compelling evidence of 1st class citizens

Just released, compelling evidence that police are indeed 1st class citizens held to lower standards than the likes of Lindsay Lohan, and Paris Hilton for their crimes.    

Case and point:  A Milwuakee police officer sped after his girlfriend  in a jealous rage while drunk, and pulled a gun on the occupants.

Madrigal pointed his gun at the people inside the Explorer and said: "Open the door or I'll kill you. Open the door or I'll shoot you in the head," according to the complaint. Madrigal and the other passenger from the Charger stood on the Explorer's running boards and shouted at the people inside the vehicle while Madrigal pointed his gun at them, the complaint said.

 The conviction for this crime?  4 Misdemeanors

A jury convicted Jorge L. Madrigal, 25, of four misdemeanors: disorderly conduct, operating a firearm while intoxicated and two counts of intentionally pointing a gun at a person, online court records state.

Now this, also from Wisconsin:

A Wyocena man faces time in prison on charges that he threatened two people with a loaded gun while intoxicated.
Michael M. Dawson, 52, of Wyocena, was ordered held on $2,500 cash bail at an initial hearing Thursday in Columbia County Circuit Court.

This is what Michael Dawson was charged with:

Dawson is charged with two felony counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety with use of a dangerous weapon as domestic abuse, and with misdemeanor domestic disorderly conduct with use of a dangerous weapon and misdemeanor bail jumping.

When you punish one group of people more harshly than another, it is an infringement on the basic concept of liberty and equality.   These police officers who are apparently 1st class citizens normally get off with reduced sentences when they commit crimes, and it's just not right.   It has been said that Law Enforcement officials are held to a "higher standard" than the rest of us.   It couldn't have been put better than Injustice Everywhere's David when he wrote:

“Held to a higher standard”… in our vernacular, this term is generally understood to describe how some people are kept to stricter adherence to rules and who face greater penalties than others if that strict adherence somehow falters.

However these police are being evidenced of being held to lower standards.   In fact, most of the cases I research, the police officers keep their jobs!   Or successfully sue to get their job back.   Citizens on the other hand, miss a day of work from being arrested, and lose their jobs for good, with no way of suing to get said job back.  This inequality must stop or the results will be ever increasing tensions between citizens and 1st class citizens, which I fear will ultimately bring about more violence to members of both parties.   The solution is simple, equality now, and save the future...  If it's a Felony in your state to open carry, then police in that state should NOT open carry.   If threatening someone while drunk is a felony, it should STAY a felony regardless of your job title.   Seems pretty simple, right?

Journalistic Asshole: Mark Karlin

Today I'm taking a look at the Journalists who report against liberty, and analyse their "beliefs". Mark Karlin is a Chicago area journalist who was not terribly happy with the supreme court decision that Chicago's handgun ban was unconstitutional. So let's look at his own words that fall like drool from his fingers, seething with unintelligent drivel.

It's about white males in America feeling threatened by becoming a minority and the gun is their last psychological reassurance of entitlement power against an encroaching demographic change in our democracy.

Mark Karlin thinks handgun ownership in Chicago is about white males. When I walk around Chicago, and look at the people who would benefit from protection from criminals with guns, white males doesn't seem to come to mind. I theorize that Mark Karlin is most afraid of good citizens who are black owning handguns. He portrays this fear by bashing white males, while skirting the "race" and gender issue altogether about how he feels about black males owning guns, or white females, or Hispanic females. I am entirely in support of every good citizen of this country being able to own a gun and protect themselves, and possibly others. The more good people with guns, the more the scale is shifted towards the side of good. Mark Karlin with his Yale degree, and six figure income must not understand that very much, he probably only associates with like-minded individuals with nothing intelligent to say.

After all, the City of Chicago allows citizens to own rifles, so there never was a ban on guns in Chicago; there was a ban on a certain type of gun, which didn't even exist at the time the Constitution was written.

This tender gutted sack of  slow moving white meat then attempted to claim Chicago allowed you to have rifles.   Sure they did, if you jumped through some registration permit hoops, and made sure to buy a rifle that wasn't on an expansive "assault weapons" list and you could justify for hunting purposes (hint: Illinois doesn't allow rifle hunting).  Keep in mind, the most common home defense weapon ever, the Remington 870 shotgun is on the Chicago list of assault weapons.  In fact, if you could fire a rifle without getting burned by it, you weren't allowed to own it in Chicago

"A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel,"

Then of course Daley turns around and decides his armed thug squad needs some of these banned items.   Mark shows his lack of historical knowledge by making the claim that handguns did not exist at the time the constitution was written.  Really asshole?  Then what is this you tubby piece of future worm food!?

That sure looks like a concealable handgun to me, Circa 1780!?  A full eleven years before the constitution was penned!   Or how about this nice 1750 model?

Apparently a Yale education isn't worth the price, because this man has officially printed lies.  This coming from some asshole who wants his readers to go to his site to see the news through a "pro-democracy lens."   I hope Mark realizes that in a democracy, the majority could vote to take his overstated paychecks away from him just for being an asshole.  What Mark doesn't realize, probably due to his substandard, overpriced education, is that America is a Republic.  This is a nation that was supposed to exist of laws that protected people from the harsh controls of the government.... So what if that backfired, and now we have Pan-troglydyte's like Mark Karlin preaching about how great democracy is, and how we had no handguns in the late 1700's so no one could conceive of controlling them.  Congratulations Mark, you're an asshole!

Daley Actively Decieves to Gain Support

After the Supreme court ruling yesterday Daley started his soapboxing with the normal humor that you'd expect from a deviously intelligent man that hides behind the persona of a complete nimrod. His antics are supposed to be funny, and distract you from the real issues. Here's an example:

Daley said yesterday, "We are a country of laws not a nation of guns", however it was the supreme law of the land that told him that we ARE a nation of laws, and the law said you can't deny people guns! He implies, with skills that could only be obtained as a lawyer, that laws and guns can't be the same thing. Well in this case, they are one in the same, it is LAW that we are a nation of people with GUNS.

Control Freaks in politics and the cycle of "law"

People are often comforted when they elect an official who claims to have all the answers, and it's even better if the people don't have to do anything to receive these answers. This is where the leaders' narcissistic traits start to backfire. The elected leader now will claim it is some inanimate object that causes all the problems, and that you have to give it up. Now you are dependent on a group of people, normally a policing unit for your needs in solving the problem. In the case of murder, while being murdered you are supposed to try to run, and phone police then be in a location where they can find you to help. Some things are just easier to do yourself, if Daley banned soap, I wouldn't want to call the soap police so they could wash my ass.

6 inches from a Felony

Probably the most atrocious law in Illinois at this current time is 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6 otherwise known as "Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon." The unique way in which this law is worded makes it clear, this one is about citizen disarmament. Let's take a look at some of the details of this piece of legislation.

(a) A person commits the offense of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon when he or she knowingly:

(1) Carries on or about his or her person or in any vehicle or concealed on or about his or her person except when on his or her land or in his or her abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm; or

(2) Carries or possesses on or about his or her

person, upon any public street, alley, or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village or incorporated town, except when an invitee thereon or therein, for the purpose of the display of such weapon or the lawful commerce in weapons, or except when on his or her own land or in his or her own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm



So we've found that if you carry a firearm at all, you are guilty. If we dissected the 2nd amendment of the US constitution we would find some simple language. The right to keep (to have), and bear (to have ON you) arms shall not be infringed. Apparently Illinois is allowed to legislate such infringement, possibly because Illinois politicians do not consider Illinois part of the United States since they follow so little of the constitution.

Of course Illinois politicians have to let gun owners transport their weapons to hunting grounds, or out of the state, so they have a few caveats:

(c) This Section does not apply to or affect the transportation or possession of weapons that:
(i) are broken down in a non‑functioning state;
or
(ii) are not immediately accessible; or
(iii) are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card.

So you need a special card, a FOID card, then you can put your M1a in a case, and transport it unloaded in your pickup truck.   Oh wait, what if you are from a neighboring state?  They don't give FOID cards to people from Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Kentucky, or any other state because the system is linked with the DMV's license database.   So for example, if you are from Wisconsin, and you have a pickup truck, suddenly no matter where you put your revolver is illegal, even if it's unloaded and in a case.  The way I interpret this law, is that people from any state can take the trigger group out of their M1a and throw her up on the dashboard with a round in the chamber!  These lawmakers are BRILLIANT!  Oh, but it gets so much worse:


Here is the portion of the law that describes what is necessary to make this a crime:

(3) One of the following factors is present:
(A) the firearm possessed was uncased, loaded and immediately accessible at the time of the offense; or
(B) the firearm possessed was uncased, unloaded and the ammunition for the weapon was immediately accessible at the time of the offense; or
(C) the person possessing the firearm has not been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card; or 

(D) the person possessing the weapon was previously adjudicated a delinquent minor under the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 for an act that if committed by an adult would be a felony; or 

(E) the person possessing the weapon was engaged in a misdemeanor violation of the Cannabis Control Act, in a misdemeanor violation of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, or in a misdemeanor violation of the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act; or 

(F) (blank); or
(G) the person possessing the weapon had a order of protection issued against him or her within the previous 2 years; or
(H) the person possessing the weapon was engaged in the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor involving the use or threat of violence against the person or property of another; or
(I) the person possessing the weapon was under 21 years of age and in possession of a handgun as defined in Section 24‑3, unless the person under 21 is engaged in lawful activities under the Wildlife Code or described in subsection 24‑2(b)(1), (b)(3), or 24‑2(f).


According to this section, that person from Wisconsin with a pickup truck, is still screwed.   Their gun is in a case, and unloaded, and can't be disassembled without a lot of undue fuss, so there is no way out.



To make matters worse, Illinois has linked Marijuana possession with carrying a gun.  Because police can be trusted so fully to NEVER plant drugs to hype up charges.


Nonetheless, thousands of out of staters, and many in state residents have succumb to this legislation for some reason.   One court counselor admitted to me that big rig truck drivers are most commonly brought in on this charge, many of them have some type of weapon to protect themselves from robbery or attack while on the road, and a broke Illinois government can't help but to destroy lives, and steal money over complete nonsense.  This law is such nonsense, that they left subsection (f) blank!
  

You may think I'm overreacting about the destroying someone's life, but if you look at the punishment, it does not fit this crime.    We are talking about a victimless-crime that involves no property damage, or emotional stress that centers around a right that Americans have to keep, and bear their arms... and doing so is a felony.

(d) Sentence. Aggravated unlawful use of a weapon is a Class 4 felony;

Governor Quinn once stated that "Aggravated unlawful use of a weapon just means that you shot at someone and missed." He said this in order to get the law passed to strengthen this law from a class 4 felony, to a class 1 felony, so in January 2011 it becomes a class 1 felony. What he didn't realize, is that the law he was really talking about was "Aggravated discharge of a firearm." Leave it to an Illinois governor to not know which it is.


Of course law enforcement is exempt, as they open carry loaded pistols every day, and have rifles within reach that are loaded in their cars.