Articles tagged as

Constitution

Anonymous responds to Obama’s 2013 Gun Control measures….

The pot is boiling.  The Executive Branch’s DHS is buying fully-automatic rifles and millions of rounds of .223 caliber ammunition. When is someone in the GOP going to file an impeachment case against this President?  Will it be left up to the people of the United States (likely just 3%, as in 1776) to correct this … Read more

Heh

More from The Looking Spoon

Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 – Senator Diane Feinstein’s push to disarm the United States

She unveiled her renewed Assault Weapon Ban that not only is going to hurt two vibrant companies here in NH (are you listening Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) – Sturm Ruger and Sig Sauer – but effectively render civilians unable to defend themselves in a multi-person home invasion.

“We have tried to learn from the bill. We have tried to recognize legal hunting rights. We have tried to recognize legal defense rights. We have tried to recognize the right of a citizen to legally possess a weapon. No weapon is taken from anyone. The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. Therefore, there is no sunset on this bill,”

Once again, we see a Progressive MORE than willing to punish law-abiding citizens as if they were criminals. No mention of the REAL reason for the Second Amendment – self-protection against a tyrannical government (as Progressives cannot even begin to fathom that their policies will end up as such as they are eroding individual Liberty and Freedom.  After all, as US Senator Schumer (or was it Durbin?) said “this isn’t about the Constitution”.

Of course not, it never is, is it?

The bill has not yet hit Thomas (it was supposed to be filed and online today) but here are some details.  The list of banned firearms are after the jump.  The Low Points:

  • Manufacture, transfer, or importation of new assault weapons
  • What is an assault rifle (redefining a real military term)?  Detachable magazine.  One of the following military features:
    • pistol grip
    • forward grip
    • adjustable, detachable or folding stock
    • barrel shroud
    • threaded barrel
    • grenade or rocket launcher
  • And yes, we now have a NEW “weenie legislator legal term” – an “assault pistol“: detachable magazine.  One of the following military features:
    • barrel shroud
    • threaded barrel
    • second pistol grip
    • accepting of a mag other than via the one allowed pistol grip
    • semi-automatic (if this is a “copy” of an automatic version)

    Read more

Response to Nancy Parsons Questions about Objections to Obama’s Gun Control Policies

Perhaps other people wonder about the questions in Nancy Parson’s letter of January 18, 2013 in the Laconia Daily Sun.  (See:  http://issuu.com/dailysun/docs/lds1-18-13 ) My beliefs are based on the following: True safety requires consideration of reality not wishes. If anyone is hurt during a crime, it should be the criminal not the intended victim.  Criminals will ignore gun laws and get the guns they want.  Lack of accurate information causes many people to irrationally fear guns in the hands of law abiding Americans.

First.  I lived most of my life outside of New Hampshire in states with very restrictive gun laws so initially it felt strange to see armed civilians.  All those other states have much higher crime rates than New Hampshire, and I feel much safer in New Hampshire where criminals aren’t assured of helpless victims.

Second.  A common question among people who know nothing about guns is about “how many bullets does one need?”  The answer is, it depends.

Anyone who thinks you only need one or two bullets should go to a shooting range (there is one in Belmont) and shoot at a target (they’ll help you).  Then consider how hard it is to hit a flying bird or a running, jumping and turning animal.

Self-defense is another matter.  To an unpredictably moving target, add in surprise, fear, perhaps terror, attempts to corral and calm children, calling the police for help, perhaps an angry attacker shooting at you, and our natural hesitancy to shoot another human.

Read more

Ignoble Quote – President Barack Hussein Obama

“What’s more important?” he asked. “Doing whatever it takes to get an A grade from the gun lobby that contributes to their campaign or giving parents some peace of mind when they drop their child off for first grade?”

 – President Barack Hussein Obama (1/16/13, on issuing 23 Executive Orders on Government gun control)

Once again, President Strawman decides to make an ignoble argument on a very important topic – how far he is going to push the Federal Government in infringing upon the Second Amendment.  Certainly anyone that has been following the issue knows exactly what he is doing with this line – he is calling those of us who support the Second Amendment as is, is framing a whole class of citizens, as kid killers.  After all, who in right mind would pick a legislative score over live kids?

Let me repeat that – Kid Killers is how he wishes to portray those that respectfully disagree with him.  That also includes us who are not always all that respectful as well (but hey, if I’m going to be called a Baby Killer and neaderthalic, I’m supposed to be respectful?).

And this from a guy (I do respect the Office of the President, but since he continues to use the language and manner of a cheap street community organizer, he has not earned that respect) who actually voted to make baby killing legal (remember, he voted to allow partial birth abortion).   So, it is merely a matter of his ideology – surround himself with kids as political stage props when it suits HIS ideological belief (which has nothing to do with kids but all about disarming the American population as his past votes and actions have shown every time).  But when HIS ideological belief supports abortion, well, the only stage props he needs is a box of plastic bags.  But, I digress.

Read more

BlogHeadline of the Day – yes, it involves the Constitution

From the Washington Times: Congress has a Constitution problem — many don’t understand document The article talks about how various CongressCritters quote the Constitution in “defending” the constitutionality of their bills (pretty much, the results are what you would think). Many don’t know the Constitution nor the philosophy that undergirds it.  Thus, when they write … Read more

Turkey Feathers and AR-15s

I’m so very tired of the intellectually empty argument from self-loathing (yet surprisingly haughty) Americans that “the Constitution was written by a bunch of dead, white, slave-owners” and that “the second amendment was written about muskets“.

Regarding the first of these two arguments: The Founders were the intellectual superstars of their time.  Most of them were rigorously trained, from very early ages, in philosophy, mathematics, logic, rhetoric, writing, politics, religion, the Greek and Latin languages, and economics.  Many of them went to Harvard, Yale, Princeton (College of New Jersey), or Columbia (King’s College) as teenagers.  Many of them could quote, from memory, Cicero, Plato, Virgil, Horace, Caesar, and others.  They mastered these subjects, and were some of the most well-rounded individuals this country has seen, or ever will.

Thirty of the fifty-five delegates to the Constitutional Convention were college graduates, all trained in similar fashion.

The point here is…

Read more

Laconia Daily Sun’s “journalist” Mike Kitch decides to make sport of newly elected NH House Rep Mike Sylvia

I met Mike Sylvia a couple of years ago now.  Being a Big “L” Libertarian, his outlook on the size and role of Government is different than mine (not in direction but in a matter of degree; same page, different paragraph).  Which, however, puts him in the cross-hairs of the local Hobbessian believing scribbler Michael Kitch (not same page, not just different paragraph – a completely different book) who has a major problem with anyone that doesn’t acknowledge the Primacy of Government in the smallest affairs of individuals (lots of samples of similar behavior after the jump).  He has this thing for anyone that attacks his belief that only Big Government can maintain peace AND demand equality (including redistribution of political and financial capital).

Laconia Daily Sun Michael Kitch Makes Sport Of Michael Sylvia

Now in this case, reporting on how the Belknap County NH House reps voted on the rules that have now reversed the ability of people to protect themselves (and now have to rely on the State – a Liberal denial of the Right to self-defense), could Kitch just have reported the news (which would have been just the vote count)?  Sure.  Did he? Nope. He decided that he had to take a poke at Micheal Sylvia, who sits on the side of Natural Rights (including that of self-defense).  Did Kitch add anything of like manner from any of the Democrats?  Nope – not even a whisper (and I bet there would have been an opposing view).

Read more

YOU sir, as a Cabinet Secretary, are BOUND to Constitutional strictures!

Once again, we see yet another Progressive downplay the values by which the government is to act by and to be held against.  Education Secretary Arne Duncan:

“I want to talk to gun owners and hunters and sport shooters and ask them, what should we do? I want to talk about community and responsibility, and I want to talk about values — because we have common values that go far beyond the constitutional right to bear arms.

A number of things come immediately to mind:

  • First, your responsibility IS to the Constitution.  Period.  First.  Last.  You are the Government – stick to what the Government must obey (be it ever so hard for the Obama Administration to do that)
  • Second, an oh so soft slither around the fact that the Second Amendment is not about hunting and it is not about sport shooters.
  • Third, this IS about you trying to not have to talk about the Constitution – because it limits you.
  • Fourth, you don’t WANT that limitation – so you all (Obama Administration) are trying get people to emote instead of think, to think in the moment instead of long term and “what brung us to this place in the dance” -the sense of Federalism and a limit on what Government can do in manipulating Society.
  • Fifth, it is because, in large part, that you Progressives have swapped out traditional values for Progressives ones that we are in this pickle.

Yes, I just said it.  I lay it all on the Progressives with the denigration of hard work and the traditional work ethic that made a lot of people no longer ashamed to be on the dole.  I blame them for the substitution of absolute values for a secular humanism whose values can change from day to day – situational ethics run amok.  I blame them that Progressives believe that the rest of us cannot function in Society (ever closed to the irony, these “self-assured incompetents” of the poor and worse job that Big Government is delivering) without the guiding hand of themselves.  I blame them for the spiritual emptiness that they are wreaking in the country.  I blame them for the financial disgrace (with many helping hands of Republicans who merely wish “to get things done” without counting the cost).

I will answer “what should we do?”

Read more

Obama-Boehner is nothing like Reagan-O’Neill

The column in the 12/21/2012 Citizen of Laconia (www.citizen.com) titled, “History teaches us valuable lesson about taking the same side”, apparently written by Steve and Cokie Roberts, is interesting, but I see little similarity between the Reagan-O’Neill situation and the Obama-Boehner situation.  For example, Tip O’Neill was interested in following the law and passing a budget.  President Obama’s last two (and perhaps 3) budgets were so unrealistic that they have received NO democrat votes in either the House or the Senate.  The Republican controlled House has passed annual budgets, but the Democrat controlled Senate refuses to consider them or pass their own budget, and President Obama is, apparently, fine with that.  Having no budget creates a crisis every time that funding is about to run out in any area.

Read more

Quick Thought – Role of the State; what about Liberties?

From Tim’s post:

the New Deal settlement has been reshaping Americans’ expectations about the nation-state’s reach and role. Consequently, the U.S. federal government will continue to provide a social safety net, regulate the economy, and shoulder a substantial share of responsibility for safeguarding the social and economic bases of political equality.

The State is responsible for two things:

  • Respecting and protecting our Rights and Freedom
  • Protecting individuals

Even with some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation,

Read more

Guest Post by Ken Eyring – Why the Henniker Zoning Board believes it owns your property

“If someone else controls your private property, you do not own it.”  – Skip Murphy.  Six days ago, Steve had this post concerning the trouble that Stephen Forster (Forster’s Christmas Tree Farm) is in with the local zoning members concerning the way he wishes to use his own property (to hold weddings as “Agro-Tourism”, a perfectly legal use of his private property with respect to State law).  He asked, in that post, that you go support Stephen keep his innate freedom to use his own land for his own purposes.  Well, a bunch of people showed up with their virtual flashlights to show their support – and made the Henniker Zoning Board rather uncomfortable.  You see, when we, the citizens, hold elected and unelected officials to account, they become very uncomfortable – they hate being held to account for things that they are not allowed to do.  Here is the  message from Ken concerning that meeting (emphasis mine):

Dear Friends,

Here is a link (at GovernmentOversite) to the Henniker Zoning Board meeting on Nov. 15th — and I urge you to watch and pass it onto others.

[Note from Skip – watch the closeups very carefully;  see how uncomfortable they are, knowing that they are being watched because of their actions?]

Why? Because it represents the type of attack on our property rights that will be coming from elected people that don’t respect our Constitution — but have unfortunately been empowered to make decisions as to what we can and can’t do on our property.

As you view this video, you will find that it is painful to listen to the Zoning Board search for a reason to justify how they can place a restriction on Steve Forster regarding the usage of his farm property. The board’s struggle occurs after it is clear they agree that holding weddings on a farm (the issue at hand) is considered to be agri-tourism… and that agri-tourism is included in the definition of agriculture. The board also agreed that the practice of agriculture is allowed on a farm under state statute.

So where is the problem you ask? They wanted to overturn the citation that was issued — which threatened fines if Mr. Forster held any events, but at the same time… they wanted to attach restrictions even though the activity in question has been occurring on Mr. Forster’s farm since the early 80’s.

Read more

Notable Quote – Thomas Paine

Another thought worth remembering; Thomas Paine wrote in his Revolutionary pamphlet, The American Crisis: “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” … Read more

Blogline of the Day: The TEA Party

From Instapundit: They will crawl over broken glass to unseat Obama, whose actions over the past 4 years have consistently demonstrated that he neither loves this country nor its Constitution. Yep, that about sums it up!  As I have told many over these last couple of years (as that is how long the Prez campaign … Read more

FaceBook Doodlings: Libertarians & Free Staters: let me amplify what Tim said about Tuesday

Tim put up this post, urging movement Libertarians to consider how they’d be voting on Tuesday:

If you are a libertarian, or if you are a Free Stater, or if you just believe in limited government, individual freedom, and personal responsibility….

David Mamet, the famed playwright that was hard Left and just veered Right after finally realizing what the results of the Left have done, put it another way (even as he was speaking to Liberal Jews, it fits here):

Are you prepared to explain to your children not the principles upon which your vote is cast, but its probable effects upon them?

Go read the whole thing.  Tim’s post started a bit of a conversation on Facebook and I waded in (note: I’ve not been active on FB for a while but given the tenor (pretty much, I “went there”.  Now Leah was the main respondent and we’ve been friendly ever since we met when the TEA Party decided to “meet & greet” back in 2009 when Obama sojourned to Portsmouth, NH.  On FB, she expressed an attitude that many Libertarians seem to hold:  both Romney and Obama are pretty much communists and there’s no difference between them (and many view Romney as actually being worse).  The comment that set me off was one about Romney not being able to reverse what Obama has done:

“He is not a king, and cannot just make a pronouncement that he declares a law null and void.“

Have you not been paying attention!!  What the heck do you think Obama has actually been doing????  My response (edited to be more bloggish and a bit more expanded here):

Read more

Glen Reynolds nails it – “Why Barack Obama should resign”

What do you say about a Government that care more about its image, more about its power, and more about re-election than doing what it is supposed to be doing?  I don’t often put up entire posts – but this one deserves to be read in it entirety – Glen Reynolds aka “Mr. Instapundit” aka The BlogFaddah” (emphasis mine):

WHY BARACK OBAMA SHOULD RESIGN. Just for the record, this is what it looked like for a man who made a film that made the Obama Administration uncomfortable:

Here’s the key bit: “Just after midnight Saturday morning, authorities descended on the Cerritos home of the man believed to be the filmmaker behind the anti-Muslim movie that has sparked protests and rioting in the Muslim world.”

When taking office, the President does not swear to create jobs. He does not swear to “grow the economy.” He does not swear to institute “fairness.” The only oath the President takes is this one:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Read more

Obama, you’re no Margaret Thatcher when it comes to Free Speech

Glen Reynolds over at Instapundit is just.all.over.this Obama #FAIL and the way it illustrates the hypocrisy that ReProgressives and Socialists have between the words they speak and what they want you to believe about them, and the actions that belie those words and public beliefs, as he floats all over the blogosphere and reports back:

Compare Margaret Thatcher and Rushdie to Obama and Nakoula.

When Salman Rushdie had a death fatwa pronounced on him for a novel considered insulting to Islam, Margaret Thatcher immediately ordered a protective detail to be sent to Rushdie, who took him to an undisclosed secure location. They have been protecting him ever since. Bear in mind that Rushdie had been a severe and vocal critic and political opponent of Thatcher.

Compare and contrast to Obama and Holder’s treatment of Nakoula.

Indeed.  Margaret rushed not just to defend a private citizen and his thoughts / speech (Salmon Rushdie) but more importantly, one of the primary pillars of Classical Western Liberalism: Free Speech. Sadly, it seems since that time, Britain has come to embrace a perverse version of Political Correctness in its stead, but at that time, Thatcher understood the power of Free Speech.

Frankly, so does Obama – and fears it.

Read more

Where Congressman Frank Guinta helps to make Congress even MORE irrelevant and Obama more powerful

“Or are you that hellbent in giving Obama and the Progressives the tyrannical Administrative State they so ever desire?“

US Constitution, Article II, Section 2, paragraph 2:

…shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments

This is one of those posts that all bloggers have – start it, something else grabs the eyeballs, and it just sits.  Unlike some of my others, though, there was a little  voice saying – yeah this is important.  Why?  All during the campaign back in 2010, it was “Constitution Frank” Guinta; I remember that because I interviewed him often.  He realized which way the political way the wind was blowing and decided to ride it.  Problem was, we all believed what he said (and knew what Carol Shea-Porter would do if re-elected – and still do).  The problem is that when you go to the mat for someone, which the ‘Grok did during the primary and the general, when you come across stuff like this, you end up doing more than merely wince and cringe (reformatted and emphasis mine):

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXing