Italy Passes Salvini-Backed Self-Defence Law to Protect Homeowners

H/T Breitbart.

The Italians understand to stop and a bad guy with a gun it takes a good guy with a gun.

The Italian Senate passed the new legitimate defence bill this week, liberalising the previous self-defence code and allowing citizens more options to protect their homes from burglars and other intruders.

The reform, which modifies article 52 of the Italian penal code, now allows Italians to use “a legitimately held weapon” to protect themselves and members of their household, making it far less likely individuals will be brought up on charges for defending themselves, Il Giornale reports.

The new changes were welcomed by populist Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior Matteo Salvini, who has previously pushed hard for self-defence reform.

It is a beautiful day for the Italians in which the sacrosanct right to self-defence is sanctioned,” Salvini said.

Previously, the Lega leader had even offered to pay the legal expenses of those brought up on criminal charges for using force to protect their homes.

“A thief comes into your house, company or store, and you defend yourself? It will be your right to do so, and the thug (and his relatives) will not be able to ask for a euro of compensation,” Salvini vowed.

“Besides, you won’t end up on trial for years and you won’t pay your own pocket: the state will cover any legal expenses of those who defended themselves.”

Breitbart London@BreitbartLondon

Salvini: Italian State Will Strengthen Self-Defence Rights, Cover Legal Costs of Home Defenders https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/10/07/salvini-italian-state-will-strengthen-self-defence-rights-cover-legal-costs-of-home-defenders/ 

Salvini: Italian State Will Cover Legal Expenses of Home Defenders

Italy’s Matteo Salvini has promised that people who confront home invaders will have their legal bills paid for by the Italian state.

breitbart.com

68 people are talking about this

“From today the criminals know that to be a robber in Italy is more difficult: it is an even more dangerous job,” the League (Lega) leader observed

Around 4.5 million homes in Italy have access to firearms, according to figures released in June of last year.

33 million Italian homes have anti-theft doors, while 10 million or so have alarms and often video cameras as well.

The new policy marks a stark contrast to the United Kingdom, where it is alleged that home defence policies have made British homeowners easy targets — to the point where Chilean criminal gangs have been known to fly in to rob British homes in what has been dubbed “burglary tourism.”

Breitbart London@BreitbartLondon

Khan’s London: 98-year-old Second World War Veteran Dies After Savage Home Invasion https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/02/khans-london-98-year-old-second-world-war-veteran-dies-after-savage-home-invasion/ 

Khan’s London: World War II Veteran, 98, Dies After Home Invasion Attack

Second World War veteran Peter Gouldstone, 98, has died in hospital after a savage beating in his London home.

breitbart.com

139 people are talking about this
Advertisements

Lindsey Graham Hits NBC Reporter Over ‘Absurd’ Question: ‘You’ve Got to Be Kidding Me’

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

The absurdity of the drive-by media is mind-boggling.

This question would have never been asked of a DemocRat Senator and Bathhouse Barry Obama.

A reporter asked whether supporting Trump is ‘conflict of interest’

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) got testy with a reporter Monday who asked whether he had a “conflict of interest” by being close to President Donald Trump while chairing the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Graham held a press conference in wake of the completion of the Mueller report and its finding that there was no evidence of collusion between candidate Donald Trump and Russia. Graham told reporters he was scheduled to speak with Attorney General William Barr at noon but would like him to testify before the committee as well.

“You brought up [former Attorney General] Jeff Sessions’s clear conflict of interest, and yet you I’m told delivered a rousing speech at Mar-a-Lago over the weekend,” asked NBC News reporter Geoff Bennett. “Is that kind of public closeness with the president appropriate? Does it not at least give the appearance of a conflict of interest, given your role in chairing the Senate Judiciary Committee?”

“You’ve got to be kidding,” Graham deadpanned in response.

“Did anybody ever ask during the Clinton impeachment that a Democrat was conflicted on speaking out on behalf of the president?” he continued. “I am a elected political official. I am a Republican, I am going all over the country to speak to the Republican Party. I want Trump to win.”

“I’m chairman of the Judiciary Committee,” he continued. “I do my job very responsibly. This committee is going to allow Mr. Barr to come forward and tell us and answer some of the questions you’ve asked. I’m asking him to lay it all out. I stood by Mr. Mueller because I believe in the rule of law.”

“There’s politics, and there’s the rule of law,” Graham said, holding up his hands to demonstrate. “So to suggest that if you’re a Republican, and that you want Trump to win, somehow you can’t do your job is absurd.”

Graham has previously parried baseless accusations that he’s being blackmailed to support Trump, a president in his own party.

Rand DEMANDS Probe of Obama Admin Over Russia – ‘Could Be WORSE Than Watergate’

H/T Flag And Cross.

This whole mess needs to be investigated and people need to be held accountable no matter who it is Obama, Hillary, etc.

Kind of a big deal…

No more games.

Senator Rand Paul is calling for an investigation into the Obama administration – and it’s all because of Russia.

This could further tarnish Barack’s already damaged “legacy,” as well as many of his associates.

Here’s the scoop…

 

From Washington Examiner:

Sen. Rand Paul escalated his demand for an investigation into former Obama officials who “concocted” the anti-Trump Russia scandal, revealing that former CIA Director John Brennan was the key figure who legitimized the charges and discredited “dossier” against the president.

In an interview, the Kentucky Republican said the Senate Judiciary Committee should immediately ask Brennan about his involvement in the document that helped to kick off the Russia collusion investigation of President Trump.

Paul tweeted:

BREAKING: A high-level source tells me it was Brennan who insisted that the unverified and fake Steele dossier be included in the Intelligence Report… Brennan should be asked to testify under oath in Congress ASAP.

Senator Rand Paul

@RandPaul

BREAKING: A high-level source tells me it was Brennan who insisted that the unverified and fake Steele dossier be included in the Intelligence Report… Brennan should be asked to testify under oath in Congress ASAP.

35.9K people are talking about this

Time to investigate the Obama officials who concocted and spread the Russian conspiracy hoax!

Senator Rand Paul

@RandPaul

Time to investigate the Obama officials who concocted and spread the Russian conspiracy hoax!

32.6K people are talking about this

Time to investigate high ranking Obama government officials who might have colluded to prevent the election of @realDonaldTrump! This could be WORSE than Watergate!

Senator Rand Paul

@RandPaul

Time to investigate high ranking Obama government officials who might have colluded to prevent the election of @realDonaldTrump! This could be WORSE than Watergate!

63.7K people are talking about this

Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters, just like every liberal in America, was on Robert Mueller’s side from the start.

And then, the Special Counsel’s report revealed no evidence, whatsoever, of Russian collusion with the 2016 Trump campaign.

Now, Dems are quick to criticize Mueller and his team. Many members of Congress are even saying they will keep digging for Russia dirt.

Add Maxine to that list.

She says Mueller’s report is not the end of the Russia probe.

WATCH:

Just silly, isn’t it?

It took Mueller two years of dedicated searching to result in jack squat, but Dems still aren’t satisfied until 45 is impeached.

They don’t care about the thriving economy, the stock market, or the low unemployment numbers.

They care about “getting” Trump and nothing more.

In another recent MSNBC appearance, Maxine declared she has “everything” necessary to impeach Trump.

From American Mirror:

During an appearance Saturday on MSNBC’s “AM Joy,” the chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee began by claiming that Trump is not acting in the best interest of the country.

[…]

“I believe in the Constitution, and the Constitution gives us the authority and the responsibility to decide whether or not a president is acting in the best interests of this country. This president is not. As far as I’m concerned, he has enough violations, he’s been involved in a lot of activity that we believe needs to be made apparent,” Waters said.

Waters added, “And so, I believe that we have everything that it needs to basically impeach him. I believe that. And you’re absolutely right, we’re depending on Mr. Mueller.

WATCH:

David Hogg Makes A Rather Strange Declaration About His Potential Death

H/T Town Hall.

Little Davey Camera Hogg feels he needs to get back in the spotlight.

 

On Saturday, David Hogg took to Twitter to share his “last wishes” should he die as a result of gun violence. He’d want his photo to be publicized as a way of enhancing the gun control movement.

David Hogg

@davidhogg111

In the event that I die from gun violence, please publicize the photo of my death

1,840 people are talking about this

It turns out that a group of students from Columbine High School have launched the “My Last Shot” movement. They’re encouraging people to put stickers on a personal item, like a driver’s license or cell phone, that says, “In the event that I die from gun violence, please publicize the photo of my death.”

According to the campaign’s founders, the goal is to force people to look at graphic images of gun violence in order to spark change. In their frequently asked questions section, the campaign explains why the sticker is important:

I put a sticker on my personal item. What does this accomplish?

The sticker is an important symbol for this project in its fight against gun violence, but it is not legally binding in any way.

It is a statement of intent; telling the world and those close to you that you want the graphic image of your death from gun violence publicized.

After placing a sticker on your personal item, we ask you to designate an advocate to ensure your last wish is fulfilled in the event of your death from gun violence. Ideally, your advocate is a close friend and family member.

The campaign’s launch comes a few months before the 20th anniversary of the shooting at Columbine High School in Littletown, Colorado.

“Sometimes, it takes seeing the worst of humanity to bring out the best,” a promo video for the campaign said.

Feinstein fumes as Trump administration pushes forward with 9th Circuit nominees without consulting her

H/T Fox News.

President Trump knows that both Feinstein and Harris would never have anything good to say about any of his nominee’s to the courts.

Look and the disgraceful way that Feinstein and Harris treated Brett Kavanaugh during his hearing to be an Associate  Supreme Court Justice.

The Senate is poised this week to consider two more conservative nominees selected by President Trump to sit on the left-leaning 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — and the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee isn’t happy about it.

That’s because the nominees, Ken Lee and Dan Collins, were picked without any input from either Dianne Feinstein or Kamala Harris, California’s two Democrat senators. Traditionally, the White House seeks to obtain a so-called “blue slip,” or approval, from a judicial nominee’s two home-state senators before pressing on with their nominations.

But the Trump administration, which has successfully nominated several conservative judges to the 9th Circuit already, has pointedly disregarded that process as it continues its push to transform the appellate court that the president repeatedly has derided as hopelessly biased and “disgraceful.”

“I take it that without notice or discussion, the blue slip is essentially dead,” Feinstein, the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in televised remarks on Thursday. “This change in practice not only harms the Senate, it harms the federal judiciary. And I wish we could’ve had an opportunity to discuss it. I really believe it’s a mistake.”

Feinstein, whose handling of the Brett Kavanuagh confirmation process still rankles conservatives, went on: “Before President Trump took office, the blue slip had been a Senate practice for nearly one century. And during the past 100 years, before this presidency, the Senate confirmed only five judges with only one blue slip, and the last one was in 1989 – and in 100 years the Senate had never confirmed a judge without two blue slips.”

 

But “since President Trump took office,” Feinstein charged, “Republicans have held hearings for 12 circuit court nominees and voted to confirm seven – seven – over the objection of home-state Democrats.”

TRUMP: 9TH CIRCUIT WOULD OVERTURN MY THANKSGIVING TURKEY PARDON IF IT COULD

Among those nominees was Seattle attorney Eric Miller, who was confirmed to the 9th Circuit in February by a vote of 53-46. Progressives fiercely attacked Miller as a corporate lawyer and Federalist Society member whose career supposedly had been hostile to Native American rights.

Feinstein continued: “There is no justification for disregarding Democratic blue slips. Democratic senators have made and continue to make good faith efforts to find consensus picks for the circuit courts.

“As Senator Harris and I have made clear, we’ve been willing to work from the start with this president to choose consensus, mainstream nominees to the 9th Circuit,” Feinstein added. “One of the things I’ve learned is: what goes around, comes around. I had hoped that we would be able to work in a very cooperative way.”

In January, Feinstein and Harris lashed out at the White House with a similar statement: “We are deeply disappointed that the White House has chosen to re-nominate Daniel Collins and Kenneth Lee to the 9th Circuit. We made clear our opposition to these individuals and told the White House we wanted to work together to come to consensus on a new package of nominees.”

 

With a sprawling purview representing nine Western states, the 9th Circuit has long been a thorn in the side of the Trump White House, with rulings against his travel ban policy and limits on funding to “sanctuary cities.”

Just weeks ago, the 9th Circuit broke ranks with another federal appellate court and ruled that a Sri Lankan man who failed his initial asylum screening had the constitutional right to go before a judge — threatening to clog the immigration court system further with tens of thousands of similar claims per year and setting up an all-but-certain Supreme Court showdown.

However, the court’s left-wing reputation might be changing, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Senate Republicans have continued to use the GOP majority to confirm judge after judge appointed by the president.

Among Trump’s other recent successful picks to the 9th Circuit: Ryan Nelson, a former staffer to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions; former Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett; and Magistrate Judge Bridget Bade.

Following Miller’s confirmation month, in an analysis titled “Thanks to Trump, the liberal 9th Circuit is no longer liberal,” The Washington Post noted that once all of Trump’s current nominees to the bench are confirmed as expected, there will be 12 Republican-appointed judges on the 9th Circuit, which consists of 29 full-time judges.

This Colorado sheriff is willing to go to jail rather than enforce a proposed gun law

H/T CNN.

Bravo, Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams for saying he would go to jail rather than enforce unConstitutional gun law.

Denver (CNN)Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams disagrees so much with a gun bill making its way through the Colorado legislature that he’s willing to go to jail rather than enforce it.

“It’s a matter of doing what’s right,” he said.
He’s not the only one who feels so strongly.
The controversial “red flag” bill aims to seize guns temporarily from people who are deemed to be a threat to themselves or others.
190330192454-02-colorado-sheriffs-gun-law-medium-plus-169
Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams
Colorado’s state Senate passed the bill Thursday by a single vote, without any Republican support, and the bill is expected to pass the House, possibly this week. With Democratic majorities in both chambers, state Republicans have too few votes to stand in the way.
But more than half of Colorado’s 64 counties officially oppose the bill. Many have even declared themselves Second Amendment “sanctuary” counties in protest.
Failure to enforce a court order to seize a person’s guns could mean sheriffs being found in contempt. A judge could fine them indefinitely, or even send them to jail to force them to comply.
Reams says it’s a sacrifice he’d be forced to make.

What is the bill?

Colorado’s “extreme risk protection order” bill would allow a family member, a roommate, or law enforcement to petition a judge to take someone’s firearms if they are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.
The push for legislation followed the death of Zack Parrish, the 29-year-old Douglas County sheriff’s deputy killed in 2017 by a man with an arsenal of weapons who authorities said had a history of bizarre behavior, including threats to police.
Parrish’s former boss, Sheriff Tony Spurlock, has been one of the most vocal advocates of the bill and says he believes it could have prevented Parrish’s death. Democratic House Majority Leader Alec Garnett, one of the bill’s primary sponsors, agrees.
The other House sponsor is Rep. Tom Sullivan, whose son, Alex, was killed in the Aurora, Colorado, movie theater shooting in 2012.
Garnett says he won’t lose any sleep if Reams or another Colorado sheriff opts for jail instead of enforcement of a court order.
“What I’m going to lose sleep over is, if that’s the choice that they make and someone loses their life, someone in crisis goes on a shooting spree, (or) someone commits suicide” because a gun wasn’t taken away, he said.

What’s so controversial?

Gun rights activists, and an increasing number of law enforcement leaders, say the bill goes too far.
David Kopel, a constitutional law expert who has written extensively about gun policy in the United States, says he thinks the bill is generally a good idea but that he has serious reservations about how it is written — in part because of outside influence.
“The gun ban lobbies are getting more and more extreme and aggressive,” he said.
The bill allows a judge to order a person’s guns to be seized before the person has a chance to appear in court. The bill does require a second hearing with the gun owner present to be held within 14 days, where the owner could make a case to keep the weapons — but if the owner is unsuccessful, a judge could order the guns seized for as long as a year.
Kopel said it would be difficult to prevent a nightmare scenario in which someone misuses the law to take guns away from a person they intend to target violently.
The burden of proof is low — “preponderance of the evidence,” which is the same standard used in civil cases, and a much lower bar than the criminal standard, “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Reams said he also worries about the potential to aggravate an already volatile person by taking their weapons.
“Going in and taking their guns and leaving the scene, I can’t see how that makes them less of a risk. It just takes one tool away,” said Reams, arguing that a person bent on hurting someone could do it with a knife or a car.
In 2018, a man near Baltimore was killed after officers showed up to seize his weapons based on a court order and “he became irate,” police said.
Garnett dismissed concerns about the bill.
“The opposition is always there. It will always be there and there’s nothing, there’s no amendments or any changes that could be made to bring the sheriff from Weld County onboard,” he said.
He’s right. Reams concedes he would still never support the bill, even with amendments.

Counties fighting back

A total of 32 counties have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuary, or preservation, counties or passed similar resolutions. Most vow support for their sheriffs and state that no resources or money will be used to enforce unconstitutional laws. Another two counties already had similar resolutions on the books, and one other has sent a letter to the legislature declaring its opposition.
Even Douglas County, where Deputy Parrish was killed, passed a similar resolution pledging that no county resources would be used in the enforcement of the red flag law, despite Sheriff Spurlock’s support for the legislation.
“We’re putting a line in the sand for what we believe right now is support (for) constitutional laws,” said Douglas County Commissioner Roger Partridge at a contentious meeting in March.
“Why would you tell a law enforcement officer they could not enforce the law because you didn’t like it? That’s craziness,” said Spurlock.
“The idea of a sanctuary county is more of a political move than it is a legal move,” said John Campbell, a law professor at the University of Denver.
Campbell said he also believes there could be civil or even criminal liability for a defiant sheriff if they refuse to seize a weapon and that person goes on to commit a crime with it.

What happens next?

The bill wouldn’t officially come into force until next year, but El Paso County is planning to launch a legal challenge as soon as it is signed into law.
In a statement, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said he is “confident that when and if the time comes, all law enforcement officials will follow the rule of law.”
But Reams is steadfast.
“I’ve explained that time and time again,” he said. “I’m not bluffing.”