Tag Archives: Constitutional Rights

St. Louis Mayor Shocked by Constitutional Activism

constitutional activism

Constitutional Activism Expected in the good ol’ US of A

A recent reformation of Missouri law, the result of effective constitutional activism, makes openly carrying a firearm just a little bit easier than it used to be.  On October 24th in St Louis, about 40 legally armed demonstrators rejoiced over this reform by peacefully assembling and exercising their right to be openly armed.

The mayor of St. Louis and a variety of sheeple expressing opposing views were shocked by this event – shocked that citizens would actually openly exercise their constitutionally protected rights simply….. because they can!  Regarding the peaceful and quiet demonstration, Mayor Francis Slayer was quoted by the St Louis Post-Dispatch at a news conference:

“This is not Deadwood, South Dakota, in the 1870s…….In Deadwood, there was no law, but in Missouri, it is the law,” he said, referring to the legal ability to openly carry guns in public. “I don’t know what is worse.” He then said that the new law on carrying is “confusing” to police.

What’s Confusing? Am I Missing Something?

The law is “confusing” to police?  Where’s the confusion?  If a citizen is openly armed and is not posing a threat to anyone, then leave him or her alone.  On the other hand, if a citizen is a danger to others in violation of a law, then police action should be taken to control that person, armed or not. When was the last time a violent criminal was seen openly carrying? From the criminal’s standpoint, would carrying openly be in the best interest of his own violent criminal intentions?

I think that’s a very easy to understand policy, and it is clearly in conformance with the new law and with basic constitutional rights. Am I missing something?  Maybe they have all been watching too much TV.

There is one fact I overlooked.  Police have grown accustomed to hassling those who open carry.  The prohibition of open carry was the “law” to which they were accustomed. Many of them are now upset about no longer being permitted to do so, and that is their only point of confusion.

Sorry to inform you, Mr. Slayer, but this is St. Louis in 2014 and it IS rightfully the law in Missouri, and it IS rightfully the law nationwide. It is law specifically defined by provisions of the Second Amendment to our US Constitution.  In addition, the Tenth Amendment assures us that no State has the authority to impose any law that is contrary to provisions defined in the US Constitution.

Law in the Old West in Deadwood

Why was there no law against open carrying in Deadwood, South Dakota, in 1870?  Back then, like today, it was because of the Second Amendment.  I do not know the present law in Deadwood, but if there is now any law there today which would pretend to prohibit open-carry, that law would be just as invalid there today as such law presently IS invalid in St Louis. The Second and the Tenth Amendments apply universally, for all time.

The Right to Free Assembly and Free Speech: It’s NOT Shocking!

Should it be shocking that citizens who have for too long been denied the ability to exercise their natural constitutionally guaranteed rights without risk of being locked up for such action, should now take measures to openly re-assert their rights?  If we do not openly exercise our rights and exercise them now, they will surely be walked upon.  As soon as we allow our rights to be walked upon, we have given them up to an unjust authority.

What’s the Real Shocker, Mayor Slayer?

More shocking to me than peaceful people carrying guns in public is popular opposition to the open exercise of a constitutional right.  Of course those who oppose exercising constitutional rights have every right to do so.  We all have a right to remain ignorant, and to practice ignorance. The truth is that the trending lack of truth in education on the subject of the history of the American Revolution has resulted in widespread ignorance of the real basis of our founding documents, and of what they mean to each of us in real life-practice.

On the other hand, with no knowledge of the political climate under which the American colonists revolted against tyrannical authority imposed by the British monarchy of King George III, and with no understanding or knowledge of the motivations of the intentions of our Founding Fathers, could we reasonably expect any intelligent responses from the ignorant?  I guess not.

A Bad Western?  Of Course.  Nobody was Shot!

St Louis Mayor Francis Slayer also referred to the peaceful and quiet demonstration as akin to “something out of a bad western”.  Maybe the mayor is right.  A western without an exaggerated and overly dramatic fatal shooting scene would be a very bad western indeed.

Time for America to awaken –  Time to Exercise your Rights!

How can America return to its original foundation, grounded in the guarantee of individual liberty? Each and every one of us must awaken to understand that the Bill of Rights was an enumeration of rights.  The granting of natural rights comes from God Himself, and not from any document or human being. That is exactly why the Bill of Rights is referred to as an enumeration.  It is a listing of self-existent and therefore inalienable rights.

If you happen to be an atheist, then I will state that another way, and I doubt that you will disagree:  You are a self-governed and independent being.  No other human being possesses any valid authority to control your actions or your life, and as soon as you hand over your keys to yourself to someone or something else, you by default give up your own natural sovereignty.

Kudos are due the organizers of this demonstration in St. Louis. The time has come for us all to exercise and practice our rights publicly, or lose their recognition. Now let’s get to it!

You can read about this and similar topics at http://dailyunconstitutional.com

Facebooktwitterrss

Officers in Unwarranted No Knock Raid Terrorize Family and Murder Child

no knock raids

Civil Rights Violations by Unwarranted No Knock Raid a Growing Police Problem

The frequency of civil rights violations carried out daily across this nation by out of control police departments is as alarming as is their sickening and shocking natures, but unwarranted no knock raids are the worst kind.  Just over four years ago an innocent seven year old girl was shot in the head and killed by an over-zealous SWAT team officer in an out of control no-knock raid  carried out on the wrong address in Detroit, MI.

Here’s what happened on May 16, 2010 in Detroit.  A “Special Response Team”, or SRT in police lingo (don’t you love the official sounding names?)  had prepared to carry out a surprise no-knock raid on a wanted man. It had been determined he was living in one half of a duplex rental unit in a Detroit neighborhood.  Another family lived in the other half of the duplex.

The SWAT Team had obtained a warrant for the unit in which they had determined the wanted man was living.  The big mistake the team made in their midnight raid was to raid both sides of the duplex.  They did have a warrant for the address of the wanted man, but not for the innocent family who lived in the other half of the duplex.

Officers arrived in armored vehicles armed with automatic rifles and battered down the doors on both sides of the duplex.  A neighbor who was outside walking his dog when the police arrived tried to warn the cops that there were children and innocent people inside the second residence the cops were about to mistakenly raid.  The children’s toys all over the yard should have tipped them off too, but that neighbor was pinned to the ground and restrained by other officers while the unjust raid proceeded.

What they found inside the residence they had no authority to enter was a sleeping family – Mom, Dad, Grandma, and four young children.  Grandma was asleep on the couch with her 7 year old granddaughter.  The raid began and ended in tragedy in less than 30 seconds. One officer broke a window and tossed a percussion grenade inside, while others rammed the front door open. In the next 6 seconds of total confusion, the SWAT team leader, Joseph Weekley, shot and killed an innocent child.

What is worse, several hours more of mayhem and abuse ensued.  Aiyana Jones, 7, was dead.  Cops restrained her distraught grandmother  on the floor in handcuffs and forced her to lie in the child’s blood and the broken glass from the window that has been shattered.  Further abuses not only to the grandmother, but to both of the murdered child’s parents occurred over the next several hours.

Aiyana’s father was also required to lie face down in a pool of his daughter’s blood, while he pleaded for some kind of explanation for what had just happened.  He was given none.  Aiyana’s grieving and frightened mother was detained for several hours, forced to stay sitting sitting on the couch in the blood of their murdered daughter, after which she was transported to a facility where she was forced to undergo — a drug test!

Police at first claimed they had a rightful warrant.  They can apparently do no wrong.

The suspect that the police had sought was arrested and taken into custody in the raid.  He was in the other duplex unit, the side for which the police had initially obtained a signed warrant.  As soon as police realized the error they had made, the police chief took action to get a CYA warrant for the second residence – after it was broken into and Aiyana was killed.

Shouldn’t we expect some admission of error from someone on the part of the police department, and not just a massive cover up of a blunder that resulted in the death of an innocent child?  Shouldn’t we expect to see some kind of admission of error on the part of the officer who pulled the trigger and put a bullet through seven year old Aiyana’s brain?  Shouldn’t we expect remorse from the trigger man?

Apparently, every action taken by a police raid is infallible and justified.

Four years and two mistrials later, the gunman is held unaccountable

Prior to this incident, Joseph Weekley, the officer who pulled the trigger on Aiyana, had 14 years of law enforcement experience.  In 2007 he was under investigation as a member of another police raid team in which guns were pointed at children, and two family pets were shot.

Weekley also aspires to be a hero in the SWAT team raid business.  A&E’s pro-police-state reality show, “The First 48”, glorifies the aggressive use of police power.  The team of which Weekley was the leader in this particular raid was accompanied by a full TV crew from the show.  Their video illustrates just how hyped the team was when the shooting occurred.  They were in full aggression mode. Their macho police raid was, after all, going to be on TV, and they were going to be the stars!

Even more sickening is the involvement of the Chief of Police of Detroit, Warren Evans.  Evans had been positioning himself to be featured in the A&E program as the lead police officer, directing cops to take back the streets of Detroit.  Evans’ self aggrandizing plans backfired on May 16, 2010.

Weekley is Free.  Why?

Weekly was tried in June 2013 on a charge of manslaughter.  A mistrial was declared due to a hung jury.  In September 2014 ,Weekley stood trial once again.  The charge was reduced from manslaughter to reckless firing of a weapon causing death.  Conviction would have carried a possible 2 year sentence. It didn’t matter.  The jury was hung again, and another mistrial was declared.  According to the system, that’s the end of legal proceedings against Weekley for this crime.

If you’re not familiar with this case, here are several relevant links filled with greater detail to build and justify your outrage.  This case was big enough to be summarized in Wikipedia already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Aiyana_Jones

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2014/10/06/joseph-weekley-aiyana-stanley-jones-appeals-court/16803207/

http://new.livestream.com/wildabouttrial/events/3402923

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2013/06/grandmother_testifies_aiyana_j.html

That’s plenty to keep your blood boiling, I’m sure.

Facebooktwitterrss

Christian Sermons are the New Hate Speech!

The “Bathroom Bill”

One October 17th, 2014, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, stood in defense of Houston pastors’ First Amendment right to preach and speak from the pulpit freely.  The controversy has been nicknamed “the bathroom bill”   Thanks to our Bill of Rights, The City of Houston has backed off, a little bit at least. Let’s review the event and analyze how and why the Constitution once  again is at least almost doing its job as designed.

Senator Cruz’s speech concerned a shockingly unconstitutional attempt by the City of Houston to restrict Houstonians’ practice of religion and free speech, in favor of furthering a pro-gay political agenda backed by the city government.

In the video linked below, Senator Cruz called upon the pastors and citizens of Houston to defy the City of Houston’s recent unjust sermon subpoena requirement.

That’s right, you read it correctly; a city requirement to examine and approve the contents — of Christian sermons!

Listen to exactly what Senator Cruz had to say about the matter here,  courtesy of  The Liberty Foundation

Outrage is Due!

This action taken by the City of Houston should seem  outrageous to  every American, but what is frightening is that this unjust policy  garnered  any support from the public at all.  Gay and transgender supporters feel especially offended  by traditional Christians who disagree with their version of morality.

No Political Bias Here

I’m not here to defend or to oppose the morality held by the offended party, namely, the LGBT crowd.  I’m only here to defend every  citizen’s inalienable right to hold and to speak his own religious opinion freely.  Period.

Who Grants Human Authority?

Who granted the City of Houston the authority to pass judgment upon the truth of any human opinion?  Who granted The City of Houston the authority to exercise an assumption that their morality trumps all other versions of morality?  Nobody grants such authority, and that logically renders such supposed authority invalid.

Any humanly supposed authority is self granted. It has no real authority, except that imagined by those who claim it. Such a false supposition of authority rings of tyranny.

The First and Tenth Amendments

We’re all familiar with the First Amendment’s assurance of free speech and  of free religious practice, but what about the Tenth Amendment?

In a nutshell, the Tenth Amendment states that all clauses distinctly defined in the Bill of Rights are valid and enforceable at every level of government within the United States, including, but not limited to the level of state and city governments.

That means that the First Amendment always trumps local laws and rulings.  The right to practice free speech of any nature is universal and inalienable, and that is why it was spelled out in the Bill of Rights – because that is what the Bill of Rights is, namely, an enumeration of inalienable rights..

The Right to Live Your Own Belief System is also Universal

I can really sympathize with the LGBT point of view, but I cannot at all sympathize with their unconstitutional methods of flexing political power.

The right to your own belief system is yours,  and the right to speak freely about that belief system is yours  – whatever it might be.   So, let’s look at both sides of the coin.

If you are LGBT or an LGBT sympathizer, you have the right to be what you are, and you have the right to openly disagree with those who oppose your choices.  That is, in traditional Christian terms, free will.  If you are an atheist,  it’s a sure bet you will still agree that you possess an inherent right to choose for yourself.

Likewise, if you are the member of a Christian congregation, or the pastor over such a congregation, you also have the right to be what you are, and you have the right to openly disagree with those who oppose your choices.  It’s as simple as that!

LGBTs, like anyone else, don’t like being criticized for their choices, and neither do Christians.  Yet, Christian pastors do not disagree with the individual right for any individual to choose to be LGBT.  Once again, that’s called free will in religious circles.  It’s widely accepted in traditional Christianity that God granted us free will,  the option of making a mistake that can be corrected.  What  Christians preach about is what they see as the dangers of your making the wrong  choice, and of course they hope to talk you out of doing what they feel might be bad for you.

Yes, certain churches do condemn the practice of homosexuality, and they do openly preach against it, and  they do warn of what they believe to be the dangers of that style of life.  On the flip side, pro-gay groups are often quite active in openly bashing traditional Christianity.

Do not pastors, as Americans, have as much right to condemns LGBTs , as LGBTs have a right to openly preach against and condemn Christians?  Pro-gay groups do commonly openly bash traditional Christianity, yet traditional Christians generally do not call for the silencing of the opinions of the LGBT crowd.  Why the hypocrisy?

 The New Hate Speech

Why is a traditional pastor’s version of the truth painted as hateful, while the derision of Christians on the part of those who oppose traditional moral Christianity, the LGBT version of truth,  is painted as a fair and balanced view?

Why do we consistently see one sided behavior from human government that would silence traditional Christian opinion, and would herald their own humanist opinion as the superior one?  If Christians were really mistaken, and the real God is not divine, but instead humanism really rules us all, then there would be no real authority outside of humanism!

Who, then, in a supposed humanist world, would decide which of the two humanist views was superior?

Facebooktwitterrss
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!