Tag Archives: Disarm

News

61-year-old British man convicted for cutting up fruit with a Swiss Army knife

7 Comments

Story from the UK Daily Mail. (H/T Overlawyered via ECM)

Excerpt:

A disabled caravanner who kept a penknife in his glove compartment to use on picnics has blasted the authorities after being dragged through court for possessing an offensive weapon.

Rodney Knowles, 61, walks with the aid of a stick and had used the Swiss Army knife to cut up fruit on picnics with his wife.

[…]He said: ‘There is no previous conviction history whatsoever and it was not in his possession and was in the car glove compartment in a pouch.’

The retired maintenance engineer, from Buckland, Devon, had no criminal record before the case.

He said: ‘The tool was in my glove box in a pouch, along with a torch, first aid kit and waterproofs.

‘It is everything I need for the maintenance of my car or if I break down.

‘Now I have a criminal record for the first time in my life. I am upset by that.’

This is good, because once the public is disarmed, then the poor helpless criminals who are only criminals because of the social injustice of the capitalist system will have no one to fear as they execute crimes. Stealing isn’t wrong – nothing is right or wrong. And criminals shouldn’t be deterred from crime by having their victims defend themselves – even if law-abiding people have to be injured or killed.

Besides, it’s illegal for men to be protectors of their families in the UK – that’s the government’s job. Men just get to pay the taxes for the government. After all, men don’t really care about their families. It’s not like men have some sort of innate desire to protect and provide for and lead their families that would be thwarted by gun control, high taxes and mandatory public schooling. They’ll still want to get married, right? Besides, not having to defend the family leaves a man more time for looking at homes for sale and shopping for women’s shoes.

What went wrong in the United Kingdom?

I wonder if you all remember a while back when I linked to all the chapters of Theodore Dalrymple’s famous book “Life at the Bottom”, which is about the worldview of the British lower class. It’s also about how rich, well-meaning secular leftists hurt the poor by enacting public policies that reward bad behavior and punish good behavior. Dalrymple is a psychiatrist in a hospital, so he sees it all firsthand.

News

Evaluating Sotomayor’s views on abortion and gun ownership

Leave a comment

The article by Wayne Lapierre is from the Washington Times.

Excerpt:

After the first day of confirmation hearings, gun owners have good reason to worry. Those of us who respect the Second Amendment are concerned about the case of Maloney v. Cuomo, which reviewed whether this freedom applies to all law-abiding Americans or only to residents of Washington. If it’s incorporated, the Second Amendment prevents the states from disarming honest Americans. If it’s not, the Second Amendment is meaningless outside of our nation’s capital.

Judge Sotomayor was on the U.S. 2nd Circuit panel that decided the Maloney case in a short, unsigned and clearly incorrect opinion. The fact that the Maloney panel misread precedent in order to avoid doing the 14th Amendment “incorporation” analysis required by the Supreme Court is troubling to say the least.

Equally troubling is the fact that Judge Sotomayor said she wasn’t even familiar with the Supreme Court’s modern incorporation cases. There are few issues more important for a judge to understand than whether the fundamental guarantees in the Bill of Rights apply to all Americans. Our First Amendment right to free speech applies to all Americans. Our Fourth Amendment protection from illegal search and seizure applies to all Americans. It’s hard to believe that a potential Supreme Court justice wouldn’t be familiar with those cases.

Despite that judicial amnesia, Judge Sotomayor co-authored an opinion — in January — holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. So that leaves two options: Either she failed to follow the Supreme Court’s direction in Heller that judges are required to analyze the modern incorporation cases or she actually did review those cases but came to an incorrect conclusion. Neither option gives gun owners much confidence in her view of the Second Amendment.

Issues, Etc. did a podcast with pro-lifer Charmaine Yoest. Sotomayor is apparently a radical pro-abortionist, as well.

Video from Fox News:

You can read more about Charmaine’s challenge to Sotomayor in this Washington Post article.

Excerpt:

Yoest is a calm, articulate, smart abortion opponent — the kind who gives abortion-rights supporters nightmares. Since virtually the moment Sotomayor’s name surfaced as a possible Supreme Court candidate, AUL has been conducting vigorous opposition research. It has set up two Web sites, including Sotomayor411.com that compares Souter to Sotomayor on a variety of issues, including abortion, end-of-life issues and the rights of abortion demonstrators. Suffice to say that Sotomayor doesn’t fare too well. And it has also has AskSotomayor.com, which lays out 10 questions that it says senators need to ask her.

I am so glad that we have someone intelligent and articulate to speak for us at Sotomayor’s hearings. A lot of people are pro-life, and are not really informed about it. But Charmaine is going to go out there and make a solid case in the little time she has available!