ACTION

By Oscar Y. Harward

Based on our Second Amendment freedoms, it should be ‘unconstitutional’ for law-abiding citizen(s) be required in any state to complete any government form(s), other than a ‘legally valid’ Photo Identification (ID), prior to purchasing any hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol.

An ‘instant’ National Instant Criminal Background Check System investigation should and would immediately ‘qualify or deny’ each individual’s right to purchase a hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol. 

Use of a hunting rifle, shotgun, a pistol, etc., was addressed by our Founding Fathers only as “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”.  

Many left-wing elected and appointed officials, and other activists who yearn in abolishing the Second Amendment often refer to these armaments only as hunting guns; rifles, shotguns, and/or pistols, but their characteristic descriptions are not metaphors from our Founding Fathers.

The ‘right of the people to keep and bear Arms’ discussions were referenced by our Founding Fathers only as a form of protection for individuals, their families, and a protection ‘from’ a lawless and mutinous government.

Any and all ‘elected and/or appointed’ government officials, who require, create, and/or command a recorded public record of purchasing, owning, and/or possession of a weapon, as defined, are themselves the ‘lawless’ in creating and recording additional illegal and unconstitutional freedoms, legislations, and/or regulations.

I translated the Obama Executive Orders into “peasant language”. The Obama version is listed, with the truth following:

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

Insure that every agency has every bit of information on everyone in the nation so nothing slips through our fingers, er through the cracks. “Sieg Heil!!!”.

Read More:

http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2013/01/obamas-gun-control-executive-orders-plain-english-version/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=obamas-gun-control-executive-orders-plain-english-version

   Obama uses Executive Orders to Strip Gun Owners of

            legal Constitutional Gun  Weapons Rights

Where do you draw the line in the sand in defense of your life, your family and your community? What happens when the President of the United States, determines that it is illegal for you to use the very guns which are constitutionally protected because he issues an executive order against ownership? What alternative are you left with, and who can you turn to?

Your weapons which are constitutionally protected may need a local sheriff who will stand against the federal tidal wave of unconstitutional White House directives to protect gun rights!

States and local sheriffs in several jurisdictions are leading a resurgent awakening in the nation in protecting the gun rights of citizens from being quashed by federal edicts. In fact, some of these states which are considering legislation to criminalize efforts of federal employees that attempt to enforce gun control executive orders. Some of these states considering legislation action include Alabama, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Texas, and Wyoming, among others.

Reaction to the proposed legislative edicts by President Obama for a reinstated sticker assault-weapons ban and a 10-round limit on magazines is raising concerns by local law enforcement officials. According to CNS News, Oregon, Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller has already told Vice President Biden in a letter, that he will not enforce any recommended gun laws he deemed unconstitutional.

Another sheriff has joined the growing effort to prevent the assault on legal law abiding citizen’s Second Amendment rights in the state of Kentucky. According to Breitbart, Sheriff Denny Peyman of Jackson County, Kentucky stated recently, “My office will not comply with any federal action which violates the United States Constitution or the Kentucky Constitution which I swore uphold."

A state legislative leader in Texas is tackling this gun control overreach by the Obama administration and gun control advocates. Rep. Steve Toth (R) is planning legislative action to make it illegal for the state of Texas to enforce any federal laws that restrict the constitutional rights of its citizens to own semi-automatic firearms or the size of gun magazines.

Is this not the legal obligation of all local sheriffs and state legislative officials to uphold the dictates of the U.S. Constitution as well as their own state constitution? Is this not their oath of office? In fact, it makes perfect sense that every county, parish and borough in America has a sheriff or law enforcement officials who has taken such an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

( Click to read more )

Vice President Biden prepares to submit presidential  task force strict gun control measures to Obama

There is a sickening aroma in the air that is beginning to permeate the very soul of independent freedom embracing Americans. It began to originate long before the shooting at Aurora, Colorado, or recently in Newtown, Connecticut. Its rancid fragrance seeps into the fabric of the U.S. Constitution and is emitted by the control terrorists who manipulate the facts and perceptions of Americans who watch the news. These purveyors of stricter gun control measures seek to erode your defenses so that in your weakened state you will accept their sweet smelling tyranny.

The nation that was represented as a symbolic shining city on a hill that President Ronald Reagan spoke about over 30 years ago is now becoming a broken mud hole of shattered dreams. America’s morning that has dawned over the nation is now bearing witness to the shredding of constitutional protections which have safe guarded families since the infancy of the republic. Obama has given the order to Vice President Biden: full steam ahead to obliterate gun rights in your town. You and your family are the targets and what will you do?

The reaction by gun owners and even prospective gun owners to Obama’s desperate executive order zeal is to hurry up and buy up all the potential guns and now legal weapons. The worry is that these legal weapons might be taken by edict or by force by the government. That may be a logical solution, but it is only a temporary one.

Once Obama’s federal government has quenched its thirst on stripping away gun rights, it will not hesitate to take the next step to criminalize actual possession of legally held banned weapons!

Then what will you do?

What is the response to a government that embraces tyrannical rule over the constitutional guarantees and protections contained within the U.S. Constitution?

What are you, the father, the mother, the son or the daughter prepared to do when, the government official, acting on direct orders from a new commission set up by President Obama to confiscate your guns, comes to your home’s door?

Where are the defenders of the U.S. Constitution who are elected in Congress? Are you absolutely certain they will not give in, and knuckle under Obama’s determination which is aided by the mainstream media talking heads?

Remember these are the same talking heads that avoided Obama’s dismissive behavior in not enforcing congressional legislation. This is the same mainstream media that buried the White House Benghazi murder cover up as if it never happened. Think about your choices when seeking to rely upon the once independent fourth estate, which has been rendered a useless patsy for the Obama administration.

Do you really believe that once your guns are banned, and the weapons that were grandfathered in and off limits from government seizure, will not be taken in the second round of gun control legislation?

(Click - to read more)

Patriots,

We have been here before. We stand in the shadow of Tyranny, and it drives an unbearable chill through the souls of Free Men. The last time we stood here, we threw off the mountain of Tyranny against us, stood on our principles, brought a just war against our oppressors in government, and exposed ourselves and our Brethren to the full light and warmth of Liberty. 

The shadow of Tyranny has once again fallen across our country. The chill to Freedom is quickly becoming unbearable. Again.

How do we pull back this blanket of Doom?

It will be the Citizens. Not the Government, but the Patriotic Citizens of We The People.

Consider:

The Battle of Athens was an armed rebellion led by WWII veterans and citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the tyrannical local government in August 1946. The local Sheriff had illegally closed the polls, stolen the ballot boxes, and recused himself to the local courthouse to 'count' the votes. 

It did not end well for him.

It did end well for Liberty.

Here is the story... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5ut6yPrObw&feature=player_detai...

It might have to come to this again for Freedom to remain.

But this time, it won't be in Athens, Tennessee...it will be in Washington D.C.

And it will come when they ATTEMPT to disarm us.

Live Free or Die Trying.

By Oscar Y. Harward

"Those who have sought the most in gun control have sought the least in the punishment of criminals." - Robert J. Kukla

As we read, listen, and/or watch the news concerning a criminal tragedy of shooting children and adults as recently occurred in Newtown, Connecticut, and/or the violent lawbreaker who fired a rifle directed at Firemen in Webster, New York, the Liberals immediate remedy is to legislate more gun control.  The criminality with guns is not our problems; criminal individuals and others with deranged minds are.

Journal News’ publication of the New York citizens’ lawful purchasers’ of gun permits is just as serious of an invasion of each individual’s privacy rights as if Journal News’ privacy rights invasion(s) were in each and every individual’s own bedroom(s).

The foremost problems of illegal gun activities are the criminal elements and their political leaders within (y)our own Liberal government agencies.

Evidence may prove that several associates in President Obama’s administration, including the US Justice Department, and members of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) acted in the Fast and Furious plot while selling and/or approving the sale of automatic rifles, shotguns, and pistols, to a Mexican drug cartel; weapons that were used in murdering 3 innocent Americans and hundreds of Mexicans.  Our Justice Department and/or ATF had devised a scheme in an attempt to blame U.S. firearms manufacturers as scapegoats for this criminal violence.

Government gun control is nothing new.  History will prove that many Socialist and Communist leaders have become member leaders of the worldwide “Gun Control Hall of Fame”  who include: National Socialist Leader and Reich Chancellor of Nazi Germany, Adolph Hitler; Communist Party Chairman and founder of the People's Republic of China, Mao Tse-Tung; Cambodian’s Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot; and Soviet Union’s Joseph Stalin who have become directly responsible for millions of innocent deaths with their own government’s gun control. 

When guns are confiscated by government(s), only criminals and government(s) have guns; then law-abiding voices become easier targets.

President Obama, Liberal Capitol Hill Democrats, Liberal main-stream Medias, and Liberal Academia are pounding their Liberal political agenda and silencing most Conservative by limiting or even denying any open forum in the Liberal Medias.

It is Liberal Democrat lawmakers, Liberal main-stream Medias, and Liberal Academia who spotlight Congress and States’ Legislatures into softening and/or decriminalizing more criminal acts; then demands more gun control legislation as a solution to the lawless craziness within our society.

It is our US Military who have used rifles and other weapons of war to defeat other nations, on foreign land and waters, and through the air without warfare within our own homeland in defeating enemy nations.

Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto: “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”

The 2^nd Amendment of our US Constitution was crafted by our Founding Fathers to prevent a lawless and mutinous government from confiscating our weapons of protection.

“According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.”  Are Liberal Capitol Hill Democrats, Liberal main-stream Medias, and Liberal Academia proceeding to support banning hammers?

Under our 2^nd Amendment freedoms, it should be unconstitutional for law-abiding citizen(s) to be required in any state to complete any government form(s) before purchasing any hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol.  A National Instant Criminal Background Check System investigation should and would immediately qualify or deny each individual’s right to purchase a hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol.  The criminality of using a hunting rifle, shotgun, or pistol is most feared by law-abiding citizens whenever that weapon is used by a lawless and mutinous government, as well as by unlawful and psychologically ill individuals. 

Even less than a perfect solution, a m more comprehensive National Instant Criminal Background Check System can fix these glitches more quickly, accurately, effectively, and less expensive than any government(s) current laws and/or added legislation(s).

Our USA has become a nation with absent, and somewhat, lawless leadership of elected and appointed individuals who choose to obey or disobey our Constitution and US Code as they choose.  Furthermore, these lawless criminal officials are not being investigated, arrested, prosecuted, and if found guilty, sentenced to prison.

Any further gun control legislation will further tarnish (y)our Constitutional freedoms.

First, I wish to thank everyone for all that you have done to aid our country in its time of greatest need since the Revolution itself. 

Following is a conservative action plan that I first developed in 2009.  It was rejected by all of the tea party leaders that I could find at that time as too drastic.  Perhaps it is, but it could be incredibly effective.  The bottom line is that since the beginning of time, power = control of resources.

This nasty nation, the USA, created a new paradigm enshrining private property where individuals control their own resources, producing untold prosperity to the point where our poorest people now have a standard of living that would be the envy of kings of yore.  In fact, it has a built-in method of wealth redistribution that until recently prevented a handful of people getting control of most of the resources. 

At present, the single largest pool of money is the private retirement accounts of the baby boomers, totaling around $17 trillion.  I am sure this is the next target of the government.  Prior to the Obama administration, the pool of wealthiest people in the nation was very fluid, with most people only staying there briefly.  We saw that our greatest financial successes, from the infamous robber barons to today’s wealthiest, eventually tire of making money, and promote themselves to positions of philanthropy. 

From the Carnegies and Mellons to today’s Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, they reach the pinnacle of power and CHOOSE to redistribute their wealth.  That is the end result of unleashing the liberty of self interest, people get tired of “themselves” and seek deliberately to aid others.  There has never been a more benevolent system of economics in history.  It is only opposed by those who cannot create and crave control over others' resources.  This conflict dates to the dawn of history.  Our free market system defeats that conflict, and therefore, must be destroyed by those who thrive on conflict.   

Since 1776, the Royalists and their descendants have been trying to put the genie of liberty back in the bottle.  The only reason that “social” issues have any relevance at all is that they are used to cajole us out of our resources.  That’s it, power mongers don’t care about health care, the environment, children, gay people, religion, God or gun crime; they only care about getting their grubby hands on our accumulated wealth.  They use all of the social issues and often create social issues to use as emotional levers to expand their control, not to improve our lives.

The only hammer we have to control our out-of-control government is our cumulative wealth.  It is the only tool we have refused to use to date.  For the past 3 years, conservatives have spent untold dollars and hours in a futile effort to get our government to respond to our demands.  We tried the election method, only to be subverted by a combination of a deceitful media and election fraud.  I am presenting this very simple and very doable action plan because I hope you will take it seriously and help to promote it.

Another aspect of conservative activism that we have been ignoring is that we don’t have the manpower to reach all of our possible voters.  We have fewer foot soldiers because most of us have jobs, families and commitments to churches and civic groups.  Liberals don’t have most of that, or don’t invest much time and energy in them.  Additionally, approximately 40% of the population self-identifies as conservative – we have twice as many people to contact door-to-door.  It’s a logistical nightmare, and as we saw in 2012, it didn’t work.  The reason my proposed plan can work is because it is a 2-stage spending freeze program for individuals.  They don’t have to do anything, they just have to not do something.  It is a very passive protest not requiring any particular time or energy.  But it directly targets government revenues to the degree that we can disseminate this program.

We want the government to stop spending.  They won’t.  The obvious solution is to give them an object lesson in “not spending”.  The following action plan focuses on a short term plan to bring this government to its knees and submit to our demands, then a long term plan to restore our Constitution to actual use, not just rhetoric.  If it shocks you too much after first reading, please save it, mull it over and read it again in a week or so.  It’s really incredibly simple and would be 100% effective if we can get it promoted broadly.  If we can get it to enough people through back-channels, it can work:

One of the major premises of a representative republic is that collectively, we are wiser than competent statesmen. I believe that is correct and look forward to hearing from all of you as I believe this plan can be improved.

CONSERVATIVE ACTION PLAN
To
Restore the Republic

Since I first drafted this Conservative Action Plan in 2009, we have seen our nation deteriorate on many levels.  It appears that our government is on the verge of yet another destabilizing spending binge.  In the past 3 years I have yet to see a bold plan that will enable us to rein in our government to constitutional limits.  In the absence of a successful plan of action, I am proposing this Conservative Action Plan again.

We the People of the United States of America hereby demand our nation and our government back. We demand all egregious spending, including the Stimulus Package, Omnibus Spending bill and the Budget be rescinded immediately.  All socialist legislation, including Health Care Reform, Cap and Trade and any other wealth redistribution legislation must be rescinded immediately.  All restrictions to energy exploration and development must be revoked.

As an object lesson for our government, We the People, are about to embark on an object lesson in how to "not spend money".

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN

We have concluded that our government no longer represents us.  After calls and letters to the government were between 100 to 1 against the TARP program and all subsequent spending, Congress passed all of that legislation in open defiance of the American people.  Indeed, our government has demonstrated such contempt for us, for life, liberty and pursuit of happiness that we have difficulty recognizing it as a government of the United States of America.

These actions constitute gross betrayal and abuse of our trust and shall not stand.

Emergency Demands

     1.  Repeal the Stimulus Package.
     2.  Repeal the Omnibus Spending Bill
     3.  Recall the Budget, eliminate all unnecessary spending and pork and resubmit for a vote
     4.  Rescind health care reform
     5.  Reject Cap and Trade legislation
     6.  Revoke all restrictions to domestic energy exploration, development and production
     7.  Engage in immediate and serious reform of all entitlement spending to relegate most safety net
          activities to private charities where they belong.

Phase 1 Protest

     1.  Weekly 24-hour spending freezes on Mondays beginning immediately
     2.  When the media can no longer ignore the spending freezes and begins to report on it, Phase 1 is
          complete.

During Phase 1, no one will reduce spending, and may increase it while stocking up on non-perishable consumables.  Businesses can participate in and support this freeze by not transacting business on Mondays.  Retailers can close on Mondays, or stay open with a skeleton crew for emergencies.  They can also prepare for the long-term spending freeze by saving cash to sustain their businesses during that period or supplement their services and products to include consumable necessities.

Phase 2 Protest

Halt the 24-hour spending freezes and engage in a long-term discretionary spending freeze.  During this long-term freeze we will refrain from making any purchases or investments which are not absolutely necessary to hold our jobs and feed our children.

This spending freeze will continue until all of the above terms are met.

While engaging in the spending freeze, we will further research and debate the following initial recommendation for a long term strategy to fully restore our republic and self government:

STRATEGY TO RESTORE THE REPUBLIC

     1.  Restructure the House of Representatives to equal either the 1 Representative per 30,000 citizens as
          stated in the Constitution, or at a level at which citizens can successfully run for House seats.

          1. Split all Congressional districts during each succeeding census, increasing the number of
              Representatives until the target ratio is met. (Recommend 1 representative for every 100,000
              citizens as I believe modern technology can support such a ratio.)
          2. As the House becomes better populated, more and more Representatives can reside in their
              districts most of the year and participate in debates and votes electronically from their home
              offices.
          3. Offices in Washington, D. C. can be shared and rotate to allow all Representatives some time in
              Washington, and most of their time in their home offices where they are available to their
              constituents.

     2.  Repeal the 17th Amendment allowing general elections to select State Senators. Restore to the State
          Legislatures the right of selecting the Senators to hold office in the Federal Senate as this
          amendment has diminished the sovereignty of the States.

     3.   Repeal the 16th Amendment allowing the Federal government to tax income.  This will reduce federal
           revenues by about 50%.

     4.   Dismantle all Federal agencies, bureaus and departments not specifically authorized by the
           Constitution, delegating those deemed necessary to the States.

           Where desired by the States, they can assume authority over those federal bureaus, departments and
           agencies as are hosted within state borders and continue their operation at the individual state
           discretion.

SUPPORTING LOGIC

Recipe for Tyranny

In 1911 the number of Representatives in the House was limited to 435. Two years later, the 16th Amendment granted the Federal Government the right to tax “income” (though the exact definition of “income” remains in some dispute).

These two events created two corresponding statistics, one going up and one going down, that have reached critical mass in their relationship.

The two statistics are:

     1.  Per capita representation in Congress which is going down. At present, with a population of over
          306,000,000 and approximately 435 members of the House of Representatives, we have
          Representative for every 703,000 people. When the Constitution was written, it stated “The Number
          of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least
          one Representative;”
     2.  Federal revenues from income tax are going steadily up. The liberal desire to “spread the wealth” may
          have some merit. We currently have, by one revenue chart, as much as 40% of the GDP of our entire
          nation under the incontestable and un-monitored control of 535 people who are more answerable to
          campaign contributors and lobbyists than to their constituents.

This is a recipe for tyranny. Whether it results in an oligarchy that engages in socialism, communism or any other ism is immaterial. Losing our right to control our individual and national destiny is a problem that warrants some attention, even some action.

The Citizen Statesman and Self-Government

The purpose of the lower house, the House of Representatives, is to ensure self government by the Citizens of the United States of America. The House was to be composed of citizen statesmen, not professional or career politicians. The term is only for 2 years for multiple reasons, to prevent too long of an interruption in the citizen statesman’s career, and also to prevent complacency and self indulgence to take root.

This body of citizen statesmen is the only arm of the government empowered to introduce new legislation to raise revenues. Yet, our President repeatedly demanded such of them, and they have complied against the will of the people they represent.

The upper house, the Senate was to be composed of longer term, career statesmen who can provide balance and guidance to the members of the House. Neither the executive branch nor the judicial branch is empowered to introduce new legislation, only Congress. And that lower house was to be composed, not of politicians, but of citizens.

With each Representative representing a constituency of over 700,000, it is no longer possible for a common citizen to communicate effectively with enough of these people to acquire a majority of votes.  Only the independently wealthy are able to run for office.  People who need to work fulltime jobs are prohibited by logistics from office.  This is the greatest tragedy and the single greatest reason for the deterioration of our republic to an oligarchy.  We must, reduce the ratio of citizens to representatives to a level which will enable an average working citizen to campaign and fund-raise on a part-time basis and be able to win.  If it means enlarging the House of Representatives to a full 10,000 members, to the level of 30,000 citizens per representative, then so be it.

Summary

The Constitution of the United States of America was so designed that all laws are to originate with the people, via Congress, not the government.  It was designed to prevent the tyranny of an elite minority over the majority, to prevent a cabal from seizing the reins of government.  Yet, over the past century, this is exactly what has transpired.  Per our Declaration of Independence, it is not only our prerogative to take action, but our duty.

This proposal is submitted to the people of the United States of America for consideration, debate, and comment. It is a starting point; please feel free to add comments and refinements to help us Restore the Republic.

www.backyardfence.wordpress.com

                       David Gregory attempts to embarrass NRA leader by holding up

                                      high-capacity magazine clip on Meet the Press

Just how important was it for David Gregory, NBC Meet the Press anchor to break a gun law to embarrass NRA on Sunday’s show? It was not enough for Gregory to continue to badger NRA Chief Wayne LaPierre, into submitting to points that a New Assault Weapon Ban would work when the expired ban had not. According to the Washington Post, Wednesday, December 26th, an official investigation has been launched by the D.C. attorney general’s office.

The NBC anchor had to go the extra mile to challenge Wayne LaPierre, with a high magazine clip, knowing full well that it was against the law in Washington D.C. to be in possession of such a clip. So, was it right for Gregory, a longtime Washington journalist, to break the law, when he knew that the Washington D.C. police had denied the display of the gun clip on the air when it was requested? Should Gregory be fined, suspended or fired for going too far in breaking the law in his attempt to neuter the Second Amendment rights of American law abiding citizens?

There is a serious problem that is emerging in the nation when journalists like NBC’s Gregory can decide that they are above the laws which mere mortals in the heartland of the nation must obey.

Was it not enough to bring up points of disagreement with the NRA as it attempted to do, and were summarily dismissed with great professional skill as LaPierre, displayed? When the arguments that the Meet the Press anchor was trying to skewer the NRA were easily deflected, Gregory appeared to become more combative. His continued being more insistent, and even attacking and vilifying the NRA official for not agreeing with the gun control Washington democrats, and headline writers from around the nation.

Instead, LaPierre, calmly and firmly stated his and the concerns of millions of parents around the nation that wanted to see their children arrive and leave safely from their schools. The Meet the Press anchor kept insisting that the NRA leader was wrong, wrong, wrong!

Gregory, appeared visibly shaken by the steadiness of the NRA leader and seemed to decide at that moment that he needed to play the ace, which the police had already said he could not. Gregory picked the high-capacity magazine and held it up.

( Click - to read more )

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

                               Mother holds young child who escaped murderous rampage of lone gunman,

                                          who killed 20 children and six adults at school

On Friday, December 14th, 20 innocent children walked into their schoolroom class at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and before noon, Adam Lanza, 20, had gunned them and his mother down, according to Fox News sources. Recently, this horrific scene has been played out far too many times in malls, movie theaters, and at universities. This time, the unthinkable has occurred. The innocence of childhood was stripped away by this lone gunman, and left a town, and a nation in mourning.

Yet, in the midst of this very tragic day, the routine calls for tighter gun control laws have again raised its ugly head. While there is no reported connection to alleged shooter, Adam Lanza and illegal firearms, the calls are spreading, as they did earlier in the week, when another masked gunman entered a Portland, Oregon area mall, and shot and killed two victims.

According to Fox News, a U.S. Justice Department source, indicated that weapons used in the murderous assault, including a .223-caliber rifle, had been legally registered to the shooter’s mother. There is a serious problem in this nation, but with this tragedy and the one on Tuesday in Portland, Oregon, it was not the gun, but the stolen weapons that was the problem.

In a nation where there are over 50 million legal gun owners, there is no clear reason how the outbursts of violence by mentally unstable individuals whose weapon of choice is a gun, can be used as a rationale to curtail constitutionally protected Second Amendment rights. The two are not even logically synonymous.

Gun control laws that are not strict enough did not fail these families who are undergoing this very grievous period of mourning for their dead loved ones. What may have failed, even though speculative, is whatever social service system that did not intervene or pay attention to domestic issues that were occurring inside the home of the dead shooter.

The answers to what motivated Adam Lanza, to head into the school where his mother taught and into the very room where she was a teacher and open fire on precious little kids, shows anger that was perhaps motivated by revenge, or some other deep unsettling motive. But a gun control law is not the culprit in this tragic scenario.

How much tighter should the state of Connecticut’s laws be, if the weapons were purportedly registered to the shooter’s mother? The State of Connecticut gun laws specifies in part:
“It is unlawful to possess any other firearm by a person who has been convicted of a felony. It is unlawful to possess a handgun if convicted as a delinquent of a serious juvenile offense which includes.”

The mother did not appear to be a felon, now was she a convicted delinquent. She was a teacher in an elementary school, who was according to published reports from Fox News, murdered by her own son, who stole the weapons from her home. She was a victim not of a right-wing fringe element. She was murdered by her son.

( click to read more )

            Bob Costas Attacks 2^nd Amendment Gun Rights During NBC football game

                                       to deny gun owners protection

On Sunday night, NBC sportscaster Bob Costas decided during a Halftime break to tell America that your Second Amendment gun rights should be dialed back if not eliminated. He was reacting to the Saturday morning murder-suicide committed by Jovan Belcher, former linebacker for the Kansas City Chiefs. According to police officials, Belcher’s chose a gun to murder his 22-year-old girlfriend Kasandra M. Perkins, in an apparent domestic violence dispute.

Did Costas misuse his position as a sports commentator to decide upon his own, without knowing the factual circumstances of the domestic dispute? Was he legitimate in broadcasting a determination before law enforcement authorities had completed their investigation, of Belcher’s use of a gun to commit both her murder and his suicide? Should he have linked the murders to a condemnation of legal gun owners in 43-55 million households in America?

While the nation grieves for the murders which are devastating for both families and the young 3-month old child of the dead parents, Bob Costas decided to become judge, jury and executioner of the Second Amendment guarantees, by issuing a political verbal assault during the halftime show of the game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Philadelphia Eagles.

There is a line in the sand that legitimate law abiding gun owners must draw and it must be firmly placed and unmovable. The use of the public airwaves to continue the assault against the U.S. Constitution is not something that should be continuously witnessed nor permitted to go unchallenged.

Why didn’t Costas do his homework before he went on the air with his fictional beliefs? Sure, there has been an increase in firearm ownership. In fact, there are approximately 43-55 million households in America with guns, which is about 43 to 50% of US households. Yet, what Costas neglected to mention is that with the increase of legal gun ownership in America, there has been a steady decline of murders due to gun violence. An armed American is a safer American.

Instead, Costas plays upon the fearful images that are fortified in the conscious of the nation, by media imagrey of horrific assault and murders of innocents like Aurora, Colorado's murder in July. With the attack by shooting suspect James Holmes charged with 24 counts of first-degree murder, liberal gun control advocates targeted the Second Amendment as the convenient villain.

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg demanded more detailed gun control measures from both presidential candidates, Obama and Romney. He stated in July, “I can tell you what we do here in New York. The State Legislature passed the toughest gun laws.”

It must be very comforting for families of victims who could not fight back, that with New York State’s stricter gun controls the murder rate has remained close to the current 4.0 and 4.05 per 100,000 as it has for last several years. In New York City, the tough “Stop and Frisk” measures have been attributed by law enforcement as the real solution to the lowering of gun murders in New York City, not tougher gun control laws.

So where does that leave law abiding citizens who continue to be victimized by liberal media pundits, as well as network news and sportscasters who feel compelled to interject personal opinions and nonsensical fabrications and cast them into cement as news?

( Click to Read More )

   Should Lindsey Stone's employer be blamed for  Facebook photo of her 

       disrespecting Arlington Cemetery Tomb of Unknown Soldiers

Lindsey Stone’s photograph on her Facebook page disrespecting the solemn military burial ground of Arlington National Cemetery sent shockwaves across the nation. Unfortunately her former employer, Living Independently Forever, Inc. (LIFE), was caught in the Facebook photograph crossfire. It appears that a lot of the anger that was generated by outraged Americans was also laid at the doorstep of the organization.

This does raise several crucial questions that many employers and employees have to come to terms with. How responsible or even liable are employers for bad conduct that their employees engage in outside of the office? Is it fair to hold any organization, morally liable if an employee like Lindsey Stone decides to engage in outlandish disrespectful and dishonorable actions?

Should an organization like LIFE, or any other employer initiate an employment policy that includes forbidding employees from engaging in conduct that embarrasses their employer? Would that employment policy also include, posting of photographs on Facebook that may harm the organization’s ability to conduct its business or delivery of services.

Certainly, many Americans feel it is unreasonable to assign any liability for the immature 30-year-old Lindsey Stone’s conduct at Arlington Cemetery to LIFE. This notable non-profit organization has a solid reputation for proving quality services for adults with disabilities in Cape Cod, Mass. In fact, the organization responded to the disturbing behavior by stating in part:

Living Independently Forever, Inc. (LIFE) Statement

“This photograph in no way reflects the opinions or values of the LIFE organization, which holds our nation’s veterans in the highest regard. We are proud to have veterans serving on our staff and board of trustees, and we value their service. The men and women who have selflessly fought and sacrificed their lives to protect the rights and lives of Americans deserve our utmost respect and gratitude. We are acutely aware that this photo has done a disservice to veterans and we are deeply saddened that it was taken and shared in a public medium.”

The organization’s deep sincere regret expressed by the former employer of Lindsey Stone and her co-worker Jamie Schuh, demonstrates clearly that every employer in America needs to have a chat with their employees and examine their employee policies. Unruly conduct on and off the premises of an organization, business or employment location, does have consequences.

Employees may claim that they have 1st Amendment “Freedom of Speech" rights under the U.S. Constitution. However those constitutional rights do not extend entirely to certain types of postings on an employee’s private Facebook page. ( Click to read more )

   Lindsey Stone  Facebook photo of her  Disrespecting Arlington Cemetery

                                        Tomb of Unknown Soldiers

When your son or daughter or other loved one goes off to war, there is pride in your heart as well as tears in your spirit. If they are called on to pay the ultimate price and are laid to rest in a place of honor like Arlington National Cemetery or local military cemeteries you understand in your soul that a grateful nation and its families appreciate their sacrifice as well as their noble service.

But what about those disrespectful Americans that engage in actions to attack the honored silence and solitude of the military resting place. What if instead , they decide to give the dead soldiers the finger or brazenly shout absurdities at those gathered to grieve at their loved one’s gravesite?

Lindsey Stone is such an American, who by birth can claim citizenship, but who by conduct certainly walks the line of needing to be stripped of it.

She decided in October to go to Arlington National Cemetery, to according to published accounts, engage in behavior that was prankish. But what exactly is prank behavior when a person not only engages in this behavior to disrespect the soldiers and their families? She then to add insult to injury, had an accomplice take a photo of her conduct and posted the photo to her Facebook page a as badge of honor.

The photo which went viral across the nation shows Ms. Stone using an obscene gesture. In addition, Next to her was a sign at Arlington Cemetery which clearly displays, "Silence and respect." Yet in the photo, Stone is depicted yelling. What was her purpose and what was she thinking?

Does this trouble you? Was Stone’s behavior juvenile for a 30-year-old woman, who seemed to seek social media approval by posting this shameful act on her Facebook page? Was it her First Amendment right to break the solemn rules of a hallowed place of dignity, because respect, discipline and decency are diminished institutional beliefs?

Lindsey Stone’s, now former employer Living Independently Forever (LIFE) initially placed her on suspension along with Jamie Schuh who joined her in the incident, according to Fox News. On Wednesday, Fox News reported that both Stone and Schuh were fired.

So where is the line in America? How far can a person be allowed to go to disrespect or infringe upon another citizen’s rights to grieve in peace? What about the right of the nation to insure that their honored war dead in any military cemetery in any state will not be dishonored?

( Click to read more )

Are you ready to wake up in an America where your family is defenseless against enemies foreign or domestic? This reality is right around the corner. A day after his reelection, Barack Obama signaled the United Nations that he is ready to sign an Arms Treaty to strip you of your U.S. Second Amendment Constitutional right to bear arms.

This is not new. The United Nations made earlier attempts during the administration of former President George W. Bush. But, President Bush soundly rejected the measure. Now, President Obama, fresh off of this presidential win, feels emboldened to go forward with his design to unilaterally dismember the guaranteed constitutional protections citizens of this nation are entitled to.

Do you feel comfortable with the idea that the U.S. State Department under the control of either Ambassador Hillary Clinton will truly represent your interest? What about her possible replacement nominee, America’s United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice. This is the same Ambassador Rice’s who went on five television network shows to cover up the truth of what happened to four Americans murdered on 9/11 in Benghazi, Libya.

Where does that leave Americans?

The real question is what are you prepared to do in order to defend your right to defend your family? Will you wait to see what happens? Or will you take the necessary steps to make certain that you will not have to wait and see if United Nations gun control officials knock at your door, demanding, and “Gun license and registration, please!”

The right to control your guns is not open for debate or for negotiation. It is a sovereign right that no foreign organization, including the United Nations has the right or the authority to undertake, because a president gives the go ahead.

When any president decides to destroy the nation’s U.S. Constitutional rights afforded its citizens, which he has sworn to uphold, he no longer has the authority to represent the nation’s citizens. He must be impeached!

The U.S. Constitution says with great clarity in Article II, 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."

Your signed petitions should be forwarded to John Boehner, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.

The impeachment process begins in the House of Representatives according to Article I, Section 2: "The House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

You do not need the permission of the White House nor do you need the permission of the mainstream media to determine your course of action to demand the impeachment of Barack Obama. Develop a list of particulars that petitioners in all fifty states will sign. The secessionist movement has already gotten the ball rolling.

( click to read more )

Obama Brings UN’s Gun-Grabbing Resolution to Limelight

http://godfatherpolitics.com/7991/obama-brings-uns-gun-grabbing-resolution-to-limelight/

This is very serious.  Please do not take lightly the resolve from the United Nations and our own left to eventually turn us into England where don't have gun rights.

We absolutely must stand against this and any other crap they drive down our throats about being "reasonable".

Gun control is not about guns--it is about controlling you.  Gun control has never worked, anywhere.  Our safest cities and states are those with the least restrictive gun laws.  These are undisputed facts rather than the lies you will hear from Obama and the media.

Go to JPFO.org if you want to begin fact checking.  Link to the FBI Crime Staistics reports, Google what happened in England or Australia.  There are several YouTube videos of Brits and Aussies bemoaning how they were taken in by "reasonable" gun control that morphed into total confiscation. Rest assured that your ideological enemies fully understand their limits as long as America retains it 2nd Amendment rights.

The election is over.  I'm not happy with the outcome, but I cannot change it.  I don't care to argue about who you voted for or why.  I am warning you of some of the consequences.  This is not some "chicken little" the sky is falling or a "boy crying wolf".  This is a very real agenda that we can never give an inch.  Once you give an inch, it's like letting the camel get his nose under the tent; you'll soon have the whole camel to deal with.

The NRA, JPFO, and a number of other organizations are fighting for our rights.  We have to join them, support them, write/call congress and tell them where we stand.  We must be unrelenting or you, your children, and subsequent generations will never know liberty.

PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY.  Do your own research.  Hillsdale College offers a free on-line course on the Constitution--EXCELLENT!  JPFO has a number of FREE educational videos regarding our constitutional rights under the 2nd Amendment as well as what have been the historic reasons and results of gun control.

YES, IT REALLY IS THAT SERIOUS!

Despite recognition by virtually everyone but the Oval Office that the White House trumpeted anti-Islamist video trailer has next to nothing to do with violence in the Middle East, and that it is simply a re-election distraction ploy that deflects blame from Obama’s failed foreign policy; in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly Barack Obama continued to blame the video for Mid-East riots and violent demonstrations.

Obama used that narrative as the backdrop for saying there is "No speech that justifies mindless violence.  There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents" and "No video that justifies an attack on an embassy".  Obama also said that the video "is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well."

 http://news.yahoo.com/obama-condemns-violence-tied-anti-muslim-film-145204587--election.html

How is the exercise of free speech by an American an insult to America?  Is Obama ever going to make a similar statement about artists who dip Crucifixes in urine?

Obama also said “I know that not all countries in this body share this particular understanding of the protection of free speech. We recognize that.”

So Obama recognizes that UN member states do not share American views on the protection of free speech by the U.S. Constitution.

What is Obama doing about it?  Recognizing that Islamists will continue to launch military assaults upon American embassies and consulates around the world while he continues to lay the blame at the feet of Americans exercising their right to free speech?

GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, giving an address before the Clinton Global Initiative's annual conference, made the case for the inherent strength and endurance of the private sector and the dignity derived by individuals reaping the rewards of their own labor.

"That must be at the heart of our effort to help people build economies that can create jobs for people, young and old alike. Work builds self-esteem. It transforms minds from fantasy and fanaticism to reality and grounding.  Work will not long tolerate corruption nor quietly endure the brazen theft by government of the product of hardworking men and women."

Romney said if he wins the White House, he will "remind the world of the goodness and bigness of the American heart.  I will never apologize for America. I believe that America has been one of the greatest forces for good the world has ever known.  We can hold that knowledge in our hearts with humility and unwavering conviction."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-jokes-clinton-influence-2012-election-143506618--election.html

Two candidates for one high office offer distinctly differing world views.

Obama’s view is to preach moral equivalence while shrinking from defense of the U.S. Constitution and the God given rights it protects for all Americans.

Romney’s is to stand up for America and its economic system while celebrating the prosperity and good America has both created and symbolized for over two centuries.

Does the distinction need to be drawn more clearly?

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/romney-obama-two-speeches-two-views/

In case you missed it, our government perpetrated a crime against its citizenry recently by scooping up an American off the street and holding him indefinitely without charge for exercising his right to free speech.  This is truly frightening and clearly illustrates just how close to that edge of despotism we are currently teetering.  Glenn Beck refered to this act as a "shark bump".  A shark bump is what a shark does to potential prey to gauge its vulnerability before deciding to strike.

After posting a Facebook comment labeled “The Truth”, where Brandon J. Raub listed grievances against the American ruling establishment, the FBI involuntarily detained him for psychiatric evaluation.  All Raub did was to expresses his belief that the American principles of limited government and personal liberty are being ignored and that corporations and international bankers run the state, not the people.  Raub has directly called for the arrest of bankers and politicians who consistently defy their oath to the United States Constitution.  He is a combat veteran who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan who was openly anti-war and a 9-11 Truther.  His personal opinions DO NOT CHANGE THE CRIME THAT WAS COMMITTED, no matter how stupid or crazy you think they may be.

Brandon Raub did not have a history of violence and had no record of mental instability.  He was contained after refusing to a warrantless search of his home.  Again, he was detained without charge, without Miranda rights, with no signs of a psychotic disorder and actually forced to undergo psychological evaluations against his will - this goes against every constitutional principle this country was founded upon.  FBI, Secret Service agents and police in Virginia's Chesterfield County questioned him about what they said were ominous posts talking about a coming revolution, pointing out the quote "Sharpen my axe; I'm here to sever heads."(which turned out to by a lyric from a Canadian hip-hop group)  Police – acting under an obscure state statute that allows emergency, temporary psychiatric commitments [for 30 days] upon the recommendation of a mental health professional – took Raub to the John Randolph Medical Center in Hopewell, VA without charging him with any crime.

It is significant to point out that one of the 1963 long-term goals of the Communist party in their quest to communize America was to "Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals."  Classifying dissidents as mentally ill is a timeless art.  In the former Soviet Union, millions were condemned to “psikhushkas,” or psychiatric prisons, in order to  isolate, discredit and destroy dissent and activism.  Even in our country, President Woodrow Wilson unsucessfully sought to silence suffragette Alice Paul through legal declarations of insanity.

Authorities have used the recent mass shootings to justify their actions in this case.  Dee Rybiski, a FBI spokeswoman in Richmond said, "We received quite a few complaints about what we're perceived as threatening posts, given the circumstances with the things that have gone on in the country with some of these mass shootings, it would be horrible for law enforcement not to pay attention to complaints."  The big concern here is that government officials are monitoring citizens' private Facebook pages and detaining people with whom they disagree.  This is where the hypocrisy really is.  The Obama administration uses a double standard when determining right or wrong and even truth and lies and the cooperate mainstream media goes along with it.  Watch the video showing Liberal hate speech that maybe should be getting some media coverage and investigated before the next libertarian or tea party group. Under the Obama administration's NDAA, it is reasonable to assume that if Raub (or any other dissident) can be deemed a “terrorist”, even before manifesting intent to act, federal authorities could skip the entire judicial process and imprison him at the pleasure of the President.  Very few civilized nations allow unchecked power of this magnitude in the 21st century.  Further, the language of the NDAA is so vague that Raub’s entire family, friends  or anyone who “substantially supported” him or “associated forces” could also be  indefinitely detained without trial.

This is a scary new chapter in this nation’s history.  It is an unspoken understanding of the politically aware that the federal government monitors social media accounts of American citizens to mine for political opinions.  The extent of the snooping is classified, but a Freedom of Information Act release revealed that General Dynamics was awarded the $11.3 million dollar tax-payer funded contract to spy on social media.  Keyword-generated status reports “capturing public reaction” and opinions that “reflect adversely” on the federal government were produced weekly for the Department of Homeland Security.  Senior officials insist the government can be trusted and that citizens are not tracked by their political views at this time, but Ginger McCall, director  of the EPIC’s open government program points out, “The language in the documents  makes it quite clear that they are looking for media reports that are critical  of the agency and the U.S. government more broadly.  This [monitoring] could have a substantial chilling effect on legitimate dissent and freedom of speech.”

A comment from an on-line article on the case is interesting, “After the recent shootings and the Virginia Tech massacre, can the authorities really ignore threats that seem immediate?  Their job is to protect us."  Surely, it must have been from a liberal idiot, but it should remind you of another famous quote.  Benjamin Franklin once said, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." 

If you can't stand behind our troops, PLEASE, PLEASE feel free to stand in front of them.

"We The People's" authority to amend the Constitution of the United States is derived from

Article V of the Constitution

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a “two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, or  by a “constitutional convention” called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures and since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval.

A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States).  The process is called “Constitutional Convention”.

Constitutional Convention has only been used once in the entire history of this country.  I was astonished that it wasn’t congress that got the credit for ending “prohibition” but rather it was because of the united efforts of “We The People” through our collective state legislatures resulting in a forced joint resolution through the people’s right of Constitutional Convention.

What the Constitutional Convention does  is, if the President of the United States refuses to faithfully uphold his oath of office, just as President Obama did when he refused to enforce the“Defense of Marriage Act”(DOMA), and a U.S. Congress Committee fails to put forth an amendment in the  form of a joint resolution, just as the House Judiciary Committee has and is still doing to prevent a vote to amend the United States Constitution defining marriage to be the union between one man and one woman, the citizens of the United States can have their state legislatures  demand and force the U.S. Congress to do so through “Constitutional Convention” and bring forth a joint resolution to amend the U.S. Constitution and the United States President is powerless to do anything about it.

It means “We The People”, through “Constitutional Convention” could hold the U.S. Senate accountable to pass a budget by amending the U.S. Constitution preventing any further spending until it is done.

It means “We The People” through “Constitutional Convention” could establish the law of the land that no tax could be levied against the people without the ratification of (38 of 50) states of the union.

It means the people have a course of action to define and limit the scope of authority of any appointed or elected official.  The Supreme Court’s authority can be limited to the interpretation to the U.S. Constitution and any law or executive order would require the ratification of (38 of 50) states.

It means “We The People” could amend the Constitution to enhance the checks and balances of government  to allow the majority vote of either the House or Senate be sufficient cause for dismissal of any elected official or appointed official, including the Supreme Court Justices.

The Tea Party is in an excellent position to collaborate the state cooperation needed to make this course of action a reality for the American People.   

Will you help spear head the practice of "Constitutional convention" on behalf of “We The People”?  If the Tea Party of Each State were to coordinate efforts and topics of "Constitutional Convention" to each state legislature, "We The People" would not only have a greater voice but also would begin having a greater impact in Washington instead of just every four years or time of re-election

Please coordinate with your Tea Party commander and state representatives about“

your Constitutional Convention”  right, and process,  thank you.

The Freedom of speech that we are entitled to in the First Amendment has been DELETED by this president in secret and signed into LAW.  HR347 gives secret service agents (hand picked by the president) sweeping powers to decide where we can and can't protest his policies.  They are able to determine NO FREE SPEECH ZONES!!  

For 230 years we have had the right to debate policies by any political figure.  This freedom of speech has been abridged.  Very little public debate in Congress.   Speech violations, the right to petition the government for a redress of your grievances, association violations will all fall into this category.  It gives unbridled power to the Secret Service members hired by Obama to decide where we can speak up against him - and since Obama is able to assign Secret Service protection to whomever he chooses - then they can decide that we are not entitled to protest those designated by the president as part of his team (David Axelrod, for example).  We need to be outraged and protest Congress on this one!  Destruction of our basic liberties happening live!

http://youtu.be/7SGWH3kirzg