This is a placeholder for now because I have not had ads on this blog for years. In case I ever start up again, this will be the policy in effect:
The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don't think we're getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you're stupid, too. I have had a few ads on this site in the past and may do so again if I think it's worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn't buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don't mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now--you're not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer.
About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
Comment House Rules
Keep them on topic. No spam. No threats against anyone except me. Do not feed trolls--I'll take out the trash. Try to keep it clean. I'm the final arbiter. If you don't like the rules, start your own damn blog.
Link Policy
WarOnGuns reciprocates links with liberty-oriented sites promoting the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable individuals. If you have linked to me and don't see your site below, it's probably just because I haven't noticed it yet. Shoot me an email via the "Contact Form" (see above in this sidebar) if you want to fix that.
As a general rule I remove links for blogs that have been inactive for over one year.
This is why, whenever I hear anyone describe a court's decision as a 'ruling' I push back: "These courts are not our Rulers; the do not rule, they do not issue rulings; the issues opinions."
And this means we are free to ignore opinions that are unconstitutional.
Yes, Yes, Yes.... I've been saying it for years, the judges you vote for matter... too often we hear "the courts will overturn this or that law" and then seemed crushed when they don't. Judicial activism is running amok through this country.
“Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others." --ANDREW JACKSON
"You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the Constitution has given them a right to decide for the Executive more than to the Executive to decide for them. Both magistrates are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them. The judges, believing the law constitutional, had a right to pass a sentence... But the executive, believing the law to be unconstitutional, were bound to remit the execution of it; because that power is confided to them by the Constitution." —THOMAS JEFFERSON
5 comments:
This is why, whenever I hear anyone describe a court's decision as a 'ruling' I push back: "These courts are not our Rulers; the do not rule, they do not issue rulings; the issues opinions."
And this means we are free to ignore opinions that are unconstitutional.
Yes, Yes, Yes.... I've been saying it for years, the judges you vote for matter... too often we hear "the courts will overturn this or that law" and then seemed crushed when they don't. Judicial activism is running amok through this country.
“Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others."
--ANDREW JACKSON
"You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the Constitution has given them a right to decide for the Executive more than to the Executive to decide for them. Both magistrates are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them. The judges, believing the law constitutional, had a right to pass a sentence... But the executive, believing the law to be unconstitutional, were bound to remit the execution of it; because that power is confided to them by the Constitution."
—THOMAS JEFFERSON
In MY "opinion", John Ross' method is quicker, cheaper, easier and FAR more effective than any other I've read about.
-MM
And best of all, somone else gets to take all the risks and do all the work!
Post a Comment