Category: civil liberties

We’re the Only Ones Stepping Up Enough

The two-step is a tactic where a state trooper will pull an individual over for a traffic infraction and, after issuing a ticket, take steps back toward their vehicle. They will then turn around and initiate a new interaction with a driver, which the highway patrol classifies as a voluntary stop. [More]

If they’re not free to leave without getting double-tapped, it’s hardly voluntary.

[Via Steve T]

Forbidden Thoughts

33% of Generation Z believes using the wrong gender pronoun should be illegal. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer supports similar legislation that comes with potential jail sentences. [More]

What kind of anti-government extremist would support seditious conspiracies to defy that?

Or to oppose these pieces of totalitarian sh!+…?

[Via Michael G]

Plain and Simple, This is Naked, In-Your-Face Tyranny Designed to Terrorize Liberty Advocates

January 6 political prisoner Ryan Samsel has been held in prison without trial now since January 2021. [More]

Compare to:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial…

Opposing a tyrannical regime that would do this is very different from being “anti-government.”

That so many social media “progressives” laugh at this and call these political prisoners “traitors” shows that with some, reconciliation is not only impossible, but who would want it?

[Via bondmen]

Tangentially-Related UPDATE

33 years = cruel and unusual punishment AND state-perpetrated domestic terrorism.

And AP = DSM.

[Via Michael G]

Eviscerating the Blessings of Liberty, One Victim at a Time

She successfully navigated the administrative process at the DEA, but when prosecutors filed a forfeiture action in federal court she missed the deadline to file one required piece of paper. That was enough for the government to take her money forever. [More]

Just like the Founders intended!

Unanimous consent, eh? In this case, getting Black Lives Matter to start an “Anne Milgram is a racist” meme would get them to back down in no time.

I still want to get me one of those Leatherman tools…

[Via Michael G]

Why Would People Who Ignore the Second Amendment Pay Attention to the Sixth?

California Supreme Court: No Right to In-Person Cross-Examination of Accuser During Campus Sexual Assault Proceedings [More]

Well, yeah, we’re supposed to #BelieveWomen.

Noting some “women” are more equal than others.

[Via Michael G]

Shock and Awe Lawfare

The recommendation for Rhodes is the longest thus far for any person charged in connection with the Capitol attack, reflecting what prosecutors see as his role in a key organizing figure for members of the far-right militia — even as Rhodes was never alleged to have entered the Capitol building itself on Jan. 6. [More]

So he not only never went in, they have no direct orders he issued to any specific person. The seditious conspiracy here is by the persecutors.

This is an act of judicial terrorism with a chilling, wider goal in mind. What else would you call “the deliberate creation of a sense of fear, usually by the use or threat of use of symbolic acts of physical violence, to influence the political behavior of a given target group”?

I guess the jurors were impressionable and manipulable enough to embrace the hysteria. It also raises a question I’ve had for some time for those whose liberty advocacy efforts center on Fully Informed Juries: Even though “text, history, and tradition” known to the Founders is on your side, your message is limited by those who control the media, and by prevailing legal establishment interests, to the echo chambers of the political fringes.

The arrogant f*** (from Portland, OR) who wrote that actually cites a law review article that compares telling free citizens about their nullification rights to telling children not to stick beans up their noses (“most of them would not have thought about it had it not been suggested”) and wrings his hands over how difficult the First Amendment makes full suppression.

And potentially sympathetic politicians, mindful of what the Swamp and the media would do to them, have little incentive to touch it.

So why not force wider discussion and open the eyes of more by creating ballot measures in states that allow it? Just the act of collecting signatures will raise awareness “outside the choir” (and I qualify the use of that term), and the fact that something is gaining steam, and maybe even getting on the ballot, will call attention to a freedom safeguard the would-be rulers desperately want to keep citizens from learning about.

We might stick beans up our noses.

Unclear on the Concept

So, there’s no right to set a broken bone? No right to an ambulance? No right to heart surgery? No right to, say, atorvastatin? We can outlaw any medical procedure because there no right to one? You see, you don’t understand the nature of rights, or the American system of government. Under our system, people are free to conduct themselves as they like, be who they like, live as they like, however they want, as long as their actions don’t injure others. The government curtails that freedom only when it must, to protect others, and then only in the narrowest way possible consistent with that protection. That’s what freedom is. [More]

Apparently, the right to be free against being dragooned or robbed to service or pay for the above isn’t part of his (?) understanding of the nature of rights or the American system of government.

But thanks for the lecture on what freedom is.

Pot Luck

Another Federal Judge Rejects the DOJ’s Argument That Cannabis Consumers Have No Second Amendment Rights [More]

And then there’s action on the restraining order front…

I’ll bet a lot of “prohibited person” exclusions could be overturned with the right case, starting with the “one year” nonsense that has no bearing on proven proclivities for violence.

Qualified Impunity

All to say, the Supreme Court’s original justification for qualified
immunity—that Congress wouldn’t have abrogated common-law
immunities absent explicit language—is faulty because the 1871 Civil Rights Act expressly included such language. Those sixteen lost words, by presumably encompassing state common-law principles, undermine the doctrine’s long professed foundation and underscore that what the 1871 Congress meant for state actors who violate Americans’ federal rights is not immunity, but liability—indeed, liability notwithstanding any state law to the contrary. [More]

So the whole scam is exactly that, and it’s within the power of the Supreme Court to end it…?

[Via Michael G]

Unclear on the Concept

No wonder she’s so hot for “red flag laws.”

[Via WiscoDave]

We’re the Only Ones Blunt Enough

Last month, Bianca Clayborne and Deonte Williams were driving through rural Tennessee with their five young children when they were pulled over. When police found 5 grams of marijuana in the car, Williams was arrested and the five children were seized by local child protective services. One month later, the couple is still fighting to regain custody of their children. [More]

Securing the Blessings of Liberty again, are you, you badged thugs?

These outrages are perpetrated on citizens by real people with names. Those ought to be known so we can see what kind of snouts are in the public trough.

And remember: Back the Blue!

[Via Michael G]

We’re the Only Ones Kidnapping Enough

Then her father did “what any dad would—he went to hug his crying kid,” says Kaplan. “And at that point he was arrested. With handcuffs.” [More]

What can I say but “New Jersey“?

Things sure have changed since I was his daughter’s age. Kids playing unsupervised outside was the norm back in the days before widespread Ritalin prescriptions, school shootings, “single mothers,” DEI, “groomers,” and “gender dysphoria”.

If You Have to Ask You Can’t Afford It

Kenton County District Court Judge Ann Ruttle will be suspended for two weeks without pay in May after the Judicial Conduct Commission found she denied appointment of council to a defendant in 2021 who couldn’t afford one in a criminal case, according to court records. [More]

That’s just the way some like it.

[Via Michael G]

We’re the Only Ones Unsigning Enough

“Friend was violating no law by standing on the sidewalk and displaying his sign, and [Police Sgt. Richard] Gasparino had no lawful reason to order him to desist from that conduct,” the appeals court ruled. [More]

If he wanted to engage in police-approved speech in Stamford, he should have become a paid gunsnitch.

That said, it’s probably unfair for me to judge Sgt. Gasparino until I’ve goose-stepped a mile in his jackboots.

Kinda helps explain why Connecticut is so hot for unending citizen disarmament schemes…

Verified by MonsterInsights