And he is an advocate of gun
control. For instance, Ohio’s WHIO TV’s
website has video of him talking
about gun control. I can’t embed it,
so let me suggest instead you go there and view it. talking about gun control. And if you can’t, here are some choice
quotes:
“We know that guns
are being sold on the floor inside Hara Arena illegally” said Jerome McCorry.
“No background checks no identification of any kind.”
McCorry said “AK-47s
and M16s are not gonna be used for hunting, they’re not going to be used to
protect anybody. These are the weapons that are coming back and being used in
mass murders and mass killings.”
And here he is on Dayton’s WDTN
News website:
If you can’t watch it, here’s
some choice quotes from the accompanying article:
Reverend Jerome
McCorry is on the other side of the gun debate.
"What we are
saying is if you are protecting yourself with a M-16 or AK-47, then maybe you
need to call someone outside of yourself," said McCorry, President of
Ceasefire Dayton and the Adam Project, two anti-violence groups aimed at
changing the gun culture in our community.
McCorry said
President Obama's plan isn't the entire solution but, it's a start.
The page I linked to won’t tell
you much unless you pay for a background check, but it does tell you where he
currently lives according to the sex offender registry and that his victim was
female.
So he is a convicted felon now
heading two charity organizations supposedly dedicated to good causes... Where have I heard that before?
Well, I won’t let my recent
negative experiences cause me jump to the worst conclusions. Maybe he is sincere about reforming himself
and others, although I have had my fill of convicted felons who fake reform so you will hopefully understand if I am wary of a new one.
But still even if you accept his reformation, isn’t it creepy to hear
him talk about how easy it was to get a gun without a background check, when
more than likely he can’t pass a background check? Isn’t it creepy to for him to talk about the
mechanics of self-defense when some time ago a woman had a need to defend
herself against him?
But of course according to
WHIO-TV that past is not relevant:
Why don’t you guys give us that
information yourself, and let us decide for yourself?
Indeed, if I was a liberal, I
would be quoting Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in The Abyss and saying to the Reverend: “do me a favor, stay off my side.” It is criminals like him that make people
like us want a gun in the first place.
Or for that matter there is Brett
Kimberlin, too. In a series of posts at
his organization’s site, Justice Through Music (no links, you will have to
trust me on this), he urges readers to sign a petition to ban assault weapons,
and his site features this rant against Ted Nugent:
Ted Nugent, one of
the leading Teabagger mouthpieces, Tweeted after the news broke of the national
tragedy in Connecticut that "we take our kids huntin so we dont hafta hunt
our kids", and has (no pun intended) stuck to his guns and continues to
voraciously and vocally support the rights of Bushmasters to be in our
communities, rather than side with the families who want to protect their
children. RawStory.com reports that Discovery Channel announced they have
canceled the "Ted Nugent's Gun Country" TV show, along with another
unrelated show "American Guns". One wonders about the "Sons of
Guns" TV gun show and it's future. I say we rethink this whole thing about
these death machines being "entertainment". Hitler ruined the
toothbrush mustache, and Lanza ruined assault weapons as
"entertainment". Take up another hobby, do a different TV show. JTMP
fully supports bringing back the assault weapons ban, closing the "gun
show loophole", and other measures to make our communities safer and
reduce the chance, even if slightly, of a tragedy like this one.
Well, of course anyone claiming
that there is a gun show loophole is lying.
There
is no gun show loophole. There is
not a single word in the U.S. Code that treats sales at gun shows different
from anywhere else. It’s a political lie
made up, as best as I can tell, by Bill Clinton. I know… “Clinton lied! Hold the presses!”
In any case, it is curious that one
of Brett Kimberlin’s organizations would advocate gun control. After all, Kimberlin himself is a repeat
violator of gun control laws. As a brief
review here’s what the Seventh Circuit said about him in Kimberlin
v. White:
Kimberlin was
convicted as the so-called "Speedway Bomber," who terrorized the city
of Speedway, Indiana, by detonating a series of explosives in early September
1978. In the worst incident, Kimberlin placed one of his bombs in a gym bag,
and left it in a parking lot outside Speedway High School. Carl Delong was
leaving the high school football game with his wife when he attempted to pick
up the bag and it exploded. The blast tore off his lower right leg and two fingers,
and embedded bomb fragments in his wife's leg. He was hospitalized for six
weeks, during which he was forced to undergo nine operations to complete the
amputation of his leg, reattach two fingers, repair damage to his inner ear,
and remove bomb fragments from his stomach, chest, and arm. In February 1983,
he committed suicide.
But usually I don’t get into the
nitty-grits of what he was convicted of.
What he was convicted of in part was unlawful possession of firearms (as
in “bombs”). From U.S.
v. Kimberlin:
In Counts 1 through
8, each corresponding to one of the explosions, defendant was charged with
possession of a firearm (destructive device) not registered to him, in violation
of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). In Counts 9 through 16, he was charged with manufacture
of a firearm in violation of Chapter 53 and § 5861(f) of 26 U.S.C. In three
counts (17, 18, and 22), he was charged with maliciously damaging by explosive
the property of an entity receiving federal financial assistance, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 844(f), and in three counts (19, 20, and 21) with so damaging
property at a business used in and affecting interstate commerce, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i). In Count 22, it was also charged that personal 216*216
injury resulted, augmenting the maximum penalty prescribed by § 844(f).
You see by the time he committed the
Speedway bombings, Kimberlin was already a convicted drug dealer and perjurer,
and due to being a drug dealer he was prohibited from having any kind of
firearms, which naturally included bombs.
In addition to that, Mark Singer reports
that when he was arrested for the Speedway Bombings, he was in possession of
numerous more ordinary firearms, including the now infamous AR-15. So Brett Kimberlin knows first hand exactly
how useless gun laws can actually be, but he wants the rest of us, the law-abiding,
to be prohibited from having the very guns he had no trouble obtaining illegally.
But hey, at least he isn’t doing
something really crazy like running a website devoted to stopping domestic
terrorism... oh
wait.
(Don’t worry, that is a safe
link. Always practice safe surfing when the
Kimberlin Krew is involved. And yes,
Velvet Revolution is the other alleged charity he runs.)
But it does bring up a big
point. Several times when talking about
gun control, I have linked the issue to border control, making sarcastic comments
like “gun control is pretty much pointless without border control” or something
to that effect. I mean if you can’t stop
a full human being from coming into this country, what chance do you have of
stopping a gun which is much smaller, and doesn’t need stuff like food, water,
and oxygen and can be broken down easily into smaller parts? And that is true, but it occurred to me
recently that gun control is like immigration control in another way. Let me quote extensively from a classic Mark
Steyn essay on immigration:
In Michelle Malkin's
book "Invasion," she recounts the tale of two fellows who in August
2001 pulled into a 7-Eleven parking lot in Falls Church, Va., in search of fake
ID from the illegal-immigrant assistance network that hangs around there. Luis
Martinez-Flores, who'd been living here illegally since 1994, took them along
to the local DMV, supplied them with a fake address and falsely certified they
lived there. The very next day, the two guys returned with two pals of their
own, and used their own brand new state ID on which the ink was not yet dry to
obtain, in turn, brand new state ID for their buddies. A couple of weeks later,
all four of them used their Virginia ID to board American Airlines Flight 77 at
Dulles Airport and plowed it into the Pentagon.
Think about that.
From undocumented illegal alien in the 7-Eleven parking lot to lawful resident
of the Commonwealth of Virginia in just a couple of hours. Wow. Say what you
like about Luis Martinez-Flores but he runs one efficient operation.
By comparison, say
you've got two kids under 5, and you'd like to bring over a nice English nanny
to look after them. Name of Mary Poppins. Good references, impeccable
character. If you apply now, there's a sporting chance the process may be
completed before your children's children are in college.
Given that the
immigration "compromise" bill that the Senate was wrangling over last
week retrospectively approves all the millions of people who've been through
the superefficient Luis Martinez-Flores immigration system but without doing
anything to improve the sclerotic U.S. immigration system, maybe it would be
better just to subcontract the entire operation to Senor Martinez-Flores and
his colleagues. It would certainly be cheaper.
His point is to contrast how we
treat legal immigrants with illegal immigrants, how much easier things are for
those who aren’t troubled by breaking the law.
And then he really twists the knife in.
After quoting Bush as saying that family values doesn’t stop at the U.S. border, he tells us where apparently family values stops:
Here's another place
where family values stops: The rubble of the World Trade Center. Deena Gilbey
is a British subject whose late husband worked on the 84th floor: On the
morning of Sept. 11, instead of fleeing, he returned to the building to help
evacuate his co-workers. A few days later, Mrs. Gilbey receives a letter from
the INS noting that as she's now widowed her immigration status has changed,
and she's obliged to leave the country along with her two children (both U.S.
citizens). Think about that: having legally admitted to the country the
terrorists who killed her husband, the U.S. government's first act on having
facilitated his murder is to add insult to grievous injury by serving his widow
with a deportation order.
And indeed you should read
the whole thing. It was written in
2006 but applies just as well today.
(And you can get much more about Gilbey’s plight, here.)
So that is immigration control:
harassing, keeping out and throwing out the good people who are willing to obey the law and
come in the front door, while barely doing anything to stop the millions of
people sneaking in on the side. And that
is gun control, too: harassing and disarming good people who obey the law,
while doing nothing to stop the Brett Kimberlins of the world from getting
bombs and assault rifles. And that is
why gun control is worse than useless: it is dangerous to the good, law-abiding
people.
---------------------------------------
My wife and I have lost our jobs
due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an
attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up
to ten years. I know that claim sounds
fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these
claims using documentary and video evidence.
If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin
accountable, please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right. And thank you.
Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing,
mostly for snark and site updates. And
you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent
History here.
And you can read a little more about my novel, here.
---------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
I have accused some people,
particularly Brett Kimberlin, of
reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice I want is through the
appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system. I do not want to see vigilante violence
against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.
In the particular case of Brett
Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.
And for that matter, don’t go on
his property. Don’t sneak around and try
to photograph him. Frankly try not to
even be within his field of vision. Your
behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to
mention trespass and other concerns).
And do not contact his
organizations, either. And most of all, leave his family alone.
The only exception to all that is
that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with
contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might
report. And even then if he tells you to
stop contacting him, obey that request. That
this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that
a person asks you to stop and you refuse.
And let me say something
else. In my heart of hearts, I don’t
believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.
Wait... so the courts can deport the citizen children of legal immigrants, but they can't deport the anchor babies of illegal immigrants?
ReplyDeleteDo I have that right or am I missing something/ have something wrong here? Because that seems.... messed up.