OK, 2nd Amendment Repeal is a bit too Ambitious, But

there are some things that I think common ground can be found by all who are appalled by the terrorist carnage that our insufficient gun regulation allows.

Universal Background checks and gun registry for semi-automatic weapons that are not otherwise outlawed.  If you want to own a military style weapon, you have to be willing to be called up on quick notice with your weapon to defend the United States and the United States must be knowledgable about that willingness.  And no one under 21 would be allowed such a weapon and if they possess such a weapon, the parents are legally responsible for any and all legal ramifications of anything that transpires.

A effective mandatory process for getting the mentally ill and violent people with restraining orders against them into a database that supports the Background checks.

Make any mechanism that turns a gun into a more automatic weapon illegal.

People who are on terrorist watch lists should not have any rights to weapons.

People should not be allowed to purchase more that one gun a year.

There are 300 million guns in America and only 15% of the population owns all of them.  That is an average of 6.2 guns per gun owner.  How many more do they need to purchase in any one year?

I would also like to see no legal ownership of any gun more powerful and rapid than what any policeman carries.  A policeman should not be outgunned.

Repeal the 2nd Amendment

This is actually Bret Stephen's, a conservative columnist, idea.  I happen to like it.  It is simple.  It is democratic.  And it will relieve the Supreme Court of bizarre contortions that states and Congress don't have the right to regulate things that in the absence of regulation cause public harm.

Bret's Stephen's Original column


It will not be quick, but it could be a winning campaign strategy for 2018 and 2020 for the Democrats.  The Congress would have the ability to set national policy and States would have the right to set their local policy within that national framework.  Hunters will still have hunting rifles and people afraid for their personal safety can have their handguns in their homes and on their property.  A tourist in NYC doesn't need a hidden weapon.  There are amble police everywhere tourists go.

This Blog will Be Becoming Inactive After this one

Most of my reader hits are from Italy and I don't believe that many Italians love my writing even though I love Italian food, wine and visiting Italy.  Instead, I think those hits from Italy are Russian botts trying to accomplish heaven knows what.

But for those of you who are not Russian botts, I leave you with this thought.

I recently saw a historical review of Birth of a Nation.  This film made about 100 years ago revealed how widespread racism was in America.  Even President Wilson, who I always thought of as a liberal leader, believed in racist separation and Jim Crow laws.  I think he thought of Separate but Equal as being a good state of affairs even if there was no equality in such a state.

But reviewing the controversy surrounding the movie, the widespread support and viewership of the movie in the countryside, there can be no doubt that racism was widespread in white America.  The KKK had even been put to rest prior to the movie and the movie revived the KKK and made it more popular than ever for the next 30 to 40 years.

And I believe Donald Trump knows about his history because his campaign playbook is right out of it.  He panders to racists in the same manner the movie did.  And just as the movie revived the KKK, so shall Donald Trump's words revive racist action.  Donald Trump can protest that he is not a racist, but if you pander to racists, you are guilty of pandering to racists which will get you accused of being a racist.  I happen to think Donald Trump is an economic racist.  If you are not rich, you are not worthy.  If you are not working to support him personally, you are not worthy.  He can only care about those who care about and pander to him.  That is narcism and that is what Trump is.

So racism is alive and well in the U.S.  And it must be fought so it has no political standing.  Not every Trump supporter is a racist, but if they don't disown Trump's racist actions, like him they will be subject to accusation of being a racist.  I know the GOP wants to free people who they believe the welfare system is holding back by creating a culture of dependency.

But I ask you, how are so many Medicaid people who don't work able-bodied and not looking for work.  I have never met such a person, although I do not doubt that a small number might fit this profile, it is a large country.  But a small number should not determine how we fund a necessary support scheme for public health care.

And, as my final parting, I repeat what I have written before.  Fear drives much use of guns.  And the widespread availability of guns makes the police legitimately afraid, but there can still be no forgiveness for a police officer who lets fear generate the killing of an innocent human being.  That is why I do not understand why police across this nation are not speaking out for sensible gun control.

A Coherent Explanation of Why the Nunes's Memo Doesn't Destroy the Investigation

I will admit I had trouble reading the memo because it is a bunch of gobbledygook.  Then this morning I read how it was written by a staffer who went to a foreign law school and then couldn't pass the bar exam so he went to work as a Congressional staffer.  Talk about hiring the best and brightest!

Anyway, Bret Stephens explains coherently why this memo is worth the paper it is written on from a legal perspectives.  It is just a political rant.  Why the GOP insist on protecting Trump when they have a perfect foil for their political goals in the Vice President baffles me.

Link to "NothingBurger"

And from the WaPo.

From the memo
“The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok,”

From the WaPo
That timing is significant, given the FBI did not seek authorization to conduct surveillance on Page until three months later, on Oct. 21, 2016.


So the lier in Chief, our President, is wrong when he says the investigation is finding nothing.  If it was finding nothing, why have two people from the Trump campaign pleaded guilty.

And why doesn't everybody want to see Trump's tax returns?