Our utility company (city owned and operated) has already changed out all meters to ‘smart’ ones that can show usage of whatever commodity down to the hour. I suspect in home devices are next on the agenda, but as our utilities are very locally controlled, I think if such shenanigans are attempted, the populace will have a definite say about it.

BLUF
Environmentalists don’t believe there is such a thing as clean or green energy either. Their goal is to reduce energy usage by replacing reliable energy systems with unreliable ones, and inexpensive ones with expensive ones, as a way of ‘Cloward-Pivening’ the energy grid to force energy rationing and the eventual reduction of the human population

The Government is Coming for Your Thermostat

It’s the middle of a summer heat wave and temperatures are rising. Suddenly your air conditioning turns off. It’s not a blackout or a brownout: it’s the new government plan.

Mass government subsidies for inefficient and expensive ‘green energy’ wind turbines and solar panels combined with bans on efficient and cheap oil, coal and gas, have made energy grids unreliable and costly. States that have aimed for widespread use of green energy like California and Texas are suffering blackouts and brownouts at growing rates.

Instead of building reliable energy resources, federal and state governments, along with monopolistic energy companies, are making up for green energy with energy rationing.

Or ‘smart rationing’.

Virtual power plants were a green energy buzzword that promised to harness local battery capacity to distribute energy to the grid, but the diminishing promise of solar panels and the power hunger of electric cars has poured cold water on the idea that the ‘green’ battery devices and useless solar panels will ever reliably give more to the grid than they take from it.

Virtual power plants, like all things virtual, have come to mean power that isn’t really there. Instead virtual power plants have become another euphemism for rationing power.

Unable to get meaningful savings from so-called battery ‘distributed energy resources’, virtual power plants now mean using smart thermostats to seize control over homeowner power usage with bureaucrats or AI software deciding how much power people should be using and turning off their heat or air conditioning. Government agencies and monopolistic utilities insist on calling this ‘efficiency’ rather than what it actually is which is rationing customer power usage.

State utilities have taken to bribing consumers with discounts on skyrocket energy rates and ‘free’ smart thermostats like Google Nest in order to induce them to turn over control of their thermostats. Once they give up control, they may be allowed only limited manual overrides a month to be able to turn on the heat or air in even the most miserable weather.

Families facing summer heat and winter cold find that they’re not just wrestling with each other for control of the thermostat but with their utility company, its software and the government mandates that are out to force them to use less energy even as energy prices climb higher.

A recent Department of Energy report revealed the ambitious scope of the ‘virtual power plant’ strategy while emphasizing the rationing aspect of ‘smart thermostats’ and ‘smart water heaters’ which “can be controlled remotely” in ways that are “typically imperceptible to the owner.”

Continue reading “”

Maryland Group Asks Supreme Court To Explore State’s Handgun Licensing Requirements

Fresh off the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Maryland’s Handgun Qualification License requirement is constitutional, plaintiffs in the case are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue.

On September 27, plaintiffs in the case Maryland Shall Issue v. Moore filed a petition with the Supreme Court in hopes the onerous law won’t meet muster before that body.

“Just two years ago, this Court rejected the interest-balancing approach adopted by nearly every lower court, and emphatically held that the Second Amendment ‘demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history,’” the petition states. “But certain lower courts—determined to avoid applying Bruen’s holding—are disregarding this Court’s precedents and straining the constitutional text to fit desired policy ends. That is exactly what the en banc 4th Circuit did in this case to uphold Maryland’s ahistorical and burdensome two-step licensing and registration scheme for acquisition and possession of a handgun for self-defense.”

In fact, the process in question is quite complicated. Before possessing any handgun, Maryland requires citizens to obtain a Handgun Qualification License, which isn’t an easy task. To qualify, citizens must be fingerprinted, attend a half-day training course, live fire a handgun and pass a background check—all of which takes significant time, effort and money. Once they receive their license, there are still hurdles to overcome, as another Maryland law requires a background check and seven-day wait before taking possession of a purchased handgun.

In late 2023 a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court ruled that the HQL requirement unconstitutional. But on August 23, an en banc panel of the 4th Circuit issued its decision upholding the Handgun Qualification License law.

“Compliance with the HQL Requirement places significant burdens on possession and acquisition of a handgun unknown at the Founding and is an outlier even in modern times,” the plaintiffs’ petition states. “Failure to comply may result in fines, imprisonment and the permanent loss of firearm rights.”

The petition further states: “The HQL Requirement is an unconstitutional outlier that the Founders never would have tolerated. Petitioners have shown that Maryland’s novel and extreme acquisition-and-possession licensing regime burdens protected conduct. And Maryland has not met its burden to prove that the HQL Requirement—step one of its two-step licensing scheme—is consistent with historical tradition.

In the end, Maryland Shall Issue is asking the Supreme Court to consider the case using its own two-step process handed down in the Bruen case in 2022.

“This Court should grant certiorari to prevent lower courts from reading exception-upon-exception into Bruen’s standard—before that standard exists no more,” the petition concludes. “The constitution ‘demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history,’ not tests rooted in dicta and whatever constructions of text best fit lower courts’ desired policy ends. This Court should once again say so.”

U.S. Soldier Plotted to Ambush His Fellow Soldiers — Yes, He Believes Just What You Think

Maybe it was just a play for sympathy or an attempt to prove that he was remorseful, but when former U.S. Army Private Cole Bridges appeared in court to be sentenced for plotting to aid Islamic State jihadis in carrying out massacres in the United States, as well as ambushing and murdering his fellow soldiers, he actually requested the maximum 40-year sentence. Bridges appears to have realized the disastrous course his life has taken, but will military and intelligence officials absorb the lessons of his case? Not a chance.

Fox News reported Saturday that Bridges got a sentence of fourteen years, rather than forty, despite telling Judge Lewis J. Liman: “Honestly, I do believe that I deserve the maximum sentence. I know what I did was wrong.” He added that he would feel “regret for as long as I live.”

Back in September 2019, Bridges joined the Army; he became a cavalry scout for the Third Infantry Division in Fort Stewart, Georgia. However, the seeds of his personal disaster had already been planted: Fox notes that “about a year before he joined the Army, Bridges began researching and consuming online propaganda promoting jihadists and their violent ideology, and began to express his support for ISIS and jihad on social media.”

After he had been in the army for roughly a year, he “began communicating with an FBI online covert employee (OCE), who was posing as an ISIS supporter in contact with ISIS fighters in the Middle East.” He “expressed his frustration with the U.S. military and his desire to aid ISIS.” Nor did he just talk: “Bridges provided training and guidance to purported ISIS fighters who were planning attacks, including advice about potential targets in New York City. He also provided the OCE with portions of a U.S. Army training manual and guidance about military combat tactics, with the understanding that the materials would be used by ISIS in future attack planning.”

That wasn’t all. Around Dec. 2020, according to the Justice Department, Bridges gave his ISIS contact “instructions for the purported ISIS fighters on how to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East.” He “diagrammed specific military maneuvers intended to help ISIS fighters maximize the lethality of attacks on U.S. troops.” He also “provided advice about the best way to fortify an ISIS encampment to repel an attack by U.S. Special Forces, including by wiring certain buildings with explosives to kill the U.S. troops.” 

Warming to his role, Bridge made a video of himself, which he passed on to his contact, in which he wears army body armor while “standing in front of a flag often used by ISIS fighters and making a gesture symbolic of support for ISIS.” He also sent along “a propaganda speech in support of the anticipated ambush by ISIS on U.S. troops.” 

It’s good that he got caught, but the most important question is the one no one is asking: what got into this kid? The reason why no one is asking this question is that there are two answers, both of which involve hard truths that no one wants to hear. The first and most obvious answer is that Bridges went from U.S. soldier to traitor because of Islam. Pointing it out will get you swift charges of “Islamophobia,” which is why no one dares discuss such matters, but Islamic theology includes the concept of the umma, the supranational community of believers to whom every Muslim theoretically owes an allegiance that is above all other allegiances except to Allah himself.

Thus when Cole Bridges became a Muslim, he was likely told that his identity as an American came second to his identity as a Muslim. That is not necessarily problematic; innumerable Christians think the same thing about Christianity. But he was also probably informed that America, by attacking Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq, and by supporting Israel, had become an enemy of Islam, such that it was his duty as a Muslim to wage jihad against it.

The second answer to the question of what got into Cole Bridges is just as unwelcome: America got into him. Our leftist-dominated, rootless, materialistic, narcissistic, self-obsessed, reality-denying society is leading increasing numbers of young people to think that something, anything, that provides some standards and expectations will be better.

With the churches all too often hanging up Pride flags and aping the secular culture, many are finding Islam’s absolute unwillingness to compromise with the spirit of the age refreshing. The only problem is that part of Islam’s rejection of the values of our society is an aggressive and supremacist impulse that leads many believers to want to do violence to unbelievers in order to compel them to convert or submit as inferiors to Islamic hegemony. If our culture had any sane values, this might not appear so attractive. But…well, you know that story. 

In any case, the lessons of Cole Bridges’ case will not be learned. Despite the large numbers of converts to Islam who turn to terrorism, authorities have never shown any interest in this phenomenon or made any effort to counter it. This will only ensure that there will be many more young men like Cole James Bridges.

BLUF
There is nothing wrong with Trump doing just that, and the worst results of that process would not be as bad as what we’ve seen with the military being suborned on a wholesale level by the left.

Donald Trump’s Pledge to Rid Our Military of the ‘Woke’ Virus Causes Consternation in the Right Places


The observance of Pride Month, celebrated every June, was first recognized by the Department of Defense in June 2012. It is a time when the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer community come together to celebrate love and authenticity. Maj. Rachel Jones is an example of this, serving openly as a transgender female Soldier. Jones is the U.S. Army Sustainment Command’s Cyber Division chief, G6 (Information Management). (Sarah Patterson)

That -whatever that is -shouldn’t be anywhere near a uniform, and should be discharged. Miles

Former President Donald Trump’s use of a mashup of scenes from the 1987 Stanley Kubrick film, “Full Metal Jacket,” interspersed with clips of today’s military, has caused some outrage on the left, but mostly, it has caused consternation among some of the right people.

I think it is inarguable that the military created by Joe Biden and Kamala is only fractionally as effective as the military under Trump. And even in Trump’s first term, the rot of DEI and “gender equality” had already taken root.

The failure of Biden and Harris is made clear every day as the only way the services make their manpower goals is by cutting end strength. We’ve seen the US Navy in the Western Pacific on the cusp of being unable to operate because of a lack of fleet oilers.

The official and institutional embrace of sexual fetishes as a normal part of the military has been shocking. The clips Trump shows are nowhere near as bad as the situation really is.

Trump’s promise to fire the generals behind this insanity is viewed by Kamala’s flailing and undirected campaign as a campaign issue.

Continue reading “”

Man shot by homeowner while trying to get into Fresno house

FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) — A suspect was hospitalized after he was shot by a homeowner in a southeast Fresno neighborhood on Friday night.

The shooting happened in the area of Whitney and Hoxie avenues.

Fresno police say a man had been vandalizing vehicles before he tried to get inside of a nearby home.

Officers say the suspect was banging on a door of the house when he was shot by the homeowner in self-defense.

The suspect was taken to a local hospital with a gunshot wound to his arm.

 

Remember John Kerry going on about deer hunting back in ’04? Just as ignorantly stupid here. One would think they would have learned not to try this after Dukakis’ idiot stunt in a tank back in ’88.

Opposing Gun Laws Is NEVER ‘Protecting the Criminals’

While it looks like the Supreme Court may well side with the Biden administration on so-called ghost guns, the debate over them is far from over. All the administration did was make it illegal to sell an unserialized receiver with all of the other parts needed to make a firearm. You can still buy a parts kid and an incomplete receiver.

It’s the principle of trying to restrict what people can and can’t do about firearms.

If you allow one restriction to stand unchallenged, someone will invariably use that to justify the next restriction. It’s why we stopped playing nice and compromising on gun issues. It was never enough for them and we were the only ones giving anything up.

Especially when criminals continued to get firearms regardless.

But an op-ed at the Las Vegas Sun tries to argue that in opposing the “ghost gun” regulations, we’re really just protecting criminals.

On the surface, the Biden rule seems like a no-brainer. Shouldn’t all of the law-abiding good guys who claim they need to be armed so they can protect themselves from bad guys be embracing policies that keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

And yet, gun-rights groups, joined by Republican lawmakers, are fiercely opposing the regulation, arguing that it’s an infringement on the rights of hobbyists and an example of executive overreach by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

This position reveals a glaring contradiction in the pro-gun narrative. If gun-rights extremists are truly committed to empowering “good guys with guns,” then why are they fighting to ensure that people can easily access weapons that are designed to be untraceable? Why oppose rules that help law enforcement track down dangerous criminals? The fact is these advocates are not standing up for law-abiding citizens; they are like mob lawyers fighting to protect the rights of people who want to stay outside the law.

Ghost guns have become the weapon of choice for criminals precisely because they are difficult to trace.

Yet we all know the truth: The very existence of ghost guns undermines the efforts of police to combat crime, and pro-gun advocacy groups are spending millions of dollars to make sure these weapons remain on the streets — eliminating any chance at sensible gun policy that bars felons, extremely mentally ill people and minors from acquiring guns without someone giving them a look and a little paperwork getting filed.

Now first, if the author could show me a policy that actually keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, especially if it doesn’t infringe on our rights, we might be willing to listen.

But no such policy exists.

For example, the author makes a whole thing about how these are the “weapon of choice for criminals,” a common talking point among the anti-gun crowd, and how law enforcement has recovered more than 20,000 of these (that was elsewhere in the piece, not the section quoted above). However, I’ve seen these claims before.

Breaking down the numbers previously, I found that what we’re looking at is this “weapon of choice” that criminals are flocking to wasn’t particularly common.

Yes, the raw numbers sound scary, but you need to remember that these were found at “crime scenes.” That means anywhere a crime was committed, so if they stop some random dude because he has a suspicious bulge around his beltline, that’s a crime scene.

But if we assumed each one was used in a violent crime–they weren’t, but let’s roll with it for the sake of argument–then we’re looking at something like two percent of crimes were associated with a “ghost gun.”

Just two percent.

With that put out there, let’s talk a bit about why gun rights groups and Republican allies oppose these measures.

First, it just makes things a pain for the law-abiding. While plenty of folks claim that Biden’s rule did something, it couldn’t have. All it did was prohibit kits that contained all the parts. People can still buy the incomplete receivers and the parts. They just have to click “add to cart” twice instead of just once.

While most criminals are lazy, they’re not that lazy.

But what the rule does is open the door just a bit to more restrictions. If you let this one stand, then it’ll be used to excuse the next one, and the one after that, and then the one after that.

The door opens and we get more and more federal overreach.

Plus, a lot of the issue here is that the ATF didn’t have the authority to redefine what makes something a gun versus something that isn’t despite what Congress has actually said. If we allow the executive branch to simply issue decrees as they wish, ignoring the will of the legislature whenever they so please, the legislative branch devolves into nothing but meaninglessness.

We’re not defending criminals. It’s never defending criminals.

It’s about defending ourselves, our rights, and the Constitution itself.

NSSF Adds Resources for Veterans, Including a Fact Sheet on the Mistaken Beliefs about VA Confiscating Veterans’ Guns

WASHINGTON, D.C.—NSSF, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, has developed a webpage containing resources for military veterans, including a fact sheet discussing mistaken beliefs that cause some veterans to forego seeking health care from the Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA) because of concerns about having their firearms taken away.

“Understanding the facts about this topic can help veterans make informed decisions about seeking the health care they are entitled to,” said NSSF President and CEO Joe Bartozzi. “This care can range from a routine checkup to a hip replacement to screening for PTSD to mental health care.”

The fact sheet is titled “Correcting Mistaken Beliefs about VA Confiscating Veterans’ Guns.”

The webpage notes that “NSSF and its member companies proudly support America’s military service veterans. On this page NSSF shares information and resources that can benefit veterans’ health and resiliency, and that highlights their importance as employees and leaders in America’s firearm industry.”

The site includes information about several NSSF veterans-focused initiatives. They include programs to help prevent suicide among veteran and non-veteran populations and a careers center that lists job opportunities in the firearm industry, which employs thousands of veterans. Also noted is NSSF’s support for Honored American Veterans Afield (HAVA), an industry-run organization that helps the healing and re-integration of disabled combat veterans back into normal life through participation in hunting and the shooting sports.

The goal of the fact sheet is to dispel misinformation about veterans, health care and personal firearms. “Many veterans hold a common misconception that seeking mental health care or other treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will lead to their guns being confiscated. This belief, though widespread, is mistaken. The following information gives the facts about veterans’ health care, disability claims, and gun ownership rights.” Read the complete “Correcting Mistaken Beliefs about the VA Confiscating Veterans’ Guns.”

As a supporter of America’s military veterans, NSSF is sharing the “Correcting Mistaken Beliefs about the VA Confiscating Veterans’ Gun” because it recognizes that many veterans do not seek the VA health care they are entitled to out of fear of having their firearms taken away. That fear is unfounded, as the fact sheet explains in a clear Q&A format.

The fact sheet was developed by the Veterans Healthcare Policy Institute. NSSF joins other groups in distributing “Correcting Mistaken Beliefs about the VA Confiscating Veterans’ Guns.”

Some firearm retailers are distributing the fact sheet in their stores, and NSSF encourages any individual, business or organization that cares about the well-being of veterans to share “Correcting Mistaken Beliefs about the VA Confiscating Veterans’ Guns.”

 

FPC WIN: Federal Judge Blocks New York Carry Ban

BUFFALO, N.Y. (October 10, 2024) – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that the United States District Court for the Western District of New York has granted partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in FPC’s Christian v. James lawsuit, permanently enjoining the state’s law banning guns on all publicly-open private property without express consent of the owner, and denied the state’s request for a stay of that decision. The opinion can be viewed at firearmspolicy.org/boron.

“This is yet another important victory for Second Amendment rights and another major loss for New York, authoritarian governments, and radical anti-rights organizations like Everytown and Giffords. We will continue to fight forward as we work to restore the full scope of the right to keep and bear arms throughout the United States. Hopefully Kathy Hochul is ready to write another check for legal fees,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.

Just yesterday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul said that, after the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, the State “doubled down” on its anti-rights agenda. In a statement yesterday, she said that “[the State] came up with legislation. And we have a prohibition on concealed carry weapons in sensitive places. I personally think every place is sensitive[.]” However, today’s decision again shows that Governor Hochul couldn’t be more wrong.

“Regulation in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the new enactment is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations. New York fails that test here,” the Court said in its opinion today. “Indeed, property owners have the right to exclude. But the state may not unilaterally exercise that right and, thereby, interfere with the long-established Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to carry for self-defense on private property open to the public.”

BLUF
Hezbollah is crying out for peace because it does not have the upper hand. It is calling for a ceasefire because it is weak, and needs time to gather its strength

Hezbollah Wants a Ceasefire Now. Here’s Why Israel Shouldn’t Give Them One.

Ceasefire now? As much as Kamala Harris wants one and would capitalize upon one if it did materialize, the answer must be a firm no.

After exploding pagers and a series of carefully targeted Israeli airstrikes have completely decimated Hezbollah’s senior leadership, the jihad terror organization now wants a ceasefire with Israel. This will come as music to the ears of the Biden-Harris regime, which would like nothing better than an October peace agreement between Israel and one of the major players that are arrayed against it.

The Harris campaign could wave this agreement in the air every time someone pointed out that the world during the Trump years was a much more peaceful place than it is now, and use it going into the election as evidence of Kamala Harris’ superior negotiating skills. But for a number of important reasons, Israel should resist all pressure from Washington.

So far, the pressure for the moment is coming not from Washington, but from Hezbollah itself. CNN reported Tuesday that Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Naim Qassem, who is the highest-ranking official in the organization at the moment (after Israel took out longtime Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and several of his designated or potential successors) said, “We support the political efforts led by (Parliament Speaker Nabih) Berri under the banner of achieving a ceasefire. Once the ceasefire is firmly established and diplomacy can reach it, all other details will be discussed and decisions will be made collaboratively.”

Ceasefire! Diplomacy! Qassem knows how to push all the right buttons to get the U.S. State Department, the European Union, and the United Nations on his side, and even to shower billions upon his straitened organization. Kamala Harris has already sent $157 million to Lebanon, which means to Hezbollah.

Continue reading “”