07.01.2008 0

Maryland Solves the Hybrid No-Noise Problem

  • On: 07/16/2008 16:21:28
  • In: Government Transparency
  • Dave Barry is right: You really can’t make this stuff up.

    So, here, straight from the unimpeachable scribes at the formerly “Free State’s” AP Bureau is the full story – believe it or not, Mr. Ripley:

    “The House of Delegates has approved a bill to study whether quiet hybrid vehicles should be louder so that they don’t pose a threat to blind pedestrians.

    “The idea came to the General Assembly because of complaints that blind people can’t hear the vehicles when they try to cross the street.

    “Minimum noise levels are not addressed under current law.

    “A similar proposal is pending in the Senate. The bills would set up a task force to investigate whether Maryland officials should require noisier cars.”

    One has to wonder exactly what Maryland’s nanny-state solons have in mind to achieve their goal of “noisier cars.” Straightpipes on the mufflers? Kazoos attached to the antennae? Whistles on the wheels? Perhaps a deafening car horn blaring forth every other millisecond to keep the blind – as well as everyone else – off the streets altogether? Now, there’s a sound every citizen looks eagerly forward to hearing.

    Or, how about this: How about forcing all the owners of those sneaky little hybrids to play a continuous loop of screeching dolphins trapped in tuna nets over giant loud speakers firmly affixed to the front and back bumpers (after all, hybrids can go in reverse)?

    Then the nanny-state solons can strike down two enemies of the state with a single “progressive” blow. And, to make matters even better, Governor O’Malley can add on a noise abatement tax to get the motorists coming, going, or just passing through. After all, say it loud and say it clear: in Maryland, freedom’s become just another word for nothing left to lose.



    ALG Prediction: This bill will pass, unfortunately, because Maryland is thoroughly dominated by Democrat politicians in the State Legislature and the Governorship. And this will give rise to yet another tax, plus a noisemaker surcharge on the offending hybrid. Nope, you can’t make this stuff up.

    D.C. to Citizens: “Drop Your Rights and Give up Your Guns”

  • On: 07/16/2008 16:15:25
  • In: 2nd Amendment
  • D.C. to Conduct Door to Door Search for Guns

    “Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA – ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.” – Heinrich Himmler


    The Supreme Court is preparing to render its ruling in the landmark case District of Columbia v. Heller. So D.C. officials, ever fearful that the Second Amendment might be actually upheld, are launching the SafeHomes Initiative- a last ditch (albeit unconstitutional) effort to get firearms off city streets—by invading people’s homes.

    According to the Metropolitan Police Department’s web-site, under the SafeHomes Initiative:

    “Officers…will visit your community and knock on your door. If you wish to have your home searched for weapons [ED: And don’t we all?], you have the option to choose the officer you wish to conduct the search. He or she will provide a Consent to Search form for you to complete and sign.

    “In the event that a trace of the weapons yields a connection to prior crimes, charges may be filed against the individuals responsible. If the trace finds no connection to criminal cases, the weapon will be destroyed.”

    However, don’t be fooled by the government’s patently absurd propaganda. This initiative poses a serious threat to the Constitutional rights of the citizens of the District of Columbia. According to the government, these searches are “purely voluntary”. However, according to Arthur B. Spitzer of the American Civil Liberties Union:

    “…it’s a very bad idea. It sends the message to the public that police ought to be able to search your house anytime for any reason. People will be intimidated. That cheapens civil liberties and privacy for everyone.”

    Additionally, this initiative would put the Constitutional notion of separation of powers in serious jeopardy. According to Thomas Nolan, a Criminology professor at Boston University:

    “I just have a queasy feeling any time the police try to do an end run around the Constitution. The police have restrictions on their authority and ability to conduct searches. The Constitution was written with very specific intent, and that was to keep the law out of private homes unless there is a written document signed by a judge and based on probable cause. Here, you don’t have that.”

    And, Professor Nolan, is not alone in his concerns. In his dissent in the landmark Supreme Court Case Terry v. Ohio, Justice William Douglas stated:

    “To give the police greater power than a magistrate is to take a long step down the totalitarian path.”

    Yet that’s exactly what this initiative does. The District of Columbia does not want ordinary law-abiding citizens to be in the possession of firearms. It’s just that simple. So, they’ve given their citizens the ultimate Hobson’s choice: Either supinely submit to having your home searched—or know that the local gendarmerie are eyeing you suspiciously and wondering why.

    ALG Perspective:
    This is a prime example of the government relying on the naiveté of the average citizen who may not know that they have the right to not consent to a police search and seizure. Plus, it paves the way for door-to-door police sweeps whenever the state deems it appropriate. This was done once before. It was called “Kristallnacht” and it lead, invariably, to disaster.

    Copyright © 2008-2020 Americans for Limited Government