Some Guns Need to be Banned

When will the Federal government stop massacres? Why should the public be victim to crimes that can be reduced? When only about 15% of the population owns firearms why must the rest of us hope and pray that no one in our family is a victim when they go to a shopping mall or other public location?

We have an amendment to the constitution that provides for everyone to own a gun for their own protection and for use in a militia. That right does not say that crazy, mad, and the mentally imbalanced have a right to fire arms.

Semi-automatic weapons and assault weapons used in war appear to be the guns used to for massacres in most instances. So why aren’t these weapons banned? The AR-15 assault rifle was among the weapons banned by the federal government up until 2004, when the ban expired. It has not been renewed. The gun lobby and the NRA have done an outstanding job of preventing sensible regulations. It is obvious that our congress is subject to the will of those businesses and gun hobbyist groups that want to stop all regulation.

Both automatic and semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

The following list is not a complete listing. The lives lost and the lives permanently maimed should be sufficient motivation for new enforcements.

Place	Date	Number Killed	Number Injured	Weapon Used
Orlando Fl., nightclub	June 12, 2016	49	17	similar to an AR-15
Virginia Tech	April 16, 2007	32	53	22-caliber Walther P22 semi-automatic handgun and a 9 mm semi-automatic Glock 19 handgun.
Newtown, Conn, elementary school	Dec. 4, 2012	27	1	AR-15 assault rifle
San Bernardino, Calif., community center	Dec 4, 2015	14	21	Smith & Wesson M&P assault rifle
Binghamton, New York, outside the American Civic Association	April 3, 2009	13	4	2 hand guns
Washington Navy Yard	Sept. 3, 2013	12	3	AR-15 assault rifle
Aurora, Colo. Movie theater	July 29, 2012	12	58	AR-15 assault rifle
Charleston S.C. church	April 19, 2015	9	1	45-caliber semi-automatic Glock handgun
Stockton, Calif., elementary school playground	Jan. 17, 1989	5	30	AK-47 and a semiautomatic handgun
Ft. Hood, Texas	April 2, 2014	3	16	5.7-millimeter pistol

Stay Vigilant Against Bogus IRS Phone Calls and Emails

We were called twice today with a recorded message telling us to call a phone number to resolve our tax issues. We do not have any tax issues.

From the IRS web site:

IRS Tax Tip 2015-20, February 17, 2015

Tax scams take many different forms. Recently, the most common scams are phone calls and emails from thieves who pretend to be from the IRS. They use the IRS name, logo or a fake website to try to steal your money. They may try to steal your identity too. Here are several tips from the IRS to help you avoid being a victim of these tax scams:

The real IRS will not:

–Initiate contact with you by phone, email, text or social media to ask for your personal or financial information.

-Call you and demand immediate payment. The IRS will not call about taxes you owe without first mailing you a bill.

–Require that you pay your taxes a certain way. For example, telling you to pay with a prepaid debit card.

–Be wary if you get a phone call from someone who claims to be from the IRS and demands that you pay immediately. Here are some steps you can take to avoid and stop these scams.

If you don’t owe taxes or have no reason to think that you do:

Contact the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. Use TIGTA’s “IRS Impersonation Scam Reporting” web page to report the incident.

You should also report it to the Federal Trade Commission. Use the “FTC Complaint Assistant” on FTC.gov. Please add “IRS Telephone Scam” to the comments of your report.

If you think you may owe taxes:

Ask for a call back number and an employee badge number.

Call the IRS at 800-829-1040. IRS employees can help you.

In most cases, an IRS phishing scam is an unsolicited, bogus email that claims to come from the IRS. They often use fake refunds, phony tax bills, or threats of an audit. Some emails link to sham websites that look real. The scammers’ goal is to lure victims to give up their personal and financial information. If they get what they’re after, they use it to steal a victim’s money and their identity.

If you get a ‘phishing’ email, the IRS offers this advice:

–Don’t reply to the message.

–Don’t give out your personal or financial information.

–Forward the email to phishing@irs.gov. Then delete it.

–Don’t open any attachments or click on any links. They may have malicious code that will infect your computer.

–Stay alert to scams that use the IRS as a lure. More information on how to report phishing or phone scams is available on IRS.gov.

If you found this Tax Tip helpful, please share it through your social media platforms. A great way to get tax information is to use IRS Social Media. You can also subscribe to IRS Tax Tips or any of our e-news subscriptions.

Donald Trump is a Racist

June 10, 2016

Since posting The New York Times editorial numerous Republicans have spoken out against Donald Trump’s racist remarks. The best was said on June 7, 2016 by Paul Ryan. “I disavow these comments. I regret those comments that he made. Claiming a person can’t do their job because of their race is sort of like the textbook definition of a racist comment.”

The following New York Times editorial reflects my views in words that I cannot construct in a better way.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD of The New York Times JUNE 6, 2016

Donald Trump’s Contempt for the Rule of Law

Federal judges have repeatedly and emphatically refused to recuse themselves from cases because of their race or ethnicity. These rulings were driven by two realizations: Ethnically based challenges would reduce every judge to a racial category, which would be racist in itself. And such challenges would make judges vulnerable to recusal motions — for reasons of race, ethnicity, gender or religion — in every case that came before them.

In other words, once these challenges were allowed, there would be no end to them.

The gravity of this matter has clearly eluded Donald Trump, who has cast aside the Constitution and decades of jurisprudence by suggesting both ethnic and religious litmus tests for federal judges. These pronouncements illustrate that Mr. Trump holds the rule of law in contempt.

Mr. Trump started down this road months ago, attacking a federal judge in California who is hearing a lawsuit against the now-defunct Trump University. Last week, he asserted that the judge, Gonzalo Curiel, had an “inherent conflict of interest” because he was “of Mexican heritage.” Mr. Trump implied that Judge Curiel — an American, born in Indiana — was biased against him because he intended to build a wall along the border to stop illegal immigration.

Republican leaders repudiated the remarks and hoped that the issue would disappear. But Mr. Trump went further on Sunday, when he said on the CBS News program “Face the Nation” that a Muslim judge might be similarly biased against him because he has proposed a ban on Muslim immigrants entering the United States.

When the interviewer, John Dickerson, reminded Mr. Trump that this country has a tradition of not judging people based on heritage, the presumptive Republican nominee responded, “I’m not talking about tradition, I’m talking about common sense.”

Republicans who say they disagree with Mr. Trump’s racialist statements have tried to assuage the public by arguing that he doesn’t really believe those views. But if that’s the case, it is pretty cold comfort. Cynically choosing to equate ethnicity with bias is hardly more appealing than simply being ignorant or bigoted.

The Nominees

Neither of these candidates are good for America. I see two Twilight Zone Devils.

In other words they appear reasonable until the until the last moment when they will do their nasty acts. Of course we won’t know that until it has happened.

Hillary Clinton is an insider who has too many donors that will have the final say on her actions as president. She is most likely to follow the philosophy of her husband (former President Bill Clinton). Recall that he signed the law revoking the Glass-Steagall act of 1933 that prohibited commercial banks from engaging in the investment business. He also signed into law NAFTA, a law proposed by Republicans and pushed by President George H.W. Bush that resulted in numerous companies relocating to Mexico.

Donald Trump has no experience in public office and does not appear to understand the workings of the federal government. He clearly does not understand the total significance of the Bill of Rights. “One of the things I’m going to do if I win… I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” Trump said during a rally in Fort Worth, Texas. He has limited understanding of the relations the United States has with other countries and like most of us does not know a great deal about our military capabilities. He is a scholar of business.

Let’s start with Hillary Clinton.

There is no explanation to be found where she tells where she was and what she was doing when Benghazi, Libya was attacked.
The use of her private e-mail server does not appear to have compromised anything. However, her use of that device calls into question her judgement.
There is no theme to her campaign for president. Her entire theme seems to be she will continue the Obama administration and the banners saying “She’s with Us” and “Fighting for us.” The number one reason Hillary should be our next president according to her web site is “As a former secretary of state, U.S. senator, first lady, and a lifelong advocate for women and families, no one is more qualified to be president than Hillary.”

Let’s look at Donald Trump.

He has never held any elected office.
People might ask “How is Donald Trump able to file for bankruptcy so many times?” The answer is “He didn’t.” Trump himself has never filed for bankruptcy. His corporations have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy four times. This information from http://thelawdictionary.org/.
Is he a buffoon? A genius? An exploration of the man, his brand, and his chronic bluster at The Atlantic offers a perspective.
Foreign trade is a big part of the Trump campaign. Donald Trump’s trade war could kill millions of U.S. jobs contends Jim Tankersley in The Washington Post.

Go ahead and choose your devil. Just understand that in four years you will be ready for another unacceptable president. Ugh!!

Recalling the George W. Bush Presidency

Remembering one of America’s worst presidents!

It appears that the folks in South Carolina have forgotten some major events that occurred when George W. Bush was president. Not all were his direct fault but he and his administration, in my opinion, did not take sufficient precautions. I did not have to refer to any publication or website for these occurrences. They are all clearly in my mind. They should be in yours too.

September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center in New York City did occur eight months after he was inaugurated into office. The prior administration had warned of a possible terrorist attack.
Hurricane Katrina occurred on the morning on August 29, 2005. When the storm made landfall, it had a Category 3 rating on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale–it brought sustained winds of 100–140 miles per hour–and stretched some 400 miles across the Gulf coast. The History Channel says “Officials, even including President George W. Bush, seemed unaware of just how bad things were in New Orleans and elsewhere: how many people were stranded or missing; how many homes and businesses had been damaged; how much food, water and aid was needed. Katrina had left in her wake what one reporter called a “total disaster zone” where people were “getting absolutely desperate.” The Bush administration was widely criticized for its slow response to the disaster.
The invasion of Iraq occurred in the spring of 2003, the United States invaded Iraq in order to overthrow leader Sadaam Hussein (1937-2006), whose regime was accused of supporting international terrorist groups and possessing large caches of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). No WMD were found. 4,486 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq.
He began his presidency with a federal budget surplus; however, factors such as the enormous cost of fighting two wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) and the broad tax cuts led to annual budget deficits starting in 2002.
The 2008 financial crisis was the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. The president was mostly absent from the efforts to save the economy. Instead it was his Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, who made requests to congress for funds to support the banking industry.

Perhaps the above listing of George W. Bush’s major administration failures would be a reason to suspect another Bush would not be welcomed to the White House.

Analysis of GOP Debate on CBS February 13, 2016

The debate was a disappointment for me. The moderators failed to focus on anything that might change public opinion. Donald Trump has been leading in the polls and nothing was said that will change his lead.

The first thing that should have received greater attention is the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. A one minute of silence was nice gesture but where were the questions about selecting a replacement? Instead all who were asked said the next president should select a replacement but no discussion of ties in voting during the current court session. No discussion on selecting a new justice who will not be politically motivated.

North Korea now appears to have a ballistic missile that can reach the U.S. mainland and yet there was not a single question about addressing the obvious threat.

President Obama is hosting a meeting of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and possible additional members to the president’s TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership). Not a single question about our relationship with those countries and no discussion on the impact of free trade agreements.

No discussion about Social Security and Medicare and how to keep them financially healthy.

Instead there was discussion about eminent domain. That is not a topic that will determine who should be selected as the president.

One other thought. If the number of candidates continues to total five or more the field will be split and that will power Donald Trump’s lead in the polls that has remained in the 30% to 35% range.

End the Gun Epidemic in America

New York Times front page editorial, By THE EDITORIAL BOARD DEC. 4, 2015 . The first front page editorial in 95 years.

It is a moral outrage and national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.

All decent people feel sorrow and righteous fury about the latest slaughter of innocents, in California. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies are searching for motivations, including the vital question of how the murderers might have been connected to international terrorism. That is right and proper.

But motives do not matter to the dead in California, nor did they in Colorado, Oregon, South Carolina, Virginia, Connecticut and far too many other places. The attention and anger of Americans should also be directed at the elected leaders whose job is to keep us safe but who place a higher premium on the money and political power of an industry dedicated to profiting from the unfettered spread of ever more powerful firearms.

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

Opponents of gun control are saying, as they do after every killing, that no law can unfailingly forestall a specific criminal. That is true. They are talking, many with sincerity, about the constitutional challenges to effective gun regulation. Those challenges exist. They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France, England and Norway that have strict gun laws. Yes, they did.

But at least those countries are trying. The United States is not. Worse, politicians abet would-be killers by creating gun markets for them, and voters allow those politicians to keep their jobs. It is past time to stop talking about halting the spread of firearms, and instead to reduce their number drastically — eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.

It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has retained its sense of decency?

Is the United States Becoming a Nazi Replica?

-Doctor Ben Carson: ‘We should have a database on everybody’

-Donald Trump told NBC News there should be a database of all Muslims.

-Senator Ted Cruz agrees with Donald Trump. He would winnow the field of acceptable refugees down to only Christian Syrians, similar to what Jeb Bush proposes.

-Kasich on Syrian Refugees: ‘We Don’t Know Who They Are, Where They Come From’

-There’s nothing outrageous about barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. unless they pass background checks, Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio said on “The Kelly File.”

As reported on CNN
Shockingly, Trump told Yahoo News that he would consider requiring Muslim-Americans to register with a government database, or worse, mandating that they carry special identification cards that note their faith.

The reaction to this idea, fairly or unfairly, by many on social media, was to accuse Trump of wanting to mimic laws that Nazis had imposed on Jews, including requiring them to wear a gold Star of David on their clothes.

After Trump confirmed that he would set up a database for Muslim-Americans, an NBC reporter asked him point blank: “Is there a difference between requiring Muslims to register and Jews in Nazi Germany?” A clearly annoyed Trump at first refused to respond, but then told the reporter, “You tell me,” and walked away.

The likelihood is that a Republican will be the next president of the United States.

Trump is now reported to have “backed away” from tracking people. Still, the fear factor has taken over this nation.

With the rise of radical Islam and the non-stop reports on television we are all observing a frightening rise in those wanting the government to monitor every person’s movement. It is a form of fascism.

I wonder if any of these politicians have read George Orwell’s 1984. In that story the government spies on everyone’s personal life. Televisions are everywhere an each has a camera that watches what you are doing.

The data base idea is the most worrisome idea I have heard. Perhaps we could have the Muslims wear arm bands so they can be easily identified. Does this idea remind you of a past event? Yes! It reminds me of Hitler and the arm bands worn by Jews in Germany and all the places invaded by the Nazis.

The reaction of governors and the Speaker of the House to the situation in Europe is reminiscent of American reaction to the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

My reaction is what about other minorities in the United States? Will all of us be subject to data bases?

The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy. 1.”Everything in the state”. The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator. 2.”Nothing outside the state”. The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government. 3.”Nothing against the state”. Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

The use of militarism was implied only as a means to accomplish one of the three above principles, mainly to keep the people and rest of the world in line. Fascist countries are known for their harmony and lack of internal strife. There are no conflicting parties or elections in fascist countries.

Nazi Germany was extreme Fascism, better examples of fascist countries were Mussolini’s Italy, Iraq, Iran, and many middle eastern countries.

America Has Not Been and is Not Now Friendly to Immigrants

The reality is that the United States has not been the welcoming nation that is portrayed by many of America’s leaders. The verse on the Statue of Liberty was more likely a wish than a fact.

The reality is immigrants have been welcomed in the United States when there has been a labor need. The outstanding situations were building the railroads that brought thousands of Chinese in the 1800s, the flourishing factories of the early 20^th century, and today the need for farm workers, gardeners, hotel workers, and restaurant workers-the jobs Americans don’t want to do.

Look at America’s history starting with the second administration of the United States. John Adams, our second president signed four bills into law referred to as The Alien and Sedition Acts. The Alien Friends Act allowed the president to imprison or deport aliens considered “dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States” at any time, while the Alien Enemies Act authorized the president to do the same to any male citizen of a hostile nation, above the age of 14, during times of war. Clearly, the Federalists saw foreigners as a deep threat to American security. As one Federalist in Congress declared, there was no need to “invite hordes of Wild Irishmen, nor the turbulent and disorderly of all the world, to come here with a basic view to distract our tranquillity.” Not coincidentally, non-English ethnic groups had been among the core supporters of the Democratic-Republicans in 1796. Those Democratic-Republicans were the party opposing the Federalists.

Then in 1875 came the Page Act. The law was named after its sponsor, Representative Horace F. Page, a Republican who introduced it to “end the danger of cheap Chinese labor and immoral Chinese women.” It was the first federal immigration law and prohibited the entry of immigrants considered as “undesirable.” The law classified as “undesirable” any individual from Asia who was coming to America to be a contract laborer.

In 1882 the Chinese Exclusion Act restricted immigration of Chinese laborers for 10 years and prohibited Chinese naturalization.

Then in 1891 the First comprehensive immigration laws for the US. The Immigration Bureau, created by the law, was directed to deport unlawful aliens.

The 1898 the Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the decision resulted in the recognition of the 14^th amendment as taking priority and the ruling that all Chinese children born in the United States are citizens of the United States.

The Emergency Quota Act of 1921 limited the number of immigrants from any country to 3% of those already in the US from that country as per the 1910 census.

The 1924 Immigration Act imposed first permanent numerical limit on immigration and thus began a national-origin quota system.

In 1954 under the direction of President Eisenhower, Operation Wet Back sent about 1 million Mexicans back to Mexico. Many of the deportations probably included many legal residents of the United States.

I have not covered all of the history of immigration into the United States but you certainly get the message that this country has not been friendly to immigrants. They have been used when there was a labor shortage of people willing to do the work that most Americans won’t do.

So why would the United States be willing to grant entry to Syrians, Iraqis, and other Middle Easterners? It’s not likely. There is no current need for more people in the United States. There is little evidence of sympathy. Read this article in the Washington Post on American opinion about permitting the migration of Jews in the late 1930s. The article shows a Gallup poll that indicated 61% of Americans at that time opposed allowing 10,000 Jewish refugee children into the United States.

Unless you bring a technical skill or money that will create jobs we really don’t want you to immigrate to our country. Those people from the Middle East don’t follow our religion, don’t understand our culture, and don’t speak our language. We really don’t want you!

David Bancroft