Tag Archives: gun owners 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

Care to Surrender your Facebook Password for a Permit to OWN a Gun?

Facebook Account Information Used by Police to Approve or Deny Gun “Permits” in New York Town

 According to a piece in thefreethoughtproject.com,  the Watervliet  Police Department and the court which issues gun permits in that New York community have been found  violating the Constitution on multiple counts.  They’re not even violating it under the provision of any statute or law.  It’s simply police department procedure that has been unquestioned until now.

The City of Watervliet requires that residents wishing to possess a handgun there must be permitted to do so. As unconstitutional as that is in itself, that’s not even the main source of outrage here.

Recently the department sent a form to an applicant who had applied for a local handgun “permit”. The application received asked the applicant supply personal Facebook account information as a condition for granting the “permit”.

This applicant rightfully complained.  The department responded by claiming that the form was sent to him in error.  They said that the form he received was the one normally filled out used in face-to-face interviews.

There were other details and you can check them out here.

This is just one example of constitutional abuses increasing at every level of government nationwide.  The real history of the American Revolution is no longer taught in public schools, and it’s showing now.

Demanding Facebook Information for Gun “Permits” is a Threefold Constitutional Violation

First, this policy violates the applicant’s 1st Amendment rights to free speech by ruling for or against the issue of a permit to exercise 2nd Amendment rights on the basis of the applicant’s political views.

It violates 2nd Amendment rights first by virtue of the very existence of a law requiring a permit to own a pistol (more on that later), and second by making it possible to deny a citizen his natural individual rights for purely political reasons.

This policy also violates the 4th Amendment by forcing the applicant to accept a warrantless search of personal property, namely, Facebook account information.

Don’t Forget the 10th Amendment.  What’s That?

Let’s look at the unconstitutionality of all state and local law.  Such law may not conflict with rights defined in the Constitution.  The 10th Amendment covers that.  The 10th Amendment states that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”.

It is clear then, that states and localities may not pass law contrary to the supreme law of the Constitution, whose 2nd Amendment guarantees no infringement.  Issuing a “permit” to exercise what is already a right is infringement.  Therefore, every state or city law requiring the “permitting” of gun possession is infringing, and is therefore invalid on the basis on the 10th Amendment and the 2nd Amendment. 

Every Gun Law is Unconstitutional! Every One!

The existence of a law, regardless of the established constitutional process it went through in order to become law, by no means establishes or creates the constitutionality of that law.  It’s a fact that unconstitutional law is passed regularly, and that consequently we live in a maze of conflicting state and federal laws, many of them constitutionally invalid.  The 10th Amendment has not been honored.

In this small town case in New York, a local government has granted itself an authority it never had constitutional grounds to possess. Government regulation of speech and behavior is not a constitutional right at any level, federal, state, or local.  The Bill of Rights was written for the people’s protection from government, and no rights belong to government.  Only the Constitution defines what it may do.  The regulation of free speech, the regulation of the individual’s right to bear arms, the right to be protected from warrantless searches and seizures – these rights belong naturally to the individual.  Any claim of any level of government to act contrary to these protections is a tyrannical abuse of power.

This is getting old. The 2nd Amendment says “shall not be infringed”.

The primary motivation of the Founders for designing the constitutional republic that they did was to prevent the possibility of recurrence of the same tyrannical abuses they had just a decade earlier revolted against!

George Mason wrote that the 2nd Amendment was established to ensure that the people would be protected from repeating the very same tyrannical enslavement by government that King George III had inflicted upon them.  Noah Webster strongly agreed.  It’s all in the history that is no longer taught in public schools.

In the 4th Amendment, warrantless searches were prohibited, as well as standing federal armies.  Why do you suppose they mentioned that?  Could it have had anything to do with the presence of militarized police in the colonies that were directed by agents of King George III?

Running over the Constitution

The Constitution was carefully designed to provide infallible guidance which, properly applied, would suppress tyrannical government actions at all levels.  However, when the Constitution is neither respected and nor honored for its original intentions, it becomes useless.  In proportion as knowledge of the history of our founding era has diminished, so has respect for our Constitution.  As a result, Supreme Court rulings have replaced and superseded constitutional authority, and consequently the Constitution is now regularly run over by the courts.

Constitutional Infringements Running Rampant at Local Government Levels

Come to think of it, I said that the Watervliet police department was not violating the Constitution under the provision of any statute or law.  But they really were.  The very fact that their city honors an unconstitutional law is the basis of this entire set of additional infractions

Contentions that a law is constitutional and valid until its validity is overturned by the Supreme Court, are ridiculous. That position would render the Constitution of no value unless it were to be first sanctioned by the federal government  –  the very entity it was designed to protect the people against!

Read more at http://westernjournalism.com 

Facebooktwitterrss

Obama’s Executive Ordered Study Report On Gun Violence Slaps Him In The Face | Guns Save Lives

white house gun free zone

If you recall, back on January 16, 2013, standing with little children, Barack Hussein Obama tried to pull a fast one on the American people and issued 23 executive orders pertaining to gun control. Among those was number 14: Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. Well friends, that study did happen and it destroyed Obama’s position on guns and gun violence.

Well like all things in government, the people tasked with the study simply directed the study to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. However, many people have not heard about the report. Could it be that much of the information in the report didn’t quite “jive” with Obama and the anti-gun crowd?

Actually, that’s exactly what it did. In fact, not only did they not hold any water for Obama’s claims regarding gun violence, it poured it on him, pretty much backing every Second Amendment lover’s argument that has been made.

The report, titled Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-related Violence, which identifies the particular topics of gun violence to be researched over the next few years, made the point that the majority of deaths that take place annually by the use of a firearm are not related to crime, but to suicide.

“Between the years 2000-2010 firearm-related suicides significantly outnumbered homicides for all age groups, annually accounting for 61 percent of the more than 335,600 people who died from firearms related violence in the United States,” reads the study.

That’s obviously not a good thing. However, it indicates that many Americans suffer from both a spiritual and mental health issue. With that said, let’s not then run to government to deal with mental health issues. I’ve warned before and I’ll warn you now: That would be a very bad move.

Here’s the great news in the report though. It points out that virtually every study which “assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns” discovered the same thing. Those using their guns for self-defense “consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

Oh and remember how we’ve been told by the Obama administration and the socialist gun grabbers that guns aren’t used that often in self-defense? Well, the report shows that isn’t true either.

 

“Defensive uses of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a),” the study reads. “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010).”

 

Yeah, not as uncommon as the propagandists would have us believe.

In all fairness, the report does point out that “some scholars point to radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997).”

While the report does maintain that this will always be a controversy in the field, the study does state that “the estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys,” while the “estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.”

“A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim,” reads the report.

The report does have a downside. It indicates that we have the most firearm related deaths of any western nation. However, the good news is that the study claims that is rapidly declining.

 

“Overall crime rates have declined in the past decade, and violent crimes, including homicides specifically, have declined in the past 5 years.” However, “Between 2005 and 2010, the percentage of firearm-related violent victimizations remained generally stable.”

Additionally, the report goes on to inform about other declines. “Firearm-related death rates for youth ages 15 to 19 declined from 1994 to 2009,” the report continues, adding that accidental shootings were declining as well.

 

The report also states that “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”

While everyone recognizes that there will always be crime and violence and yes, even gun violence, the fact of the matter is that gun control is not the answer, except to make sure you control your own gun and hit your target. For sure there will be more data added as the study continues, but already what they do have from the past indicates something that is completely opposite from what this administration has presented and there is no doubt that any information that comes out of the study will be thoroughly scrutinized.

The report also referenced video game violence to see how it might contribute to gun violence, but said that more research would need to be done and no research to the present has been conclusive.

Anyone wondering why Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Dianne Feinstein aren’t running to the state run media to air out this little report? It’s because they have egg on their face.

One last question that is on my mind is, how much did will this study end up costing the American taxpayer?

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/07/obamas-executive-ordered-study-on-gun-violence-slaps-him-in-the-face/#ixzz2YKlFOzyW

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