Show all posts by user

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - Today

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote I see. So, if you don't agree with them, someone elses Rights are disposeable. How very Republican of you. The rights of corporations to enhance their profits do not trump the civil liberties of the people of the nation. One of those civil liberties is the Right to Bear Arms. Says it there in the Constitution, in the part called the Bill of Rights, just after the Ri

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - Yesterday

I see. So, if you don't agree with them, someone elses Rights are disposeable. How very Republican of you.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - Yesterday

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote I only used the BATFE and the GCA of 1934 because I am very familiar with it. Were I an environmental scientist specializing in hydrology, I'm sure there is a lot of EPA I could point to. Adding an adendum to the GCA clarifying triggers and firing should be pretty easy. I've watched legislative sessions where they rip through votes on minor

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: Someone asked about Chicago today? - 2 days ago

Quotecbelt3 Continued reasons for gun control, I was passed on the interstate highway this afternoon by a pack of young men on motorcycles, all running well over 100mph. And every single one of them had a nice matte black semiautomatic pistol tucked into the back of their jeans. Yeah… concealed carry without a permit in Ohio…. speeding doesn't forfeit your right to carry, concealed ot n

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote I only used the BATFE and the GCA of 1934 because I am very familiar with it. Were I an environmental scientist specializing in hydrology, I'm sure there is a lot of EPA I could point to. Adding an adendum to the GCA clarifying triggers and firing should be pretty easy. I've watched legislative sessions where they rip through votes on minor clarification votes.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

QuoteTed King QuoteSmote I only used the BATFE and the GCA of 1934 because I am very familiar with it. Were I an environmental scientist specializing in hydrology, I'm sure there is a lot of EPA I could point to. Adding an adendum to the GCA clarifying triggers and firing should be pretty easy. I've watched legislative sessions where they rip through votes on minor clarification votes.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

I only used the BATFE and the GCA of 1934 because I am very familiar with it. Were I an environmental scientist specializing in hydrology, I'm sure there is a lot of EPA I could point to. Adding an adendum to the GCA clarifying triggers and firing should be pretty easy. I've watched legislative sessions where they rip through votes on minor clarification votes.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

Well, the GCA of 1934 could have a clause that definitions of short barreled shotguns, short barreled rifles, and machine guns can only be changed by a vote of Congress. That flat out says the BATFE can't redefine based on political whims. But if there is a real need, Congress can make that change. In very limited use, are electronic triggers that are literally buttons/microswitches, solenoi

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

There is a huge missing component. Congress can GIVE the Agencies the authority to do what they have already taken liberties with. That's a perfectly acceptable and legal solution too. Congress can define specific guardrails, and if an agency stays within them, they are left alone to do their jobs. And when a president orders an Agency to jump a guardrail, they get hauled into court. That'

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote no, it's about Agencies overstepping their authority... No. It's not that at all. On page 22 of the decision "The EPA resists this reading of §1362(7) and instead asks us to defer to its understanding of the CWA’s jurisdictional reach, as set out in its most recent rule defining “the waters of the United States.” The EPA literally asked the Supreme C

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: paid $8 for 5/lb of whole wheat flour yesterday - 2 days ago

blend it 50/50? Make your bread beige? I do that with "french" style in my bread machine, along with a healthy shot of EVOO.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

no, it's about Agencies overstepping their authority, whether by holes in the laws that they step into and try and fill, or by redefining what they don't have the authority to define. Its about Chevron deference, and being called on it. When the same people making the "regs" both define, and redefine them at will, as well as enforce them, there is no due process. When the EPA say

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote "That phenomenon, Gorsuch noted... Can you provide a citation from someone with a credible knowledge of the law? When you sit on the Supreme Court bench, feel free to debate Justice Gorusuch on this. I will gladly sit in the gallery for that. But when your response is snark, that's the move of a losing conversant.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 2 days ago

QuoteAcer Don't worry. This court will rule in your favor, and purely 100% merely coincidentally with the opinons of the folks who have given them vacations, covered their loans, and bought their properties. Is it your contention, that every judge who sides with the plaintiffs, from county judges, all the way up to the Supreme Court justices, are bought and paid for? 13 of the 16 judge en ba

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

I am very familiar with CFRs. I have one of the beige books on my bookcase that I can see from here. The 5th Circuit says the ATF exceeded its authority. "The decision defends the separation of powers and the rule of law against an attempt to prohibit firearm accessories by administrative fiat." "After that massacre, the 5th Circuit notes, "public pressure to ban

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote I'm not debating that at all. But Congress wrote muddled law perhaps, as is their right I suppose. But that is no excuse for the EPA seeing a hole in the laws, and filling them on their own authority, not by the authority of Congress. Agencies are created by Congress with authority delegated by both Congress and the executive. They do not have their own authority. T

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: paid $8 for 5/lb of whole wheat flour yesterday - 3 days ago

no idea why the regional gouging. Just got back from Kroger. 5# of whole wheat flour was $2.79 I checked because of this thread.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

I'm not debating that at all. But Congress wrote muddled law perhaps, as is their right I suppose. But that is no excuse for the EPA seeing a hole in the laws, and filling them on their own authority, not by the authority of Congress. You can literally fill a pothole in the street in front of your house. You don't have that authority though, despite the fact it obviously needs to be done.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

QuoteAcer Are you saying the White House does not think the executive branch has the power to write regulations? They have the authority to, when authorized by Congress. And presidents often order various Agencies to make things happen, sometimes through Executive Order. It doesn't mean they have the authority in every instance, and certainly doesn't mean the EO is legal either. Hence the bu

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

QuoteTiangou QuoteSmote QuoteAcer Agencies are given authority to interpret the law by Congress. They can't "usurp" it. Congress never gave the ATF the authority to change legal definitions of short barrelled rifles, or "machine guns" hence the law suits. Those 2 definitions were set forth in the GCA of 1934. Only a change to the law, by Congress, can alter those deffini

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

QuoteAcer Agencies are given authority to interpret the law by Congress. They can't "usurp" it. Congress never gave the ATF the authority to change legal definitions of short barrelled rifles, or "machine guns" hence the law suits. Those 2 definitions were set forth in the GCA of 1934. Only a change to the law, by Congress, can alter those deffinitions. Agencies do it a

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: another one: only 8.5 years - 3 days ago

Had she been an officer in the Army, Biden could have called her back into service, then a Courts Martial for treason...........

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: One more jailed - this time 54 months - 3 days ago

but does he have a pretty mouth?

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

There IS a legal solution that can be done. Congress legislates the authority in certain matters to the various Agencies to interpret the laws. They userped that authority away from Congress. That's why these lawsuits across the Agencies. It's not just one Agency, under one Director. It's endemic. And because of Chevron defference, they became the SMEs of the regulations and deffinitions,

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 3 days ago

Quotemattkime It seems that the text is never specific enough when some don't like what it says. Also part of the problem, because the Agencies seem to think they have the authority to interpret the laws. They don't, the Judicial Branch DOES. That is the biggest reason that SCOTUS has decided to grant cert, and hear a case next session. Specifically, if the Chevron Doctrine allowing defferen

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 4 days ago

The ruling was 9-0, there was dissent on the reasons for the votes, but the votes were unanimous. I don't base this on news stories, I base it on lawyers' breakdowns who are experts in their field. The reason the EPA lost was that they even thought they should have started the fight in the first place. The law was clear. They just ignored it. It is endemic in the regulatory agencies.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 4 days ago

QuoteAcer We need to err on the side of protecting our natural resources. Those that err on the side of profit over sustainability have enjoyed two centuries of regulatory capture in this country. Oh absolutely. But the way to do it is clear and concise laws with plainly spelled out penalties. Then the EPA (or the BATFE or NRC etc) has real guardrails directing them on how to do their jobs, a

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: Oath Keepers founder sentenced to 18 years in prison - 4 days ago

full treason is 20 years to execution. 18 years is a pretty steep sentence. If you plan an armed insurrection, you damn well better win.

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: Busy weekend in Chicago - 4 days ago

QuoteMr645 Fully automatic weapons and assault rifles were effectively banned in 1986, and yes, mass shootings were rare back then, compared to today UNLISCENSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! fully automatic weapons. There are about 170K of legally owned fully auto firearms in the US in the hands of private citizens. I beg of you to be meticulous when you make broad statements that are actually

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting

Re: SCOTUS on the watch for us - 4 days ago

W Virginia v EPA limits the EPA's ability to make stuff up without express authority via legislation. Also effected the BATFE, which is why they keep getting sued. They regularly exceed their authority. ! injunction granted just 2 days ago on the new pistol brace fiasco. Still waiting on results of the other requests for injunctions. Either of them are nationwide. Sackett v EPA wi

by Smote - 'Friendly' Political Ranting