April 20, 2014

Call The Police! A Man Has a Gun……….Tattoo

GunTatooGasp! I just couldn’t let this story go by without sharing with others. In Maine, a tree company sets up in front of a man’s house and are about to start cutting trees and limbing branches for the electrical lines running overhead. The man, who works nights and sleeps days, is awoken by the noise of crunching ice.

Scurrying, the man throws on only a pair of pants and rushes outside, into the frigid air, to stop the men from cutting his trees. The man is shirtless and half asleep. He asks the men to stop working and they do.

The man returns to his bed to get back to some needed sleep, when he hears a knock on the door. Answering the door, he discovers the Maine State Police. They report that a worker for the tree company called police to report that the man who lived there had confronted them and that he thought the man had a gun.

As it turns out, the man did have a gun, or at least a facsimile of a gun. He had a tattoo of a gun on his abdomen that made it look like a gun was tucked into the waist of his pants. See the photo.

Here’s the link to the story.

Sweden’s Problems With Reintroduced Wolves

From Yahoo! News:

“When you know a wolf can turn up on your land anytime, it changes your whole quality of life. You don’t dare let your dogs out in the yard … and people say you need to take a rifle when you walk in the forest!”

There are few differences between Sweden and the USA when it comes to problems with wolves. Sweden, no longer a sovereign state (some may live in denial over that), really has no say over the disease-ridden wolves raising hell in that country. The USA, no longer a sovereign state (many still live in denial of the fact), and the individual states that make up what was once a sovereign union, have no say over what becomes of wolves. All are forced by totalitarian communists to have their right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness snatched from them over the evil dictates of world rulers and powers, all of which we never see, hear and certainly do not elect.

As with news article after news article, this one from Yahoo! News fails miserably to even mention the human-threatening disease these government-sponsored terrorist wolves carry and disperse on the landscape. Just like when some lying, thieving, corrupt person says, “If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it…..PERIOD,” so too do we hear the same lying, thieving, corrupt people say these diseases are of no harm to humans.

Well, we know how Obamacare is turning out. You want to wait to get diseased before you do something about it?

The Continued Insanity of Wolf Introduction

It is becoming more common to read and see events such as the one where a person’s young colt gets slaughtered by wolves, among other assorted property losses, attacks on humans and the spread of deadly disease, and yet the perverts continue to defy sanity and plan to place more of them useless, disease-infested, criminal animals onto the landscape. Not only is the continued act a substantiation of insanity, it is very telling that such action is a tool for the destruction of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

What was once white is black, what was right is wrong. Everything is the opposite of what was once taught. And among the insanity, we read press releases like the one below, in which officials plan to release more useless, mongrel, hybrid, mixed-breed canine killers into the countryside.

From the Arizona Game and Fish Department:


For immediate release, Feb. 14, 2014

Plan announced for 2014 Mexican wolf releases in Arizona
Releases to replace wolves illegally shot between 2011 and 2013

PHOENIX – The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) have initiated actions for the release of two Mexican wolves in Arizona to replace wolves illegally shot, as directed by the Arizona Game and Fish Commission in 2012 and to increase the genetic diversity of the wild population.

The Mexican Wolf Interagency Field Team (IFT) tasked with the day-to-day management of the wild population captured two wild males during the January winter population count. M1249 was taken to the Service’s Sevilleta Wolf Management Facility in New Mexico and is paired with a captive female wolf. M1290 was paired with a captive female wolf and is being held in a release pen in the Apache National Forest.

Neither of the male wolves has documented involvement in livestock depredations or nuisance behavior, making the animals good candidates for pairing with a captive female and subsequent release. Both wolf pairs are being observed for breeding behavior and will be released into the primary recovery zone in Arizona in the spring prior to giving birth.

“This is one of the important steps in Game and Fish’s commitment to replace the four wolves lost to illegal causes between 2011 and 2013. One of the key considerations when the options were evaluated was to improve population genetics, which is important to the long-term survival of the subspecies,” said Jim deVos, the Arizona Game and Fish Department’s assistant director for wildlife management.

An additional option to replace wolves illegally shot and to increase the genetic diversity of the wild population – cross fostering wolf pups born in captivity into a wild wolf pack litter – still remains under consideration and will be evaluated in the future.

“The pairing of genetically valuable females with males with wild experience accomplishes two goals, adding genetically valuable genes into the population and replacing wolves that were taken illegally,” said Benjamin Tuggle, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Southwest Regional Director. “If these pairs successfully establish themselves in the wild, they will increase population numbers immediately and will contribute to a more genetically robust population in the future.”

In 2013, the IFT attempted the release or translocation of two pairs of wolves and a single wolf into the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area. A single male was released into Arizona and recaptured in New Mexico shortly after release for displaying nuisance behavior. Plans to release a pair of wolves in Arizona were halted when another pack displayed territorial aggression and threatened the safety of the new pair. That pair was returned to captivity. In addition, a pair of wolves was translocated into the Gila Wilderness of New Mexico. However, the male dispersed outside of the recovery area boundary and was recaptured, and the female was later legally shot and killed on private land in the act of killing livestock.

Release sites will be chosen based on several factors including appropriate prey density, distance from occupied residences, seasonal absence of livestock grazing, and occurrence of established wolf packs in the area.

The Mexican wolf population is estimated to be at least 83 animals, the highest number of wolves since the reintroduction began in 1998.

The Reintroduction Project partners are AGFD, White Mountain Apache Tribe, USDA Forest Service and USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service – Wildlife Services, several participating counties in Arizona, the Eastern Arizona Counties Organization, and the Service.

PIGS Want Man to Stop Raising Pigs

(NaturalNews) A Michigan farmer says he could be facing an armed raid by government agents soon, following a lengthy disagreement with state Department of Natural Resources officials over his refusal to obey an order to kill his feral pigs.<<<Read More>>>

Black Activists Blast Congressional Attack on Ballot Protections

New Bill Provides Fraudsters with Opportunity to Steal, Nullify Votes of Law-Abiding Americans

Washington, DC – Legal experts with the Project 21 black leadership network are highly critical of new legislation introduced in Congress meant to overturn and pervert reforms to the Voting Rights Act that were instituted by the U.S. Supreme Court just a few months ago.

“This proposal is fundamentally flawed. Instead of explicitly acknowledging the rights of states to engage in lawful voter integrity measures, it only does so begrudgingly. And it fails to reset the clock before allowing the federal officials to micro-manage the voter laws of sovereign states,” said Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper, a former professor of constitutional law and former congressional leadership staff member. “This so-called reform permanently lowers the standard of review for allowing the federal government to intervene in the election law decisions of states in a way that conflicts with the federalist system that our nation’s founders created.”

This past June, a majority of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 effectively discriminated against certain states and localities by holding them to different enforcement standards than the rest of America and was predicated on behavior from nearly 50 years ago. In its decision, the justices threw out the outdated formula used to determine which jurisdictions were forced to obtain “preclearance” on any voting and election-related change — no matter how small — with the federal government.

Now the “Voting Rights Amendments Act of 2014,” introduced late last week, would create a new formula and with it new criteria that could force even more states and localities to have to report to federal overseers on all matters related to the electoral process. This proposed bill absolutely endangers polling place protections such as photo and government-issued ID requirements recently instituted in many states through democratic means and with strong popular support.

“Specific states were targeted under the old formula, but the proposed legislation makes it clear that any state or municipality could be subject to stiffer scrutiny if it is found to have a recent history of voting problems,” said Project 21 Co-Chairman Cherylyn Harley LeBon, a former senior counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee. “This ‘subjective’ criteria is the most troubling and will result in a highly-politicized Department of Justice essentially declaring war on voter ID and other voter integrity measures passed in the various states. This simply does not give me confidence that we can and will be able to reduce voter fraud.”

Project 21 members submitted a legal brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Shelby County v. Holder, the case that brought about the Voting Rights Act of 1965 reform last year. That brief pointed out that evolving attitudes and decreased racial animosity created “new circumstances now place even covered jurisdictions well ahead of where non-covered jurisdictions were in 1965, and provide an ongoing political check against backsliding… The urgent necessity for extreme measures such as preclearance is this well past, and such legislation is no longer appropriate.”

Previously, Project 21 joined with the Pacific Legal Foundation and other organizations on a similar brief urging the Court to take up the Shelby County case.

Activists affiliated with the Project 21 black leadership network are longtime and strong supporters of the various safeguards against identity theft in the electoral process found at the state level. In additional to the legal briefs in the Shelby County case and support of those state-level protections, a delegation of Project 21 members also met with United Nations officials at the world body’s New York City headquarters in 2012 to provide a commonsense rebuttal to efforts at that time on the part of the NAACP to turn the issue of polling place security into an international human rights concern. The U.N. never intervened.

In 2012 and 2013, Project 21 members earned approximately 800 known interviews and media citations with regard to the issue of ballot security. It was the only conservative organization to actively speak out for the concerns of the plaintiffs in the Shelby County case at the Supreme Court plaza on the day the justices heard oral arguments in the case.

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over two decades, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative, free-market, non-profit think-tank established in 1982. Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated .

Would Banning Guns Reduce Murder and Suicide?

A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence. Study compiled by Don B. Kates and Gary Mauser. This study can be found in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.

Judge Rules NSA Spying OK, Can Only Work if Everyone is Spied On

“This blunt tool only works because it collects everything,” Pauley said. “The collection is broad, but the scope of counterterrorism investigations is unprecedented.”<<<Read More>>>

Baiting Bears (Animals) is Inhumane Because HSUS Says So

The perverse, non-thinking, hypocrites at the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), and other environmental groups think that putting out bait to attract a bear to a site for the consideration of taking a bear for harvest, is inhumane. When one considers the multiple ways in which humans have always “baited” animals, not only for sustenance but to also reduce or eliminate pests, why then does the HSUS, et. al. pick on bears and bear hunters.

Should the HSUS and their blind followers be successful in presenting a citizen’s initiative in Maine to effectively end bear hunting, bear trapping and bear hounding, then we should prepare for the stoppage of the use of any kind of “bait” for fishing, including artificial lures and flies. I assume then that the anti humans at HSUS would prepare to stop tree stand sitting for all other species to hunt. No more imitating sounds to “bait” an elk, deer, turkey or a moose into your hunting area. No more cover scents. No more luring scents and sounds. And let’s not forget putting cheese or peanut butter in a mouse trap.

There are some members of these hate-filled, totalitarian organizations that believe that providing “bait” for game is making animals unnaturally fat and disrupting that animal’s good, balanced diet. If so, then what will be their argument when they have succeeded in ending “baiting” bears (of which I don’t recall anyone has defined what constitutes “bait.”) and hunters and trappers continue to use man-made, artificial lures and “baits?”

Will HSUS be successful in ridding Maine of this person’s game attractants and cover scents, along with many, many others?

We haven’t been presented with any such referendum…yet. I will guarantee that if and when that time comes, there will be nothing in that referendum to define specifically what it is they intend to prohibit through referendum. And that’s by design and ignorance…..they know nothing about bear hunting, trapping or hounding.

Groups like HSUS do their homework. They determine who or what is vulnerable to one of their anti human attacks, for the purposes of forcing people to end their long-held heritages in exchange for a decadent, hate-filled, progressive, Marxist lifestyle. They care not about the welfare of the bear or any other animal, yet they are very good at pretending. HSUS has proven they are an illegal, political, lobbying organization that deceives people into giving up their money for animals and very little goes for animal welfare. Because they work in conjunction with the corrupt, agenda-driven United States Government, a blind eye is turned their way and they are allowed to continue their corrupt and deceptive practices.

Their target is to end your heritage because they see this kind of lifestyle as a direct threat to their future. HSUS and their groupies will lie, cheat and steal to get what they want. Pretending they care about the inhumane aspects of animal welfare is a joke. They want the destruction of your lifestyle.

They may or may not be successful in putting a stop to “baiting” bears. But it will not end there. They will go after lures and attractants. Their goal is to stop all hunting, trapping and yes, they also want to stop fishing.

Gee, I think I recall having said all these same things during all the last lawsuits filed against Maine and other states. And yet, I continue to hear from hunting, trappers and fishermen that the perverse environmentalists will go away. Not going to happen.


In New York, the Nanny State Marches On

Public Smoking AND Quitting Smoking Now Both to be Outlawed in the Big Apple?

New York to Vote on Banning Public Use of Device that Helps Smokers Quit

The Nanny State Marches On

New York, NY – This week, the New York City Council is expected to vote on a bill that would ban the use of e-cigarettes where cigarette smoking is banned. In an op-ed in today’s New York Post, “Bloomberg’s E-Cig Ban Likely to do More Harm than Good,” the National Center for Public Policy Research warns city council members that not only will the bill not have the desired effect, it could do harm.

“The key idea is that e-cigs somehow facilitate tobacco smoking – but the best evidence suggests the reverse, that they’re mainly useful for (and used by) people trying to quit. So the ban is likely to do harm, not good,” writes National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Jeff Stier, the author of the op-ed.

Earlier this month, Stier testified at the City Council health committee where the issue was debated

Stier testified:

I would caution you that this is not the prudent thing to do. The prudent thing to do here is to help cigarette smokers quit. Rushing to judgment here could have serious, unintended consequences that you need to be aware of. It will stop people from quitting smoking. E-cigarettes are not a gateway to smoking. The data does not show that. E-cigarettes are a gateway to quitting smoking.

“Nicotine,” Stier explains, “is addictive, but not particularly harmful, especially at the levels consumed by smokers or users of e-cigarettes, who are called ‘vapers’ for the vapor, rather than smoke, emitted by e-cigarettes.” “Nicotine’s bad reputation should be attributed to its most common delivery device, cigarettes,” says Stier. “Nicotine itself is about as dangerous as the caffeine in soda. Along the same lines, while too much soda can cause weight gain, nobody seriously suggests that caffeine causes obesity. Similarly, e-cigarettes provide the nicotine and the habitual activity of smoking, without the danger of burning tobacco.”

Stier’s op-ed, available here, also provides responses various charges by e-cig ban supporters.

“…Ban fans suggest it’s just the prudent thing to do until we have more data,” concludes Stier in the op-ed. “No, the prudent thing to do is to help smokers trying to quit.”

Stier’s testimony before the New York City Council’s health committee can be viewed on YouTube here.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations, and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 96,000 active recent contributors.

Contributions are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.

Black Conservatives Discuss NRA Founded to Protect Slaves

VIDEO: An interesting discussion on the founding of the NRA and the reason for it. Listen carefully to the historic references and then ask yourself if they are true – go find out.

Bookshelf 2.0 developed by revood.com