Remembering Things, More People Should Try It.

20 07 2015

Your Blogmeister’s Desk

Slay, Dotson, Joyce, and just about everyone of civic prominence and importance in this town is preaching gloom and doom and disaster if SCOMO doesn’t find state level absolute felon in possession laws to be square with Amendment 5.

I wrote in this space four days ago:

…even though before Amendment 5, the state’s felon in possession laws were hardly ever enforced.  Felon in possession raps, then and now, almost always fall to the Feds.

To add some clarity to that, I’m wondering why everyone in this town is so antsy pantsy about having a state level absolute felon in possession law when I don’t recall it ever being used that much, maybe except as an add on charge as plea bargain fodder.

But then I remembered something else:  Until 2007, Missouri’s actual felon in possession law was not absolute itself.  It only disallowed felons to possess firearms during their probation.  Once they were off papers, they were good to go.  In theory only, because the Feds’ felon in possession law has been absolute since it was enacted in 1968.  What happened in 2007 is that the General Assembly made the state’s felon in possession law absolute at the same time it got rid of the ridiculous permit to purchase scheme.

Therefore, the time period before the state’s felon in possession law was made absolute in August 2007 must have been the end of the world.  Right?

I think the source of the anxiety is that Joyce and Dotson know that even if the state level absolute prohibition remains, that it’s not going to result in waves of ex-felons found to be in possession of guns filling up state prisons.  It’s not like there’s that much room in state prisons anyway.  No, what they want is for yet another technical process crime relating to felons and firearms to exist to use as plea bargain fodder.


Right to Know

16 07 2015

Jefferson City

P-D headline tonight:

Court upholds public’s right to know pharmacy used to supply Missouri execution drugs

I respond:

About eleven months ago, the consensus from state officials and the state’s major media outlets was that the public had a right not to know Michael Brown’s actions inside the Ferguson Market.

Road Narrows Ahead

14 07 2015


Ma and Pa Gentle Giant are losing some of the arrows in their quiver.

With any luck, another Federal judge will narrow what remains of their lawsuit out of existence.

Then they just might have to accept the truth.

Numbers Game

11 07 2015

Washington, D.C.


Obama: ‘A Person’s Zip Code Shouldn’t Decide Their Destiny’

President Obama declared “a person’s zip code shouldn’t decide their destiny” while promoting the administration’s Fair Housing Act push during Saturday’s Weekly Address

And then Obama does a belated victory lap over the Texas Housing v Inclusive Communities SCOTUS decision.

If he thinks that zip codes cause destinies, then he should just have the USPS do away with zip codes.  Then we’ll all be equal, or something like that.

Or rather, it’s the Chetty Chetty Bang Bang madness making its way to the White House.  A Steve Sailer post last week quoting a NYT article hit me like a ton of bricks:  Raj Chetty’s research is pseudo-scientific pseudo-academic garbage designed to justify moving blacks out of cities and into suburbs, to make cities safe for SWPLs and yuppies and gentrification.

Jeh the Jailbird?

8 07 2015

Brownsville, Texas

Hanen to Jeh: Come hither, and start ‘splainin.

Hanen finds Jeh in contempt and sends him to the hoosegow?  That, and I’ll pay this month’s bills using some of the coins in the gold pot at the rainbow’s end.

But, at least we have someone with some real power telling this White House no.


Still the Law of the State

30 06 2015

Jefferson City

Breaking news this afternoon:  SCOMO beats back a challenge to Amendment 5 based on supposedly deceptive ballot language, a challenge that SLPD Chief Sam Dotson was listed as a plaintiff, and they found that the ballot language was not deceptive.  Those are the only grounds that the state Supreme Court could have used to invalidate part of the state Constitution.  It looks to be either a 6-1 or unanimous 7-0 decision, because the only one of the judges to express a dissenting opinion, Richard Teitelman, had an opinion that was part concurring with the majority but part dissenting.  So, I guess one could call this 6.5-0.5.

This case did not deal with any practical applications of Amendment 5 to any real world criminal cases involving firearms offenders.

Just Our Immediate Galaxy

30 06 2015

Washington, D.C.

I was able to read the majority opinion on Texas Housing v Inclusive Communities, the disparate impact case.  Yes, it’s bad, but the way it was written, it doesn’t seem that it is going to impact anything more than housing policy.  In other words, I don’t think this language can be used to free black murderers on the grounds that murder being a crime has a disparate impact on black men.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,399 other followers