The good doctor is popular, even in California.

This is a recently published Letter to the Editor in the Vacaville Reporter, which serves the California Bay Area and Sacramento metro vicinity. The good doctor has supporters even in Garamendi/Boxer/Feinstein-land.

Dear Editor,

Just writing to let Americans know that there is very little time left to vote off the rotten apples that we have up on Capitol Hill.

The only decent one is Ron Paul -- he really cares about what happens in America. Capitol Hill has been laughing at us for a long time now. When the treasury secretary of the Federal Reserve (Timothy Geithner) said he wasn't sure where $2.5 trillion went, the Americans did nothing.

Re: Just Say No!

Legal pot may be coming to California:

The first step to legalize marijuana in California is on a roll.

Lawmakers on Tuesday approved Assembly Bill 390 -- legislation to tax and regulate marijuana. The Assembly's Public Safety Committee voted 4-3 on bill at a hearing in Sacramento. The bill will now be passed to the full Assembly on Friday for consideration.

This would legalize marijuana -- and not just for medicine. I'm not sure how much chance this has to be passed by full assembly, but it's definitely interesting.

Police Force Being Questioned in California

Following an  incident in Cornonado, California, where a police officer tased a man not wearing his seatbelt, a federal appeals court is questioning the use of Tasers.  When is it appropriate to use the a Taser? Michael Gennaco, who has conducted internal reviews of Taser use for the LAPD, comments on the decision made in the 9th circuit ruling:

This decision talks about the need for an immediate threat. . . . Some departments allow Tasers in cases of passive resistance, such as protesters who won't move," he said. Tasering for "passive resistance is out the door now with this decision. Even resistance by tensing or bracing may not qualify.

Still, there is a need to question the use of Tasers all together. Can we trust the officer to use the Taser "appropriately" and only at a time when the person refuses to comply with the officer's orders?  I don't believe so.

Perhaps John Connor's Metal Friend needs a Tune up

It’s okay for John Connor fight the evil Cyberdyne’s Skynet with more firepower than most delta force squads, but a regular Joe who is trying to protect his property from criminals must be fingerprinted. This is the new edict from California’s "Governator" Arnold Schwarzenegger.  The star of such shoot'em ups as “The Terminator,” “Predator,” "Total Recall," and "True Lies,” now apparently does not trust his own constituents to purchase ammunition. Ammunition dealers in California must now fingerprint all purchasers of handgun ammo and keep a record of their sale for the next 5 years. To make sure you don’t try to skip over the database they have modeled this law after a gun law in which all purchases must be done in person, i.e. no online sales, so supposedly no one can fool the system. On top of this you must also provide photo ID to verify that these are your finger prints. They even were trying to make all dealers selling over 50 rounds a month to be registered with the state, but this provision was stripped in a “compromising” deal. The new law goes into effect in February 2011. This new bill raises many questions, besides the obvious question of "What are you thinking?" Some question I have are, what about current ammo stockpiles. Will they need to be registered? Will police conduct campaigns to search for them and force complience? All I know is that this typically does not end in more liberty nor safety for law abiding citizens.