.

Other states including California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York all have such bans in place. The ban would not pertain to law enforcement officials or members of the military.

There is no place in the State of Illinois for weapons designed to rapidly fire at human targets at close range.

My action today gives the members of the General Assembly an immediate opportunity to protect the people of Illinois by banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

Therefore, pursuant to Article IV, Section 9(e) of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 681, entitled “AN ACT concerning regulation.”, with the following specific recommendations for change:

By replacing everything after the enacting clause with the following:

“Section 5. The Criminal Code of 1961 is amended by adding Sections 24-1.9 and 24-1.10 as follows:

(720 ILCS 5/24-1.9 new)

Sec. 24-1.9. Manufacture, possession, delivery, sale and purchase of semi-automatic assault weapons, assault weapon attachments, .50 caliber rifles, and .50 caliber cartridges.

(a) Definitions. In this Section:

(1) “Semi-automatic assault weapon” means:

A. Any of the firearms or types, replicas, or duplicates in any caliber of the firearms, known as:

i. Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);

ii. Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;

iii. Beretta AR-70 (SC-70);

iv. Colt AR-15;

v. Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;

vi. SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;

vii. Steyr AUG;

viii. INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, and TEC-22; and

ix. Any shotgun which contains its ammunition in a revolving cylinder, such as (but not limited to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;

B. A semi-automatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has any of the following:

i. A folding or telescoping stock;

ii. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

iii. A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles the barrel, and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned; or

iv. A fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition;

C. A semi-automatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has any of the following:

i. A folding, telescoping, or thumbhole stock;

ii. A shroud that is attached to or partially or completely encircles the barrel, and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned;

iii. An ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside the pistol grip;

iv. A fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition;

v. A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; or

vi. A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm;

D. A semi-automatic shotgun that has any of the following:

i. A folding or telescoping stock;

ii. A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

iii. A fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; or

iv. An ability to accept a detachable magazine.

“Semi-automatic assault weapon” does not include:

A. Any firearm that:

i. Is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;

ii. Is an “unserviceable firearm” or has been made permanently inoperable; or

iii. Is an antique firearm;

B. Any air rifle as defined in Section 1 of the Air Rifle Act.

(2) “Assault weapon attachment” means any device capable of being attached to a firearm that is specifically designed for making or converting a firearm into any of the firearms listed in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this Section.

(3) “Antique firearm” has the meaning ascribed to it in 18 U.S.C. Section 921 (a)(16).

(4) “.50 caliber rifle” means a centerfire rifle capable of firing a .50 caliber cartridge. The term does not include any antique firearm as defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 921 (a)(16), any shotgun including a shotgun that has a rifle barrel, or a muzzle-loader used for “black powder” hunting or battle re-enactments.

(5) “.50 caliber cartridge” means a cartridge in .50 BMG caliber, either by designation or actual measurement, that is capable of being fired from a centerfire rifle. The term “.50 caliber cartridge” does not include any memorabilia or display item that is filled with a permanent inert substance or that is otherwise permanently altered in a manner that prevents ready modification for use as live ammunition or shotgun ammunition with a caliber measurement that is equal to or greater than .50 caliber.

(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), 90 days after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly, it is unlawful for any person within this State to knowingly manufacture, deliver, sell, purchase, or possess or cause to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed, a semi-automatic assault weapon, an assault weapon attachment, any .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge.

(c) This Section does not apply to a person who possessed a weapon or attachment prohibited by subsection (b) before the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly, provided that the person has provided proof of ownership to the Department of State Police within 90 days after the effective date of this amendatory At of the 97^th General Assembly as required by law. On or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly, such person may transfer such weapon or attachment only to an heir, an individual residing in another state maintaining that weapon in another state, or a dealer licensed as a federal firearms dealer under Section 923 of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968.

(d) This Section does not apply to or affect any of the following:

(1) Peace officers as defined in Section 2-13 of this Code and retired peace officers not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, in possession of a semi-automatic assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, or .50 caliber rifle transferred to the retired peace officer by his or her law enforcement agency upon retirement.

(2) Wardens, superintendents, and keepers of prisons, penitentiaries, jails, and other institutions for the detention of persons accused or convicted of an offense.

(3) Members of the Armed Services or Reserve Forces of the United State or the Illinois National Guard, while in the performance of their official duties or while traveling to or from their place of duty.

(4) Manufacture, transportation, or sale of weapons, attachments, or ammunition to persons authorized under subdivisions (1) through (3) of this subsection to possess those items.

(5) Possession of a semi-automatic assault weapon, an assault weapon attachment, a .50 caliber rifle, or a .50 caliber cartridge at events taking place at the World Shooting and Recreational Complex at Sparta, only while engaged in the legal use of the firearm or attachment, or while traveling to or from this location if the items are broken down in a non-functioning state, or are not immediately accessible, or are unloaded and enclosed in a care, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container.

(6) Possession of any firearm if that firearm is sanctioned by the International Olympic Committee and by USA Shooting, the national governing body for international shooting competition in the United States, but only when the firearm is in the actual possession of an Olympic target shooting competitor or target shooting coach for the purpose of storage, transporting to and from Olympic target shooting practice or events if the firearm is broken down in a non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or is unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container, and when the Olympic target shooting competitor or target shooting coach is engaging in those practices or events. For the purposes of the paragraph (6), “firearm” is defined in Section 1.1 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act.

(7) Possession of a semi-automatic assault weapon, an assault weapon attachment, a .50 caliber rifle, or a .50 caliber cartridge only for a hunting use expressly permitted under the Wildlife Code, or while traveling to or from a location authorized for such hunting use under the Wildlife Code if the items are broken down in a non-functioning state, or are not immediately accessible, or are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container.

(8) Manufacture, transportation, possession, sale, or rental of blank-firing semi-automatic assault weapons and .50 caliber rifles or the weapons respective attachments to persons authorized or permitted, or both authorized and permitted to acquire and possess such weapons for the purposes of rental for use solely as props for a motion picture, television, or video production or entertainment event.

(e) Sentence.

(1) A person who knowingly manufactures, delivers, sells, purchases, or possesses or causes to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed a semi-automatic assault weapon in violation of this Section commits a Class 3 felony for a first violation and a Class 2 felony for a second or subsequent violation or for the possession or delivery of 2 or more of these weapons at the same time.

(2) A person who knowingly manufactures, delivers, sells, purchases, or possesses or causes to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed in violation of this Section an assault weapon attachment commits a Class 4 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony for a second or subsequent violation.

(3) A person who knowingly manufactures, delivers, sells, purchases, or possesses or causes to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed in violation of this Section a .50 caliber rifle commits a Class 3 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony for a second or subsequent violation or for the possession or delivery of 2 or more of these weapons at the same time.

(4) A person who knowingly manufactures, delivers, sells, purchases, or possesses or causes to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed in violation of this Section a .50 caliber cartridge commits a Class A misdemeanor.

(720 ILCS 5/24-1.10 new)

Section 24-1.10. Manufacture, possession, delivery, sale, and purchase of large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

i. As used in this Section:

“Large capacity ammunition feeding device” means:

1) A magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; or

2) Any combination of parts from which a device described in paragraph (1) can be assembled.

“Large capacity ammunition feeding device” does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition or any device that has been made permanently inoperable.

(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), it is unlawful for any person within this State, beginning 90 days after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly, to knowingly manufacture, deliver, sell, purchase, or possess or cause to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed , a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

(c) This Section does not apply to a person who possessed a device prohibited by subsection (b) before the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly, provided that the person has provided proof of ownership to the Department of State Police within 90 days after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly as required by law. On or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97^th General Assembly, such person may transfer such device only to an heir, an individual residing in another state maintaining that device in another state, or a dealer licensed as a federal firearms dealer under Section 923 of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968.

(d) This Section does not apply to or affect any of the following:

1) Peace officers as defined in Section 2-13 of this Code and retired peace officers not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, in possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the retired peace officer by his or her law enforcement agency upon retirement.

2) Wardens, superintendents, and keepers of prisons, penitentiaries, jails, and other institutions for the detention of persons accused or convicted of an offense.

3) Members of the Armed Services or Reserve Forces of the United States or the Illinois National Guard, while in the performance of their official duties or while traveling to or from their place of duty.

4) Manufacture, transportation, or sale of large capacity ammunition feeding devices to persons authorized under subdivisions (1) through (3) of this subsection to possess those items.

5) Possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device at events taking place at the World Shooting and Recreational Complex at Sparta, only while engaged in the legal use of the device, or while traveling to or from this location if the items are broken down in a non-functioning state, or are not immediately accessible, or are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container.

6) Possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device if that large capacity ammunition feeding device is sanctioned by the International Olympic Committee and by USA Shooting, the national governing body for international shooting competition in the United Sates, but only when the large capacity ammunition feeding device is in the actual possession of an Olympic target shooting competitor or target shooting coach for the purpose of storage, transporting to and from Olympic target shooting practice or events if the device is broken down in a non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or is unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container, and when the Olympic target shooting competitor or target shooting coach is engaging in those practices or events.

7) Possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device only for a hunting use expressly permitted under the Wildlife Code, or while traveling to or from a location authorized for such hunting use under the Wildlife Code if the items are broken down in a non-functioning state, or are not immediately accessible, or are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container.

(e) Sentence. A person who knowingly manufactures, delivers, sells, purchases, or possesses or causes to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed in violation of this Section a large capacity ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than 17 rounds of ammunition commits a Class 3 felony for a first violation and a Class 2 felony for a second or subsequent violation or for possession or delivery of 2 or more of these devices at the same time. A person who knowingly manufactures, delivers, sells, purchases, possesses or causes to be manufactured, delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed in violation of this Section a large capacity ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than 10 rounds but not more than 17 rounds of ammunition commits a Class 4 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony for a second or subsequent violation or for possession or delivery of more than one of these devices at the same time.

Section 97. Severability. The provisions of this Act are severable under Section 1.31 of the Statute on Statutes.”

With these changes, Senate Bill 681 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

Sincerely,

PAT QUINN

Governor

13 Year old entrepreneur shut down

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:10:00 +0000

Every once in while I find a story that really personifies the title of my blog. "Is this really still our country?" A 13 Year old builds a business and the governments shuts it down. Can you imagine, a young entrepreneur who does things the right way, who starts small, saves money and expands into a new empire following the rules even, is shut down by the power of government. This should be the rallying cry for those of us who believe in individual liberty and prosperity. The following is a honest example of someone pulling them self up from their boot straps, only to be pushed back down by crony capitalism and government tyranny.

The following is a story from Gary North "The TEA Party Economist".

A 13-year-old mowed lawns to save up enough money to buy a hot dog cart. He got licensed. Then he tried to sell hot dogs. The city shut him down.

Why?

Two reasons. First, the good old boys who run local restaurants two decades ago got independent food vendors zoned out. Second, the teachers union got businesses banned for anyone under 18.

He had paid $2,500 for the cart. He sold it for $1,250.

He has just had the finest civics lesson that any public high school kid has received in twenty years in Holland, Michigan. He has seen civil government at work. He has seen how special-interest groups get politicians to feather all their nests.

The company that bought his cart will let him use it for free except on a few days during the year. So, he came out ahead.

The story hit the local media. He has become a kind of hero.

Readers encouraged [Nathan] Duszynski to “keep up the fight” while simultaneously blasting the zoning ordinance that he ran afoul of. Mobile food vendors have to be located adjacent to, and be a part of an existing business that already has a food service license. Duszynski is too young for a “peddler’s” license that would have allowed the cart to operate as long as it stayed in place no longer than 10 minutes.

The political system is set up to benefit insiders who have established positions in every industry. They don’t want competition. They want to pull up the ladder after they have climbed up.

It is good that this young man has seen it close up.

Gun Control Compromise

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:58:00 +0000

So Bill O'Reilly and others would like to see more gun control, specifically as Bill suggested, a law which would require folks who buy "Heavy Weapons" and large amounts of ammo to be investigated by the FBI. My first thought on this is heck no, why should the Feds watch me, because I purchase some gun that a bureaucrat deems "Heavy Weapon". As most supporters of the 2nd amendment understand, gun registration usually leads to confiscation at some point. We are always told this is crazy in America, because we are the land of the free.

We are constantly told that that these kind of measures are for our own good, they are to fight terrorists and so on. Well what about people who don't trust their Federal Government, who prepare for the day when the lines are drawn between those who support tyranny and those who fight for freedom?

So I'm willing to make a compromise.

Every American who buys "Heavy Weapons" and large amounts of ammo should go on a list so the FBI know exactly where we are. In return, every single Federal Agent who has access to the same kind of "Heavy Weapons" also goes on a list which will be made public. This way we know who they are, and they know who we are. This will make the 2nd American Revolution much more easy to fight.

What do you say???

Cheers,

Mike

Remember Colorado, Don't let them take your guns away!!!

noreply@blogger.com (IM-MTO) — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:05:00 +0000