Archive for September, 2011
This from Conservative Action Alerts:
Gun Crime continues to decrease and Gun Sales increase
by ADMIN on SEPTEMBER 29, 2011 · 2 COMMENTS
Despite increases in gun sales, Gun Crimes continued to decrease in the United States for the fourth straight year in 2010, according to the FBI.
The FBI recently released its Crime in The United States statistics for 2010. Overall, murders in the U.S. have decreased steadily since 2006, dropping from 15,087 to 12,996. Firearms murders — which made up 67 percent of all murders in the U.S. in 2010 — have followed this trend, decreasing by 14 percent.
At the same time that firearms murders were dropping, gun sales were surging. In 2009, FBI background checks for guns increased by 30 percent over the previous year, while firearms sales in large retail outlets increased by almost 40 percent. The number of applications for concealed carry permits jumped across the country as well.
“There was a huge spike,” NRA spokesperson Rachel Parsons said. “It’s probably mellowed out and gone back to normal now.”
There is no national registry of guns, but based on sales-tracking and other figures, the National Rifle Association estimates there are 80 to 90 million gun owners in the U.S.
Naturally, there is dispute over the significance of the surge in gun sales. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, for instance, says gun ownership in America is actually declining.
“While there are more people with concealed carry permits and there has been an increase in gun sales, the research indicates overwhelmingly that the same people are simply buying more guns and that there has been a sharp decline in the percentage of Americans who own guns,” Brady Campaign spokesperson Caroline Brewer said. “So while there may be more guns, they are in the hands of a smaller percentage of Americans.”
Pro-Second Amendment advocacy groups have used the decrease in Gun Crime, and crime in general, as a counter to gun control advocates’ claims that more firearms lead to more gun violence. They also point to the statistics as evidence of the ineffectiveness of gun control laws.
The top three states for gun murders in 2010 were, in order, California, Texas and New York. While Texas has lax gun control laws, California and New York are among the strictest gun-control states in the country.
“California is in a category of its own as far as gun control laws there,” Parsons said. “New York is a little bit better, but they still have discretionary concealed carry laws.”
TAKE ACTION: Your right to keep and bear arms is a Constitutionally-guaranteed right — whether or not you are in your home state! Tell Congress to allow state-to-state carry here!
This article was written by C.J. CIARAMELLA; full article at The DC …
an excellent article from Bill Wilson, LIberty Action Report
By Bill Wilson — Most Americans think that tyranny comes with the stomping of boots, secret police and a bloody takeover by brutish thugs. It is the vision of the Cold War, of the Nazi and of countless tin-horn dictators over the last fifty years. And while it is sadly true that this type of sudden move to an authoritarian regime does happen, there is a more subtle and ultimately more dangerous form.
Freedom and sovereignty can be lost by the dull, gray specter of unresponsive, unrepresentative bureaucrats cranking out their regulations with little regard to the individuals their machinery crushes. It is this type of tyranny that is growing today in America. And, without the slightest bit of shame, a top Obama aid has called for more — more control put in the hands on unelected so-called “experts” and less in the hands of the people we elect.
In a startling piece in New Republic on Sept. 14, Peter Orszag calls for “more automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions.” To make sure nobody misses the point, Orszag, Obama’s former Director of Office of Management and Budget, concludes “we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.”
Who needs elections? All we have to do is establish our soviets — my mistake, commissions — and turn everything over to them. No nasty, time-consuming representation by the masses. They don’t know what’s good for them anyway.
Seemingly on cue, on Sept. 27, North Carolina Governor Beverly Perdue even called for suspending congressional elections for two years. Later, she claimed it was a “joke.” Very funny.
Orszag and Perdue’s repugnant suggestions are based on the obvious fact that the American people are angry and frustrated with a Congress that is divided. But why is Congress working the way it is? Why has the core institution of our Republic failed to meet the clear and obvious desire of the public for reduced government spending, strong moves toward a stable and strong dollar, and an aggressive America First foreign policy?
You can get a hundred answers to that question. But the root cause is simple and has been well-understood for a long time. The greater the role the government plays in the economy and the everyday lives of the citizens the greater the stakes in any given outcome. And, as the Federal Government has moved to be all things to all people, building its dependency class with every new entitlement and program, more and more facets of life are decided in Washington. Accordingly it is only natural that such decisions are then fought out on the floor of Congress which increases the chances of gridlock since no one policy on any subject under the sun will find a just application in a nation of 300 plus million people.
The source of gridlock is not that Republicans just won’t surrender like they did for decades or that Democrats refuse to reform or change even the worst government program. The problem is that the decision is being made in Washington to begin with. There will be no gridlock if the stakes are not so high and decision making power is defused and applications tailored to the community affected.
Roger Koppl, reacting to the Orszag piece, points out in “Another Step Down the Road to Serfdom” posted on ThinkMarkets that this process was seen a long time ago. We were warned.
Koppl writes, “In The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek pointed out that no solution could satisfy all members of a democratic public. The greater the scope of centralized planning in economic affairs, the more gridlock there will be.” Could anything better describe today’s state of affairs in Washington?
In a chilling citation, Koppl quotes Hayek, “The conviction grows that the direction (of the economy) must be ‘taken out of politics’ and placed in the hands of experts — permanent officials or independent autonomous bodies.” And as the crisis persists, as it inevitably will, Hayek predicts, “The cry for an economic dictator is a characteristic stage in the movement toward planning.”
We have entered dangerous terrain. With a close friend of a President who has already usurped broad powers and assumed wide-ranging authority over the economy calling for exactly the type of central planning dictatorship foreseen by Hayek, we are in dangerous territory. Throw in a sitting governor calling for the suspension of elections, and America is on the edge.
Can we pull back in time, return to a truly small government with strictly limited powers or will we go over the cliff into the abyss of dictatorship? Every citizen has a stake in this battle. Orszag’s call for “less democratic” policy making is the throwing down of the gauntlet by the radical, socialist Left. The battle for the future of America is joined.
Bill Wilson is the President of Americans for Limited Government. You can follow Bill on Twitter at @BillWilsonALG.
Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2011/09/tyranny-with-a-whisper/#ixzz1ZQxtrfjU
This study is one of the first to estimate the total impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Most previous studies have focused on the state and local level and have examined only costs or tax payments, but not both. Based on Census Bureau data, this study finds that, when all taxes paid (direct and indirect) and all costs are considered, illegal households created a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion in 2002. We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion.
Among the findings:
- Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.
- Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
- With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
- On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.
- Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.
- If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.
- Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status — what most illegal aliens would become — can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.
- Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.
- The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain — many legal immigrants are highly skilled.
- The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.
- The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants’ education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact.
About the Author
Steven A. Camarota is Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. He holds a master’s degree in political science from the University of Pennsylvania and a Ph.D. in public policy analysis from the University of Virginia. Dr. Camarota often testifies before Congress and has published widely on the political and economic effects of immigration on the United States. His articles on the impact of immigration have appeared in both academic publications and the popular press including Social Science Quarterly, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, Campaigns and Elections, and The Public Interest. His most recent work published by the Center for Immigration Studies includes: Immigration in a Time of Recession: An Examination of Trends Since 2000; Where Immigrants Live: An Examination of State Residency of the Foreign-Born; Back Where We Started: An Examination of Trends in Immigrant Welfare Use Since Welfare Reform; and The Open Door: How Militant Islamic Terrorists Entered and Remained in the United States, 1993-2001.
The (so-called) Super Committee
by L. J. Martin
Ladies and gentlemen, We The People, it’s time to fall on our knees and pray for the country.
Here they are, Obama’s super committee, who are going to save the country with proposed budget cuts. Study this list and see if you begin to see a trend:
Patty Murray (D): U. S. Senator from the State of Washington, former preschool teacher who also taught a “parenting” class at a community college.
Max Baucus (D): U. S. Senator from Montana, professional politician since 1973. Worked as an attorney for the SEC and in private law practice.
John Kerry (D): U. S. Senator from Massachusetts. Attorney. Lifelong politician.
James Clyburn (D): Representative from South Carolina. A teacher and fundamentalist minister.
Xavier Becerra (D): Representative from California. Attorney, professional politician.
Christopher Van Hollen (D): Representative from Maryland. Professional politician. Bachelor of Arts in philosophy and Masters from Harvard in Public Policy.
Jeb Hensarling (R): Representative from Texas. Former businessman, V.P. of two companies before becoming an owner of San Jacinto Ventures.
Dave Camp (R): Representative from Michigan. Attorney. Professional politician.
Fred Upton (R): Representative from Michigan. B.A. in Journalism. Professional politician.
John Kyl (R): Senator from Arizona. Attorney, teacher, editor, professional politician.
Pat Toomey (R): Senator from Pennsylvania. Banker. Restaurateur. Politician since 1994.
Rob Portman (R): Senator from Ohio. Attorney.
Let’s see. Ummmmmm. The super committee: three teachers, one of whom is also a minister; seven professional politicians; two with slight business experience; six attorneys. Where’s a guy (other than Jeb Hensarling and possibly Pat Toomey) who’s even run a hot dog stand in the private sector?
Who said that appointees to this super critical job have to be professional politicians? After all, wasn’t it the politicians who got us up to our nostrils in ka ka in the first place?
Why didn’t our president, a former attorney, go to the private sector for professionals in jobs other than sitting in Congress playing solitaire on their computers? Or sitting in their office placating the home front by tacking two hundred million dollar worth of riders on bills, ripping off the rest of the country? A super committee made up of professional politicians, teachers, and attorneys? Come on…
Where are the businessmen who understand budgets? Where, even, are the politicians who’ve actually run a state, such as Indiana’s Mitch Daniels, who entered office fresh out of business when his state was broke and turned it into one of the most economically successful and business-attractive states in the nation? And I’m not being politically biased here. Where’s Governor Brian Schweitzer, who’s state has a surplus? Where’s Rick Perry, whose state has a surplus of eleven billion dollars? Now those three would be super on the committee.
Patty Murray, by the way, ranked No. 8 in Congress in earmarks in 2010 with $219,000,000 tacked onto bills. Now there’s a lady who knows how to budget. Why wouldn’t she? She got her background as a primary school teacher and Patty knows crepe paper and paste. And all those attorneys? Most had experience in large law firms where they may have had to turn in a balanced expense account. Now that’s real budget experience. And of course the professional politicians on the committee have great budget experience, having to keep track of donations…much harder than having to actually budget a company and try to make a profit. And, of course, not to be overlooked, there’s the minister who had to count the quarters dropped in those offering plates. Do you see the pattern here? Maybe the super committee is not so super?
Appointing teachers, professional politicians, and attorneys to analyze and supposedly cut the world’s largest budget is typical of the leadership we’ve experienced from the attorney who holds the top job in the country…who, by the way, never held a job that required him to budget, and certainly not to make a profit, other than the attorneys major bug-a-boo…trying to figure out how to bill an hour for a ten minute phone call.
God help the super committee (maybe he’s already been called upon, after all one member is a minister).
God help us.
This came to be on the web:
SHERIFF JOE IS AT IT AGAIN!
You all remember Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona , who painted the jail cells pink and made the inmates wear pink prison garb. Well……… SHERIFF JOE IS AT IT AGAIN!
Oh, there’s MUCH more to know about Sheriff Joe! Maricopa County was spending approx. $18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the County Supervisors said okay. The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who’d like to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street, given them to the care of prisoners, and had them place in dog shows. The best part? His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. Teresa and I adopted a Weimaraner from a Maricopa County shelter two years ago. He was neutered, and current on all shots, in great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day we got him. Cost us $78.
The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc. He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals. I have long wondered when the rest of the country would take a look at the way he runs the jail system, and copy some of his ideas.
sheriff Joe has a huge farm, donated to the county years ago, where inmates can work, and they grow most of their own fresh vegetables and food, doing all the work and harvesting by hand. He has a pretty good sized hog farm, which provides meat, and fertilizer. It fertilizes the Christmas tree nursery, where prisoners work, and you can buy a living Christmas tree for $6 – $8 for the Holidays, and plant it later. We have six trees in our yard from the Prison.
Yup, he was re-elected last year with 83% of the vote.
Now he’s in trouble with the ACLU again. He painted all his buses and vehicles with a mural, that has a special hotline phone number painted on it, where you can call and report suspected illegal aliens. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement wasn’t doing enough in his eyes, so he had 40 deputies trained specifically for enforcing immigration laws, started up his hotline, and bought 4 new buses just for hauling folks back to the border.
Sheriff Joe…he’s kind of a ’Git-R Dun’ kind of Sheriff.
TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO, HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF AND HE KEEPS GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER.
THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY: Sheriff Joe Arpaio (In Arizona ), who created the ‘ Tent City Jail’ He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them. He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jails. Took away their weights. Cut off all but ‘G’ rated movies. He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects. Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn’t get sued for discrimination. He took away cable TV until he found out there was a Federal Court Order that required cable TV for jails so he hooked up the cable TV again; only let in the Disney Channel and the Weather Channel. When asked why the Weather Channel he replied, ‘So they will know how hot it’s gonna be while they are working on my Chain Gangs.’ He cut off coffee since it has zero nutritional value. When the inmates complained, he told them ‘This isn’t the Ritz/Carlton……if you don’t like it, don’t come back!’
More On The Arizona Sheriff: With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees just set a new record), the Associated Press reports: About 2,000 inmates living in a barbed-wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their government-issued pink boxer shorts. On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached 138 degrees inside the week before. Many were also swathed in wet, pink towels as sweat collected on their chests and dripped down to their PINK SOCKS. It feels like we are in a furnace’, said James Zanzot, an inmate who has lived in the TENTS for 1 year. ‘It’s Inhumane.’ Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic. He said Wednesday that he told all of the inmates: ’It’s 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn’t commit any crimes, so shut your mouths!’
Way to go, Sheriff Joe! Maybe if all prisons were like this one there would be a lot less crime and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes – not live in luxury until it’s time for their parole, only to go out and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayer’s money and enjoy things taxpayers can’t afford to have for themselves.
If you agree, pass this on.
If you like him as much as I do (L. J. Martin), then let’s nominate him for Attorney General, or vote someone in who’ll appoint him!
I’m proud to report that From The Pea Patch has just gone over 2,000,000 hits for the year, with over 5,000 unique visitors (first time) per month. I’m reassured that we’re all on the right track trying to inform and enlighten everyone about the transgressions of the Federal government and the administration in particular. It’s time we all spread that word that those who work hard, pay their taxes, and love their country are taking her over again. Self-reliance, free enterprise, and hard work will win out. Thank you all for sharing in this effort. I’m proud to be an American and particularly proud of you.
Lt. Col. Allen West, Congressman from Florida, served in Iraq and Afghanistan. “If it’s about the lives of my soldiers at stake, I’d go through hell with a gasoline can.” Watch the video. We need more Allen Wests.