Articles tagged as

Rights

Treaties, Irony, and Gun Rights – Oh My!

by Steve MacDonald

When second or third world Muslim Freedom fighters want to overthrow a controlling oppressive government, the Obama administration is Johnny-on-the-spot with…well…guns; other peoples money for guns or training in the use of guns, or some such thing.  But when American citizens want to exercise their second amendment right to lawful gun ownership (at their own expense) as a long term deterrent to the potential threat of a controlling and oppressive government, Obama and the Democrats want to do everything and anything they can to make that exercise as difficult as possible, if not impossible.

So yes, you need guns in pursuit of liberty and freedom from controlling oppressive regimes just not this one.

Read more

Municipalities and martial law

by

“Of the many uncomfortable truths emerging from last week’s bombing and subsequent manhunt—including the fact that American cities are still vulnerable to Islamic terrorism—one of the most troubling but least talked-about is the fact that martial law may now become part of the municipal playbook.” Lockdown.  

NH .223 Day of Resistance — Commentary

by Don

Saturday afternoon about 400 patriots met at the New Hampshire Capital to show their support for, and commitment to defending, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution:  “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 attendees, as an expression of their rights as law abiding American and New Hampshire Citizens, brought their weapons with them.  If one listened to liberals, one would think that all these weapons, perhaps 300 of them, were broken because not a single person was murdered or injured or even threatened.

The fact is that the front of New Hampshire Capital was probably one of the safest places in the nation Saturday between noon and 2 PM.  Of course, you are most likely safer in any place at any time in New Hampshire than in almost any other place in the nation, and our respect for the Second Amendment and our New Hampshire Constitution are certainly significant reasons for that.

One of the disturbing things we learned this afternoon is that New Hampshire Democrats are trying to restrict our Constitutionally guaranteed rights to bear arms.  Democrats  have submitted several bills to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens and impact their ability to protect themselves and their families.

Read more

Maybe the start of a Revolution? Another firearms company to leave NY Govt to its own firearm devices (or not)

by Skip

LaRue Tactical.  Olympic Arms.  Now a third firearms company, York Arms,  is saying that what is bad for civilians is going to be bad for Government entities and Law Enforcement agencies in New York due to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s new law (hey, he was all but frothing at the mouth to get this, so let him own it!)  that all but eliminates gun usage / ownership (when there are no mags that fit the law AND the guns in New York, you have effectively killed the Second Amendment in NY – for now).  The Press Release:

Buxton, ME –(Ammoland.com)- Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York.

We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York.

As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.

This part was GREAT:

Read more

Settled law….

by

Ooooh the Dems they like them some settled law (except when they don’t).  

Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA): “The Rights of the few…”

by Skip

Every Sunday, I DVR the talking head shows.  This week was more arduous than most because we already knew what the topic du show were going to be: Newtown and the horrific event that happened there.  Knowing, too, who was going to be on the shows, I heard exactly what I thought I would – call for increased gun control under the stereotypical Progressive rubrics of “Nobody needs that” and “I don’t know anyone that…” as if on their worldview, only their “acceptable” items should be purchased under some strange definition of “Freedom”.  But that wasn’t the worst of it – my eyes nearly popped when I hear Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA, San Francisco) say the following on “Meet the Press” (emphasis mine):

Is this the way we want America to go?  In other words, the Rights of the few overcome the safety of the Majority?  I don’t think so!  I think America is ready (on her intent to submit a gun control bill on the first day of the next session).

The “Rights of the few” – funny, I always thought that Rights were an innate part of the ALL simply because they are US Citizens.  Perhaps I am just too old school for these fascist Progressives – I do believe in what the Founders wrote that our Rights are given to us by our Creator and Nature’s God and not just a bunch of legislators yammering away.  Sadly, she is from the philosophical Left that only believes that when it is conducive to their argument of the day.

No, Ms. Feinstein, it is NOT the “Rights of the few” –

Read more

Rebuttal to Alison Therriault – No, there is no extreme jeopardy to women’s right to control their lives in NH

by Skip

I submitted this in rebuttal to a Letter to the Editor in the Laconia Daily Sun (P. 7, March 23, 2012) (slightly expanded here):

It used to be that becoming an adult meant becoming independent and being self-responsible for their own well-being. Economic dependency on family was left behind along with the toys of childhood. It meant sober realization that what one wants, one earns. “Deserves” becomes relegated to childhood status;”earned”, its mature replacement.

Ms. Therriault shows her wish for maturity in stating “I control my body”. True enough; that’s what adults do – exhibit self-control. You have the ability to decide, within the statistical limits of reliable birth control and human discipline, how many children to have, when to have them, and when to start that family (it seems, too, that marriage is becoming more and more optional in today’s society. No wonder single moms are becoming the biggest proponents of “Government that gives you more with other peoples’ money” but that is grist for another letter).

Read more

So, gay activists, where do you think this will end up? You’ve started the snowball rolling down the hill…

by Skip

(H/T: Karen) Suitable since the repeal of the gay marriage law failed here in NH. I take an old fashioned view of marriage – the traditional one-man-one-woman definition of such.  Two people, two genders. Now, there will be the h8 mail inbound, I’m sure – there was the last time I brought up the “slippery … Read more

Of the things said at Thursday’s Presidential debate, Rick Santorum said the most important:

by Skip

Thursday night’s GOP Presidential Debate in Florida was, for the most part, a Mitt-Newt mud fight with their hands tied behind them (re: all they could do was just roll in it).  Lots of dirt to spread around.  However, Rick Santorum made the most of it, and I believe finally was able to lay in a few good licks, especially on ObaneyCare.

But as far as I am concerned, he uttered the most important words of the evening:

When an audience member asked the candidates how their religious beliefs would affect their decisions as President, Santorum turned to the nation’s founding documents to reference the relationship between faith and governance:

“The Constitution is there to do one thing, protect God-given rights,” said Santorum. “That’s what makes America different than every other country in the world.”

“When you say ‘faith has nothing to do with it’– faith has everything to do with it,” Santorum went on to say over applause. “If our President believes that rights come to us from the state, everything government gives you, it can take away.

“The role of the government is to protect rights that cannot be taken away.”

Read more

National Right to Carry And Its’ Opponents From Within

by Rick Olson

“Much of the self-righteous nonsense that abounds on so many subjects cannot stand up to three questions: (1) Compared to what? (2) At what cost? and (3) What are the hard facts?” —Thomas Sowell

Gun_in_Truck_GROK.jpg

 The Union Leader’s Mark Hayward features a front page story today entitled, “Activists: Feds’ bill would lead to gun control“. The thesis of Hayward’s article is that two activist are against the bill because it gives the federal government a toe-hold into states’ rights and is a pretext to arbitrary national gun control.

 The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, HB 822, passed in the U.S. House yesterday and enjoyed strong support. The intent of this legislation is to allow law-abiding citizens with a concealed-carry permit in one state to carry concealed in states with similar systems. Obviously, the bill must have some strong support because Charlie “the RINO” Bass is a co-sponsor.

 Yet my good friend and esteemed fellow gun advocate Representative J.R. Hoell opposes the bill.  J.R. asserts, “The federal government will then want a photo ID for concealed- carry. Then a microchip Real ID card.”  J.R, the feds already want that, irrespective of “how” or “who” regulates guns. And numerous attempts at nationalizing gun registration, gun control, microstamping of ammunition, suing gunmakers, the assault weapons ban and any other novel, unique or creative trick, dreamed up by the pablum-puking, ant-gun liberals has already dawned within the halls of our congress…irrespective of this legislation.

Read more

You Can’t Be A Republican And Vote Against Right To Work

by Steve MacDonald

Supporting forced unionization is the same as supporting mandatory campaign contributions to the Unions and the Democrat party.  There is no conceivable way to separate the two.  Unions are funded by dues.  Democrats receive millions of dollars from unions to promote their agenda.  And in some cases to promote it violently.

You can’t separate the two.

A vote to sustain the Lynch Veto and permit forced unionization is a vote for the mandatory and state funding of abortion;  financing efforts to cripple or bypass our second amendment right to self defense; you are supporting state financed birth control, confiscation of property, increased taxation and broad based taxes, an expanding regulatory state and more centralized top down government, gimmik accounting, Gay marriage, genderless bathrooms,  seat belt laws, the food police, socialized medicine, restrictions on free and corporate speech, and the entire manifold of Democrat party policy wishes which those dollars will continue to support and advance as long as workers are denied the opportunity to decide if they are willing to fund these policies or not on their own

I don’t think you can claim to be a Republican and support all of that, can you?

Read more

WHY I CARRY A GUN: One Woman’s Perspective

by Rick Olson

“Gun bans disarm victims, putting them at the mercy of murderers or terrorists who think nothing of breaking the gun laws …”  —Michael Badnarik

 Rachel Chumita

Originally published in September 2006 by the Buckeye Firearms Association

woman_handgun_Grok.jpg

When people find out that I carry a gun most of the time, they’re often curious.  What would prompt a woman to do something like that? Because it sounds a little odd, many people conclude that an armed woman must live in constant fear.

Rather the opposite, actually. The account below was written several years ago, but the sentiments in it are no less true today.  Despite the title, it really isn’t about why I started carrying a gun full-time, but about why I keep doing so.

Carrying a gun can be uncomfortable. The gun literally and figuratively gets in the way of some activities. There is a constant and slightly uncomfortable awareness that the folks around me would be unhappy with me if they knew I had a gun under my outer clothing. Nevertheless, I continue to carry almost all day, almost every day.

Last week, I went to pick up two of my children from summer

Read more

545 People Are Responsible For The Mess, But They Unite In A Common Con

by Rick Olson

“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.”~Plato, Ancient Greek Philosopher

Charley_Reese_Grok.jpg

Charley Reese retired July 29, 2001. Who was Charley Reese? He was a columnist, serving 30 of those years at the Orlando Sentinel.  Characterized best by his plainspoken manner and conservative views,  he was with the Sentinel from 1971–2001, serving as  a writer and other such editorial capacities. King Features Syndicate distributed Charley’s column, which published up to three times a week.

 On February 3, 1984 Charley originally published the column below. This column additionally republished as his final column. Rightfully so and despite being 27 years removed from its orignal publish date, it is no less relevant. 

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

Read more

If You Are Not Following Me On Twitter….

by Steve MacDonald

Twitter inspires the opportunity to aggravate the leftists who insist on following conservatives there. Not every witticism will fit on Twitter. Sometimes you have to write a blog and post a link. And then there are the thoughts that are too short to blog and too long to tweet. (Some things can’t be said in under 140 characters.)

SB 88 VETO: More Of The Same Lies, Pandering and Demagoguery

by Rick Olson

“The sure foundations of the state are laid in knowledge, not in ignorance; and every sneer at education, at culture, at book learning, which is the recorded wisdom of the experience of mankind, is the demagogue’s sneer at intelligent liberty, inviting national degeneracy and ruin.”~George William Curtis, Author, Social Reformer (1824-1896)
Lynch_SB_88.jpg

Governor John Lynch vetoed Senate Bill 88 yesterday, once again affirming allegiance to yet another unelected, unaccountable constituency: The New Hampshire Police Chiefs Association.  Despite thirty-one states adopting “stand your ground” laws and eliminating such duties to retreat, Lynch takes his counsel from those who think of themselves as smarter, wiser and more intuitive than the very people they were hired to serve.

As I pointed out in earlier blogs, back in 2006, I went on  TV-50 in Derry and debated then N.H. Association of Police Chiefs‘ President, Nathaniel “Chip” Sawyer on this issue. I also pointed out that it wasn’t much of a debate and Chief Sawyer didn’t put up much of a spirited counter-argument because he didn’t have to. He already had Lynch’s fidelity and the veto was already a done deal.

When she was Attorney General, Senator Kelly Ayotte urged Lynch to veto the Castle Doctrine Bill in 2006 (SB318) Yet, when she became a candidate for U.S. Senate, she quickly flip-flopped on the issue.  In 2006, SB 318 passed with arguable bi-partisan support in the house and it was Ayotte and her cronies that decried the bills’ passage with red-herring-esque”, arguments that somehow, “the use of deadly force on street corners, in shopping malls, public parks, and in retail stores. Drug dealers and other felons who brandish weapons will be further emboldened to use their weapons, while prosecution of those criminals will be made more difficult because of this bill’s expansion of the right to use deadly force.” That has not happened in the other thirty-one states who have passed the measure. As I recall, one assistant AG characterized the, “streets running red with blood,” if the bill became law.

Standing ones ground and owing no duty to retreat is not a new doctrine. There is a considerable body of case law addressing this very question. In Beard v. U.S. (1895) that a man who was, “[W]here he had the right to be” when he came under attack and “…did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or do him great bodily harm…was not obliged to retreat, nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground.”

Read more

Assault Weapons: A Serious Problem in America?

by Rick Olson

AWB_Author_Pic_Grok.jpg

“The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.” – Thucydides

 HR 6257 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008 was introduced by Republican Mark Kirk of Illinois, and co-sponsored by Republicans, (defeated)Mike Castle of Delaware, Mike Ferguson of New Jersey, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Chris Shays of Connecticut. The Bill was introduced on June 12, 2008 and never became law, having been stalled in subcommittee.  In January, Republican Senator Dick Lugar said he supports a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines.

These Republicans suck. Mark Kirk is a liberal, not to mention a demagogue and panderer. But coming from Illinois not much else is to be expected. Mike Castle of Delaware, also a liberal, was defeated by Christine O’Donnell in the primary. The bearded Marxist Chris Coons went on to beat O’Donnell which is not surprising, given Delaware “Kool-Aid-drinking” constituency. Mike Ferguson was a typical New Jersey anti-gunner who chose not to run for office again in 2008. Thank goodness. The dependable, but squishy Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, notorious for her associations with the “arts and croissants” crowd. and finally, RINO Chris Shays of Connecticut who got crushed in 2008. Two out of five left standing…

 According to Kool-Aid drinking Senator Diane Feinstein’s brochure, an Assault Weapon is, All semi-automatic assault pistols and rifles with detachable magazines and 2 or more “assault” characteristics, (my emphasis added) as well as semiautomatic shotguns with 2 or more such ‘characteristics‘…” “Characteristics…”

char·ac·ter·is·tic  /?kær?kt??r?st?k/ [kar-ik-tuh-ris-tik]

–adjective

 1. Also, char·ac·ter·is·ti·cal. pertaining to, constituting, or indicating the character  or peculiar quality of a person or thing; typical; distinctive: Red and gold are the characteristic colors of autumn.

–noun

2. a distinguishing feature or quality: Generosity is his chief characteristic.

Who makes this stuff up? Rarely is there ever a name attached to such a falsehood. But, if I have to lay odds it came out of Bloomberg’s camp or from the Brady Bunch. In that vein, the contemporary liars, shrills and demagogues are more dependable than a quarterly IRS Tax bill.

 What is an Assault Weapon? The rational and logical answer is nothing. There is no such thing. The term is a concoction of charlatans, the brainless colloquy bantered about by liberals and gun-banners as a pejorative mischaracterization on those firearms of a compact, utilitarian nature, originally derived from Military use. These so-called “assault weapons” available for sale in gun shops around the nation, generally do not differ in functionality from traditional hunting rifles. What sets these rifles apart are their mere appearance…or their characteristics.

 The definition for Assault Rifle, however, is a, “Light and compact selective-fire automatic rifle firing a cartridge of such power that it can deliver effective fire to a range of about 500 metres, but at the same time will permit the weapon to be fired in the automatic mode from the shoulder,” according to the Greenhill Military Small Arms Databook.  

Read more

Northern Pass: Still Ignoring the Overarching Reason for Opposition

by Rick Olson

“The only people who support the use of eminent domain for private development are cities that use it, developers and businesses that benefit from it and planners who plan it. Everyone else hates it.” – Dana Berliner, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice  Yesterday’s Union Leader featured, Another View of Why New Hampshire should be open … Read more

It’s The Christian Thing To Do.

by Steve MacDonald

Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson’s remarks, as expressed in a Sunday Union Leader staff editorial, suggest that it is immoral to reduce what the government spends on health and social programs.

As quoted, "When sacrifice is perpetrated on the vulnerable and weak by the strong and prosperous, it is social abuse."

He goes on to include the poor, the disabled, the blind, the unemployed, the impoverished elderly, the uninsured and children living in poverty.

His point (one of them at least) is that by reducing government’s fiscal contribution to bureaucracies established to manage such things, that governor John Lynch and the New Hampshire legislature are considering immoral choices to balance the state budget.

So where do I begin?

Read more

If “Reproductive Rights” means…

by Steve MacDonald

Word games are fun so let’s play some…
If by “reproductive rights” the left means that a woman has the right to destroy a person just because it is still in her womb…

Guns vs Progressives

by Steve MacDonald

Gun%20Free%20Zone%20Poll.gifAfter 12 more hours the Londonderry News on-line polling percentages tell the same story.  People who vote on polls at the Londonderry news would (so far) overwhelmingly allow their fourth grader into the New Hampshire State House even though it is not a Gun Free Zone.

For those reading this from  police states like Massachusetts, New York or New Jersey…Venezuela, Cuba and so on, you might be asking what the hell am I talking about?  Allow me to review.

Read more

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPocketPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXingYummly