Thursday, January 19, 2023
Wednesday, January 18, 2023
Monday, January 18, 1943. Encirclement of Leningrad broken.
The Red Army broke the encirclement of Leningrad. Zhukov was accordingly promoted to the rank of Marshal of the Soviet Union on the same day.
The relief came with the capture of the city of the somewhat ironically named, given its very German character, Shlisselburg (Шлиссельбу́рг,) or, in German: Schlüsselburg. Given the nature of the region, we'll note its name in Finnish: Pähkinälinna and Swedish: Nöteborg. The city dates to 1323 when a fort was built at the location by Grand Prince Yury of Moscow, in his capacity as Prince of Novgorod on behalf of the Novgorod Republic in 1323. In 1348 Swedish King Magnus Eriksson took the fortress. It was retaken by the Novgorodians in 1351. In 1478 the Novgorod Republic was absorbed by Muscovy and a new fortress was constructed there. In 1611 the fortress was taken by the Swedes again. The Russians took it back in 1702, at which time Peter the Great renamed it Shlisselburg, a Russian aliteration of the German word "key fortress", which is what Peter was trying to name it, in German.
It's just to the west of St. Petersburg, then called Leningrad, on Lake Lagoda.
Zhukov was lucky, and the Soviet Union accordingly lucky, to have been stationed in the Soviet East during the purges, or he likely would have been killed with so many others. He was well liked by his superior and protected by him, with his superior likewise remaining in Stalin's fickle favor while so many else were killed in a sea of blood that remains almost incapable of being grasped.
The first Warsaw Ghetto Uprising occurred when the Germans began their second deportation from the ghetto. Members of the Jewish resistance organization Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa (ZOB) took on the SS with pistols and disrupted the deportation sufficiently to halt it after four days of fighting. ZOB was lead by Mordechai Anielewicz who was only about 24 at the time.
In the U.S. War Food Order No. 1 went into effect requiring white bread be enriched with niacin, riboflavin, thiamin and iron, something that became standard by law in some states, and simply by custom generally, thereafter.
Also:
January 18, 1943 – Wartime Ban on Sale of Sliced Bread Goes into Effect in the U.S.
Thursday, January 18, 1923. French Toast.
France's Rhineland High Commission ordered French troops in the Ruhr to seize customs receipts and mine taxes and to take over the forests. France seized German coal trucks, and French and Belgian authorities banned singing German patriotic songs, displaying flags, or wearing the national colors in buttonholes.
Meanwhile a massive riot broke out in the French Chamber of Deputies over the topic of suspending French Communist leader Marcel Cachin in order that he could be arrested for treason. Cachin had denounced occupying the Ruhr and Morocco.
Tuesday, January 17, 2023
Sunday, January 17, 1943. London bombed, Schenectady sinks.
The Luftwaffe made a night raid on London for the first time since May 1941, no doubt in retaliation for the RAF on Berlin, which had been the first in fourteen months.
The U.S. tanker Schenectady fell apart and sank in the Willamette.
Wednesday, January 17, 1923. First successful, real, helicopter flight.
First flight of the Cierva C4 autogyro, the first practical helicopter, in Madrid, Spain.
Hypocrisy?
Hypocrisy? Or just not really thinking things through?
As noted here before, although it might not always be very obvious, I'm conservative.
I do, however, think things through.
What about our legislators? I wonder.
The bill to extend Medicaid, which only aids the poor, to mothers past 60 days to a year passed its committee, but barely.
It was supported by Governor Gordon.
It was supported by physicians.
Deacon Mike Lehman, lobbyist for the Diocese of Wyoming, spoke in favor of it.
None of which kept some of the legislative guardians of public morals from speaking against it. Jeanette Ward of Illinois spoke against it as an "entitlement program".
Eh?
Not hardly.
Deacon Lehman noted:“that not every government program is an inevitable slide into the fiery pit of Socialism.” He further noted, according to the Cowboy State Daily: “We’re talking about a segment of the population that qualifies for Medicaid coverage while pregnant, then, when the mother and child are still extremely vulnerable, they no longer qualify.”
The physicians noted they were supporting it even though the program really doesn't pay them very well at all, just barely, in fact.
I don't know, I'd note, Ward's religious affiliation, but I’m sure she's some sort of Christian. Prior to coming to Wyoming, she was very active in Illinois politics, where she was predictably controversial. An example of that is as follows:
Do you know what your children are being taught: Muslims believe in the same God as Christians and Jews?
My 6th-grader came home with this assignment today. She was supposed to read the article and answer the questions. (She will not be completing this assignment). The full text of the article is below. Quiz questions are depicted in the pictures. This article is utterly incorrect and false on many levels. This is one of the many reasons I voted no on this curriculum resource.
Well, Christians, Muslims and Jews do in fact all worship the same God. Their understanding of God's nature if quite different from each other, but they all worship the same God.
Are we really willing to deny this small class of women and their infants medical help? Seems really mean.
It's also the sort of thing that causes some people to slam the Pro Life folks on the basis that they don't care at all once people are born. That's actually completely false, and indeed many of the more dedicated pro lifers do indeed support helping mother and infant post birth.
Indeed, while often missed, there's a strong streak of liberalism in at least the Catholic pro-life crowd, which is not only opposed to abortion, but opposed to the death penalty as well. It's not actually easy to politically pigeonhole it.
Which unfortunately doesn't appear to be the case for Ms. Ward. She's pretty predictable.
So, frankly, this doesn't surprise me very much.
Without knowing more, I sort of guess that Ms. Ward is a fundamentalist of some type. I don't want to pick on fundamentalist too much, as they are highly varied, and the term is one that is put on them, rather than one they adopt, but fundamentalist of any type, and there are Islamic Fundamentalist, Hindu fundamentalist, etc., risk reducing their religion to a set of sort of Pharisaic type rules and becoming mean thereafter. Abortion is wrong because it is, premarital sex is wrong, aborting the results of premarital sex is wrong, but after that you are your own and if you get sick and die, well that's your problem.
I'm not saying that all fundamentalist of any type hold that view, but the fundamentalist of any stripe, and I'd note that for the Apostolic religions as well, run that risk.
Note, orthodox, and fundamentalist, are not the same thing.
There's a real element of solidarity and subsidiarity missing in that thinking. Yes, just the other day I criticized free school breakfast and lunches, on the basis that it encouraged parents in irresponsibility, but here a different concern exists, which is helping the most helpless in the most efficient fashion. I.e, both solidarity and subsidiarity apply here, and they argue strongly for extending Medicaid here. To argue against it as an unwanted "entitlement" really misses the boat.
And then there's the gun them down bill on trespassing.
One of the sponsors of that bill is a devout member of my parish.
Would Jesus really suggest that you can violently toss people off of land.
And it came to pass on the second first sabbath that, as he went through the corn fields, his disciples plucked the ears and did eat, rubbing them in their hands. And some of the Pharisees said to them: Why do you that which is not lawful on the sabbath days? And Jesus answering them, said: Have you not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was hungry and they that were with him: How he went into the house of God and took and ate the bread of proposition and gave to them that were with him, which is not lawful to eat but only for the priests? And he said to them: The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Luke, 6.
Would the legislators have suggested that Jesus and the Apostles be roughed up for violating the law.
Probably.
Monday, January 16, 2023
Helping people up.
It’s a cruel jest to say to a bootless man he ought to lift himself up.
Martin Luther King
Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: Civil Holidays. Their observance ...
Recycled again.
Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: Civil Holidays. Their observanc...:This is an old post that I've bumped up in this fashion on at least one prior occasion.Lex Anteinternet: Civil Holidays: Leann posted an item on her blog about Columbus Day, urging Congress to consider changing it to Indigenous Peoples Day . II was reminded of it as it's both Martin Luther King Day nationally and Wyoming Equality Day in the state, but outside of state and Federal employees, it's not observed much here. That doesn't mean its not observed at all, but not much. To the extent it is observed it tends to be observed almost ethnically or politically. Indeed, people were slow to get to the office today and I had two employees ask me "Is this a holiday?" It is, but not one that anyone takes off.I'm not sure of what to make of that. But I do know that if civil holidays aren't observed by employers there not really holidays. That may sound harsh, but that's the reality of it. It's just a day at work without mail. In some cases, like Veterans' Day, its a day where things might be observed in some fashion; a lot of businesses give breaks to veterans and the movie channels run war movies non stop, but still, a holiday that businesses don't take off isn't a real holiday.And that's a shame.If these days are important, well, they should be observed. But unless the government affirmatively requires them to be taken off, most will not be. Only the self employed who are very secure about their place in the world is going to observe some of them. But in the United States, which has an aggressive attachment to concepts of free enterprise in the current era, a legal effort to require that business stand down would not go anywhere and would instead be controversial.And, indeed, this has spread even to weekends, which used to be very widely observed, or at least Sundays were. Even around here, in a region that notoriously has not had blue laws, it used to be almost impossible to get much more than basic grocery services on Sundays. As a kid I recall you could not find an open gas station here on a Sunday. On the 4th of July weekend you had to buy your gasoline early if you intended to go anywhere, or you were going nowhere.I'm not sure the change has been for the good.
FWIW, I know of at least one law firm that now does provide this as a day off.
Saturday, January 16, 1943. The RAF Bombs Berlin, the Red Army prevails at Velikiye Luki, the Afrika Korps repulsed at Bou Arada.
A heavy Royal Air Force raid saw Berlin bombed for the first time in 14 months, seeing the return of the British air arm for the first time since November 7, 1941. The resulting fires from 1,000 bombs on the city could be seen for 100 miles.
On this, Sarah Sundin notes:
Today in World War II History—January 16, 1943: RAF bombs Berlin for first time since November 1941, with the first use of target indicator flares to mark the target for bombers farther back in the stream.
Only one British bomber failed to return.
Sundin also noted in her blog that the British 8th Army and the Free French, marching across the Sahara from Lake Chad, linked up. That was a remarkable feat by any measure.
In North Africa, the Afrika Korps attacked at Bou Arada, Tunisia, and was repelled.
The Red Army prevailed in the Battle of Velikiye Luki, sometimes called the Little Stalingrad of the North.
Iraq declared war on Germany, Italy, and Japan.
You'd think, by this point, the message to the Germans should have been pretty clear.
The cover story of Science News was on radios for the war.
Tuesday, January 16, 1923: Work on cattle ranch, Z/T Ranch, Pitchfork, Wyoming
A truly great photograph.
Also regarding Wyoming, Harry Ford Sinclair testified in front of a Congressional committee investigating the Teapot Dome lease his interest held.
The Klaipėda Revolt ended with an agreement to transfer Memelland to Lithuania. It was under French administration at the time with its ultimate ownership up until that point uncertain.
Sunday, January 15, 2023
Monday, January 15, 1973. Ceasefire and air strikes in Vietnam, independence for Comoro, Watergate plea bargains.
President Nixon announced the suspension of offensive actions in North Vietnam, effective January 27, in anticipation of a successful conclusion of the Paris Peace Talks. Effectively, this was the declaration of an impending ceasefire. The U.S. Navy, however, hit fourteen North Vietnamese bridges on this day.
_insignia_2015.png)
VFA-25 insignia. VFA-25 carried out today's' raids.
France signed a treaty with the Comoro Island guarantying them independence with five years, subject to a referendum approving the same.
.svg.png)
Comoro flag at the time.
Four Watergate defendants accepted plea bargains. Remember, this was a trial regarding an even that had happened quite recently, showing that justice really did move a lot more swiftly in the pre late Bomber era.
Friday, January 15, 1943. Tragedies and the Pentagon dedication.
US B-24s bombed a Japanese convoy off the coast of Burma and sank the Nichimei Maru, which was, unbeknownst to them, carrying 1,000 Dutch and Australian POWs. Most survived, but over 50 lost their lives.
Eric Knight, author of the Lassie books, died in a C-54 air crash in Dutch Guiana. He was serving as a Major in the U.S. Army and assigned to Special Services at the time.
Knight had been born in 1897 in the United Kingdom. His family moved to the US in 1912, but he'd only been an American citizen since 1942.
FBI agents Harold D. Haberfeld and Percy E. Foxworth were killed in an aviation accident in Suriname. The were flying to North Africa at the request of Gen. Eisenhower in a role seconded to the military at the time.
Topographic map of Pentagon area in 1945.
The Pentagon was dedicated. Construction had only commenced on September 11, 1941, which says something about. . . well something.
The British launch a new offensive against the Afrika Korps at Beurat, Libya. Tunisia saw a lot of air action on this day, and Tripoli, Libya was bombed by US and RAF B-24s.
Andrée de Jongh
Belgian resistance worker and member of the nobility, Andrée de Jongh, organizer and leader of the Comet Line that assisted downed Allied aircrewmen to escape the Germans, was arrested in southern France. She survived the war and went on to work in leper hospitals all over the world thereafter. She was decorated by the United States and United Kingdom after the war, and made a Belgian Countess.
The XP-54 flew for the first time.
The airplane was a pusher, and performed below expectations and therefore did not enter service.
Monday, January 15, 1923. Puebloans in Washington, Noble Acts, Ineffective Peacekeepers, and The Mater Familias.
A group of Puebloans visited Washington, D.C.
Puebloans are an example of a native North American culture which have been able to retain their distinctiveness to a high degree. Insular in the first place, they have remained very much so and are generally disinclined to have too much outside contact with the larger European American culture, although they do have it by necessity.
About 90% of Puebloans are Roman Catholic, although elements of their original indigenous religions have been incorporated in terms of feast days and how they are celebrated.
The patent for manufacturing insulin was assigned by its inventors to the University of Toronto, in order to make it affordable to the general public.
French troops fired on German protestors at Bochum, killing one. The French responded with threats to occupy more of the Ruhr.
Lithuanian troops captured Memel and forced the surrender of a League of Nations Peacekeeping force.
"The Queen and Princess Elizabeth talk to paratroopers in front of a Halifax aircraft during a tour of Airborne forces, 19 May 1944."
Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon and Prince Albert, the Duke of York, a dignified couple whose progeny, or at least some of them, ought to be pondering, announced their wedding date.
Zübeyde Hanım, the mother of Turkish leader Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, died at age 66.
Ataturk on this day in 1923.
The Uncomfortable Homily.
The young pastor of one of the church's of the triparish gives homilies that are really hard to ignore. Impossible, in fact. They're very orthodox, but also almost guaranteed, quite frequently, to make every one in the parish squirm. Indeed, so much so that I had decided not to post this at all, and then I started watching legislators who would raise a Christian flag make some, well morally debatable decisions, so I decided to revive it.
The four sins were:
1. Murder.
2. Failing to pay the servant his just wage.
3. Sodomy
4. Abusing immigrants.
He had these as the four sins "that really tick God off".
Probably the only one of these that doesn't make somebody upset is the first one. It's pretty obvious that you shouldn't kill other people.
I'm going to dive into these a bit, save for murder, which probably causes people who stop in here to wonder, "when is he every going to get back to the point of this blog?";
Lex Anteinternet?
Well, I'm working on that too.
Howled down
We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green.
G.K. Chesterton
Saturday, January 14, 2023
Best Posts of the Week of January 8, 2023
The best posts of the week of January 8, 2023.
And quite the week it was.
The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. The Waking Up Edition (Vol 1).
The English monarchy was in the news with lots of whiney buttism.
Kevin McCarthy became Speaker of the House and silliness, in part, commenced.
A reminder of real heroism:
Things seem to be going on, kind of, in the Russo Ukrainian War.
I'm not a Peaky Blinder.
The legislature convened in Cheyenne.
_(14764490194).jpg)
Gunfight at the Not OK Corral.
Live by the sword. Some legislators propose to take us back to 1889 once again.
Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
Douay-Rheims Bible, Matthew 26:52.
It would seem that some old wars which seemingly were behind us are not.
Once again, the forces of "property" wish to exclude. . . violently.
And once again, they have the legislature behind them.
We recently posted on this item:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0126
Trespass-removal of trespasser.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Crago and Washut and Senator(s) Kinskey and Landen
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; providing for the use of physical force against a trespasser as specified; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 6‑3‑303 by creating new subsections (d) and (e) is amended to read:
6‑3‑303. Criminal trespass; penalties; justification.
(d) A person who is the owner or legal occupant of land or a premises upon which a criminal trespass is occurring, or their agent, is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force upon another person when and to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner, occupant or agent reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the land or premises.
(e) Section (d) of this section does not supersede or add to the responsibilities applicable to the defense of self or another as provided by law.
Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2023.
Frankly, as this bill is based on what one “reasonably believes”, basically authorizes murder, or could, and probably will be, read that way.
I know Washut who due to his prior career as a policeman ought to know better. I don't know the remainder of them.
This bill, if passed, will get somebody killed.
Let's start with this. What is criminal trespass?
Well, under Wyoming's law, it's the following:
TITLE 6 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 3 - OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY
6-3-303. Criminal trespass; penalties.
(a) A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:
(i) Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or
(ii) Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.
(b) Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.
(c) This section does not supersede W.S. 1-21-1003.
So, under Wyoming's law, if a person comes up to you, and says "you are trespassing", and you remain, and you really are trespassing, you are guilty of criminal trespass.
And, under the proposed amendment to the law, this would be added to it:
(d) A person who is the owner or legal occupant of land or a premises upon which a criminal trespass is occurring, or their agent, is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force upon another person when and to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner, occupant or agent reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the land or premises.
(e) Section (d) of this section does not supersede or add to the responsibilities applicable to the defense of self or another as provided by law.
So the new law would be such that Landowner or Landowner's agent could come up to you and say, "get off", and if they didn't, they could use "reasonable and appropriate physical force" to remove you when they "reasonably believe" that you are criminally trespassing.
Seriously, "reasonably believed"?
What if their reasonable belief was wrong?
Several years ago I was on public lands when a couple of goons for a large Natrona County landowner approached me and informed me that I had to leave as I was trespassing. I had a GPS, and I knew I wasn't.
I was also deer hunting and carrying a rifle and a handgun.
Did the goons believe that I was trespassing? I don't know. It's hard to penetrate the minds of saps who take jobs as regulators. Their belief may have been based on what their employer told them. Mine was based on the United States Geological Survey.
I didn't want to bother with it, and I cleared off.
I frankly wouldn't now. Now, I would have told them to pound sand, particularly as they warned me it was a $10,000 fine is I stayed, which was bullshit.
I got my revenge, I guess, by voting against the guy, a long with a lot of other locals, when he stood for reelection for a local office he was also holding.
But back to the scenario. I'm armed. If they were too, and they believed I was "criminally trespassing", and had invoked the element by telling me I was, could they then draw down on me? Would that be reasonable force, as I was armed?
And if I did, would I have been justified in blowing them away in self defense? I wasn't trespassing, and now I'm in danger of my life.
I probably wouldn't. . . but if I were with my son, wife, or daughter and felt they actually might use the weapons? A scared person resorts to violence quickly, and men protecting their families do as well.
And if that happened, would I be found to have acted in self-defense?
This scenario, if this bill passes, will play out just this way.
Now it'll be incumbent upon anyone going afield to pack heat, least some hired moron tries to drive them off land they believe they have a right to be on. And sooner or later some asshole, probably a landowner on public land, or some out of state landowner's hired flunky, will challenge a fisherman, hunter, or hiker and get gunned down, dying for a moronic belief in the absolute nature of property rights that are, in fact, not absolute, never have been, and never will be.
What about the corner crossing case? Even the Game Warden couldn't tell if it was a trespass or not. The landowner's hired traitor to the state believed it was. Would he have drawn down on them?
Those guys were gentlemen in the whole affair. Most people are. I've known of at least one friend of mine who was confronted in such a fashion and kept a rifle on the jerk confronting him, as he was armed. The armed jerk didn't realize that he was about to meet the business end of a .30-30 if he went too far.
Life preserved by a clam reactant.
Not everyone is calm, and not everyone cares either. Some asshat is going to tell somebody to get off some land, and that person is going to stand their ground. Somebody will probably get killed, and it'll probably be the person yelling "get off my land".
Lots of people now days imagine themselves to be Matt Quigly in the final scene of Quigly Down Under, gunning down the baddy. Some have even taken up carrying all the time so that they can affect the visage of Pistol Pete or maybe Yoesimite Sam. Take our recent wholly unqualified interim Secretary of State, Karl Allred, who packed heat on to the UW campus as he wanted to make a point.
Direct link to WyoFile, "Uinta County committeeman Karl Allred reviews documents at a Wyoming Republican Party Central Committee meeting in Riverton in September 2022. Gov. Mark Gordon appointed Allred as secretary of state. (Mike Koshmrl/WyoFile)"
Mr. Allred, seen packing here complete with a handgun that has an extra magazine, may imagine himself freedom's brave sentinel. but if he had to draw that, let's be honest, he'd be lucky to get it around his gut.
Being fat is no crime, but frankly not one person in fifty knows how to use a handgun in combat, and a lot of those are people who would have the high side of the fight if confronted by a good. Pistol Packing Regulators may imagine that they can draw down on a whole passel of criminal trespasser, but the result is far from certain, particularly if they aren't trespassing.
Think that guy can outdraw and gun down a 20-year-old carrying a .357? I don't think it bloody likely.
And FWIW, there's a whole lot of people now who are packing for self-defense, including a lot of young, agile, men, and women, who actually don't have enormous waste lines to clear, and who the goons aren't going to know are packing.
What the crap has gotten into people?
Wyoming was built on go where you want, when you want. The last time somebody tried to change this, it went badly.
But we're right back at that point once again. Property rights, real or imagined, enforced at the barrel of a gun. Indeed, when we fought that battle before, the legislature was on the wrong side of it then as well.
Moreover, any property, including your very own house, that you own, you are merely renting for, at most, the extraordinary short period of your life. You don't really have a moral right to go around bullying trespassers on the open range or fishing stream. Yes, you can call law enforcement, but do that. That's their job in a civil society.
And let's be honest, if we're returning to that day, equitably, turnabout can be argued to be fair play.
Live by the sword. Some legislators propose to take us back to 1889 once again.
Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
Douay-Rheims Bible, Matthew 26:52.
It would seem that some old wars which seemingly were behind us are not.
Once again, the forces of "property" wish to exclude. . . violently.
And once again, they have the legislature behind them.
We recently posted on this item:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0126
Trespass-removal of trespasser.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Crago and Washut and Senator(s) Kinskey and Landen
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; providing for the use of physical force against a trespasser as specified; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 6‑3‑303 by creating new subsections (d) and (e) is amended to read:
6‑3‑303. Criminal trespass; penalties; justification.
(d) A person who is the owner or legal occupant of land or a premises upon which a criminal trespass is occurring, or their agent, is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force upon another person when and to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner, occupant or agent reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the land or premises.
(e) Section (d) of this section does not supersede or add to the responsibilities applicable to the defense of self or another as provided by law.
Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2023.
Frankly, as this bill is based on what one “reasonably believes”, basically authorizes murder, or could, and probably will be, read that way.
I know Washut who due to his prior career as a policeman ought to know better. I don't know the remainder of them.
This bill, if passed, will get somebody killed.
Let's start with this. What is criminal trespass?
Well, under Wyoming's law, it's the following:
TITLE 6 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 3 - OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY
6-3-303. Criminal trespass; penalties.
(a) A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:
(i) Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or
(ii) Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.
(b) Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.
(c) This section does not supersede W.S. 1-21-1003.
So, under Wyoming's law, if a person comes up to you, and says "you are trespassing", and you remain, and you really are trespassing, you are guilty of criminal trespass.
And, under the proposed amendment to the law, this would be added to it:
(d) A person who is the owner or legal occupant of land or a premises upon which a criminal trespass is occurring, or their agent, is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force upon another person when and to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner, occupant or agent reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the land or premises.
(e) Section (d) of this section does not supersede or add to the responsibilities applicable to the defense of self or another as provided by law.
So the new law would be such that Landowner or Landowner's agent could come up to you and say, "get off", and if they didn't, they could use "reasonable and appropriate physical force" to remove you when they "reasonably believe" that you are criminally trespassing.
Seriously, "reasonably believed"?
What if their reasonable belief was wrong?
Several years ago I was on public lands when a couple of goons for a large Natrona County landowner approached me and informed me that I had to leave as I was trespassing. I had a GPS, and I knew I wasn't.
I was also deer hunting and carrying a rifle and a handgun.
Did the goons believe that I was trespassing? I don't know. It's hard to penetrate the minds of saps who take jobs as regulators. Their belief may have been based on what their employer told them. Mine was based on the United States Geological Survey.
I didn't want to bother with it, and I cleared off.
I frankly wouldn't now. Now, I would have told them to pound sand, particularly as they warned me it was a $10,000 fine is I stayed, which was bullshit.
I got my revenge, I guess, by voting against the guy, a long with a lot of other locals, when he stood for reelection for a local office he was also holding.
But back to the scenario. I'm armed. If they were too, and they believed I was "criminally trespassing", and had invoked the element by telling me I was, could they then draw down on me? Would that be reasonable force, as I was armed?
And if I did, would I have been justified in blowing them away in self defense? I wasn't trespassing, and now I'm in danger of my life.
I probably wouldn't. . . but if I were with my son, wife, or daughter and felt they actually might use the weapons? A scared person resorts to violence quickly, and men protecting their families do as well.
And if that happened, would I be found to have acted in self-defense?
This scenario, if this bill passes, will play out just this way.
Now it'll be incumbent upon anyone going afield to pack heat, least some hired moron tries to drive them off land they believe they have a right to be on. And sooner or later some asshole, probably a landowner on public land, or some out of state landowner's hired flunky, will challenge a fisherman, hunter, or hiker and get gunned down, dying for a moronic belief in the absolute nature of property rights that are, in fact, not absolute, never have been, and never will be.
What about the corner crossing case? Even the Game Warden couldn't tell if it was a trespass or not. The landowner's hired traitor to the state believed it was. Would he have drawn down on them?
Those guys were gentlemen in the whole affair. Most people are. I've known of at least one friend of mine who was confronted in such a fashion and kept a rifle on the jerk confronting him, as he was armed. The armed jerk didn't realize that he was about to meet the business end of a .30-30 if he went too far.
Life preserved by a clam reactant.
Not everyone is calm, and not everyone cares either. Some asshat is going to tell somebody to get off some land, and that person is going to stand their ground. Somebody will probably get killed, and it'll probably be the person yelling "get off my land".
Lots of people now days imagine themselves to be Matt Quigly in the final scene of Quigly Down Under, gunning down the baddy. Some have even taken up carrying all the time so that they can affect the visage of Pistol Pete or maybe Yoesimite Sam. Take our recent wholly unqualified interim Secretary of State, Karl Allred, who packed heat on to the UW campus as he wanted to make a point.
Direct link to WyoFile, "Uinta County committeeman Karl Allred reviews documents at a Wyoming Republican Party Central Committee meeting in Riverton in September 2022. Gov. Mark Gordon appointed Allred as secretary of state. (Mike Koshmrl/WyoFile)"
Mr. Allred, seen packing here complete with a handgun that has an extra magazine, may imagine himself freedom's brave sentinel. but if he had to draw that, let's be honest, he'd be lucky to get it around his gut.
Being fat is no crime, but frankly not one person in fifty knows how to use a handgun in combat, and a lot of those are people who would have the high side of the fight if confronted by a good. Pistol Packing Regulators may imagine that they can draw down on a whole passel of criminal trespasser, but the result is far from certain, particularly if they aren't trespassing.
Think that guy can outdraw and gun down a 20-year-old carrying a .357? I don't think it bloody likely.
And FWIW, there's a whole lot of people now who are packing for self-defense, including a lot of young, agile, men, and women, who actually don't have enormous waste lines to clear, and who the goons aren't going to know are packing.
What the crap has gotten into people?
Wyoming was built on go where you want, when you want. The last time somebody tried to change this, it went badly.
But we're right back at that point once again. Property rights, real or imagined, enforced at the barrel of a gun. Indeed, when we fought that battle before, the legislature was on the wrong side of it then as well.
Moreover, any property, including your very own house, that you own, you are merely renting for, at most, the extraordinary short period of your life. You don't really have a moral right to go around bullying trespassers on the open range or fishing stream. Yes, you can call law enforcement, but do that. That's their job in a civil society.
And let's be honest, if we're returning to that day, equitably, turnabout can be argued to be fair play.
Thursday, January 14, 1973. Elvis in Hawaii.
Uncle Mike's Musings: A Yankees Blog and More January 14, 1973: The Dolphins Finish Undefeated & Elvis Says Aloha - *January 14, 1973, 50 years ago:* Super Bowl VII is played at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. At stake for both teams was the Championship of the Natio...
Well that's notable.
What's additionally notable that the football season wrapped up so much earlier then, than now. Would that this would not have changed.
The Dolphins beat the Redskins 14 to 7 and took the only perfect season with no defeates.
The Elvis Presley television specials were a big deal at the time. I can recall us watching them on television from our kitchen, where the tv was located.
The Mossad prevented a PLO attempt at shooting down an aircraft transporting Prime Minister Golda Meir to Rome.
Thursday, January 14, 1943. The Casablanca Conference opens.
Prime Minister Winston Church and President Franklin Roosevelt met in Casablanca for the opening of a multiday conference at the Anfa Hotel.
The Anfa.
The Japanese commenced Operation Ke, the withdrawal of their forces from Guadalcanal. Somewhat counterintuitively, it commenced with eh landing of additional troops to act as a rear guard.
Sunday, January 14, 1923. Cross Atlantic Radio
Radio broadcast of cogent voices across the Atlantic Ocean demonstrated for the first time.
The Soviet Union, an entity based on occupation of foreign territories, protested the French occupation of the Ruhr.
To build a fire.
And all the while the dog sat and watched him, a certain yearning wistfulness in its eyes, for it looked upon him as the fire provider, and the fire was slow in coming.
Jack London, "To Build A Fire"
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)