Category Archives: Bill of Rights

Schools need guns and better security, Sandy Hook fathers speak out, Gun laws not needed, Security existing law enforcement civility, Chicago gun laws failed

Schools need guns and better security, Sandy Hook fathers speak out, Gun laws not needed, Security existing law enforcement civility, Chicago gun laws failed

“Weaker people, whether at school, at home or elsewhere are best protected from stronger people, with ill intent, by guns and proper security measures.”…Citizen Wells

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

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”…George Washington

Guns are not the problem, they are part of the solution.

The problem is a lack of prioritizing, in many cases by educators as well as society, who have failed in their duties to protect our children. Security has not been a high enough priority in our schools.

From Citizen Wells January 16, 2013.

“Gun control has never worked and never will work. It is the solution of dictators and those lacking reason and accountability.

We secure our businesses with armed guards and security cameras. Rational and responsible members of society protect their families with security systems and weapons. Why have we not protected our schools?

Focusing on gun control is a knee jerk reaction that does not work and does not address the real issues of protecting our children.”

“Elementary and Kindergarten aged children are the most vulnerable and should receive the most protection. Here are some common sense based remedies that will greatly improve the security for these children.

1. Monitor the areas outside the buildings. This would include monitored security cameras and some combination of walk arounds by staff and or security personnel.

2. Security alarms for illegal entry.

3. Buffered entry ways. i.e. double entry ways. The first door should set off the alarm and the second would slow down intrusion.

4. Stronger doorways.

5. Regular drills for emergency preparedness. We had those when I was in grade school.

6. As many armed school personnel as possible. “Good guys with guns to stop the bad guys with guns.” Each armed person should be psychologically evaluated.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/secure-schools-not-empower-criminals-gun-control-does-not-protect-children-sandy-hook-poorly-prepared-ct-strict-gun-laws-failed-keep-criminals-and-insane-away-from-buildings/

Two of the father’s of Sandy Hook children have spoken out . One lost his child. The other knows that he could have as well.

I have the utmost respect for these two fathers. They have spoken the truth.

From The Blaze January 28, 2013.

“THE PROBLEM IS NOT GUN LAWS”

“Mark Mattioli, whose six-year-old son James perished inside of the school, testified that a plethora of new gun laws isn’t the answer and that, instead, personal responsibility, accountability and civility are the best path forward. He made his comments as intense debate surrounding gun control and the causal factors behind the shooting continue to be at the forefront of public discussion.

The grieving father, who ended up receiving a standing ovation, said that he believes in “simple, few gun laws” and that there are already “more than enough on the books.” Mattioli contends that “the problem is not gun laws” and that these regulations simply need to be enforced.

“How do we expect to have any impact on a society and say, ‘We’re going to pass a law. Hey this is inexcusable. We can’t allow any more of this. Let’s pass a law that will change the course of the future’  when we don’t enforce the laws that we have on the books — the most important laws?”

Read more and watch his speech:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/28/the-problem-is-not-gun-laws-watch-the-emotional-speech-by-a-sandy-hook-victims-dad-that-got-a-standing-ovation/

From Freedom Outpost February 3, 2012.

“Sandy Hook Student’s Father: You’ll Have To Take My Gun From My Cold Dead Hands!”

“A father of a Sandy Hook Elementary School student testified on January 28, 2013 in a Working Group Public Hearing at the Connecticut State Capitol on gun violence prevention. While Bill Stevens’ fifth grade daughter was not harmed in the incident, she was a part of the children that were in “lock down” during the shooting and following it. However, Mr. Stevens said that his daughter’s friend’s little sister was once of the children that was murdered, “when 911 and ‘lock down’ were not enough to protect her from an evil person, not protect her from an ‘assault rifle’ or some type of an inanimate object, but from an evil person.”

In speaking to those listening, Stevens said that the security at the school was “quite different from the elaborate security you all enjoy here at the Capitol.””

“He also pointed out that gun ownership is a right and should not make gun owners suspect simply because of the numbers or kinds of guns they own or even how much ammunition they have.

“My guns are not dangerous,” Stevens said. “They are at home, locked up, collecting dust and cat hair.”

“But criminals and tyrants,” he continued, “tyrants especially, beware, ‘lock down’ is not an option at the Stevens’ residence and 911 will be dialed after the security of my home has been established!”

Stevens asked, “Why is that same security that my daughter enjoys at home with her dad not available at school in Newtown? That is what you should be considering, not making her dad a criminal.”

“Charleton Heston mad the phrase, ‘From my cold dead hands’ famous,” Stevens thundered. “And I will tell you here today, you will take my ability to protect my Victoria from my cold dead hands!””

Read more and watch his speech:

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/sandy-hook-students-father-youll-have-to-take-my-gun-from-my-cold-dead-hands/

Piers Morgan educated by 22 year old lady on guns, Feinstein is no Einstein, Obama left et al ignorant and hypocrites, Guns protect innocent from criminals and crazies

Piers Morgan educated by 22 year old lady on guns, Feinstein is no Einstein, Obama left et al ignorant and hypocrites, Guns protect innocent from criminals and crazies

“Dianne Feinstein is no Einstein but she is a hypocrite.”…Citizen Wells

“Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.”

“Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.”…Albert Einstein

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

Dianne Feinstein and Albert Einstein both have Jewish ancestry.

Anyone who is Jewish and is for gun control is a damned fool.

However, Feinstein just wants gun control for you. She has a concealed weapon permit and her new bill exempts government employees.

Obama’s children have armed guards.

From WND January 28, 2013.

“22-YEAR-OLD EDUCATES PIERS MORGAN ON GUNS”

“CNN host Piers Morgan’s push for a ban on so-called “assault” weapons has led him to confront a host of gun-rights advocates on his program, including Republican Newt Gingrich and Gun Owners of America’s Larry Pratt, who Morgan actually blasted as “an unbelievably stupid man” for disagreeing with him.

Which makes the response of a pair of young women on Morgan’s program all the more noteworthy.

Aubrey Blankenship and Celia Bigelow are part of the leadership team of the national conservative organization American Majority Action and had recently written together a column in National Review online about why young women prefer the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle with 30-round magazines for self-defense.

“In the wake of mass murders like Sandy Hook and the horrific rapes and murders of thousands of women each year,” the ladies explained in their column, “pepper spray, mace or five-round handheld pistols aren’t going to cut it.”

Morgan, however, challenged the women when they were guests on his show last week: “One of my arguments against guns is you don’t need assault weapons for self-defense. … Explain to me why you believe you need an AR-15 style assault rifle.”

“One, they’re lightweight,” the 22-year-old Bigelow responded. “They’re quite accurate. I can shoot them much more accurately than a handgun or a shotgun. And three … I want a gun that can hold a lot of ammo, because if I’m faced with an intruder or multiple intruders that come into my home, I want to make sure I have enough ammo to get the job done, especially if they’re armed. … I don’t have to take the time to reload.”

Bigelow also brought up an example: “We saw a situation in Georgia just a couple weeks ago where a mom was hiding in her attic with her two children when an intruder entered her home. She had a handgun that only had six rounds in it. She fired all six rounds, missed the intruder once, hit him five times in the face and in the neck. And he still lived.”

That’s when Morgan repeated a line of questioning he had used with other guests – including Gingrich – who for the most part had failed to present a significant answer.

“How many of the three million Americans that own AR-15s have ever used them to defend themselves at home?” Morgan asked.

“There are … many examples,” Bigelow countered, “but are the media willing to cover them?”

“Do you know one?” Morgan persisted.

Gingrich had botched that same question, suggesting he would do some research and get back to Morgan on it.

The ladies, however, were prepared.

“Yes, absolutely,” Bigelow responded. “In 2010, in Houston, Texas, there was a 15-year-old boy alone at home. And he was – he was home alone with his 12-year-old sister when two intruders tried to enter in the front door and in the back door of his house. He grabbed his AR-15 and shot at them and they ran away.”

Bigelow’s summary of the June 2010 news story in Houston was, in fact, accurate.”

Read more:

 http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/22-year-old-schools-piers-morgan-on-guns/#Q8Tk0FDhzmK7huHv.99

Bob Schieffer Nazi comment, Schieffer CBS owe Americans and Nazi victims apology, Nazis confiscated guns herded Jews, Edward R Murrow reported truth

Bob Schieffer Nazi comment, Schieffer CBS owe Americans and Nazi victims apology, Nazis confiscated guns herded Jews, Edward R Murrow reported truth

“surely, defeating the Nazis, was a much more formidable task than taking on the gun lobby.”…Bob Schieffer

“While my father was hunted, Schieffer lived comfortably in Texas, where private citizens had guns and children were safe. There is no need to denigrate Schieffer, but he and his ilk need to be educated before invoking the worst evils of mankind.

The NAZIs were nothing like the National Rifle Association. They were the exact opposite. The Nazis were anti-gun. They confiscated guns, starting with those owned by Jews. Like many liberal American Jews today, German Jews were told everything would be fine. The government would protect them.”…Eric Golub

“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”…Edward R. Murrow

There was a time when I had respect for Bob Schieffer and CBS News. That respect and trust has eroded for years. Recently, any respect I had for Scheiffer completely evaporated.

Recently Bob Schieffer referred to the struggle against gun proponents in the context of defeating the Nazis. At CBS, the home of Edward R. Murrow, who knew first hand the tyranny and terror of the Nazis, who took guns away from the Jews, herded them up and destroyed them. Murrow did his best to inform America and the world of these atrocities.

Bob Schieffer and CBS owe the American public and victims of Nazi atrocities an apology.

From Last Resistance January 18, 2013.

“I desperately tried to find a great quote that would summarize my thoughts on what I’m about to write. I searched all over the web, and could find not a single quote that encapsulated the preposterousness of what Bob Schieffer said on Wednesday. So rather than blather on with platitudes, like I usually do, I’m gonna get right to it.

According to Bob Schieffer, President Obama’s battle against the NRA is comparable to both Lyndon Johnson’s civil rights battles, and the defeat of the Nazis in World War II. Here’s the exact quote for your perusal and general amusement:

“Let’s remember: there was considerable opposition when Lyndon Johnson went to the Congress and…presented some of the most comprehensive civil rights legislation in the history of this country. Most people told him he couldn’t get it done, but he figured out a way to do it. And that’s what Barack Obama is going to have to do…what happened in Newtown was probably the worst day in this country’s history since 9/11. We found Osama bin Laden. We tracked him down. We changed the way that we dealt with that problem. Surely, finding Osama bin Laden; surely, passing civil rights legislation, as Lyndon Johnson was able to do; and before that, surely, defeating the Nazis, was a much more formidable task than taking on the gun lobby.””

“Now onto the second part of Schieffer’s diatribe. In his rant, he equates going up against the NRA with defeating the Nazis. Seems a bit extreme. Bob Schieffer is exaggerating to such an extent, that it goes beyond simple hyperbole; it moves toward irresponsibility.

So, when actually analyzed, the information in Schieffer’s quote is nothing more than simple lies through omission, and grotesque exaggerations. It is really disturbing to me that this man is regarded as a national treasure in the news industry. He distorts the truth, and propagates gross misrepresentations; which is the exact opposite of what a journalist should do.

I would admonish Schieffer; tell him that he’s better than this garbage; but I know he’s not. Schieffer is just one of a million “journalists” who are propping this President up. Don’t believe a word he says, because he is a snake.”

Read more:

http://lastresistance.com/1064/bob-schieffer-obama-taking-on-nra-defeating-the-nazis/

From  Eric Golub and the Washington Times January 17, 2013.

“Liberals like Schieffer cannot stop. Maybe they are pro-Adolf Hitler, given their insistence in injecting him into every conversation about conservative policies from tax cuts to gun control to foreign policy. Hitler, Brown-shirts, Nazis, Goose-Steppers, and similar analogies flow from their lips as casually as others say “nice day” and “lovely weather.”

This is deeply personal for me. My father is a Holocaust survivor. So were his parents. They lived in the woods, constantly on the run. Like animals, they survived through luck and instinct. My father was a baby, spending his first four years hunted like a dog. My grandmother would keep him under her shirt to muffle his cries. Christians (those people the left keeps demonizing) risked their own lives and smuggled my grandfather food and clothing. There was no shelter. After four years on the run, World War II ended. Four years after that, my father and his parents came to America. They were lucky. His grandparents, my great-grandparents were all murdered.”

Read more:

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/tygrrrr-express/2013/jan/17/bob-schieffer-nra-and-nazis-never-again/

Edward R. Murrow

RTNDA Convention October 15, 1958

“Believing that potentially the commercial system of broadcasting as practiced in this country is the best and freest yet devised, I have decided to express my concern about what I believe to be happening to radio and television. These instruments have been good to me beyond my due. There exists in mind no reasonable grounds for personal complaint. I have no feud, either with my employers, any sponsors, or with the professional critics of radio and television. But I am seized with an abiding fear regarding what these two instruments are doing to our society, our culture and our heritage.

Our history will be what we make it. And if there are any historians about fifty or a hundred years from now, and there should be preserved the kinescopes for one week of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or color, evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live. I invite your attention to the television schedules of all networks between the hours of 8 and 11 p.m., Eastern Time. Here you will find only fleeting and spasmodic reference to the fact that this nation is in mortal danger. There are, it is true, occasional informative programs presented in that intellectual ghetto on Sunday afternoons. But during the daily peak viewing periods, television in the main insulates us from the realities of the world in which we live. If this state of affairs continues, we may alter an advertising slogan to read: LOOK NOW, PAY LATER.

For surely we shall pay for using this most powerful instrument of communication to insulate the citizenry from the hard and demanding realities which must be faced if we are to survive. I mean the word survive literally. If there were to be a competition in indifference, or perhaps in insulation from reality, then Nero and his fiddle, Chamberlain and his umbrella, could not find a place on an early afternoon sustaining show. If Hollywood were to run out of Indians, the program schedules would be mangled beyond all recognition. Then some courageous soul with a small budget might be able to do a documentary telling what, in fact, we have done–and are still doing–to the Indians in this country. But that would be unpleasant. And we must at all costs shield the sensitive citizens from anything that is unpleasant.”

“One of the basic troubles with radio and television news is that both instruments have grown up as an incompatible combination of show business, advertising and news. Each of the three is a rather bizarre and demanding profession. And when you get all three under one roof, the dust never settles. The top management of the networks with a few notable exceptions, has been trained in advertising, research, sales or show business. But by the nature of the coporate structure, they also make the final and crucial decisions having to do with news and public affairs. Frequently they have neither the time nor the competence to do this.”

“Sometimes there is a clash between the public interest and the corporate interest. A telephone call or a letter from the proper quarter in Washington is treated rather more seriously than a communication from an irate but not politically potent viewer. It is tempting enough to give away a little air time for frequently irresponsible and unwarranted utterances in an effort to temper the wind of criticism.”

And this brings us to the nub of the question. In one sense it rather revolves around the phrase heard frequently along Madison Avenue: The Corporate Image. I am not precisely sure what this phrase means, but I would imagine that it reflects a desire on the part of the corporations who pay the advertising bills to have the public image, or believe that they are not merely bodies with no souls, panting in pursuit of elusive dollars. They would like us to believe that they can distinguish between the public good and the private or corporate gain. So the question is this: Are the big corporations who pay the freight for radio and television programs wise to use that time exclusively for the sale of goods and services? Is it in their own interest and that of the stockholders so to do? The sponsor of an hour’s television program is not buying merely the six minutes devoted to commercial message. He is determining, within broad limits, the sum total of the impact of the entire hour. If he always, invariably, reaches for the largest possible audience, then this process of insulation, of escape from reality, will continue to be massively financed, and its apologist will continue to make winsome speeches about giving the public what it wants, or “letting the public decide.”

“I refuse to believe that the presidents and chairmen of the boards of these big corporations want their corporate image to consist exclusively of a solemn voice in an echo chamber, or a pretty girl opening the door of a refrigerator, or a horse that talks. They want something better, and on occasion some of them have demonstrated it. But most of the men whose legal and moral responsibility it is to spend the stockholders’ money for advertising are removed from the realities of the mass media by five, six, or a dozen contraceptive layers of vice-presidents, public relations counsel and advertising agencies. Their business is to sell goods, and the competition is pretty tough.

But this nation is now in competition with malignant forces of evil who are using every instrument at their command to empty the minds of their subjects and fill those minds with slogans, determination and faith in the future. If we go on as we are, we are protecting the mind of the American public from any real contact with the menacing world that squeezes in upon us. We are engaged in a great experiment to discover whether a free public opinion can devise and direct methods of managing the affairs of the nation. We may fail. But we are handicapping ourselves needlessly.”

“But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.”

This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. There is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television could be useful.

Stonewall Jackson, who knew something about the use of weapons, is reported to have said, “When war comes, you must draw the sword and throw away the scabbard.” The trouble with television is that it is rusting in the scabbard during a battle for survival.”

http://futurewewant.org/2012/an-inspiring-quote-from-edward-r-murrow/

“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men – not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular”

Edward R. Murrow

CT schools still don’t get security, Connecticut law allows armed personnel, State and educators to blame not guns, North Carolina schools protected?

CT schools still don’t get security, Connecticut law allows armed personnel, State and educators to blame not guns, North Carolina schools protected?

 
“Gun control is the solution of dictators and those lacking reason and accountability.”…Citizen Wells

“Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”…CT Constitution

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”…George Washington

Why do the liberals and Obama blame guns for tragedies like Sandy Hook?

Lack of reason and accountability.

Yesterday  Citizen Wells presented what all school systems, especially those most vulnerable, should have been doing to protect students.

1. Monitor the areas outside the buildings. This would include monitored security cameras and some combination of walk arounds by staff and or security personnel.

2. Security alarms for illegal entry.

3. Buffered entry ways. i.e. double entry ways. The first door should set off the alarm and the second would slow down intrusion.

4. Stronger doorways.

5. Regular drills for emergency preparedness. We had those when I was in grade school.

6. As many armed school personnel as possible. “Good guys with guns to stop the bad guys with guns.” Each armed person should be psychologically evaluated.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/secure-schools-not-empower-criminals-gun-control-does-not-protect-children-sandy-hook-poorly-prepared-ct-strict-gun-laws-failed-keep-criminals-and-insane-away-from-buildings/

Connecticut gun laws among the toughest in the U.S.

However, school personnel could have been armed.

“It is unlawful to possess a firearm on public or private elementary or secondary school property. This prohibition shall not apply to a person with a firearm carrying permit, with permission from school officials, or while traversing school property with an unloaded firearm for the purpose of gaining access to lands open to hunting or for other lawful purposes, provided entry is not prohibited by school officials.”

http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/connecticut.aspx

School security at Sandy Hook, in CT and across the country in the past has been inadequate and still is. Apparently the folks in Connecticut still don’t get it.

From the Examiner January 14, 2013.

“Connecticut school new security policies, after the Sandy Hook massacre”

“Nearly one month after the Connecticut school shooting, several local districts have put new security measures in place, including locked front doors and tighter visitor sign-in policies, and launched reviews of their safety procedures.

Area officials say they have been working closely with local police departments and staff members to come up with the best policies to protect students and teachers in the wake of the Dec. 14 tragedy in which 20 children and six adults were killed.

“We’re taking it seriously, but we’re mindful of the human factor and not increasing the anxiety of our students,’’ said Weston Superintendent Cheryl Maloney.

In Weston, all school doors were previously locked except front doors. Maloney said those doors are now locked but the district has yet to install buzzers or cameras. Members of the office staff, she said, are responsible for answering the door until a new system can be installed.

Natick has also started locking the front doors at its schools, while Newton, Sudbury, and the Ayer-Shirley Regional district have plans in the works. Acton is studying the option. Needham has completed an upgrade of security at the town’s schools that includes a buzzer and surveillance system and locked front doors,

In Weston, Maloney said there has been mixed reaction among parents to the changes. “They preferred the more welcoming front door,’’ she said.

Maloney said the district is considering a swipe-card system for the doors, but it will take time to go through the bidding process to buy the equipment and have it installed. “We will continue with that plan and may accelerate it,’’ she said.

Maloney said the district is also looking at hiring a consultant to review its practices and see whether any additional changes are necessary. She said they have been more vigilant about visitor passes, and having parents wait in the lobby for students.

Natick Superintendent Peter Sanchioni said that before the Newtown shooting, just one of the district’s eight schools had a camera and buzzer system. During the winter break, locks and buzzers were installed at all schools, he said.”

http://www.examiner.com/article/connecticut-school-new-security-policies-after-the-sandy-hook-massacre

“We’re taking it seriously”

I wouldn’t bet on it.

If you have children in CT schools, contact your officials and insist that armed personnel be present at your schools.

Too many liberals, guided by their “feelings”, have been running our school systems. We conservatives must get more involved.

I will be investigating further school security in my home state of NC.

Secure schools not empower criminals, Gun control does not protect children, Sandy Hook poorly prepared, CT strict gun laws failed, Keep criminals and insane away from buildings

Secure schools not empower criminals, Gun control does not protect children, Sandy Hook poorly prepared, CT strict gun laws failed, Keep criminals and insane away from buildings

“the deadliest school-related massacre in American history happened in 1927, at an elementary school in Bath, Mich. A school board member named Andrew Kehoe, upset over a burdensome property tax, wired the building with dynamite and set it off in the morning of May 18. Kehoe’s actions killed 45 people, 38 of whom were children.”…NY Times December 18, 2012

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

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”…George Washington

Gun control has never worked and never will work. It is the solution of dictators and those lacking reason and accountability.

We secure our businesses with armed guards and security cameras. Rational and responsible members of society protect their families with security systems and weapons. Why have we not protected our schools?

Focusing on gun control is a knee jerk reaction that does not work and does not address the real issues of protecting our children.

Guns are not the issue, school security is.

There are many ways to commit mass murders of children, including explosives as simple as molotov cocktails, fire, poisoned air, poisoned water, poisoned food, crashing vehicles, etc.

The worst school disaster happened in Bath Township, Michigan May 18, 1927. 38 elementary school children and 6 adults were killed and at least 58 others injured. Dynamite was used.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/18/bath_school_bombing_remembering_the_deadliest_school_massacre_in_american.html

Elementary and Kindergarten aged children are the most vulnerable and should receive the most protection. Here are some common sense based remedies that will greatly improve the security for these children.

1. Monitor the areas outside the buildings. This would include monitored security cameras and some combination of walk arounds by staff and or security personnel.

2. Security alarms for illegal entry.

3. Buffered entry ways. i.e. double entry ways. The first door should set off the alarm and the second would slow down intrusion.

4. Stronger doorways.

5. Regular drills for emergency preparedness. We had those when I was in grade school.

6. As many armed school personnel as possible. “Good guys with guns to stop the bad guys with guns.” Each armed person should be psychologically evaluated.

As strange as it may sound, we have been fortunate that only guns have been mostly used. The Sandy Hook tragedy could have been much worse.

Thank God some people are waking up, purchasing weapons and taking advantage of free training.

Thank God also for the Tenth Amendment which allows for state autonomy.

Despite the idiotic Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990, many states allow weapons in schools under controlled circumstances.

Too bad they did not at Sandy Hook.

From NBC News January 14, 2013.

“Guns already allowed in schools with little restriction in many states”

“With the debate over gun violence reshaped by the shooting deaths of 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school last month, lawmakers across the country are pushing proposals to arm teachers in the classroom. But many of them may be wasting their time.

More than a third of the states already allow teachers and other adults to carry guns to school. In most cases, all you need is the equivalent of a note from the principal — you usually don’t even need law enforcement approval.

NBC News reviewed the firearms and education laws in all 50 states and found that 18 of them allow adults to have a loaded gun on school grounds, usually as long as they have written permission.

That’s for pretty much any reason; the list doesn’t include states that generally ban guns but carve out narrow exceptions for specific activities like safety demonstrations or military formations and parades.

The families of the children murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School, as well as other Newtown, Conn., community members, are demanding change. NBC’s Anne Thompson reports.

During a Tea Party forum in Fort Worth, Texas Gov. Rick Perry became one of the first prominent officials after the Dec. 14 shootings to call for teachers to be allowed to carry firearms to work — even though Texas already allows any qualified adult to do so as long as the principal OKs it.

Since then, lawmakers in several states have jumped on board with proposals that mirror laws already on the books.”

“The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 prohibits anyone from having a firearm in a school zone. But that law includes the same exception recognized by the states identified in NBC News’ survey: It doesn’t apply if the weapons are “approved by a school in the school zone.”

And in any event, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Steve Stockman, R-Texas, have introduced measures in the new Congress that would repeal the federal law altogether.

Here are the 18 states that allow adults to carry loaded weapons onto school grounds with few or minor conditions:

  • Alabama (which bans possessing a weapon on school grounds only if the carrier has “intent to do bodily harm”)
  • California (with approval of the superintendent)
  • Connecticut (with approval of “school officials”)
  • Hawaii (no specific law)
  • Idaho (with school trustees’ approval)
  • Iowa (with “authorization”)
  • Kentucky (with school board approval)
  • Massachusetts (with approval of the school board or principal)
  • Mississippi (with school board approval)
  • Montana (with school trustees’ permission)
  • New Hampshire (ban applies only to pupils, not adults)
  • New Jersey (with approval from the school’s “governing officer”)
  • New York (with the school’s approval)
  • Oregon (with school board approval)
  • Rhode Island (with a state concealed weapons permit)
  • Texas (with the school’s permission)
  • Utah (with approval of the “responsible school administrator”)
  • Wyoming (as long as it’s not concealed)”

Read more:

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/14/16468754-guns-already-allowed-in-schools-with-little-restriction-in-many-states?lite

NC law enforcement officers receive Sovereign citizen profile training, Southern Poverty Law Center involved, White American sovereigns concerned with US Constitution

NC law enforcement officers receive Sovereign citizen profile training, Southern Poverty Law Center involved, White American sovereigns concerned with US Constitution

“American sovereign groups are commonly delineated along racial lines. White American sovereigns tend to be concerned with the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions, and their interpretations of those documents in a historical context.”…Police Magazine

“It wasn’t only acknowledged radicals reacting. In Wyoming, a state where guns are very much a part of life for many, lawmakers have sponsored a bill that would ensure that “any federal law which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms in this state shall be unenforceable in Wyoming.” Of course, this kind of attempt to “nullify” federal laws dates back to the Civil War and is generally unconstitutional.”…Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Watch

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

We live in an Orwellian age of undue government control and “1984” like wordsmithing. That is why what is presented here concerns me.

Words and language do matter.

American sovereigns.

The definition depends on who you ask but what is clear is that a leftist agenda of gun control, weakening of the US Constitution and misportrayal of those who believe in the Constitution is growing.

It is happening in my home state of NC.

Winston Salem police recently allowed people stopped by traffic police to present an ID card issued by a local organization that works closely with Hispanic groups and apparently the Greensboro police were considering the same move.

Illegal aliens are being protected.

What about citizens who support the US Constitution?

From WECT January 3, 2013.

“Law enforcement to be certified in dealing with sovereign citizens by the end of 2013”

“Local law enforcement will be able to spot and handle a sovereign citizen by the end of 2013.

Authorities tell WECT.com that by the end of the year, every law enforcement officer in the state will receive certification for dealing with this group of people.

According to detectives, a sovereign citizen is person who believes they can choose which laws apply to them and which do not.

Deputies in Brunswick County recently had an incident with a woman they believe to have sovereign beliefs.

The 2013 certification has been mandated for all law enforcement by training and standards.

“I believe it’s because of the rise in violence that we’ve seen from sovereign citizens,” said Cpl. Ben Byrne who works with the Apex Police Department. “I believe it’s between 6 and 8 officers since 2002 killed in the line of duty by sovereign citizens.”

Authorities said it’s hard to tell how many sovereigns live locally.

Nationally, there are 100,000 “hardcore sovereigns” and 200,000 who are just starting their journey to following these beliefs.”

http://www.wect.com/story/20498597/law-enforcement-to-be-certified-in-dealing-with-sovereign-citizens-by-the-end-of-2013

From the NC Justice Academy.

“RECOGNIZING SOVEREIGN CITIZENS #3821”

“Purpose:

To equip the law enforcement officer with the knowledge to recognize and identify sovereign citizens, and to better understand the subculture movement in order to enhance officer safety and conduct thorough investigations.

Course Goal:

Police work is an ever-evolving profession. As time progresses, new trends emerge which require police officers to be always alert and on the ready to change to meet these new threats. In North Carolina today, as well as the United States as a whole, the sovereign citizen movement and ideology is on the rise. With this new threat comes the need for professional law enforcement officers to be educated on the ideology, verbiage and monikers, tactics and criminality of this growing sub-culture. With proper training, officers can be equipped to deal safely with these individuals, and prepare thorough and successful prosecutions.”

http://ncja.ncdoj.gov/Recognizing-Sovereign-Citizens.aspx

“UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT #5230”

“Who Should Attend:

Law enforcement officers who come into contact with members of the public who may belong to a sovereign group. Each officer will receive a copy of the DVD, Understanding the Threat, about Officers Brandon Paudert and Bill Evans, who were killed by a father and son, who were sovereign citizens.

Course Goal:

To help the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) save officers’ lives through training and education.”

http://ncja.ncdoj.gov/Understanding-the-Threat–5230.aspx

Why is the Southern Poverty Law Center involved in this training?

From the Southern Poverty Law Center blog.

“It wasn’t only acknowledged radicals reacting. In Wyoming, a state where guns are very much a part of life for many, lawmakers have sponsored a bill that would ensure that “any federal law which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms  in this state shall be unenforceable in Wyoming.” Of course, this kind of attempt to “nullify” federal laws dates back to the Civil War and is generally unconstitutional.”

Next, go to the blog and examine the blogroll. This list contains some of the most pro left, biased sites around.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/

From Police Magazine September 21, 2012.

“American sovereign groups are commonly delineated along racial lines. White American sovereigns tend to be concerned with the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions, and their interpretations of those documents in a historical context.”

http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/articles/2012/09/sovereign-citizens-a-clear-and-present-danger.aspx

This is what concerns me. Tagging people who believe in the US Constitution as cop killers.

Gun Shows and Gun Buying Breaking Records, Gun prices up, Innocent people protected by guns, More Americans distrustful of government, Second Amendment right

Gun Shows and Gun Buying Breaking Records, Gun prices up, Innocent people protected by guns, More Americans distrustful of government, Second Amendment right

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

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

Guns are a tool for me, just as a hammer and saw are. I don’t love them and I don’t hate them.

I attended the Winston Salem Gun Show on Saturday. There were many gun enthusiasts there. For me however, the thrill was that the Second Amendment is still alive and we could freely walk about and purchase guns and ammunition.

Due to supply and demand and worries about government control and increasing crime, the price of guns has gone up significantly over the past several months.

From Political Outcast January 7, 2013.

“Gun Shows and Gun Buying Breaking Records”

“Americans are becoming even more distrustful of their government. They are also fearful of a segment of society that is hell-bent on taking our lives and property. It’s bad enough that our legislators vote to steal our money. If it’s OK for politicians to act illegally, dismissing their oath to uphold the Constitution that they swore to obey, so why is it wrong for others to break into our homes and take the money directly?

The Constitution doesn’t give elected officials the authority to take our money in ever greater amounts, and yet they do it every election cycle. Street-walking thieves are using the same logic. “If Congress can violate the law, why can’t we?”

What’s different about a thief dressed in a suit and tie who votes to use the power of the State to take our money and some guy dressed in black Hoodie who creeps around in the dark to do it?

At least we can protect ourselves against the creeping thieves, but not if the government passes laws that make it illegal to buy and own guns for protection. A woman in Georgia protected herself and her children after a man broke into the house with a crowbar and began ransacking the house. The woman hid in a closet with her twin daughters but not before getting a .38-caliber revolver she kept in the house. When the intruder opened the closet door, the protective mother shot the suspect five times in the face and neck.

Since Congress and the President may try to pass laws to make us defenseless, Americans are stocking up on weapons as insurance against thieves, rapists, and murderers. That’s why we’re seeing evidence of record gun buying from Florida to California.

“Nearly 8,000 people attended the first day of the Florida Gun Shows’ exhibition this weekend in Orlando, according to event organizers.

“Crowds broke records on Saturday, and organizers said it’s possible they’ll see even larger numbers of gun enthusiasts before the weekend ends.

“Hundreds of gun buyers took vouchers that would allow them to return on Sunday because it was difficult to get into Saturday’s events.

“‘[Gun enthusiasts] are buying and they’re buying as fast as they can get them,’ said Victor Bean, promoter for Florida Gun Shows. ‘We’ve had some exhibitors who had to cancel because they didn’t have any inventory from their gun shops.’”

Most Americans do not trust the government.

It’s no wonder that even California is seeing record crowds. More than 6,000 people filled the Ontario Convention Center over the weekend in Ontario, California. This was more than double the number the Crossroads of the West Gun Show promoter expected.

“‘Nationally manufacturers can’t keep up demand for firearms or ammunition,” said Bob Templeton, with Crossroads of the West Gun Shows. ‘There’s no ammunition at stores, I’m understanding, anyway.’”

It’s OK for the Department of Homeland Security to purchase more than 200,000 rounds of ammunition, but your average law-abiding American citizen just trying to protect himself from lawless thugs may be denied the right in the future. If guns and ammunition are outlawed, only outlaws — street thugs and government agencies — will have guns and ammunition.

“‘ATF: Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’ should be a sign on a convenience store, not a government agency.””

Read more:

http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/01/gun-shows-and-gun-buying-breaking-records/#ixzz2HNrbWVWw

Obama the spoiled child elected by adolescents, Real loser Adulthood Maturity Responsibility, Lack of reason and accountability cause liberals to blame guns and conservatives

Obama the spoiled child elected by adolescents, Real loser Adulthood Maturity Responsibility, Lack of reason and accountability cause liberals to blame guns and conservatives

“How do you get a Obama Liberal? You begin with a normal child at birth and take away reason and accountability.”…Citizen Wells

“The real loser in this election was adulthood: Maturity. Responsibility. The understanding that liberty must be accompanied by self-restraint. Obama is a spoiled child, and the behavior and language of his followers and their advertisements throughout the campaign makes it clear how many of them are, as well. Romney is a grown-up. Romney should have won. Those of us who expected him to win assumed that voters would act like grownups. Because if we were a nation of grownups, he would have won.

But what did win? Sex. Drugs. Bad language. Bad manners. Vulgarity. Lies. Cheating. Name-calling. Finger-pointing. Blaming. And irresponsible spending.”…Laura Hollis, attorney and associate professor of law at Notre Dame

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”…George Washington

One of my favorite movies is “As Good as it Gets.” Jack Nicholson plays a obsessive compulsive misanthrope who is transformed into a more loveable character by the end. There are 2 scenes in the movie that are significant in regard to the liberal position on gun control.

The first is when Nicholson’s gay neighbor is beaten to near death when he is robbed. In real life, he would probably have been shot or knifed to death. However, there were enough blunt instruments around to do the job. The neighbor was outnumbered. If the neighbor had been armed (of course NY City has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation for the honest citizens) he could have repelled the intruders.

The second scene has one of the all time great movie quotes. Nicholson is actually describing how he writes about women. He states.

“It’s easy. I start with a man and I take away reason and accountability.”

I believe that the quote more accurately applies to liberals, many of whom are female.

Which leads me to the following.

Obviously, for the folks reading this with reason and accountability, guns are not responsible for the deaths at the Sand Hook Elementary School or anywhere else. In the world where reason and accountability should rule, here are the guilty parties.

I do not know how much involvement the dad had in his life. It is clear that the father’s role is important, but since I do not have that information I will not lapse into conjecture.

Here is the list in priority order:

1. Adam Lanza, the apparent shooter. Despite any mental illness or adversity, he is to blame.

2. Mother. She apparently knew of her son’s problems. She should have secured the guns.

3. Sandy Hook Elementary School and the school system. It was their job to protect the students. They failed with honorable mention to the staff members who gave their lives in an effort to protect the students. However, too little, too late.

4. The damn fools who have dictated that schools should be gun free zones.

5. The whole of American society that has let Liberals & wackos take over government, schools, media, etc.

Laura Hollis is an attorney and associate professor of law at the University of Notre Dame.

From Town Hall November 8, 2012.

“I am already reading so many pundits and other talking heads analyzing the disaster that was this year’s elections. I am adding my own ten cents. Here goes:

1. We are outnumbered

We accurately foresaw the enthusiasm, the passion, the commitment, the determination, and the turnout. Married women, men, independents, Catholics, evangelicals – they all went for Romney in percentages as high or higher than the groups which voted for McCain in 2008. It wasn’t enough. What we saw in the election on Tuesday was a tipping point: we are now at a place where there are legitimately fewer Americans who desire a free republic with a free people than there are those who think the government should give them stuff. There are fewer of us who believe in the value of free exchange and free enterprise. There are fewer of us who do not wish to demonize successful people in order to justify taking from them. We are outnumbered. For the moment. It’s just that simple.

2. It wasn’t the candidate(s)
Some are already saying, “Romney was the wrong guy”; “He should have picked Marco Rubio to get Florida/Rob Portman to get Ohio/Chris Christie to get [someplace else].” With all due respect, these assessments are incorrect. Romney ran a strategic and well-organized campaign. Yes, he could have hit harder on Benghazi. But for those who would have loved that, there are those who would have found it distasteful. No matter what tactic you could point to that Romney could have done better, it would have been spun in a way that was detrimental to his chances. Romney would have been an excellent president, and Ryan was an inspired choice. No matter who we ran this year, they would have lost. See #1, above.

3. It’s the culture, stupid.
We have been trying to fight this battle every four years at the voting booth. It is long past time we admit that that is not where the battle really is. We abdicated control of the culture – starting back in the 1960s. And now our largest primary social institutions – education, the media, Hollywood (entertainment) have become really nothing more than an assembly line for cranking out reliable little Leftists. Furthermore, we have allowed the government to undermine the institutions that instill good character – marriage, the family, communities, schools, our churches. So, here we are, at least two full generations later – we are reaping what we have sown. It took nearly fifty years to get here; it will take another fifty years to get back. But it starts with the determination to reclaim education, the media, and the entertainment business. If we fail to do that, we can kiss every election goodbye from here on out. And much more.

4. America has become a nation of adolescents
The real loser in this election was adulthood: Maturity. Responsibility. The understanding that liberty must be accompanied by self-restraint. Obama is a spoiled child, and the behavior and language of his followers and their advertisements throughout the campaign makes it clear how many of them are, as well. Romney is a grown-up. Romney should have won. Those of us who expected him to win assumed that voters would act like grownups. Because if we were a nation of grownups, he would have won.

But what did win? Sex. Drugs. Bad language. Bad manners. Vulgarity. Lies. Cheating. Name-calling. Finger-pointing. Blaming. And irresponsible spending.

This does not bode well. People grow up one of two ways: either they choose to, or circumstances force them to. The warnings are all there, whether it is the looming economic disaster, or the inability of the government to respond to crises like Hurricane Sandy, or the growing strength and brazenness of our enemies. American voters stick their fingers in their ears and say, “Lalalalalala, I can’t hear you.”

It is unpleasant to think about the circumstances it will take to force Americans to grow up. It is even more unpleasant to think about Obama at the helm when those circumstances arrive.

5. Yes, there is apparently a Vagina Vote
It’s the subject matter of another column in its entirety to point out, one by one, all of the inconsistencies and hypocrisies of the Democrats this year. Suffice it to say that the only “war on women” was the one waged by the Obama campaign, which sexualized and objectified women, featuring them dressed up like vulvas at the Democrat National Convention, appealing to their “lady parts,” comparing voting to losing your virginity with Obama, trumpeting the thrills of destroying our children in the womb (and using our daughters in commercials to do so), and making Catholics pay for their birth control. For a significant number of women, this was appealing. It might call into question the wisdom of the Nineteenth Amendment, but for the fact that large numbers of women (largely married) used their “lady smarts” instead. Either way, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton are rolling over in their graves.

6. It’s not about giving up on “social issues”
No Republican candidate should participate in a debate or go out on the stump without thorough debate prep and a complete set of talking points that they stick to. This should start with a good grounding in biology and a reluctance to purport to know the will of God. (Thank you, Todd and Richard.)

That said, we do not hold the values we do because they garner votes. We hold the values we do because we believe that they are time-tested principles without which a civilized, free and prosperous society is not possible. We defend the unborn because we understand that a society which views some lives as expendable is capable of viewing all lives as expendable. We defend family – mothers, fathers, marriage, children – because history makes it quite clear that societies without intact families quickly descend into anarchy and barbarism, and we have plenty of proof of that in our inner cities where marriage is infrequent and unwed motherhood approaches 80%. When Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, many thought that the abortion cause was lost. 40 years later, ultrasound technology has demonstrated the inevitable connection between science and morality. More Americans than ever define themselves as “pro-life.” What is tragic is that tens of millions of children have lost their lives while Americans figure out what should have been obvious before.

There is no “giving up” on social issues. There is only the realization that we have to fight the battle on other fronts. The truth will out in the end.

7. Obama does not have a mandate. And he does not need one.
I have to laugh – bitterly – when I read conservative pundits trying to assure us that Obama “has to know” that he does not have a mandate, and so he will have to govern from the middle. I don’t know what they’re smoking. Obama does not care that he does not have a mandate. He does not view himself as being elected (much less re-elected) to represent individuals. He views himself as having been re-elected to complete the “fundamental transformation” of America, the basic structure of which he despises. Expect much more of the same – largely the complete disregard of the will of half the American public, his willingness to rule by executive order, and the utter inability of another divided Congress to rein him in. Stanley Kurtz has it all laid out here.

8. The CorruptMedia is the enemy

Too strong? I don’t think so. I have been watching the media try to throw elections since at least the early 1990s. In 2008 and again this year, we saw the media cravenly cover up for the incompetence and deceit of this President, while demonizing a good, honorable and decent man with lies and smears. This is on top of the daily barrage of insults that conservatives (and by that I mean the electorate, not the politicians) must endure at the hands of this arrogant bunch of elitist snobs. Bias is one thing. What we observed with Benghazi was professional malpractice and fraud. They need to go. Republicans, Libertarians and other conservatives need to be prepared to play hardball with the Pravda press from here on out. And while we are at it, to defend those journalists of whatever political stripe (Jake Tapper, Sharyl Atkisson, Eli Lake) who actually do their jobs. As well as FoxNews and talk radio. Because you can fully expect a re-elected Obama to try to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in term 2.

9. Small business and entrepreneurs will be hurt the worst
For all the blather about “Wall Street versus Main Street,” Obama’s statist agenda will unquestionably benefit the biggest corporations which – as with the public sector unions – are in the best position to make campaign donations, hire lobbyists, and get special exemptions carved out from Obama’s health care laws, his environmental regulations, his labor laws. It will be the small business, the entrepreneur, and the first-time innovators who will be crushed by their inability to compete on a level playing field.

10. America is more polarized than ever; and this time it’s personal

I’ve been following politics for a long time, and it feels different this time. Not just for me. I’ve received messages from other conservatives who are saying the same thing: there is little to no tolerance left out there for those who are bringing this country to its knees – even when they have been our friends. It isn’t just about “my guy” versus “your guy.” It is my view of America versus your view of America – a crippled, hemorrhaging, debt-laden, weakened and dependent America that I want no part of and resent being foisted on me. I no longer have any patience for stupidity, blindness, or vulgarity, so with each dumb “tweet” or FB post by one of my happily lefty comrades, another one bites the dust, for me. Delete.

What does this portend for a divided Congress? I expect that Republicans will be demoralized and chastened for a short time. But I see them in a bad position. Americans in general want Congress to work together. But many do not want Obama’s policies, and so Republicans who support them will be toast. Good luck, guys.

11. It’s possible that America just has to hit rock bottom
I truly believe that most Americans who voted for Obama have no idea what they are in for. Most simply believe him when he says that all he really wants is for the rich to pay “a little bit more.” So reasonable! Who could argue with that except a greedy racist?

America is on a horrific bender. Has been for some time now. The warning signs of our fiscal profligacy and culture of lack of personal responsibility are everywhere – too many to mention. We need only look at other countries which have gone the route we are walking now to see what is in store.

For the past four years – but certainly within the past campaign season – we have tried to warn Americans. Too many refuse to listen, even when all of the events that have transpired during Obama’s presidency – unemployment, economic stagnation, skyrocketing prices, the depression of the dollar, the collapse of foreign policy, Benghazi, hopelessly inept responses to natural disasters – can be tied directly to Obama’s statist philosophies, and his decisions.

What that means, I fear, is that they will not see what is coming until the whole thing collapses. That is what makes me so sad today. I see the country I love headed toward its own “rock bottom,” and I cannot seem to reach those who are taking it there.”

http://townhall.com/columnists/laurahollis/2012/11/08/postmortem/page/full/

House Senate Obama judges et al require Constitution 101, Natural born citizen not equal to citizen, Right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

House Senate Obama judges et al require Constitution 101, Natural born citizen not equal to citizen, Right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin”…Samuel Adams, 1776

 

Obama, many senators, congressmen, judges and state officials have a poor understanding of and little respect for the US Constitution. Over the past 5 years we have watched and listened as the natural born citizen requirement has been butchered and ignored. Now we are confronted by the attempts by many to misinterpret, ignore or subjugate the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
“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”

Citizen is not equal to natural born citizen and therefore cannot be used interchangeably.

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Infringement: The encroachment, breach, or violation of a right, law, regulation, or contract.

Constitution 101 classes was first mentioned at Citizen Wells on December 17, 2008. This was prompted by the numerous absurd, erroneous, incompetent responses from senators and congressmen when Obama’s natural born citizen status was questioned.

From Citizen Wells December 17, 2008.

The ultimate objective of a presidential election to inaugurate a
constitutionally qualified president that as closely as possible
reflects the will of the people.
The states have been given the power and the duty to control presidential
elections by the US Constitution.

The pervasive attitudes of the state officers and election officials is
that they, incorrectly, have no power to qualify presidential candidates
and/or they depend on political parties to vet the candidates.

The political parties have evolved and changed since the creation of the
US Consitution and are given no powers. However, members of the parties,
as US Citizens have an implied duty to uphold the Constitution and party
officers typically have taken oaths as elected officials to uphold the
US Constitution.

Clearly, the intent of the US Constitution and Federal Election Law is
for an eligible candidate to move through this election process to allow
for a constitutionally valid vote by Electors.

All officers and election officials, most judges and most Electoral
College Electors were informed prior to the general election and
particularly prior to the Electors meeting and voting, of compelling
evidence that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president. Despite
these warnings, Electors met and voted on the basis of party loyalty or
perceived directives from the states. State or party policies dictating
how an Elector votes violate the spirit and letter of constitutional
and federal law.

Even though the manner of Electoral College voting in clearly defined by
the US Constitution and Federal Election Law, some states have included
explicit references to law in their Certificates of Voters that are
signed by Electors and state officers. Below are certificates from 2004.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/2004_certificates/

Alabama

“pursuant to the Constitution and the laws of the United States
and this state, certify”

Alaska

“by authority of law vested in us”

Arizona

“by authority of law in us vested”

Arkansas

“as provided by law”

California

“pursuant to the Constitution and the laws of the United States
and the state of california, do hereby certify”

Connecticut

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States
and in the manner provided by the laws of the state of Connecticut”

Hawaii

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States”

Idaho

“having met agreeably to the provisions of law”

Illinois

“as provided by law”

Indiana

“as required by the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States”

Iowa

“in accordance with law”

Kansas

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

Kentucky

“In accordance with the Twelfth Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and with sections 7-11 of Title III of the
United States Code”

UNITED STATES CODE

TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT

Manner of voting

§ 8.   The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.

US Constitution

Article. II.

Section. 1.
“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.”
Minnesota

“In testimony whereof, and as required by the Twelth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States we have hereunto set
our hands”

Montana

“agreeable to the provisions of law”

Nevada

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

New Jersey

“proceeded to perform the duties required of us by the Constitution
and laws of the United States.”

North Carolina

“by authority of law in us vested”

Pennsylvania

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

Rhode Island

“in pursuance of law”

South Carolina

“pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the United States and of
this state”

Tennessee

“pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the United States and of
this state”

Utah

“in pursuance of the statutes of the United States and of the statutes
of the State of Utah”

Virginia

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States”

Washington

“pursuant to the provisions of federal and state law”

Conclusion

  • The US Constitution is clear on presidential eligibility and how
    Electoral Colleges Electors are to vote.
  • Ignorance is no excuse. Everyone involved was forewarned. Voting
    party line over law will not be tolerated.
  • Electors and state officers have signed or will sign Certificates of Voters
    for the 2008 Election. As you can see from the above, they will
    certify that they are aware of the law and are abiding by the law.
  • Kentucky gets the award for the most constitutionally clear wording
    and should be applauded for doing so.
  • There are consequences for false attesting.
  • One of the consequences is that the votes of many Electors are now
    null and void.
  • Impeachment, recall, firing, criminal charges forthcoming?

Constitution 101 classes will begin soon.

State officers, election officials, judges and, of course,
US Supreme Court Justices will be invited. Stay tuned for a
class near you. I suppose Washington DC should be first.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/2008-electoral-college-votes-certification-of-voters-state-laws-us-constitution-electors-signed-certification-certifications-invalid-obama-ineligible-violators-should-be-prosecuted-constitutio/

Nothing has changed!

John Boehner, soon after Constitution 101 classes were held for the new congress in 2011, misquoted the natural born citizen requirement in an interview.

From Citizen Wells February 13, 2011.

“John Boehner has failed Constitution 101. He is still using citizen interchangeably with natural born citizen.”

“I believe that the president is a citizen. I believe the president is a Christian. I’ll take him at his word,” said Boehner, appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/john-boehner-fails-constitution-101-meet-the-press-interview-boehner-natural-born-citizen-not-citizen-obama-eligibility/

Eric Cantor, considered as a replacement for Boehner as Speaker of the House, has made similar ignorant comments about Obama being a citizen instead of a natural born citizen.

We must keep pushing accountability.

At the end of the day, all that we have is the US Constitution and it’s provision for being armed,  to protect us from the tyranny of government.

Catholic church don’t vote for Obama, St. Raphael Catholic Church El Paso, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State IRS complaint, Bulletin recension

Catholic church don’t vote for Obama, St. Raphael Catholic Church El Paso, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State IRS complaint, Bulletin recension

“Führer, my Führer, give me by God. Protect and preserve my life for long. You saved Germany in time of need. I thank you for my daily bread. Be with me for a long time, do not leave me, Führer, my Führer, my faith, my light, Hail to my Führer!”…Recited by Hitler youth

“Red and Yellow Black and White, all are equal in his sight, MMM MMM MMM, Barack Hussein Obama.”…Recited by school children in 2009

“However, when the CHD funds Alinsky-style, church-based community organizations as in the best interest of the poor and supports organizations which advance other agendas, it divests the poor of their right to an authentic voice. This process tends to treat the poor as exploited units of human capital, rather than as human beings created in the dignity of God’s image.”

“To accomplish its goals, as outlined in the People’s Platform, ACORN has developed a political alliance with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Together with others, ACORN and the DSA have formed a political party, the New Party.”…1997 report to the Catholic Bishops

From the El Paso Times September 11, 2012.

“National group complains to IRS over St. Raphael Catholic Church bulletin”

“A national group has complained to the IRS over improper electioneering by an El Paso Catholic church.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State on Monday sent its complaint to the IRS about the Aug. 5 bulletin published by St. Raphael Parish on the city’s East Side.

The pastor of the parish has issued a written statement recanting the Aug. 5 bulletin, but the leader of the organization that complained to the IRS said damage might already have been done.

Churches are tax-exempt, as are donations to them. But IRS rules say they cannot tell people whom to vote for or against.

Apparently in reaction to President Barack Obama’s mandate that Catholic hospitals and universities cover birth-control
for women employees who want it, a passage in the St. Raphael bulletin told parishioners to vote against the president. Obama later attempted to modify the mandate, but the gesture did little to mollify some Catholics who believe artificial means of birth control are immoral.

“I am asking all of you to go to the polls and be united in replacing our present president with a president that will respect the Catholic Church in this country,” the last two sentences in the Aug. 5 St. Raphael bulletin say. “Please pass this on to all of your Catholic friends.”
After officials at the Diocese of El Paso were alerted last week to the message, the pastor of St. Raphael, Msgr. Francis J. Smith, wrote a message which was inserted into its bulletin.

“I am recanting the last two sentences from this statement as it was published on Aug. 5, 2012,” the message says. “I apologize and ask for your forgiveness if I have offended anyone. The last thing I wish to do is be offensive to my faith and the faithful.”

The language was a blatant violation of the law, the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, said in his letter to the Exempt Organizations Division of the IRS.

“The language that appeared in the bulletin — an official publication of the church — clearly encourages parishioners to vote against incumbent presidential candidate Barack Obama,” the letter says. “Since federal law prohibits tax-exempt, non-profit organizations (including houses of worship) from intervening in elections like this, I believe St. Raphael Church is in violation of the law.”

The Diocese of El Paso last week acknowledged that the passage violates IRS rules and the policy of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. A spokesman said the diocese would instruct Smith to “re-address” the article in the church’s bulletin.

Smith and diocesan officials didn’t respond to calls and emails Monday.

In a telephone interview, Lynn said his organization files 15 to 20 complaints such as the one against St. Raphael in a presidential-election year.

Last year, the organization complained to the IRS that El Pas’s Word of Life Church was improperly involving itself in electoral politics by using its Tom Brown Ministries website to encourage voters to recall Mayor John Cook and city Reps. Steve Ortega and Susie Byrd. Brown was angered that the officials voted to restore health benefits for gay and unmarried partners of city employees after he led a successful ballot initiative to end the practice in 2010.

IRS spokesman Clay Sanford on Monday would not comment on the complaint against St. Raphael.

“I can’t comment about specific, tax-exempt entities,” he said.

But an IRS publication, “Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations,” says, “Churches and religious organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”

Lynn said it was good that church officials acknowledged IRS rules, but they should have been known in the first place to anybody overseeing the St. Raphael bulletin.

“It may be a partial corrective, but the damage might already be done,” he said.

U.S. Catholic rules also prohibit the use of church resources to tell people how to vote.

“The Church’s leaders are to avoid endorsing or opposing candidates or telling people how to vote,” says a document issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.”

The IRS can revoke churches’ tax exemptions and fine them for violating its rules, or it can levy milder sanctions that often are not public.

Lynn said religious leaders have broad latitude to discuss issues — such as abortion, birth control and execution — from the pulpit; they just can’t tell people how to vote. Churches also can invite candidates and their surrogates to speak to the congregation so long as they make a good-faith effort to invite both sides.

“There’s freedom of speech in the pulpit with modest restrictions,” Lynn said, adding that St. Raphael violated those restrictions.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State last week filed a similar complaint against a Catholic Church in New York City — the Church of Saint Catherine. In its Sept. 2 bulletin, the complaint says, a priest urged parishioners to vote for Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

Lynn is a minister in the United Church of Christ, although he now only officiates at ceremonies on a part-time basis. He said there are hazards beyond breaking the law when pastors and other religious leaders tell people how to vote.

“When you start getting into partisan politics, you start dividing the congregation very deeply,” he said.”

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_21508691/national-group-complains-irs-over-st-raphael-catholic

From Last Resistance September 12, 2012.

“The ban on political campaign activity by charities and churches was created by Congress more than a half century ago. The Internal Revenue Service administers the tax laws written by Congress and has enforcement authority over tax-exempt organizations. Here is some background information on the political campaign activity ban and the latest IRS enforcement statistics regarding its administration of this congressional ban.

“In 1954, Congress approved an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson to prohibit 501(c)(3) organizations, which includes charities and churches, from engaging in any political campaign activity. To the extent Congress has revisited the ban over the years, it has in fact strengthened the ban. The most recent change came in 1987 when Congress amended the language to clarify that the prohibition also applies to statements opposing candidates.”

This so-called ban is a direct violation of the First Amendment. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law. . . .” In 1954, Congress made a law prohibiting churches from speaking out on political issues and endorsing candidates. The logic is simple. Since Congress passed such a law, then Congress violated the Constitution. This makes the law null and void.

If you are a pastor who believes in the freedoms outlined in the First Amendment and want to challenge these leftist organizations and the IRS, then I have a deal for you. The Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group, will defend you.

“In response to more than 50 years of threats and intimidation by activist groups wielding the Johnson Amendment as a sword against the Church, ADF began the Pulpit Initiative in 2008. The goal of the Pulpit Initiative is simple: have the Johnson Amendment declared unconstitutional — and once and for all remove the ability of the IRS to censor what a pastor says from the pulpit.

“ADF is actively seeking to represent churches or pastors who are under investigation by the IRS for violating the Johnson Amendment by preaching biblical Truth in a way that expresses support for — or opposition to — political candidates. ADF represents all of its clients free of charge.”

Don’t be bullied. It’s time to take a stand for Jesus Christ. Your future and the future of your children are at stake. If you want more information, go to the Alliance Defending Freedom site at http://speakupmovement.org/church/LearnMore/details/4702″

http://lastresistance.com/41/church-says-dont-vote-for-obama/