Mr VJP

As usual. My location changed when the SAFE Act was implemented. Not NY. Not NJ. I consider myself a citizen of the United States now.

Why do you ask?

Police Harassment Recently, the Chula Vista, California Police Department ran an e-mail forum with the local community (a question and answer exchange) with the topic being, "Community Policing." One of the civilian e-mail participants posed the following question: QUESTION: "I would like to know how it is possible for police officers to continually harass people and get away with it?" From the "other side" (the law enforcement side) Sgt. Bennett, obviously a cop with a sense of humor, replied: ANSWER: "First of all, let me tell you this...it's not easy. In Chula Vista, we average one cop for every 600 people. Only about 60% of those cops are on general duty (or what you might refer to as "patrol") where we do most of our harassing. The rest are in non-harassing departments that do not allow them contact with the day to day innocents. At any given moment, only one-fifth of the 60% patrollers are on duty and available for harassing people while the rest are off duty. So roughly, one cop is responsible for harassing about 5,000 residents. When you toss in the commercial business, and tourist locations that attract people from other areas, sometimes you have a situation where a single cop is responsible for harassing 10,000 or more people a day. Now, your average ten-hour shift runs 36,000 seconds long. This gives a cop one second to harass a person, and then only three-fourths of a second to eat a donut AND then find a new person to harass. This is not an easy task. To be honest, most cops are not up to this challenge day in and day out. It is just too tiring. What we do is utilize some tools to help us narrow down those people which we can realistically harass." The tools available to us are as follow: PHONE: People will call us up and point out things that cause us to focus on a person for special harassment. "My neighbor is beating his wife" is a code phrase used often. This means we'll come out and give somebody some special harassment. Another popular one: "There's a guy breaking into a house." The harassment team is then put into action. CARS: We have special cops assigned to harass people who drive. They like to harass the drivers of fast cars, cars with no insurance or no driver's licenses and the like. It's lots of fun when you pick them out of traffic for nothing more obvious than running a red light. Sometimes you get to really heap the harassment on when you find they have drugs in the car, they are drunk, or have an outstanding warrant on file. RUNNERS: Some people take off running just at the sight of a police officer. Nothing is quite as satisfying as running after them like a beagle on the scent of a bunny. When you catch them you can harass them for hours to determine why they didn't want to talk to us. STATUTES: When we don't have PHONES or CARS and have nothing better to do, there are actually books that give us ideas for reasons to harass folks. They are called "Statutes"; Criminal Codes, Motor Vehicle Codes, etc...They all spell out all sorts of things for which you can really mess with people. After you read the statute, you can just drive around for awhile until you find someone violating one of these listed offenses and harass them. "Just last week I saw a guy trying to steal a car. Well, there's this book we have that says that's not allowed. That meant I got permission to harass this guy. It's a really cool system that we've set up, and it works pretty well. We seem to have a never-ending supply of folks to harass. And we get away with it. Why? Because for the good citizens who pay the tab, we try to keep the streets safe for them, and they pay us to "harass" some people. Next time you are in my town, give me the old "single finger wave." That's another one of those codes. It means, "You can't harass me." It's one of our favorites. Hopefully sir, this has clarified to you a little bit better how we harass the good citizens of Chula Vista."

The media is making a big issue about Cuomo's DNC speech. It was a Progressive's dream in a nutshell. In the interest of equal time, I think it only fair to give a nod to this speech too. A real American's dream speech. http://dailysignal.com/2014/10/27/watch-one-greatest-political-speeches-us-history/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Seems some folks don't comprehend the English language, or intentionally mangle the interpretation of the message that is written. The man never said he wasn't a good husband, father or grandfather. Nor did he say he didn't do his best, or strive to excel. What he said was, he could have been a BETTER one, financially, as a provider, if he hadn't been hamstrung by an elected official who was more interested in taking from productive citizens, than he was in helping them. Maybe speaking the truth about the liberal progressive agenda is what really disgusts some people.

I always liked her. Donna Douglas, aka Elly May Clampett, passes away at age 81 Read more: http://www.wsmv.com/story/27748304/donna-douglas-aka-elly-may-clampett-passes-away-at-age-81#ixzz3Nh1mDmqr

Intelligence is a gift that can be used for good or evil. At least Scalia is trying to enhance the quality of life in America for those willing to work for it.

Grampy, pay no attention to those guys. They can't understand why you weren't able to live in a taxpayer funded mansion, all expenses paid for your whole family, while giving all your kids a free (taxpayer) college education and then getting one the governor's office and another one a cushy gig on ABC TV. All while doing tremendous damage to individual liberty and freedom for everyone else in the state. Every man dies. Not every man gets to do so much harm to others while alive. If you didn't have anything good to say about the man when he lived, saying anything good about him now means you're a hypocrite.

Mario Cuomo has died. How will Andy know what to do now without daddy telling him?

Since President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued 3,120 new final regulations, equaling 27,854 pages in the Federal Register, totaling approximately 27,854,000 words. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/new-epa-regs-issued-under-obama-are-43-times-long-bible New EPA Regs Issued Under Obama Are 43 Times as Long as Bible

"At least six states have issued warnings about lead bullets and the risks for pregnant women and children. " The only way lead bullets present a danger to pregnant woman and children, is if they are hitting them at 2700 fps. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said Tuesday that environmental groups have suggested no way in which EPA could regulate spent lead bullets and shot without also regulating cartridges and shells. The Toxic Substances Control Act exempts cartridges and shells from regulation. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/24/court-rules-against-environmentalists-seeking-epa-regs-for-lead-bullets/?intcmp=latestnews

Now why would I bother to do that for a guy that doesn't show me any respect? BTW, I never said .05 per round is a bad price these days. I said I stocked up when it was a lot less. That is also true of the .223, .308, .7mm-08, .30-30, .30-06, 325 WSM, .35 Rem, .375 H&H and all the shot shell ammo I purchased years ago. Even eight years ago rumors were swirling about ammo prices going up. In all the years, I've never seen it go down, so it made sense to buy it then. I have plenty of friends that did the same, and they'll probably die before they can shoot it all. But guess who their widow will call when she wants to get rid of it?

I actually stocked up on all the ammo I needed years ago when I had every rifle and shotgun I'd ever need. Why buy more firearms when ammo is what you need? I haven't bought a round of ammo, especially in NY, in 3 years. I do buy reloading supplies though. BTW, knowing what was going to happen when Obama got elected, I invested $50K in Sturm, Ruger Co. stock ( symbol RGR on the Nasdaq ) when it was selling for $10 about 6 years ago. I sold it when it hit $80 about a year ago. Can you do the math on that one? Too late for anyone now, because it's back down to $35. Look it up if you think I'm lying. Almost forgot, check out gunbroker.com where you will find quantity sales of good (Winchester, etc.) .22LR for .03 per round.

After sales tax is applied, that's about 5 1/2 cents a shot. I'm glad I stocked up with a lifetime supply of .22's years ago.

I think it would be considered livestock jrm.

I tend to believe once the deer escapes, it is no longer the property of the business. When you lose something in the ocean, it belongs to whoever salvages it because it's considered abandoned, unless it was insured. If it was insured, the insurance co. pays off on it and it is then legally theirs. This buck may have been insured too, but once it's dead I don't think the insurance company would want to take it back. The ranch lost it to the wilderness and the young man salvaged it. It won't qualify for B&C, but it will look good on his wall and have an interesting story to go along with it forever.

If you don't believe in a supreme being, then that would be yo mama. LOL!

I have a couple of very close friends on the NYPD and rumor has it many of the veteran cops have just decided to "retire on duty" at this point. Without concealed carry in NYC, it would be smart to just stay out of there from now on. The PBA knows if the police back off and let things take their expected course, the city will devolve into the hell it normally would be without LEO's controlling it. They want it to be de Blasio's problem to fix, but a lot of good people are going to be the victims of it if it happens. I hope the police make their point by threatening to do it, rather than actually doing it. But that will be up to the elected hacks in NYC to decide.

Corrected for clarity, it's a memo from the PBA about de Blasio.

By RYAN GORMAN The assassination of two NYPD officers in broad daylight has revealed a major fissure between the department and the mayor's office. NYPD officers have been directed to arrest people only if "absolutely necessary" as cops adjust to working in a "wartime police department," according to a police union memo obtained by AOL News. "Absolutely NO law enforcement action in the form of arrests and or summonses is to be taken unless absolutely necessary and unless an individual must be placed under arrest," the note stresses. The memo came Saturday evening following the shooting deaths of officers Wenjin Liu and Raphael Romero. A veteran NYPD officer told AOL News: "Cops are not gonna give a s**t anymore. "The mayor is a wolf in sheep's clothing and his poor choice of words, along with other officials and activists, helped perpetuate this senseless killing." The PBA memo also claimed that New York Mayor Bill de Blasio's "hands are literally dripping with blood because of his words, actions and policies." P.S. As far as I'm concerned, Cuomo has done nothing to prevent hatred of cops either.

He did. I assume that's the Florida killer.

My prayers are for these, and all the officers out there everyday. I think it should get worse.....for the people that are threatening to do the shooting that is. It's about time for a huge crack down on people who want to do any crime without worry of getting killed, while trying to tie the hands of cops so they are in such danger on the job, they get killed. According to respected researcher Dr. John R. Lott, “In 2013, the assault rate for the general public in the United States was 229 per 100,000 people. But the rate police were assaulted that year was 9,300 per 100,000 officers – a rate 41 times higher. … This data also suggests that police are not actively looking for excuses to fire their weapons. The number of justifiable killings by police equals less than one percent of the assaults on police. Thus even when assaulted, police rarely resort to killing their attackers.” As for police who do kill their assailants, according to Bureau of Justice Statistics, the rate of black officers who kill black felons is 32 per 100,000 black officers, which is more than twice the rate of white officers who kill black felons – 14 per 100,000 white officers. I also applaud the officers for their action here: http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/nyc-mayor-de-blasio-shows-up-at-hospital-to-pay-respects-for-fallen-officers-nypd-cops-do-this

They have to be approved by Congress to get on the SCOTUS. So, once again, the same people mentioned above are the problem if they allow biased judges to get appointed.

You may have seen this before, but it's worth a reminder, as we see this problem getting worse every day. Charley Reese's final column for the Orlando Sentinel... He has been a journalist for 49 years. He is retiring and this is HIS LAST COLUMN. Be sure to read the Tax List at the end. This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering! 545 vs. 300,000,000 People -By Charlie Reese Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits? Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does. One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country. I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank. I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes. Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. ( The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.) The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House?( John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. ) If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist. If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan .. If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way. There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do. Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess! Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper. What you do with this article now that you have read it... is up to you. This might be funny if it weren't so true. Be sure to read all the way to the end: Tax his land, Tax his bed, Tax the table, At which he's fed. Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule. Tax his work, Tax his pay, He works for peanuts anyway! Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat. Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt. Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he Tries to think. Tax his cigars, Tax his beers, If he cries Tax his tears. Tax his car, Tax his gas, Find other ways To tax his ass. Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough. When he screams and hollers; Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore. Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in Which he's laid... Put these words Upon his tomb, 'Taxes drove me to my doom...' When he's gone, Do not relax, Its time to apply The inheritance tax. Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax CDL license Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Excise Taxes Federal Income Tax Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon) Gross Receipts Tax Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Luxury Taxes Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Personal Property Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Service Charge Tax Social Security Tax Road Usage Tax Recreational Vehicle Tax Sales Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'

Those who take a cyclical view of history often contend that democracy must eventually end in some form of Caesarism. That always seemed reasonable enough, but I must admit I’ve always had a bit of trouble believing that today’s “liberals” or “progressives” would ever clamor for totalitarian state. The achievement of order by force is supposed to be a masculine fantasy driven by the insecurities neuroses of the authoritarian personality. By rights, if anyone is going to demand the iron fist and the jackboot, it ought to be me. The hippie Boomer mentality that has dominated American culture and politics for the last generation has always been so anti-authoritarian that it seemed unlikely to me that today’s “liberals” would ever openly support a police state. But then, maybe I’ve just absorbed too much of their projection. It actually makes perfect sense that the spoiled, weak-willed and fearful type would cry the loudest for discipline, direction and protection. Virile men want the reins, not the harness! I’ve long perceived the underlying passive-aggressive character of so-called liberals who want to regulate the world into what Max Weber called an “iron cage” of bureaucracy for their own comfort and security. But their authoritarianism has always been couched in the soothing language of motherly love and peace and harmony. Lately, it seems those worms have finally turned. In response to recent calls for gun control, I asked, “Who will control the guns?” My point was that gun rights advocates always seem to get lost in tangential debates about self-defense or hunting or sport shooting, but the best argument in favor of having an armed citizenry is as a check against tyranny. If you’re worried about the abuse of power, you should be worried about who has all of the weapons. The entire American conception of freedom — which was essentially a liberal project (for better or worse) — comes from men who seceded from and made war against one of the most powerful empires in the world. Men who are truly free must have access to the means to challenge oppressive or failed states, and speaking truth to pepper spray doesn’t always cut it. I’ll concede that at some level of escalation — say, nukes — this becomes absurd, but the kind of weapons currently available to average gun owners are hardly weapons of world-ending mass destruction. They are enough, however, to make any attempt at true totalitarian oppression long, bloody, and expensive. Afghanistan is smaller than Texas, and those backward insurgents have been hurting superior military forces for…ever. Imagine fighting an insurgency in Texas and 49 other states. There are 300 million firearms in America…a rifle behind every blade of grass, as they say. I’ve always thought this was a pretty basic idea of “liberty.” Power-grabbing presidents, courts and bureaucrats have hemmed in our freedoms to better suit their ambitions and ideologies over the years, but this is all the more reason to draw the line at this fundamental American right. The response I received from gun control advocates caught me off guard. I expected maudlin pleas on behalf of “the children” and a bunch of weepy Lennon-esque quotes about learning to live more peacefully. After any high profile shooting, I know I can count on feminists to re-write the same old essays and op-eds about “toxic masculinity” and the need to “reimagine” masculinity, and some will probably even use the same dusty references to Baby Boomer bad guys like John Wayne and the Marlboro Man. That’s the old default. What surprised me was the tone of at least three or four different “liberals” (and I feel confident they would all describe themselves as such) who mocked the idea that Americans could ever stand up to their government. Smugly, they argued that my “camo-clad” militia buddies and I would never stand a chance against the US Military, and these “evolved” progressives delighted openly in the fantasy of all of us Soldier of Fortune subscribers getting mowed down by Apache helicopters and the National Guard. A blogger for the Houston Press wrote matter-of-factly that, “people who decide to stand up to the government with a firearm usually end up as a stain.” They all seemed positively tickled by our imminent slaughter and subjugation. These so-called liberals argued that the government is already so powerful that any notion that an armed populace wields more political capital against a potentially oppressive state is pure delusion, so it would be better if we all simply surrendered our weapons. In a nutshell: “Give up your guns, because the state can already crush you whenever it wants.” The American left used to be uncomfortable with power, but it’s getting the hang of it. Our Leader is once again the Person of the Year, and there’s a palpable sense that — due to changing demographics — the old American right has fallen and can’t get up. Progressives have lorded over the media and universities for years, but with this recent election, it seems likely that they’ll maintain political power as well. Power is bad when it’s someone else’s power, but maybe not so bad if you believe that power is on your side. Self-proclaimed liberals once feared and loathed Big Brother, but as things move forward, I think we’ll see more and more of them acting like Little Brothers, taunting their bullies… My Big Brother’s gonna whup you! You’ll see! In the Obama era, many of those who were once “outraged” have simply stopped paying attention. Few of the enraptured bother to criticize The Leader and many seem reasonably content with whatever he and his cronies sign into law. When asked about a recent extension to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008, which allows the federal government to spy on American citizens without a warrant, Washington University law professor Neil Richardsactually said, “Other than the vague threat of an Orwellian dystopia, as a society we don’t really know why surveillance is bad.” Naomi Wolf did recently warn of a coming drone attack on America, but the average bumper sticker Democrat isn’t exactly taking to the streets to protest free-range surveillance drones. Those folks are more worried about, well, whether or not crazy kids and scary white rednecks can get AR-15s with high-capacity “clips.” They aren’t overly concerned about a police state, because after all, it’s supposed to be their police state. It’s time to break the habit of referring to these people as “liberals.” True anti-authoritarian liberalism probably died with a Smith & Wesson at Owl Farm. Whatever their faults, classical liberals believed that the state should, for the most part, stay out of people’s business. Today, we call them libertarians. Modern — or “social” — liberals are simply socialists. Many want to avoid the stigma of the that word, but we shouldn’t flatter them by placing them in the company of anything having to do with “liberty.” The truth is that everything they want requires the state to get into people’s business. These police state progressives always want more regulation and state involvement, and more regulation will always demand more enforcement at every level. Jack Donovan