“Republican Party candidate Ron Paul got only five percent of the votes [Super] Tuesday for his message of less government, lower taxes and following the Constitution. The American people have spoken. Five percent of the voters are for freedom, and 95 percent are for free stuff.” —Argus Hamilton
from Patriot Post
~snip~
I have commented on Ron Paul enough elsewhere on this blog. However, isn’t the above quotation a bit frightening?
GOA Files Blockbuster Brief Before The U.S. Supreme Court!– Pratt hits the airwaves, selling the pro-gun position in the courtof public opinion Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408http://www.gunowners.org Tuesday, February 12, 2008 Gun Owners of America filed its brief yesterday before the U.S.Supreme Court in defense of Dick Anthony Heller, who was denied theright to own a gun in the nation’s capital as a result of thedraconian gun ban which exists there. In this hard-hitting brief, GOA takes aim at the weak arguments putforth by both the DC government and the Bush Administration. Butmore than that, GOA examines the favorable text and context of theSecond Amendment in great detail, while also documenting the pro-gunhistory that formed the backdrop of its inclusion into the Bill ofRights. The GOA brief even presents the greatest reason for the right to keepand bear arms, stating that “the Second Amendment right is to beexercised as a last resort to guard against tyranny.” GOA’s Executive Director, Larry Pratt, has hit the airwaves recently,appearing on many talk shows and in newspapers to differentiate theGOA approach from the sullied road the President has taken. Pratt,along with other GOA spokesmen, has argued that the “bomb” whichBush’s Solicitor General dropped last month (when he submitted hisbrief) would destroy the Second Amendment.
After all, the Bush administration’s approach is that any and allguns can be controlled or banned if a federal court finds that to be”reasonable.” The GOA approach differs from many of the briefs that are beingsubmitted to the high Court. For example, one brief which is beingsubmitted by several legislators highlights Congress’ position on theSecond Amendment over the years. This can be a useful approach, tobe sure. But while the congressional brief concedes that the DC Council mayhave gone too far, it also says it’s appropriate for the legislativebranch to pass restrictions upon our Second Amendment rights — astance which is, in principle, not too different from the one theU.S. Solicitor General has filed. That’s where the GOA brief draws a “bright line” in the sand byrepeating the amendment’s wording “shall not be infringed” over andover again. For example, our brief states: [T]he argument that “the right of the people” is subject to reasonable regulation and restriction tramples on the very words of the Second Amendment, reading the phrase — “shall not be infringed” — as if it read “shall be subject only to reasonable regulation to achieve public safety.” The GOA brief can be read online athttp://www.gunowners.org/fs0802.pdf on the GOA website. Severalpro-gun groups joined GOA, including Gun Owners Foundation, GunOwners of California, Maryland Shall Issue, Inc., Virginia CitizensDefense League, among others.
You will remember that last month, GOA alerted you to Rep. VirgilGoode’s efforts to get President Bush to pull his brief before theCourt. Thanks to your efforts, Rep. Goode has almost 50congressional signatories on his letter. While the letter hasalready been sent to the President, Goode continues to solicit evenmore signatories and is sending those names to Bush as well. (GOAwill provide you further updates and a list of the congressman whohave cosigned the letter in an upcoming alert.) Gun Owners of America is committing a significant portion of ouravailable resources as we are fighting this battle in the courts, inthe Congress and in the media. If you would like to help do your part in covering the tremendouscosts associated with this effort, please go tohttp://www.gunowners.com/heller.htm to make a tax-deductiblecontribution. Thank you so much.
Vice President Cheney Signs On
To Congressional Amicus Curiae Brief:
Affirms Unequivocal Support Of Second
Amendment As An Individual Right
Today, in his capacity as President of the United States Senate, Vice President Cheney signed on to the congressional amicus curiae brief affirming the individual rights view of the Second Amendment. As Americans, we are grateful and fortunate to have a friend of freedom in the Vice President.
NRA And U.S. Lawmakers Join D.C. V. Heller Plaintiffs In Filing Briefs With U.S. Supreme Court: On Thursday, February 7, NRA and the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund submitted an amicus curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller. This “friend of the court” brief supports a lower federal appeals court decision holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and asserts that the D.C. bans on handguns, on carrying firearms within the home, and on possession of loaded or operable firearms for self-defense violate that fundamental right.
COLORADO: Update on Pending Firearm Legislation On Wednesday, February 6 the House Judiciary Committee voted 5 to 4 to defeat House Bill 1066, sponsored by State Representative Cory Gardner (R-63). This “Castle Doctrine” legislation would have extended self-defense protections beyond the home to include businesses. In spite of this unfortunate loss, three anti-freedom bills were also defeated in the Colorado legislature this week thanks to the activism of NRA members. On Wednesday, February 6, the House Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources Committee voted down two bills, House Bill 1137 and House Bill 1096. Finally, House Bill 1190 was withdrawn by its sponsor.
Mandatory Storage Bill Sent to Senate Appropriations Committee On Monday, February 4 the Senate Committee on State, Veterans & Military Affairs voted 3-2 to send Senate Bill 49 to the Senate Appropriations Committee. SB49 requires mandatory storage of all firearms. This legislation would force adults to put all their firearms under lock and key or face an undetermined misdemeanor if that firearm is later used in a suicide or crime. This dangerous bill renders homeowners defenseless and gives criminals a clear advantage in home invasions. Please contact the members of the committee and respectfully urge them to defeat this dangerous legislation. Contact information can be found here.
AFGHANISTAN GENOCIDE EXPOSED « A Soldier’s Heart
Can you say “propaganda?” I knew ya could!
source: http://rupeenews.com/2008/02/03/why-is-west-after-pakistan%e2%80%99s-nukes-by-maftab/
You will have to read this entire story to fully understand the obvious hatred that this man has for western society, and the United States in particular. Well Mister Aftab, get a clue:
This is an interesting study to be sure. How much is practical and easily doable remains to be seen. It is in PDF so you will need a reader. I do agree with a lot that is in there, such as immigration issues. But the parts that give more government money (taxes that you and I pay) are anathema.
Test your knowledge and common sense in this simple 10-question test.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html
Enjoy!
URGENT ALERT: Ask Your U.S. Senator and Representative To Sign The Amicus Brief Against The D.C. Gun Ban Today!
As the most critical Second Amendment case of our lifetimes is now before the Supreme Court, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) is gathering signatures for an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief by Members of Congress. And we need your support to back up this important effort, today.
The case is District of Columbia v. Heller — the case in which several District of Columbia residents have challenged the District’s laws that prohibit handgun ownership and armed self-defense in the home. This brief is an opportunity to show strong congressional support for the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right to keep and bear arms and not just a “right” to bear arms while serving in a government militia.
Sen. Hutchison’s brief points out the many occasions-from 1866 to 2005-when the Congress has spoken in favor of the Second Amendment as protecting the rights of individuals, and has taken action to protect those rights by law. Congress has also voted repeatedly to repeal the D.C. gun ban.
When Congress speaks, the Supreme Court listens. Every Senator and Congressman who supports individual rights should step forward to be heard by signing this brief. The brief is due within days, so we need your immediate help today.
Please call and email your U.S. Senator and Representative today and urge them to sign on to this critically important brief, which will be a key part of the legal battle to protect the Second Amendment in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Used with permission: http://www.geocities.com/fountoftruth/jurynull.html
January 26, 2008
Posted at Liberty Post.
Letters to the Editor
Rocky Mountain News
101 W. Colfax Avenue, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
Editor:
I want to commend Chris Maj on his fine letter of January 24 on the rights of jurors.
Jurors’ rights are the most forgotten rights of all. Indeed, from before the Revolution up through the Civil War, jurors had the power to judge not only the facts of a case but also the law pertaining to that particular case. If a juror thought the law under which the defendant was being tried was unconstitutional, unjust, immoral or just plain stupid, that juror could vote to acquit and the defendant would walk. The best example of jury nullification at work can be found with regard to the Fugitive Slave Laws of the 1850s. If juror Smith opposed these laws, he could, on this basis alone, vote to acquit defendant Jones. As a result, the Fugitive Slave Laws became unenforceable.
Consider some of the onerous laws on the books today and how we could combat them if jurors only knew their rights. Imagine someone on trial for violating a tax law that not even a Harvard-educated tax attorney could understand; imagine a doctor on trial for prescribing marijuana to patients who had exhausted all conventional medical avenues; imagine a woman who uses a gun to ward off a rapist, and then faces charges when it is discovered that said gun is unregistered.
Jury nullification is the ultimate check against bad laws. Today, almost no one even knows about jury nullification. Legislators concoct new laws at a rate unthinkable a few decades ago. And the people think they are powerless in the face of a runaway government.
When I present this subject, people are often skeptical. They say things like, “Why, if a juror can acquit just because he does not like a particular law, this can only result in anarchy! We cannot have people making up laws as they go along!” I respond that jurors exercising their rights are not making up new laws, but acting in defense against bad laws. An unrestrained government – i.e. one that makes whatever laws it willy-nilly wants whenever it willy-nilly wants to — is far more dangerous than an educated populace that uses every available tool to restrain that government.
Far from being a crackpot “theory”, jury nullification is a cornerstone of constitutional government and a truly free society.
Doug Newman
Aurora
Doug is one of the best “communicators” of social and political ideology that I have been exposed to over the years. Keep the great stuff coming Doug!
 | Patrick Sperry on On Not so civil wars… |
 | TexasFred on Guest commentary… |
 | MaddMedic on Guest commentary… |
| Patrick Sperry on The Stupid runs deep… |
| Patrick Sperry on Math for planning in the comin… |
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 