By The People

There are fundamental flaws in how American government operates today,
contrary to the Constitution and the vision of a representative republican form of governance.
I intend doing something about it: by educating and informing others who
are not even aware of the dangers.

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Littering?, or Operation OVERKILL!



How many times in any state have drivers passed temporary memorials to fatalities along the roadside?


The Esteemed Readers might guess hundreds of thousands of temporary memorials across America, and that might be an underestimate. These small memorials usually consist of a small wooden cross, a picture, flowers and cards. Do these remembrances constitute terrorist activity?  Do they constitute littering? 

Do these activities constitute true Felony Criminal Mischief (a $5,000.00 dollar fine), or a Class A Misdemeanor (a $400.00 to $1,200.00 dollar fine)?  What will the Administrative Assistant to the State Tribunal (read as Judge in a state court) decide the fine should really be?  If the alleged crime took place on Federal Public Property (a National Forest), Why would the proceedings be held in a State Tribunal?

Are simple temporary memorials within the boundary of State or Federal Highway Easements really serious crimes worthy of $5,000.00 dollar fine?   Is the damage to State or Federal Property in excess of $1,000.00 dollars?

Oregon Public Policy Statutes follow:

§ 164.365¹ 
Criminal mischief in the first degree
(1) A person commits the crime of criminal mischief in the first degree who, with intent to damage property, and having no right to do so nor reasonable ground to believe that the person has such right:
(a) Damages or destroys property of another:
(A) In an amount exceeding $1,000;
(B) By means of an explosive;
(C) By starting a fire in an institution while the person is committed to and confined in the institution;
(D) Which is a livestock animal as defined in ORS 164.055 (Theft in the first degree);
(E) Which is the property of a public utility, telecommunications carrier, railroad, public transportation facility or medical facility used in direct service to the public; or
(F) By intentionally interfering with, obstructing or adulterating in any manner the service of a public utility, telecommunications carrier, railroad, public transportation facility or medical facility; or
(b) Intentionally uses, manipulates, arranges or rearranges the property of a public utility, telecommunications carrier, railroad, public transportation facility or medical facility used in direct service to the public so as to interfere with its efficiency.
(2) As used in subsection (1) of this section:
(a) Institution includes state and local correctional facilities, mental health facilities, juvenile detention facilities and state training schools.
(b) Medical facility means a health care facility as defined in ORS 442.015 (Definitions), a licensed physicians office or anywhere a licensed medical practitioner provides health care services.
(c) Public utility has the meaning provided for that term in ORS 757.005 (Definitions) and includes any cooperative, peoples utility district or other municipal corporation providing an electric, gas, water or other utility service.
(d) Railroad has the meaning provided for that term in ORS 824.020 (Definitions for ORS 824.020 to 824.042).
(e) Public transportation facility means any property, structure or equipment used for or in connection with the transportation of persons for hire by rail, air or bus, including any railroad cars, buses or airplanes used to carry out such transportation.

(f) Telecommunications carrier has the meaning given that term in ORS 133.721 (Definitions for ORS 41.910 and 133.721 to 133.739).
(3) Criminal mischief in the first degree is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §147; 1973 c.133 §6; 1975 c.344 §1; 1979 c.805 §1; 1983 c.740 §33a; 1987 c.447 §104; 1987 c.907 §10; 1989 c.584 §2; 1991 c.837 §13; 1991 c.946 §2; 1993 c.94 §1; 1993 c.332 §3; 1999 c.1040 §11; 1999 c.1093 §2; 2003 c.543 §4; 2009 c.16 §6]

What is the definition of criminal mischief?

A person commits the offense of criminal mischief if he or she willfully and maliciously injures or damages by any means any real or personal property belonging to another, including, but not limited to, the placement of graffiti thereon or other acts of vandalism thereto.

What is the definition of "A Class A Misdemeanor?"

It is the most serious classification of misdemeanor charge in most states. States typically divide misdemeanors into categories such as Class A, B, C, D (or some numerical equivalent), with A being the most serious and C or D being the least serious. Mar 1, 2016


All of this Legal activity seems Draconian when compared to a simple roadside memorial to someone who died;  however, when the State or Federal Government is involved and their involvement was the cause of the fatality, extreme measures seem to be necessary. Why?  Possibly to deflect or misdirect any blame or guilt in any direction other than where it squarely belongs, at the Government's front door. 

What, if any, action must be taken to gard Property against this type of damage?

The the BLM’s Air Tactical Program could be enlarged in purpose and scope and used to track and record these types of truely serious crimes against humanity, just like Military Drones tracking and recording the loss (think collateral damage or innocent bystander) of women, children, and babies in the War torn areas of the Mideast and elsewhere. 

http://reagangirl.com/blm-launching-drone-program-to-monitor-public-lands/

BLM LAUNCHING DRONE PROGRAM TO MONITOR PUBLIC LANDS
Posted by ReaganGirl in Bureau of Land Management, Federal militarism, Range Wars
massacres, June 22, 2016

The Bureau of Land Management has already promoted a notorious thug agent, Dan Love, to head up its new Protective, Security and Intelligence (think Spy) division, and now the federal agency is launching a drone program to monitor various activities and conditions on public lands under BLM control. Do you trust this agency, headed by Harry Reid lackey, Neil Kornze, to use surveillance drones for the limited and specific purposes they profess?


The following story is written by Gary Harmon, as published by the G.J. Daily Sentinel

MEEKER COLORADO — A drone could do in minutes the work of several federal employees to monitor pipeline reclamation efforts, identify and provide a count of endangered plants, watch over raptors, even in their nests, and go where literally no man has gone for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

Drones were doing just those things, and more, recently, in northwest Colorado, as a team of drone operators and supervisors tested the craft under the deep blue Colorado sky and buffeting spring winds.

“We’re just testing the technology to see how well it works,” Kent Walter, manager of the Bureau of Land Management’s Meeker Field Office, said before heading to the Hay Gulch area to see a drone, or unmanned aerial system, do its stuff over a stretch of the Overland Pipeline.

On a dusty road through a meadow, a crew of BLM employees ran through a checklist, much as a pilot on manned aircraft might do, in preparation for a UAS flight to survey about 400 yards of pipeline.

Once clear, the drone was released to shoot up to 100 feet — the pre-set altitude for the survey — and then down to another pre-set point, where it began a series of transects back toward its starting point.

Think of a transect as one might mow a yard, said Gil Dustin, the BLM’s air tactical program manager. The drone flies a pattern just as a lawnmower would cut a strip, turn and cut a return strip parallel to the first, gradually working its way back to the crew.

In the drone’s case, the swaths are some 40 feet wide across the pipeline and the camera aboard takes high-resolution photos according to a program built into the flight plan. Those photos then are studied by experts to determine whether the earth above the pipeline is indeed being reclaimed according to BLM requirements.

It would require several hours with a crew of employees on foot to conduct the same survey, Walter said.

The same territory could be surveyed again, using GPS, to determine what kinds of change have occurred over the intervening time.

The UAS crew didn’t limit itself to a reclamation survey. It also flew a nearby canyon in search of cultural sites, capturing views of rugged country no human — in centuries — has seen, Walter said.

“We’ll see country that has never been seen before, using the drone’s camera, Walter said.

It also was used to study raptor nests in the piƱon-juniper forest — “It doesn’t seem to bother raptors,” said Walter — as well as other tasks.

The drone crews file flight plans with the Federal Aviation Administration, just as they would if flying manned craft.

Reposted by Reagangirl.com  6/22/16

Enough is Enough:  Can anyone say OVERKILL!

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Another Senseless Act of Violence: Or Something More?





The agenda of the foreign privately owned-for profit-incorporated UNITED STATES Government is clear:  NO American or U.S. Citizen should own or posses a firearm. The slow step by step build-up of terrorism against Americans incidences began in earnest with George Herbert Walker Bush who gave up his American National status (he is no longer an American):

Ruby Ridge August 24, 1992
World Trade Center Bombing February 26, 1993
Waco (Branch Davidian massacre) April 19, 1993 
Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City April 19, 1995
World Trade Center Attack September 11, 2001 
Pentagon Attack September 11, 2001

(Note: it should be remembered that the WTC Towers, Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, and the Pentagon were HARDENED STRUCTURES, not capable of being damaged by any kind of aircraft collision, Burning Jet Fuel, or Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer Bomb) 

These types of events have continued with the person occupying the White House, Soetoro/Obama Soebarkah.

Operation Wide Receiver (2006–2008)
Fort Hood mass shooting November 5, 2009 
Operation Fast and Furious (2009–2011)
Sandy Hook December 14, 2012
Batman Movie Shooting July 20, 2012
Benghazi Gunrunning to Syrian Rebels September 11, 2012
Boston Marathon Bombing April 15, 2013
Fort Hood mass shooting April 2, 2014

(Note:  it should be remembered that the official FBI report on the Sandy Hook first person shooter exercise concluded that no one was wounded or killed/murdered, also, it should be recalled that the same known crisis actors were at the Batman Movie Shooting and Boston Marathon Bombing.)

From the point of view of this article, It makes no real difference whether these incidences were real or not, real tragedy aside. The importance of these events is from the American public's perception of them:  In other words, there worth as propaganda or mind control devices of manipulation is important;  although, these events or exercises (in regard to government sponsored terrorism) worked to some extent, they did not have the desired effect (to enable the disarming of the American Public):  the incorporated U.S. Government then shipped into the country real Islamic terrorists into the country knowing that in time they would plan and carry out real terrorist activities in the name of Allah, in the name of Mohammed, in the name of Islam, in the name of Al Qaeda, in the name of ISIS (ISIS-ISIL-Islamic State Iraq Levant), etc.

A series of PSYOPS (Psychological Operations) to condition the American Public to activities of violence in order to begin another war, in order to force the disarming of Americans, in order to desensitize Americans to acts of violence (yet to happen) carried out directly by the incorporated US Government, or other deep state organizations directed by the incorporated US Government.

The yet to come rhetoric from the privately owned major media will, without doubt, carry anti-gun debates, assault weapons bans discussions, emotional pleas from grieving relatives, pictures of people holding or waving black rifles or carbines, etc. The sum total will once again try to force Congress to pass more restrictions, or outright bans. The privately owned major media is a controlled group spewing government (one world government-new world order-United Nation) propaganda intent on disarming the American public. If that situation should come to pass, the American Public will have very little with which to resist Government Tyranny.

The most recent terrorist/hate crime/first person shooter exercise involved Omar Mateen's activities at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. One or more terrorists entered the night club carrying an estimated at 40 or more 30 round magazines and a sig sour MPX rifle. While one or more people barred the exits telling the club goers to stay inside, Mr. Marteen began shooting randomly at people, walls, ceiling and later local police. After three hours of activity, Mr. Marteen was killed by Local Police. 

(Note:  30 round magazine about a pound. many of the more than 50 people hit a dozen times or more-30 magazines 30 pounds. hundreds of rounds fired during exchange with police 100 rounds approx 3 30 round magazine 3 pounds. dozens of misses and 15 rounds fired into the air or ceiling 30 rounds 1 pound. approximately 40+ 30 round magazines weighing 40+ pounds.)

The back story and continuing comments on Mr. Marteen follows: 

From FBI and Local Orlando Police Sources:

"First he claimed family connections to al-Qaeda. He also said he was a member of 
Hezbollah, which is a Shia terrorist organisation that is a bitter enemy of the so-called Islamic State [Isil]. He said he hoped that law enforcement would raid his apartment and assault his wife and child so that he could martyr himself."

The FBI's Mr. Comey said the agency began a 10-month investigation into Mateen at 
that time:

"Our investigation involved introducing confidential sources to him, recording conversations with him, following him, reviewing transactions and records from his communications, and searching all government holdings for any possible connections, any possible derogatory information.

"We then interviewed him twice and he admitted making the statements that his co-workers reported, but explained that he did it in anger because he thought his co-workers were discriminating against him and teasing him because he was Muslim. After 10 months of investigation we closed the preliminary investigation."

Two months later Mateen's name surfaced in an indirect way, as an acquaintance of a man who became a suicide bomber in Syria for al-Nusra. The FBI determined that there were no significant links between the two men.

One person from the mosque he attended said he had once been concerned about Mateen 
radicalizing, but concluded after he had been married and got a job as a security guard that there was no reason for concern.

5:46pm
The Harry Potter ride worker excited for a big night out. Luis Vielma was among 49 people to die later that night inside Pulse nightclub – a venue which attracted people from all across the city of Orlando. The club was gay, Luis was not, but that didn’t matter as the Latino music blared and the Saturday night party was in full swing.

Harriet Alexander in Orlando has spoken to his family who described their last moments and messages with Luis.

An employee at Universal Studios theme park, working on the Harry Potter ride, the 22-year-old was planning a big night with Laura, a Colombian friend from Miami.

“I said to him, hey, why don’t you bring her over for dinner and I’ll cook us all some Mexican food,” said Jose Vielma, Luis’s father, speaking to The Telegraph inside his home on the outskirts of Orlando.

“But he said they were going to head downtown. He texted me at 8.32pm and said: 
‘I love you.’”

That was the last Mr Vielma ever heard of his son.

At 5 pm on Sunday she received a text message from Kimberley, at 16 the youngest of the three siblings, confirming their worst fears. She was in Mexico with her mother, Tina, a restaurant worker, preparing for celebrations to mark her birthday. Her father and brother Brian, 19, were at the Orlando hotel which served as a gathering point for the families, and had been given the news.

4:54pm
Soetoro/ Obama Soebarkah:  No clear evidence Orlando attack 'directed' from abroad

From AFP: the person occupying the White House, Barry Soetoro.Barack Hussein Obama said there was no clear evidence that the gunman who triggered a bloodbath in a Florida gay nightclub was directed by a foreign group (Note: plausible deniability is in full force)

While warning that the investigation was at a "preliminary stage," the person occupying the White House said 29-year-old Mateen appeared to have absorbed "various extremist 
information" found online. (Note:  implying online access to information is somehow dangerous and obviously should be controlled)

Here are some quotes from this Soetoro/Obama Soebarkah speech:

"At this stage we see no clear evidence that he was directed externally.

"It does appear that at the last minute he announced allegiance to Isil, but there is 
no evidence so far that he was in fact directed by them," he said, using an acronym for 
the Islamic State group.

"There's also no direct evidence that he was part of a larger plot.

"We're also looking at all the motivations of the killer, but it's a reminder that 
regardless of race, religion, faith or sexual orientation, we're all Americans. (Note:
Soetoro/Obama Soebarkah is not an American in any way, shape, or form.)

"We need to be looking after each other and protecting each other at all times in the 
face of this kind of terrible act."

4:37pm
Police chief: We blew a hole in the wall to prevent further loss of life
Orlando's police chief describes the response to the shooting at an Orlando gay 
nightclub at a press conference on Monday.

Telegraph speaks to British-born preacher 
Ruth Sherlock has spoken with Farrokh Sekaleshfar, the British preacher who spoke 
out against homosexuality at a mosque in Florida.  

Sekaleshfar, a doctor and Muslim scholar from Manchester told this newspaper that he 
had used his sermon at the Husseini Islamic Centre just outside Orlando in April to 
talk about "how Muslims should deal with homosexuals at the university place".

"Many people come to the West in academic institutions and they want to know how to 
manage it," he said. "My sermon was about nurturing children’s views; nurture their 
sexuality."

He said he was helping them develop a "healthy" - straight - sexual identity.

In 2013 the preacher gave a sermon at the University of Michigan in which he said 
that execution of homosexuals was permissible under certain tenets of Islamic 
literature

He claimed that if a gay person has intercourse in public, and more than four people 
witness it, then "death is the sentence".

"There's nothing to be embarrassed about this. Death is the sentence,' he said.

Dr. Sekaleshfar said he "didn't speak about the death sentence" during his Orlando 
address.

He said that had been an "academic" speech on "Islamic theory" and that he didn't 
condone violence against homosexuals in practice. "I regard homosexuality as a sin. 
But it's just like any other sin, like adultery," he said.

"They are not aliens. I wanted to put fears at rest that [Muslim students at 
universities with homosexual peers] shouldn’t be scared."

It has been suggested that Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter might have attended, or 
been inspired by Sekaleshfar's speeches. But Sekaleshfar is a Shia scholar, and 
Mateen a Sunni Muslim; two denominations of Islam whose worshippers do not usually 
attend each others' sermons.

Sekaleshfar said that only a small number of the usual congregation had come to 
hear his sermon at the Husseini Islamic centre because his scheduled appearance 
had been controversial. He said he never met or interacted with Mateen.

3:44pm
Dalai Lama says shooting was "very serious tragedy"
Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama on Monday called the shooting in Orlando, 
Florida, in which 50 people died at the weekend, "a very serious tragedy."

Speaking at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, the Buddhist leader called 
on the audience to observe a moment of silence.

"Yesterday, very serious tragedy, Orlando. So let us some silent prayer, OK," he said.

3:31pm
Security warning in UK after Pulse shooting
Police in the UK are being asked to review security for all public events following 
the Orlando attacks, the BBC has reported. 

In particular events with the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender) community 
such as Gay Pride, which is on for the next two weeks, need extra vigilance, police 
said. 

2:44pm
Shares in security company G4S have plunged to a seven-year low after it confirmed that Omar Mateen, the man who killed 50 people in an Orlando nightclub, was one of its employees, writes the Telegraph's  Rhiannon Bury. 

The company’s shares were down 6.5pc this morning to 175.3p as investors reacted to the news that G4S had carried out a number of checks on Mr Mateen during the time that he worked for them.

In the early hours of Sunday morning, Mr Mateen entered the Pulse nightclub in 
Orlando, Florida and opened fire, killing 50 people and injuring 56 more, some 
critically. The incident is the worst mass shooting in US history.

Mr Mateen had been employed by G4S since September 2007 and worked at a gated 
retirement community in South Florida. He was off duty at the time of the incident. 

2:35pm
Gunman's father 'running for president of Afghanistan'
More information about the extraordinary background of Mateen's family.

Omar Mateen's father, Seddique Mateen, who has said he believes that gays should be 
"punished by God," poses with the Afghan flag in military fatigues. 

And in a video he posted online, Mateen Sr. also declares his candidacy for president 
in Afghanistan. 

2:16pm
Killer Omar Mateen smiled in photo with ex-wife and child. Beaming for the camera with his wife and child, this could be the image of any cheerful family man. 

But behind the smile, the people of Orlando discovered on Sunday, lurked the mind of a cold-hearted killer who gunned down dozens of gay and lesbian fellow Americans, 
reportedly after being enraged by the sight of two men kissing. 

1:07pm
Clinton renews calls for tougher gun control laws 
The Telegraph's Ruth Sherlock has been following Hillary Clinton's response to the 
shooting:

Hillary Clinton has said America has to recapture the spirit of unity that it had after the 9/11 attacks.

In an implicit rebuke to Donald Trump she said: 'This is a time for statesmanship; for Republicans and Democrats and Independents to come together. We have to remember how we came together after 9/11 and we should recapture that."

She said Trump's rhetoric is 'quite dangerous to our country'. 

"Yes we have to go after anyone who threatens us with terrorism, and tackle radicalism 
in the United States," she said, but added that there are many people in this country 
who use weapons who have no connection to terrorism. 

Pressed on why she wouldn't label the attack yesterday radical Islamic terrorism, she 
said: "It matters what we do more than what we say. It matters we got Osama bin laden; 
not what we call him. What I won't do is demonise an entire religion - plays right into 
Isil's hands. Want to reach out to vast majority of Muslims around this world."

She used the attacks to again press her views on gun reform: "A gunman used a weapon 
of war to shoot down 50 people and we can't even get the congress to block the buying 
of arms for people on no fly-lists."

She said 23 people have been shot by toddlers this year alone.

1:06pm
"We will not be defined by a cowardly hater"

Harriet Alexander in Orlando writes:

Police, prosecutors and politicians in Orlando are currently updating us on what they 
know so far.

Of the 49 victims - the death toll of 50 mentioned yesterday includes Mateen - 48 have 
been identified. And of those, 24 have had their next of kin informed.

We were also told that the FBI are investigating other people, and preparing search 
warrants. "If anyone else is involved in this crime they will be prosecuted," said 
Lee Bentley, of the FBI.

Police have said their priority today is identifying the remaining victims, and informing their families. "We will not be defined by a cowardly hater," said Buddy Dyer. "We will be defined by how we respond."

1:01pm
Gunman's father says 'gays should be punished by God,' not those on earth. The father of Florida gunman Omar Mateen has issued a video statement where he says it was wrong of his son to take it upon himself to "punish" the gay community. "God himself will punish those involved in homosexuality,” Seddique Mateen said in the statement, which was posted on Facebook and uncovered by the Washington Post. “This  is not for the servants [of God]," he adds. 

12:33pm
Wreath appears to have been put on shooter's door - US media 
Fallon Silcox , a journalist in Fort Pierce, tweeted an image which purports to show a wreath laid at the front door of gunman Omar Mateen's house. 

11:34am
#GaysBreakTheInternet: How the LGBT community is showing solidarity with Orlando 
Social media users are showing solidarity with the victims of the Orlando shooting using 
the hashtag #GaysBreakTheInternet, the Telegraph's Mark Molloy writes:

#GaysBreakTheInternet began trending worldwide on Twitter, along with #PrayforOrlando, 
with many users posting photos and messages of support for the LGBT community.

One user wrote: “#GaysBreaktheInternet because violence will not silence us and I choose 
to love her loud & proud.”

10:57am
Florida gunman Omar Mateen had been investigated for links to US's first suicide bomber 
in Syria Omar Mateen, the gunman who killed and wounded more than 100 people at a 
nightclub in Florida, had been in contact with America’s first suicide bomber in Syria, 
writes Josie Ensor in Beirut. 

The 29-year-old American citizen whose parents had immigrated from Afghanistan, had been in regular communication with Moner Mohammed Abu Salha, a fellow Floridian who was a member of al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra.

Gunman Omar Mateen
In early 2014, Mateen was put under surveillance for possible ties with Abu Salha, the 
son of a Palestinian father and American mother who left his home state to join jihadists 
in Syria. Abu Salha, 22, was trained by Nusra in 2012 before returning to Florida in 2014, 
when it is believed he met with Mateen.

10:24am
Isil (ISIS-Islamic State Iraq Levant) praises Mateen in radio bulletin 
In a radio bulletin, Isil has declared Omar Mateen a "soldier of the caliphate." 

The news item by al-Bayan, an Isil-allied station, also noted that the shooting was the worst in US history. 

It remains unclear whether Isil's (ISIS-Islamic State Iraq Levant) leadership in Raqqa approved the attack. 

But the group last month encouraged its followers across the world to carry out lone wolf attacks in its name. 

10:14am
China’s leaders express condolences after Orlando shooting 
Xi Jinping, the president of China, called his US counterpart Barack Obama to 
express condolences, The Telegraph’s China Correspondent Neil Connor writes from 
Beijing.

“On behalf of the Chinese government and the Chinese people, Xi expressed deep 
sympathy and sincere condolences to Obama, the US government and the US people,” 
a report by state news agency Xinhua said.

“He also expressed grief to the victims of the terror attack.”

Li Keqiang, the Chinese premier, also expressed his condolences over the shooting, 
as he spoke to reporters during a visit by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, 
according to several domestic media outlets.

Premier Li said China “opposes any form of violence & terrorism”, a Tweet by state 
media outlet People’s Daily said.

9:54am
How serious is America's gun control problem? 

9:22am
Victim Luis Vielma, 22, worked on Harry Potter ride at Universal Studios
Harry Potter author JK Rowling has revealed that one of the young men who lost his 
lives in the shooting, Luis Vielma, worked at a Universal Studios ride inspired by 
the fictional wizard. Luis Vielma worked on the Harry Potter ride at Universal. 
He was 22 years old. I can't stop crying. #Orlando

9:16am
Gay men's choir sing outside White House for Orlando victims 

Contrary to Federal, State, and Local Administrative Public Policy Statutes and Police rhetoric one thing becomes crystal clear. At the end of the day, after everything is said and done, one thing is certain, Gun Free Zones demand and insure only one outcome 'no one has the capability or ability to defend themselves or anyone else' from terrorist activities of this type. 

Australian Gun Ban Facts & Statistics

Reasonforforce ^ 
Posted on 1/3/2013, 4:48:26 AM by RC one
It has now been over 10 years since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The statistics for the years following the ban are now in:
Accidental gun deaths are 300% higher than the pre-1997 ban rate The assault rate has increased 800% since 1991, and increased 200% since the 1997 gun ban.
Robbery and armed robbery have increase 20% from the pre-97 ban rate.  From immediately after the ban was instituted in 1997 through 2002, the robbery and armed robbery rate was up 200% over the pre-ban rates. In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 171 percent

The following graphs are from Australian Institute of Criminology - Statistics



Let's examine the overall murder rate and the gun murder rate in Australia. Take note both are virtually unchanged and unaffected by the gun ban. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. While the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns
Some more fun tables to shut liberals up:


ASSAULT



The trend in assaults shows an average growth of five percent each year from 1995 to 2007. The Australians "banned" guns in 1997 as you will recall.

ROBBERY


Oh look. after we banned guns in 1997, people murdered by guns decreased by 10%. On the other hand, people murdered by knives increased by 10%. Well, at least you weren't shot to death and thank goodness no criminals were hurt in the commission of their murders. Awesome!

RAPE




Reported sexual assaults have increased by 51 percent since 1995, at an average of four percent each year. Let's not forget about those little Sheilas now. look at that. They're getting raped more often than ever now that the rapists know they're unarmed. How about that.

I'm sure it wouldn't be that way in America though because our citizens are known to be SOOOO much more civilized than those violent barbaric Australians.
hmmm, wait a second...on second thought-you know what? There's no way I'll be turning my guns in.


Another One Bites The Dust. 30.


Tuesday, June 14, 2016

What about Reason and Law




The un-elected Governor, Kate Brown, of Oregon has stated her intent to enact by Executive Order a Ban on some types of firearms, mainly rifles and carbines. The executive action can only be understood as a restriction or infringement of our unalienable right to self defense and defense against deadly force toward others.

"And that said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe…or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

~ Sam Adams ~

I see where the Bush administration has initially indicated support for extending the Clinton-Feinstein-Schumer ban on scores of semi-automatic rifles and on magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition that the Clinton Administration imposed on America back in 1994.  I am seriously disappointed in that decision if it holds.




Laws against violent crimes such as murder, robbery or assault are already on the books and do not require a gun to be used in their commission to be considered criminal acts.  The only thing any criminal needs to carry out such deviant behavior is some means of providing a force advantage over the victim and he could use almost anything for that.

A criminal can just as easily kill or rob with a knife, a baseball bat or his bare fists so what difference does it make which gizmo is used to provide that force advantage over the victim—none whatsoever to my way of thinking.  It’s the act itself that makes such behavior a crime, not the tool used.

Laws are needed to deal with harmful deeds inflicted on people by the misfits of society—those whose behavior deviates from the accepted norm and thus becomes injurious to others.  They are needed to deal with the behavior that inflicts such harm —nothing more complicated than that. 

Crime is the result of socially unacceptable behavior and it is the behavior that determines the crime.  The operative word here is behavior not the implement used by some degenerate. A criminal can choke a person to death with his own mother’s apron strings as well as shoot him.  Is the victim any more dead if a gun is used or is the criminal any guiltier?  I think not. 

There are already laws punishing deviant behavior therefore to my way of thinking, laws pertaining specifically to guns are laws focused on objects incapable of behavior.  A mother’s apron strings can be just as deadly as a gun if the one exhibiting such criminal behavior chooses to use them in that way so should we have laws governing apron strings? Gun-centric laws only restrict, limit, prevent—infringe—upon your right to keep and bear 
arms and do nothing to address violent behavior.

Those 20,000 gun specific laws such as limited magazine capacity, rate of fire, barrel length, registration, licensing, waiting periods, and concealed carry without government permission as examples, do nothing but limit your right of access to guns—infringements upon your rights.  Such is not the mark of a free society.  What harm is there in a 15 round magazine or carrying a gun under your coat?  It’s when that gun is used to harm others that the crime is committed and it’s the criminal behavior that is the crime not the gun.  The gun is obviously incapable of behaving in any way whatsoever—but we all know that don’t we? 

Keep in mind the Second Amendment states, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”  There are no qualifiers to that statement, as “…shall not be infringed except for…” and you fill in the blank with any of those 20,000 gun laws.

If I could ask the founders their opinion on this question, I would ask if felons, the insane or the immature should be denied access to firearms.  Felons have proven to be unfit members of society and by their own choices have surrendered their rights to fully participate in our society. The insane are not responsible members of society for medical reasons.  The immature, let’s say those that do not know the difference between life and death, and that do not know the difference between right and wrong, and have had no firearms training for the sake of argument, are not yet fully responsible because they are still in the formative years of their lives.

So call me whatever you like but the laws against murder, robbery, and assault exist in Common Law and should be seriously enforced with harsh punishment for violating them—the type of weapon used is entirely irrelevant to the behavior involved.  We should address the behavior of the criminal and leave the law abiding among the rest of us alone. Our right to keep and bear arms is an unalienable right and not a Government granted privileged to be assigned or removed at the whim of anyone. 

Of course, such an approach would allow the general population to be fully armed and capable of resisting an out-of-control government if need be, so maybe that wouldn’t do after all—perhaps that thought just scares the living daylights out of some politicians.  Might that fear then be the genesis of the 20,000?  Remember the words of Thomas Jefferson, 

“When citizens fear their government, you have tyranny; when the government fears its citizens, you have freedom.”

The Founder’s intent underlying the Second Amendment is easy to understand. 
It is fair to say the Founders and Framers obvious intent was to ensure that an individual’s right to keep and bear arms was never threatened or infringed by any government action.

So what have the courts said over the years about such a “radical concept?”  Many times we’re told by anti-gun elements that the courts have maintained no individual right to keep and bear arms exists and pro-gun advocates are just too stupid to understand the intricacies of constitutional law.

Have the courts universally denounced the individual’s right to keep and bear arms over the past 200 years and are you really too stupid to read and understand what the Constitution plainly says?  To believe any of that anti-gun bilge, you’d have to be terminally stupid.  

Let’s read a few examples of what several courts across the country and across history had to say in the years after the Constitution was adopted.  Please judge for yourself and draw your own conclusions. 

One note before starting:  I suspect the Esteemed Readers will never see any of these quotes or rulings either reported or cited on the evening news but that would be just a guess.


1803:  George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia in I Blackstone COMMENTARIES Sir George Tucker Ed., pg. 300 (App.)

“The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits...and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”


1822: Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251

"For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution."


1846: Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251

" The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right."


1859:  Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402

"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power."


1871: Andres v. State, 50 Tenn. (3 Heisk) 165, 178

“....the right to keep arms necessarily involves the right to purchase them, to keep them in a state of efficiency for use, and to purchase and provide ammunition suitable for such arms, and to keep them in repair.”

“The rifle of all descriptions, the shot gun, the musket and repeater are such arms; and that under the Constitution the right to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed or forbidden by the legislature.”  [ANDREWS V. STATE; 50 TENN. 165, 179, 8 AM. REP. 8, 14 (TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT)]


1876: The Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank (92 U.S. 542)

Recognized that the right to arms preexisted the Constitution. The Court stated that the right to arms "is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence."


1878: Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54

"To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege."


1921: State vs. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224

"The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions."


1922: People vs. Zerillo, 219 Mich. 635, 189 N.W. 927, at 928

"The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff."  


2000: Tuesday, June 13th. Let’s fast-forward to the Clinton years of judicial activism and see how an attempt was made to unscrupulously bastardize this long venerated inalienable right by a dangerously anti-gun, anti-constitution administration in U.S. v. Emerson.

Early accounts from those who attended the week's oral arguments on U.S. v. Emerson (see FAX Alert Vol. 7, No. 23) revealed, with no uncertainty, how the Clinton-Gore Administration truly viewed our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The attorney representing the government, William Mateja, said that the Second Amendment offers law-abiding U.S. citizens no protections against the government prohibiting them from owning any firearm. Judge William Garwood, one of three judges on the panel that heard arguments, had the following exchange with Mateja:

Judge Garwood: "You are saying that the Second Amendment is consistent with a position that you can take guns away from the public?  You can restrict ownership of rifles, pistols and shotguns from all people?  Is that the position of the United States?"

Meteja (attorney for the government): "Yes".

Garwood: "Is it the position of the United States that persons who are not in the National Guard are afforded no protections under the Second Amendment?"

Meteja: "Exactly."

Fortunately, the court rejected the Clinton-Gore argument—this time.

It’s frightening how tenuous is the jewel of liberty and how easily it can be incrementally eroded if left unguarded by the people and totally entrusted to the Machiavellian machinations of insidious politicians.

James Madison had it pegged, 

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

If the un-elected Governor, Kate Brown, of Oregon begins legislating from the Executive Branch of the Oregon State Government, she shall be subverting the intent of the Oregon State Constitution, the Law, and the Legal System she was sworn to uphold. Then again, maybe she does not care about reason, the Law, or the Legal System.

It’s my uncompromising conviction that unless the people jealously guard our jewel at every turn and strongly reject any attempt to incrementally infringe on our freedom, we will eventually and unwittingly lose it—piece by little piece.  Once it is lost however, it might be lost for generations. Generations that won’t even know what they’ve lost.

Sources:

Excerpts from:  What The Courts Said by Colonel Dan

http://fixamerica-fredmars.blogspot.com/2015/01/one-more-time-gun-laws.html