Advertisements
Home

7 States Which Are Banning Sharia Law: Is Yours? The List…

3 Comments

This is from Joe For America.

If you want Sharia Law take your sorry goat humping ass to some Muslim third world shit hole.

I am glad to see my home state of Indiana is on the banning list.

So far seven states have banned Sharia law.

 

image: http://therightcurmudgeon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/screenshot-www.google.com-2015-04-26-09-25-18.jpeg

 

In the US, our laws are supposed to be based on the principles set forth in the United States Constitution.

Last we looked the Koran was not a part of the Constitution.

The states where “foreign law” is banned include Alabama, Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee.

 Oklahoma, passed an amendment to their state constitution that was struck down by a federal judge because it specifically referred to “Sharia law.”  Missouri’s legislature passed a ban on international law that was vetoed by Democratic Governor Jay Nixon.

Bans are being considered in a number of states including Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming.South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

You may be saying, “Wait a minute. The First Amendment is supposed to keep church and state separate.”

Apparently that only applies to Christianity

Everywhere Muslims immigrate they begin to demand the imposition of sharia law. There have been numerous criminal trials in the US where a father has murdered his daughter and justified it using Sharia law.

 

image: https://givemeliberty01.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/c345d-6a00d8341c60bf53ef0120a6a1ce2c970c-500wi.jpg

An Iraqi immigrant was found guilty of second degree murder today for running over his daughter, a crime motivated, prosecutors said, by the Arizona Muslim man’s belief that the 20-year-old woman had become “too Westernized.”[…]

According to prosecutors, Almaleki and his daughter fought over her adoption of Western ways, including her decision to attend college, her rejection of an arranged marriage and her chosing [sic] a boyfriend her parents did not approve of.

The usual suspects are claiming that banning Sharia law is, well, racist.

In a disturbing trend, anti-Muslim bigotry has recently crept into state legislatures around the country. Several states have passed or attempted to pass laws designed to prevent courts from applying Islamic or “Sharia” law, as well as “foreign” or “international law.” Some, such as a constitutional amendment passed in Oklahoma, mention Sharia specifically,  in addition to international law.  Others only mention foreign or international law. Whatever the specific terminology, all of these attempts raise serious red flags.

Efforts to single out Muslims and to advance the ugly idea that anything Islamic is un-American are unjust and discriminatory and should be rejected.

That little gem is from our friends at the American Civil Liberties Union. Virtually every group on the political left is experiencing hysteria over the idea that Sharia law should not be used in US courts.

We have seen Supreme Court Justices refer to international law in their decisions. We wouldn’t be surprised to see imposition of Sharia law creeping into US courts. We think it’s pretty obvious that as long as Muslims have their Public Relations man sitting in the Oval Office, Sharia law will be given free reign, so it is important for the states to block imposition of “international law” at the state level.

 

Has your state taken a stand in favor of Constitutional law? Is your state considering banning “international law”? If not, why not.
Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2015/04/seven-states-banning-sharia-law-list/

Advertisements

Sheriffs Plan Massive Opposition to Obama’s Executive Amnesty in Washington

1 Comment

This is from Freedom OutPost.

Hey Barack you did build this distrust.

We need  to support these Sheriffs in any way we can.

 

In light of Barack Obama’s defiance to institute amnesty to tens of millions of illegal aliens in America, following his public spanking on Tuesday, constitutional sheriffs from across America are planning a massive meeting in Washington to oppose his usurpation of power.

Bristol County Sheriff Thomas M. Hodgson sent out a letter recently which called on sheriffs to descend on Washington on December 10 to meet with congressmen and encourage them to secure the border and oppose Obama’s executive action regarding amnesty. The meeting will occur just days before the existing government funding bill expires.

“Never before in our nation’s history has it been so important for the American sheriffs to stand united and speak with one voice to secure our nation’s borders,” Hodgson wrote. “No longer can we sit idle while the inaction of our Federal Government marginalizes our ability to preserve public safety, enforce our laws, and protect the Constitutional rights of all who legitimately reside and work in our communities.”

“As a fellow Sheriff, and someone who shares a common mission and obligation to defend the public safety and national security concerns of our citizens, I am respectfully asking that you join me and our brother and sister Sheriffs on December 10, 2014 in [sic] at the United States Capitol to encourage immediate action by Congress and the Administration to pass legislation that will secure border security once and for all,” he added.

Hodgson said that he already had the support of members of Congress, as well as several senators.

Senator Jeff Sessions, Senator David Vitter and other members of Congress have agreed to join us at the Capitol to demand immediate action to secure our borders as the first step in achieving legitimate immigration reform in the future,” he wrote. “Several sheriffs have agreed to work in a spirit of cooperation to assist in recruiting at least 200 sheriffs to travel to Washington, D.C. for this historic meeting and press conference with members of Congress.

Sheriff Hodgson told National Review Online, “I think by the sheriffs going there in big numbers, it places an incredible amount of emphasis on the most important thing that is impacting us in the biggest way in our country across every spectrum of our society, from medical to economics to safety and national security, and that is secure the borders. We don’t need people to sit down there in Washington and sort of intellectualize what they think is the right thing to do without listening to the people who are dealing with these problems day-in and day-out and know the problems intimately.”

The Massachusetts sheriff believes that the meeting will motivate citizens to rally around the sheriffs to address the “significant threat to the welfare and safety of our American people and legal residents.”

He wrote that the policies of the Obama administration, which have encouraged illegal immigration, “have created serious threats to our domestic and national security.”

“The citizens of our nation are counting on the American Sheriffs to fulfill our oath to preserve law and order and live up to our responsibilities as guardians of the United States Constitution,” he exhorted. “Given the fact that 25 people in the United States are killed each day by illegal immigrants, and our schools are becoming overcrowded and more costly, our public health is threatened by new diseases and ailments introduced by people living in our communities illegally, and the fact that benefits are being given and violations of laws forgiven for a select group of non-citizenss, makes clear our obligation to act now before we erode the confidence and faith citizens have in Sheriffs across the country and throughout our history.”

Hodgson also told NRO that US sheriffs are “sick and tired of being marginalized in our ability to protect our citizens. We want the border secured. And until you do that, until you secure these borders, which you’ve been telling us since Day One, you will never ever have legitimate, comprehensive immigration reform.”

Constitutional sheriffs are the last line of defense against a tyrannical government and as we have seen many sheriffs stand against the Obama administration’s push for more unconstitutional gun legislation and against Islamic State threats, we now see them beginning to take a stand against their illegal policies regarding immigration. Take the time to call your sheriff and encourage him to attend in December. Let’s show them that we support upholding the law of the land and are behind them in their efforts.
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/11/sheriffs-plan-massive-opposition-obamas-executive-amnesty-washington/#a3XtlKA2a2kceqf6.99

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

1 Comment

This is a very important document for the American

people to read.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Article. I.

Section 1.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Section. 2.

Clause 1: The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

Clause 2: No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Clause 3: Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. (See Note 2) The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

Clause 4: When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

Clause 5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Section. 3.

Clause 1: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, (See Note 3) for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Clause 2: Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies. (See Note 4)

Clause 3: No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

Clause 4: The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

Clause 5: The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

Clause 6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Clause 7: Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Section. 4.

Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

Clause 2: The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, (See Note 5) unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

Section. 5.

Clause 1: Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Clause 2: Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Clause 3: Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

Clause 4: Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

Section. 6.

Clause 1: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. (See Note 6) They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, beprivileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Clause 2: No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

Section. 7.

Clause 1: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Clause 2: Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Clause 3: Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;

Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;–And

Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Section. 9.

Clause 1: The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

Clause 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Clause 3: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Clause 4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. (See Note 7)

Clause 5: No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

Clause 6: No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

Clause 7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Section. 10.

Clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

Clause 2: No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

Clause 3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Article. II.

Section. 1.

Clause 1: The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows

Clause 2: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Clause 3: The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President. (See Note 8)

Clause 4: The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Clause 5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Clause 6: In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, (See Note 9) the Same shall devolve on the VicePresident, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

Clause 7: The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Clause 8: Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Section. 2.

Clause 1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section. 3.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Section. 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article. III.

Section. 1.

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2.

Clause 1: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;–to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;–to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;–to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;–to Controversies between two or more States;–between a State and Citizens of another State; (See Note 10)–between Citizens of different States, –between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Clause 2: In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Clause 3: The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section. 3.

Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Clause 2: The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Article. IV.

Section. 1.

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section. 2.

Clause 1: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Clause 2: A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

Clause 3: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due. (See Note 11)

Section. 3.

Clause 1: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

Clause 2: The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

Section. 4.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Article. VI.

Clause 1: All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Clause 3: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Article. VII.

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,

GO WASHINGTON–Presidt. and deputy from Virginia

[Signed also by the deputies of twelve States.]

Delaware

Geo: Read
Gunning Bedford jun
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jaco: Broom

Maryland

James MCHenry
Dan of ST ThoS. Jenifer
DanL Carroll.

Virginia

John Blair–
James Madison Jr.

North Carolina

WM Blount
RichD. Dobbs Spaight.
Hu Williamson

South Carolina

J. Rutledge
Charles 1ACotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler.

Georgia

William Few
Abr Baldwin

New Hampshire

John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman

Massachusetts

Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King

Connecticut
WM. SamL. Johnson
Roger Sherman

New York

Alexander Hamilton

New Jersey

Wil: Livingston
David Brearley.
WM. Paterson.
Jona: Dayton

Pennsylvania

B Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
RobT Morris
Geo. Clymer
ThoS. FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson.
Gouv Morris

Attest William Jackson Secretary

NOTES

Note 1: This text of the Constitution follows the engrossed copy signed by Gen. Washington and the deputies from 12 States. The small superior figures preceding the paragraphs designate Clauses, and were not in the original and have no reference to footnotes.

The Constitution was adopted by a convention of the States on September 17, 1787, and was subsequently ratified by the several States, on the following dates: Delaware, December 7, 1787; Pennsylvania, December 12, 1787; New Jersey, December 18, 1787; Georgia, January 2, 1788; Connecticut, January 9, 1788; Massachusetts, February 6, 1788; Maryland, April 28, 1788; South Carolina, May 23, 1788; New Hampshire, June 21, 1788.

Ratification was completed on June 21, 1788.

The Constitution was subsequently ratified by Virginia, June 25, 1788; New York, July 26, 1788; North Carolina, November 21, 1789; Rhode Island, May 29, 1790; and Vermont, January 10, 1791.

In May 1785, a committee of Congress made a report recommending an alteration in the Articles of Confederation, but no action was taken on it, and it was left to the State Legislatures to proceed in the matter.

In January 1786, the Legislature of Virginia passed a resolution providing for the appointment of five commissioners, who, or any three of them, should meet such commissioners as might be appointed in the other States of the Union, at a time and place to be agreed upon, to take into consideration the trade of the United States; to consider how far a uniform system in their commercial regulations may be necessary to their common interest and their permanent harmony; and to report to the several States such an act, relative to this great object, as, when ratified by them, will enable the United States in Congress effectually to provide for the same.

The Virginia commissioners, after some correspondence, fixed the first Monday in September as the time, and the city of Annapolis as the place for the meeting, but only four other States were represented, viz: Delaware, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania; the commissioners appointed by Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Rhode Island failed to attend. Under the circumstances of so partial a representation, the commissioners present agreed upon a report, (drawn by Mr. Hamilton, of New York,) expressing their unanimous conviction that it might essentially tend to advance the interests of the Union if the States by which they were respectively delegated would concur, and use their endeavors to procure the concurrence of the other States, in the appointment of commissioners to meet at Philadelphia on the Second Monday of May following, to take into consideration the situation of the United States; to devise such further provisions as should appear to them necessary to render the Constitution of the Federal Government adequate to the exigencies of the Union; and to report such an act for that purpose to the United States in Congress assembled as, when agreed to by them and afterwards confirmed by the Legislatures of every State, would effectually provide for the same.

Congress, on the 21st of February, 1787, adopted a resolution in favor of a convention, and the Legislatures of those States which had not already done so (with the exception of Rhode Island) promptly appointed delegates. On the 25th of May, seven States having convened, George Washington, of Virginia, was unanimously elected President, and the consideration of the proposed constitution was commenced.

On the 17th of September, 1787, the Constitution as engrossed and agreed upon was signed by all the members present, except Mr. Gerry of Massachusetts, and Messrs. Mason and Randolph, of Virginia.

The president of the convention transmitted it to Congress, with a resolution stating how the proposed Federal Government should be put in operation, and an explanatory letter. Congress, on the 28th of September, 1787, directed the Constitution so framed, with the resolutions and letter concerning the same, to “be transmitted to the several Legislatures in order to be submitted to a convention of delegates chosen in each State by the people thereof, in conformity to the resolves of the convention.”

On the 4th of March, 1789, the day which had been fixed for commencing the operations of Government under the new Constitution, it had been ratified by the conventions chosen in each State to consider it, as follows:

Delaware, December 7, 1787; Pennsylvania, December 12, 1787; New Jersey, December 18, 1787; Georgia, January 2, 1788; Connecticut, January 9, 1788; Massachusetts, February 6, 1788; Maryland, April 28, 1788; South Carolina, May 23, 1788; New Hampshire, June 21, 1788; Virginia, June 25, 1788; and New York, July 26, 1788.

The President informed Congress, on the 28th of January, 1790, that North Carolina had ratified the Constitution November 21, 1789; and he informed Congress on the 1st of June, 1790, that Rhode Island had ratified the Constitution May 29, 1790.

Vermont, in convention, ratified the Constitution January 10, 1791, and was, by an act of Congress approved February 18, 1791, “received and admitted into this Union as a new and entire member of the United States.”

Note 2: The part of this Clause relating to the mode of apportionment of representatives among the several States has been affected by Section 2 of amendment XIV, and as to taxes on incomes without apportionment by amendment XVI.

Note 3: This Clause has been affected by Clause 1 of amendment XVII.

Note 4: This Clause has been affected by Clause 2 of amendment XVIII.

Note 5: This Clause has been affected by amendment XX.

Note 6: This Clause has been affected by amendment XXVII.

Note 7: This Clause has been affected by amendment XVI.

Note 8: This Clause has been superseded by amendment XII.

Note 9: This Clause has been affected by amendment XXV.

Note 10: This Clause has been affected by amendment XI.

Note 11: This Clause has been affected by amendment XIII.

This information has been compiled from the U.S. Code. The U.S. Code is published by the Law Revision Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives.

 

 

Muslims My Ass…

3 Comments

Hat Tip To  Freedom Is Just Another Word.  

 

 

Muslims My Ass…

Excellent!

I want to shake the guy’s hand that wrote this…

Have you ever seen a Muslim hospital?

Have you heard a Muslim orchestra?

Have you seen a Muslim band march in a parade?

Have you witnessed a Muslim charity?

Have you shaken hands with a Muslim Girl Scout?

Have you seen a Muslim Candy Striper?

The answer is no, you have not. Just ask yourself WHY ???

Barack Obama, during his Cairo speech, said: “I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America ‘s history.”

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN’S RESPONSE

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed? Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the: United States Constitution?

Declaration of Independence ?

Bill of Rights?

Didn’t think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England ? No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America ? No, they did not.

In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery. Your own half-brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.” Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country?

Not present.

There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era?

Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture. So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

Where were Muslims during World War II?

They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001?

If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news network’s that day. Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who’s asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo, Egypt on June 4thwere stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich heritage” Muslims have here in America …

Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslims.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 – the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan .

Also, don’t forget the Boston Marathon bombing on April 15.2013 was done by 2 Muslim Brothers. That, Mr. Obama is the “Muslim heritage” in America

EVERY AMERICAN MUST READ THIS !!

Be sure to SEND IT TO ALL.

Muslim Heritage, my ass.

9 Things You Didn’t Know About the Second Amendment

1 Comment

This is from the PolicyMic.

1. The Second Amendment codifies a pre-existing right
general congress

The Constitution doesn’t grant or create rights; it recognizes and protects rights that inherently exist. This is why the Founders used the word “unalienable” previously in the Declaration of Independence; these rights cannot be created or taken away. In D.C. vs. Heller, the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment “codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed this is not a right granted by the Constitution” (p. 19).

2. The Second Amendment protects individual, not collective rights

download (11)

The use of the word “militia” has created some confusion in modern times, because we don’t understand the language as it was used at the time the Constitution was written. However, the Supreme Court states in context, “it was clearly an individual right” (p. 20). The operative clause of the Second Amendment is “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” which is used three times in the Bill of Rights. The Court explains that “All three of these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not ‘collective’ rights, or rights that may be exercised only through participation in some corporate body” (p. 5), adding “nowhere else in the Constitution does a ‘right’ attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right” (p. 6).

3. Every citizen is the militia

download (12)

 To further clarify regarding the use of the word “militia,” the court states “the ordinary definition of the militia as all able-bodied men” (p. 23). Today we would say it is all citizens, not necessarily just men. The Court explains: “’Keep arms’ was simply a common way of referring to possessing arms, for militiamen and everyone else” (p. 9). Since the militia is all of us, it doesn’t mean “only carrying a weapon in an organized military unit” (p. 11-12). “It was clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia” (p. 20).

4. Personal self-defense is the primary purpose of the Second Amendment

download (13)

 We often hear politicians talk about their strong commitment to the Second Amendment while simultaneously mentioning hunting. Although hunting is a legitimate purpose for firearms, it isn’t the primary purpose for the Second Amendment. The Court states “the core lawful purpose [is] self-defense” (p. 58), explaining the Founders “understood the right to enable individuals to defend themselves the ‘right of self-preservation’ as permitting a citizen to ‘repe[l] force by force’ when ‘the intervention of society in his behalf, may be too late to prevent an injury’ (p.21). They conclude “the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right” (p.56).

5. The Second Amendment exists to prevent tyranny

download (14)You’ve probably heard this. It’s listed because this is one of those things about the Second Amendment that many people think is made up. In truth, this is not made up. The Court explains that in order to keep the nation free (“security of a free state”), then the people need arms: “When the able-bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny” (p.24-25). The Court states that the Founders noted “that history showed that the way tyrants had eliminated a militia consisting of all the able bodied men was not by banning the militia but simply by taking away the people’s arms, enabling a select militia or standing army to suppress political opponents” (p. 25). At the time of ratification, there was real fear that government could become oppressive: “during the 1788 ratification debates, the fear that the federal government would disarm the people in order to impose rule through a standing army or select militia was pervasive” (p.25). The response to that concern was to codify the citizens’ militia right to arms in the Constitution (p. 26).

7. The Second Amendment was also meant as a provision to repel a foreign army invasion

 

You may find this one comical, but it’s in there. The court notes one of many reasons for the militia to ensure a free state was “it is useful in repelling invasions” (p.24). This provision, like tyranny, isn’t an everyday occurring use of the right; more like a once-in-a-century (if that) kind of provision. A popular myth from World War II holds Isoroku Yamamoto, commander-in-chief of the Imperial Japanese navy allegedly said “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” Although there is no evidence of him saying this, there was concern that Japan might invade during WWII. Japan did invade Alaska, which was a U.S. territory at the time, and even today on the West Coast there are still gun embankments from the era (now mostly parks). The fact is that there are over 310 million firearms in the United States as of 2009, making a foreign invasion success less likely (that, and the U.S. military is arguably the strongest in the world).

8. The Second Amendment protects weapons “in common use at the time”

The right to keep and bear arms isn’t unlimited: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited” (p. 54). The Court upheld restrictions like the prohibition of arms by felons and the mentally ill, and carrying in certain prohibited places like schools and courthouses. What is protected are weapons “in common use of the time” (p.55). This doesn’t mean weapons in common use “at that time,” meaning the 18th Century. The Court said the idea that it would is “frivolous” and that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding” (p.8). The Court’s criteria includes weapons in popular widespread use “that [are] overwhelmingly chosen by American society” (p. 56), and “the most popular weapon chosen by Americans” (p. 58).

9. The Second Amendment might require full-blown military arms to fulfill the original intent

The Court didn’t rule specifically on this in D.C. vs. Heller, but noting that weapon technology has drastically changed (mentioning modern day bombers and tanks), they stated “the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large” (p. 55).

They further added that “the fact that modern developments [in modern weaponry] have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right” (p. 56). A full ruling has not been made, as this was not in the scope the court was asked to rule on in the D.C. vs. Heller case, but they left the door open for future ruling.

 

 

Allen West says that ‘States will nullify Obamacare’

1 Comment

This is from The Washington Times Communities.

I agree with Lt. Col. West the states need to take the lead in

nullifying Obamacare.

Then the states need to call a Convention of States to reign in

the federal government.

During said convention the 17 Amendment needs to be repealed.

So our Senators become more in tune to the will and wishes

of the people in their home states.

Then if they go against the will of the people they can be replaced.

 

NASHVILLE, January 4, 2014 — Calling the execution of the healthcare law a “real constitutional crisis”, former Congressman Allen West was interviewed on Fox News’ “On the Record with Gretta Van Susteren” Friday night.

When Susteren asked West whether or not the state attorneys general were actually going to take any action against the Obama administration’s lawless handling of the healthcare law, West told Susteren that they wouldn’t have a choice because states were stepping in to keep the feds in check.

“One of the things you have to look at is whether or not they [the states] can go back and challenge this based upon a thin possibility of nullification; sovereign states using the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the Constitution are not going to follow this [Obamacare]…”

But can the States nullify Obamacare?

According to Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution”: Absolutely.

West referred to the Ninth & Tenth Amendments as warrant for nullification. Here are those two Amendments broken down with the founders’ notes expounding this right of the states.

Jefferson wrote in the Kentucky Resolutions how to handle such federal usurpations of power:

“Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the Act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits…”

Madison also confirmed Jeffersonian nullification in his Report of 1800 and his Notes on Nullification.

The powers delegated to Congress are few and defined. The Tenth Amendment provides explicit validation for nullification, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”

In regards to nullification, the Constitution does not delegate this power to the federal government. The Constitution also does not clearly prohibit nullification. Therefore, it can now clearly be concluded that nullification is a power reserved for the people of their respective states.

The Ninth Amendment expounds even further the right to nullification. “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Jefferson explained that nullification was a natural right belonging to the people and their respective states. Because the Constitution does not expressly prohibit nullification, the federal government cannot deny or disparage this natural right of the people.

Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/american-millennial/2014/jan/4/allen-west-says-states-will-nullify-obamacare/#ixzz2pa8swjeU
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S TWO QUIET NEW EXECUTIVE ACTIONS ON WHO CAN BUY A GUN

3 Comments

This is from The Blaze.

Dictator Barry says privacy laws or any law means nothing to me.

Laws only apply to the peasant class but never to royalty like

Moochelle and myself.

When in the Hell are we going to put a stop to this bullshit?

 

After failing to strengthen background checks on gun buyers through Congress, the Obama administration on Friday announced pending executive action on the matter focused mainly on mental health issues that would allow the government to get around certain privacy laws on the books in order to obtain more information.

Obama Administrations Two Quiet New Executive Actions on Who Can Buy a Gun

The new restrictions would take the form of regulations from the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services. One of the regulations would seek to gain information previously withheld because of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPPA, which protects medical privacy.

“Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence,” a White House release said Friday. “While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent, in some cases when persons with a mental illness do not receive the treatment they need, the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide.”

The administration’s Friday post-holiday announcement came while President Barack Obama was still on vacation in Hawaii, in stark contrast to Obama’s first executive actions on guns, which were announced in a White House ceremony. “Friday news dump” announcements have also traditionally been used to try to avoid media scrutiny.

Federal regulations do not require congressional authorization, but must go through a period of public comment and review before being enacted.

The Justice Department regulation would clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law for reasons of mental health. The White House says that terminology in federal law is ambiguous.

Examples given by the Justice Department are the statutory terms “committed to a mental institution” and “adjudicated as a mental defective” to include involuntary inpatient and outpatient commitments, anyone found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, someone lacking mental responsibility or deemed insane, and persons found guilty but mentally ill.

“We are taking an important, commonsense step to clarify the federal firearms regulations, which will strengthen our ability to keep dangerous weapons out of the wrong hands,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement. “This step will provide clear guidance on who is prohibited from possessing firearms under federal law for reasons related to mental health, enabling America’s brave law enforcement and public safety officials to better protect the American people and ensure the safety of our homes and communities.”

The Department of Health and Human Services wants to ensure states are submitting more information on individuals through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS. Thus far, the health privacy laws have gotten in the way, so the HHS wants to “eliminate this barrier by giving certain HIPAA covered entities an express permission to submit to the background check system the limited information necessary to help keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands.”

The Government Accountability Office found in 2012 that 17 states had submitted fewer than 10 records of individuals to the federal background check system who were prohibited from buying guns for mental health reasons.

“There is a strong public safety need for this information to be accessible to the NICS, and some states are currently under-reporting or not reporting certain information to the NICS at all,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement. “This proposed rulemaking is carefully balanced to protect and preserve individuals’ privacy interests, the patient-provider relationship, and the public’s health and safety.”

HHS began looking at the matter last April. The regulation would not prohibit someone seeking help for metal illness from buying a firearm. Further, the White House says, the rule wouldn’t require reporting routine mental health visits.

Last year, the Democrat-controlled Senate rejected a proposal backed by Obama to expand background checks. The legislative push came in response to the December 2012 elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn. A shooting occurred earlier that year at a movie theater in Colorado. In both of cases, and in others, the accused shooters have had mental health problems.

 

 

 

 

House passes ‘Undetectable Firearms Act’ renewal, with 1 ‘No’ vote

1 Comment

This is from The Examiner.

I sent my Congress Critter an email expressing my

disappointment with his vote.

I hope the Tea Party comes up with someone to oppose

Larry Buschon.

 

On Tuesday, December 3, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 3626, a ten year extension of the “Undetectable Firearms Act,” by voice vote.According to Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), he was the onlyonly “No” vote (although since it was a voice vote, that will be hard to verify).

Not only did House Republicans overwhelmingly support this infringement on that which shallshall not be infringed, the bill waswas introduced by North Carolina “conservative” Republican Howard Coble. Coble has an “A” rating from the NRA. Admittedly, Gun Owners of America have awarded him the same grade, but in their case, there is reason forreason for confidence that Coble will downgrade significantly. In the NRA’s case–not so much.

One interesting aspect of H.R. 3626 is the “Constitutional Authority Statement.” For the last several years, House rules have required that every bill be accompanied with a statement outlining what provision of the Constitution empowers Congress to pass the law in question. Rep. Coble would like us to believe that this bill is justified by “Article I. Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution.” That, of course, is the long-abused “interstate commerce clause.”

Perhaps Rep. Coble would like to explain how an item one produces on a 3-D printer in one’s own home, for one’s personal use, has anything to do with “interstate commerce.”

Ironically, the greatest remaining hope for killing this legislative atrocity lies in the anti-gun Senate Democrats who are most enthusiastically in favor of it. From McClatchy D.C.:

Some Democrats reportedly think the bill doesn’t go far enough and may vote against it.

. . .

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement on Monday that the House bill was “better than nothing, but it isn’t good enough.” Schumer said it was necessary to close a loophole that allows guns to be made out of plastic as long as they have some metal in them, even if it’s an easily removable part.

Schumer is referring to what he and the doubly dishonestly named “Think Progress” (which advocates neither thought nor progress) call the “loophole” of the current ban’s requirement that a gun contain a certain minimum quantity of metal, but not requiring that the metal comprise a part of the gun that is absolutely necessary for the gun’s function:

Renewed twice since 1988, the federal law bans firearms that go unnoticed by a metal detector and requires them to be shaped like a gun. However, the law by itself does not fully address the threat of plastic guns made from 3D printers, because a loophole permits some plastic guns even if the small metal piece that triggers detectors is removable. One legal model lets owners carry firearms with a removable nail that would not be picked up by metal detectors and X-Ray machines.

In other words, Schumer and “Think Progress” are asking the American people to believe that someone with murderous intent would print an all-plastic gun in order to sneak it onto an aircraft or into a courtroom (what about ammo?) if it were legal, but will not if the government tells him doing so is verboten. Sure, Chuck.

Schumer and fiends (that’s not a typo) apparently are not without allies in the GOP, according to MSNquoting a Kentucky Republican congressman who shares Schumer’s sick desire to “tighten up” the existing ban:

Representative Hal Rogers of Kentucky, a leading Republican, expressed concerns of his own, and said, “I’ll be looking to tighten up the process.”

Unfortunately for Schumer, he appears unlikely to win the Most Hysterical Panicked Screeching Award, despite his impressive effort. That award appears to be unshakably in the grasp of the Brady Campaign‘s Brian Malte, judging by this quote in the Guardian:

“We can’t let a minute or hour or day go by without having a renewal [of the ban],” said Brian Malte, a director of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The group’s strong concerns about the availability of plastic guns were “no reason to hold up renewal”, he said.

Malte is evidently of the opinion that our hypothetical aspiring terrorist would print a plastic gun if the the law allows–for a minute (keep in mind that printing guns to date has invariably required a considerable number of hours), but will faithfully obey the law if it never lapses.

As this column has argued repeatedly, the anti-gun zealots’ real objection to printed guns has nothing to do with the silly non-issue of their being “undetectable,” and everything with them being uncontrollable, because a fighting arm that one can make for oneself is clearly not subject to background checks or arbitrary limits on its effectiveness.

And the best news of all is that no law Congress passes can do anything about that. Anyone who has any doubts about that statement is encouraged to check out the Terminal Cornucopia website, featuring weapons designs that can be quickly built from materials one can easily and legally obtain after passing through airport screening measures, with tools that one could legally have brought along. The sidebar video shows the “BlunderBusinessClass” shotgun, but that’s only one of several impressive designs.

 

 

 

 

Ted Cruz criticizes DOJ for arguing international treaty can trump the Constitution

Leave a comment

This is from The Washington Examiner.

This is Damned Dangerous territory.

Nothing I repeat Nothing  trumps The Constitution.

We are headed into a Dictatorship.

“Wake Up America Before Liberty and Freedom are Lost .”

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.

.Ronald Reagan

Justice Department attorneys are advancing an argument at the Supreme Court that could allow the government to invoke international treaties as a legal basis for policies such as gun control that conflict with the U.S. Constitution, according to Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

Their argument is that a law implementing an international treaty signed by the U.S. allows the federal government to prosecute a criminal case that would normally be handled by state or local authorities.

That is a dangerous argument, according to Cruz.

“The Constitution created a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers,” Cruz told the Washington Examiner prior to giving a speech on the issue today at the Heritage Foundation.

“The Supreme Court should not interpret the treaty power in a manner that undermines this bedrock protection of individual liberty,” Cruz said.

In his speech, Cruz said the Justice Department is arguing “an absurd proposition” that “could be used as a backdoor way to undermine” Second Amendment rights, among other things.

The underlying case, Bond v. United States, involves a woman charged with violating the international ban on chemical weapons because she used toxic chemicals to harass a former friend who had an affair with her husband.

Under the Constitution, such an offense would be handled at the state level. In Bond’s case, the federal government prosecuted her under the Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act.

That law implements the Chemical Weapons Convention, the international treaty Syrian dictator Bashar Assad is accused of violating in that country’s vicious civil war.

“The problem here is precisely that Congress, rather than implementing the treaty consistent with our constitutional system of federalism, enacted a statute that, if construed to apply to petitioner’s conduct, would violate basic structural guarantees and exceed Congress’s enumerated powers,” according to Bond’s lawyers.

The Judicial Crisis Network’s Carrie Severino said the Bond case could have ramifications for many other issues.

“If the administration is right, the treaty power could become a backdoor way for the federal government to do everything from abolishing the death penalty nationwide, to outlawing homeschooling, to dramatically curtailing the states’ rights to regulate abortion,” she told the Washington Examiner.

The Judicial Crisis Network is a conservative legal activist group.

 

 

The Sunshine State moves to fortify the 2nd Amendment against Federal infringements

Leave a comment

This is from Bullets First.

More states need to fortify The Second Amendment. 

We need to tell the Feds we want to be left to Hell alone

and keep your Damned hands off of our guns. 

 

There was some worry that Florida, after the railroading and demonization of  Peruvian-American Jorge Zimmerman when he defended himself against alleged homophobe and gay basher Trayvon Martin, would crack down on the right to keep and bear arms.

Fortunately, there were enough clear eyed people in the sunshine state who saw through the media’s fog of bias and racial pandering.  Not only did they leave “Stand Your Ground” alone, despite the media’s continued assault that SYG had anything to do with Zimmerman being found not guilty, the legislators and people of Florida are pushing for more freedom from tyranny in the form of the “Florida Second Amendment Preservation Act.”

For the most part, this Act follows in the footsteps of other Firearm Protection Acts in that it reasserts State Sovereignty in the protection of rights granted to the people by their Creator and Natural Law.

To wit:

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

STATEMENT OF INTENT – The intent of this legislation is to reject any and all power or influence or interference of and by the federal government regarding the right to keep and bear arms (including ammunition); and to prohibit federal actors from infringing on these rights within the borders of FLORIDA; and to prohibit state employees in aiding the federal actors from infringing on these rights; and to provide felonious penalties of such.

SECTION 1 – THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FINDS THAT:

(a) The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows, “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.”

(b) The Constitution of the United States does not provide the federal government with the authority to impose acts, laws, orders, rules, or regulations relating to civilian-owned firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition.

(c) All federal acts, laws, orders, rules or regulations regarding civilian-owned firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition are in violation of the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution and the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

 

It continues on with what specificially Florida won’t permit the Federal Gov. to do as well as penalties for federal agents who try to enforce federal anti gun laws in Florida.

The Act has recently garnered a resounding endorsement by my former colleagues at Gun Owners of America.

Why are such Acts as these important?

Because the 10th Amendment is important and yet has been ground under heel for more than a century.

The 10th doesn’t get all the sexy press like the 1st or 2nd but it is still an important one that states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

There are SO many laws that are doled out by the Federal Government that have been usurped from the states.  Among these include every single gun control law passed by Congress.

But you may say, “States like California love gun control, does the 10th give them that power?”

Not really.  While they have more claim to pass gun control in their state than the Federal Gov. has, they also have to ensure that the rights in the Constitution are upheld.  Hence the reason a state can’t give slavery another go.

The problem is that the only ones who can keep the unfettered tyranny in check (besides voters removing politicians from office) are the courts.  And with the courts too often they decide on their own biases and not on what is right and Constitutionally protected.

That is a matter for another time though.

For now, if you are a Floridian, contact your legislative rep and tell them that you support a Florida free from the squeezing grip of a rights’ infringing Federal Government.

If you are in a state that has yet to pass a form of the Firearms/2nd Amendment Protection Act, contact your representative and get the ball moving.

If enough states reassert their sovereignty then we can change our path from it’s current direction towards a Federally run tyrannical dictatorship.

To quote Rep Edward Rutledge from 1776:  A nation of sovereign states, Mr. Adams. United for our mutual protection, but… separate for our individual pursuits. Now, that is what we have understood it to be. And that is what we will support.

Read more at http://bulletsfirst.net/2013/10/19/sunshine-state-moves-fortify-2nd-amendment-federal-infringements/#TPW7hXBXo5HO5Whj.99

 

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: