Thursday, October 22, 2009

Help FEMA catch lawbreakers burying survival items

Help FEMA catch lawbreakers burying survival items.
Posted April 28th, 2008 by McClarinJ

Due to the likelihood that FEMA or other government agents will enforce restrictions that violate citizens' rights to own guns, ammunition, food reserves, and precious metals in the event of a severe depression or other calamity, some outlaws might consider burying at least some of their cache of survival items in well-sealed, unbreakable plastic containers.

Large PVC pipe sections with glued-on end caps might be used for smaller items like guns, ammunition, and precious metals. Guns could be wrapped in oil-drenched rags and inside plastic bags. When gluing, these scofflaws would know to swab surfaces with PVC primer first then make sure to quickly and thoroughly slop lots of PVC glue on the parts to be joined, speedily join them, rotating a partial turn, and hold them tightly in place for at least five seconds, ensuring a watertight capsule. Some might use a clean-out plug for easier opening, well sealed on both threaded surfaces with sticky wax from a wax toilet ring after the cache capsule is loaded for burial.

Where might they bury these capsules? Scofflaws realize that anything metal (gold, silver, guns & ammo) buried in their yard or hidden in their wall or attic can be easily located with a good metal detector and they could be prosecuted for noncompliance or conspiracy to withhold contraband if detected. Therefore they are apt to select an off-site location that is free from prying eyes as they bury, a site also unlikely to be bulldozed in the near future. First they would select a spot that aligns with permanent features so they could relocate it. They would use a small tarp to protect the surface from soil spillage and load one or more plastic buckets with their excavated earth. Before digging, they would carefully set aside any surface debris so they could replace it afterward to disguise their digging location. A smart illegal hoarder would tamp the earth well as they covered the cache capsule so it will not settle, leaving a telltale depression.

Since anti-hoarding statutes may entail house-to-house searches for food reserves, expect illegal hoarders to hide at least part of their food reserves underground. This presents a more complex challenge than burying smaller items. One likely if surprising ruse is to hide food reserves in a septic tank. Let me explain.

The hoarder realizes he needs a strong, waterproof, good-sized chamber for storing sealed plastic buckets full of storage foods underground. I have recently researched polyethylene septic tanks and suspect they are already in use for this purpose. They are light enough to be transported by pickup and carried or dragged by two people. They come equipped with manhole covers that could be sealed using the toilet ring wax method after they are stocked with provisions, plus they are non-metallic so a metal detector cannot be used to find them. These tanks are available for about a dollar per gallon capacity. You can judge for yourself by googling "plastic septic tanks" or follow some of these links to investigate:

Many suppliers also sell underground cistern tanks that might also be used in this fashion, not to mention as rainwater storage tanks for which they are intended.

Those who conspire to hoard foodstuffs are sure to select long-term storage foods, adequately protected against moisture and insects. LDS church members have lots of information on storage techniques, which outlaws should be able to locate online.

Here again, care is probably taken to conceal signs of recent excavation, so lots of tarps are no doubt laid down, topsoil set aside for later replacement, and grooming/planting/littering to resemble the surrounding terrain as the final touch. The manhole cover would be buried at least as deep as the top of the tank is wide to avoid any hollow sounds. A sheet of plastic covering the manhole would protect against earth intrusions when the chamber is opened. Let's say illegal hoarders planned to bury a 1,000-gallon tank. They would need to remove at least 300 five-gallon buckets-full of earth. That's a lot of digging over several days so they would pick a location hidden from view and unlikely to attract visitors. They could be slowed down or even thwarted by big boulders, bedrock, or tangled tree roots, plus they would have to find a home for their excess dirt away from their cache site. They would be sure to have a couple pairs of tough, comfortable gloves and a good, stout long-handled shovel before they begin. It would be a bit of a workout.

Now that you know the details of how criminal hoarders are apt to try to thwart federal authorities you will be better able to spot suspicious activity and turn them in to the proper authorities. Go get 'em!

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Ben Franklin advice to a young man

Benjamin Franklin, Advice to a Young Man on the Choice of a Mistress (1745).
June 25, 1745

My dear Friend,

I know of no Medicine fit to diminish the violent natural Inclinations you mention; and if I did, I think I should not communicate it to you. Marriage is the proper Remedy. It is the most natural State of Man, and therefore the State in which you are most likely to find solid Happiness. Your Reasons against entering into it at present, appear to me not well-founded. The circumstantial Advantages you have in View by postponing it, are not only uncertain, but they are small in comparison with that of the Thing itself, the being married and settled. It is the Man and Woman united that make the compleat human Being. Separate, she wants his Force of Body and Strength of Reason; he, her Softness, Sensibility and acute Discernment. Together they are more likely to succeed in the World. A single Man has not nearly the Value he would have in that State of Union. He is an incomplete Animal. He resembles the odd Half of a Pair of Scissars. If you get a prudent healthy Wife, your Industry in your Profession, with her good Economy, will be a Fortune sufficient.

But if you will not take this Counsel, and persist in thinking a Commerce with the Sex inevitable, then I repeat my former Advice, that in all your Amours you should prefer old Women to young ones. You call this a Paradox, and demand my Reasons. They are these:

i. Because as they have more Knowledge of the World and their Minds are better stor'd with Observations, their Conversation is more improving and more lastingly agreable.

2. Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Men, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a 1000 Services small and great, and are the most tender and useful of all Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an old Woman who is not a good Woman.

3. Because there is no hazard of Children, which irregularly produc'd may be attended with much Inconvenience.

4. Because thro' more Experience, they are more prudent and discreet in conducting an Intrigue to prevent Suspicion. The Commerce with them is therefore safer with regard to your Reputation. And with regard to theirs, if the Affair should happen to be known, considerate People might be rather inclin'd to excuse an old Woman who would kindly take care of a young Man, form his Manners by her good Counsels, and prevent his ruining his Health and Fortune among mercenary Prostitutes.

5. Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part: The Face first grows lank and wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower Parts continuing to the last as plump as ever: So that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding2 only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old from a young one. And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement.

6. Because the Sin is less. The debauching a Virgin may be her Ruin, and make her for Life unhappy.

7. Because the Compunction is less. The having made a young Girl miserable may give you frequent bitter Reflections; none of which can attend the making an old Woman happy.

8thly and Lastly They are so grateful!!

Thus much for my Paradox. But still I advise you to marry directly; being sincerely Your affectionate Friend.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Weapons of choice
Saturday, October 03, 2009
WorldNetDaily Exclusive
Feds sued to keep out of state's gun affairs
Complaint filed seeking affirmation of Montana Firearms Freedom Act
Posted: October 03, 2009
11:25 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh

In the second major front in the war over gun rights that has developed in just days, a lawsuit has been filed against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder seeking a court order that the federal government stay out of the way of Montana's management of its own firearms.

Montana statehouse

The action was filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Montana Shooting Sports Association in U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., to validate the principles and terms of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which took effect today.

WND previously reported on the precedent-setting move taken over the course of recent months when the 2009 Montana Legislature approved the bill and the plan was signed into law by Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer.

The law provides guns and ammo made, sold and used in Montana would not require any federal forms; silencers made and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered; and there would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required.

The idea is spreading quickly. Tennessee already has a similar law, and similar plans have been introduced in many other states.

An organization called the Firearms Freedom Act has created a map of such activity nationwide:

Map of gun law activity assembled by

The move comes at a time the nation has a president who has placed anti-gun activists in several influential positions, including an attorney general who supported a complete handgun ban in the District of Columbia before the U.S. Supreme Court threw it out.

Get "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense" and learn why you have a responsibility to be armed.

Montana's plan is called "An Act exempting from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution of the United States a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured and retained in Montana."

The law cites the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the Constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time it was admitted to statehood in 1889.

"The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889," the law states.

The lead attorney for the plaintiffs' litigation team is Quentin Rhodes of the Missoula firm of Sullivan, Tabaracci & Rhoades, PC. The team includes other attorneys working in Montana, New York, Florida, Arizona and Washington.

"We're happy to join this lawsuit," said Alan Gottlieb, founder of the SAF, "because we believe this issue should be decided by the courts.

"We feel very strongly that the federal government has gone way too far in attempting to regulate a lot of activity that occurs only in-state," added MSSA President Gary Marbut. "The Montana Legislature and governor agreed with us by enacting the MFFA. We welcome the support of many other states that are stepping up to the plate with their own firearms freedom acts."

David Codrea, a Gun Rights Examiner writer, noted the federal government already has started attacking the move.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, he wrote, previously had written to Federal Firearms Licensees, warning that they could be prosecuted for following the state laws in Montana and Tennessee

"What if an FFL was not acting in his capacity as a federal licensee to manufacture for personal use, or to transfer firearms strictly within a state? Or what if a person so engaged was not a federal licensee at all?" Codrea asked.

Then he answered: "ATF's determined intent to hold all accountable under federal law has not wavered. In a letter to MSSA president Gary Marbut, Richard Chase, Special Agent in Charge, Denver Field Division, states: 'The manufacture of firearms or ammunition for sale to others within Montana requires licensure by ATF.'"

In a statement the SAF said, "The primary purpose of the MFFA is to set up a legal challenge to federal power under the commerce clause."

The lawsuit seeks a "declaratory judgment" and is "brought for the purpose of determining a question of actual controversy between the parties."

"Passage of the MFFA was an express exercise by the State of Montana of powers reserved to the states and to the people under the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution," the lawsuit said.

"The MFFA is also authorized under the conditions of the compact with the United States that Montana entered upon admission to the union. The United States Congress therefore has no authority, under the limited powers granted to it by the United States Constitution, to preempt the MFFA."

The arguments continued, "Under the 10th Amendment, all regulatory authority of all such activities within Montana's political borders is left in the sole discretion of Montana. Federal law therefore does not preempt the MFFA and cannot be invoked to regulate or prosecute Montana citizens acting in compliance with the MFFA, so long as they do so solely within the political borders of Montana."

WND also reported this week on a second front in the battle over guns when the Supreme Court agreed to hear a landmark Second Amendment case challenging Chicago's ban on handguns and onerous registration procedures on other firearms.

The Illinois State Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation filed a lawsuit against the city of Chicago claiming the city enforces a handgun ban identical to the one struck down by the Supreme Court in the case District of Columbia v. Heller and that the ban violates residents' Second Amendment rights.

In Heller, the court rejected a lower court position that claimed the Second Amendment applied only to state "militia," such as the National Guard. However, the 5-4 ruling referenced the federal jurisdiction of Washington, D.C., and not states and localities.

This case, McDonald v. Chicago, challenges a 7th Circuit court ruling that said the Second Amendment applies only to federal regulation of an individual's right to guns and not in cases of restrictions by states and municipalities like Chicago and Oak Park, Ill.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Furthermore, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, or the Privileges or Immunities Clause, states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The plaintiffs argue that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" in the Second Amendment is "incorporated" into the 14th Amendment and applies to both states and localities.