Senate Considers Vote on Concealed Firearm Laws

pistols.001” A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

For most Americans, the 27 words of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are not all that hard to understand: a citizen has a fundamental right to “keep and bear Arms” and as is true with freedom of religion and freedom of speech, this right is sacrosanct, and any effort to abridge such constitutional guarantees is seen as a threat to the fundamental rights of the American people.

Last year’s landmark ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller affirmed this understanding, recognizing that the right to bear arms is, in essence, inextricably bound up with the right of self-defense.

However, despite such constitutional guarantees, a recent Rasmussen poll “revealed” what may seem obvious to many readers of The New American: the American people believe President Obama will aggressively promote further restrictions on the constitutional right of citizens to keep and bear arms. The poll revealed that 57 percent of Americans “believe gun sales are up over the past several months because of widespread fears that the government will tighten restrictions on gun ownership.” In fact, only 23 percent of those polled believed that gun sales had risen on account of rising crime.

According to press reports, the U.S. Senate will consider today an amendment intended to bring the law closer to conformity with the letter and spirit of the Constitution. On Monday, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) introduced an amendment to the defense authorization bill that would bring clarity to the tangled web of state laws regulating the right to carried concealed firearms. According to an article at USA Today Online, the amendment states:

(1) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of any State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm, may carry in any State a concealed firearm in accordance with the terms of the license or permit, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.
(2) A person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, and is otherwise than as described in paragraph (1) entitled to carry a concealed firearm in and pursuant to the law of the State in which the person resides, may carry in any State a concealed firearm in accordance with the laws of the State in which the person resides, subject to the laws of the State in which the firearm is carried concerning specific types of locations in which firearms may not be carried.

At present, a complicated web of reciprocally recognized state-issued permits regulate such licenses for the concealed carry of a firearm. When traveling around the Union, Americans need to give careful consideration not only to considerable variations in various state and local laws regarding the right to keep and bear arms, but also to the question of whether their state-issued concealed carry permit will be recognized at all. Whether one is speaking of a trucker whose route carries him across state lines, or vacationing families who want to be safe while they “get away from it all,” citizens have enough to worry about without the added concern of questioning whether they may legally defend themselves from criminals. For Americans concerned about the preservation of their constitutional rights, the Thune amendment offers a step in the right direction on the way back to the simple language of the constitution: “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Powered by ScribeFire.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Listen to the CLC Gets Grizzly Tuesday, Aug. 25 for a Wrap-Up of the Liberty Ride

Click to visit Liberty Rider

Click to visit Liberty Rider

Join us this Tuesday evening, August 25 at 7pm CDT / 8pm EDT / 6pm MDT / 5pm PDT

on the Constitutional Liberty Coalition Gets Grizzly!

on Blog Talk Radio

This week, we will have Liberty Rider Michael Maresco as our guest for the full hour to review his Ride for Honesty.

Michael spent over two months this summer riding a bike across the country, starting at the Statue of Liberty and ending at Alcatraz Prison to symbolize freedom to fascism.

Click to visit the Liberty Rider website

Click to visit the Liberty Rider website

But Michael’s trip had other purposes, several of which he would like to see continued even though his ride is over.

To listen to the show, just click on the icon below.

Just click on the image above to listen to the show

Just click on the image above to listen to the show

If you have questions for Michael, the call in number for the show is 646-915-9997.


2 Comments

Filed under Grassroots, Patriots, Statesmen

FreedomWatch 28 – RJ Harris and more

FreedomWatch28 via R3s

click on the picture to go to the FreedomWatch28 site for the video link to this show (site has an embedded streaming feature and will take you from video to video for the show) there are six 10 minute segments!

R3publicans post on FreedomWatch28 here (videos here are all visible and you may watch any/all)

see R3publicans for late breaking information from Republicans Restoring the Republic

connect via friendfeed here (brand NEW – check it out)

@scrosnoe on twitter #R3s (to see other messages)

find and support your states grassroots efforts here

@dripusa on twitter #dripusa (Don’t Return Incumbent Politicians USA)

Leave a comment

Filed under Grassroots, Incumbents, Patriots, Statesmen

It is a Sad day in America when the Law of the Land is Ignored — yet again

It is a sad day for America when the law of the land is ignored, yet again.  Sonia Sotomayor was confirmed by the Senate to the Supreme Court today.

Sadly, ignoring our Constitution is happening all too often.  I was actually preparing to write this article, when I discovered that Jeannie had already done so and a lot better than I could.  So I am providing a snapshot of her page and a link to her post for you all to read and weep.  One of the  saddest things is that the msm made this confirmation about race when nothing could be further from the truth.  The Obama administration that should have been about healing race relations continues to work to divide on race issues.

Big news flash!  The Constitution unites us and protects us all if we will but submit ourselves to coming under the rule of law and insisting upton that from our leaders as well.

The one thing that I want to add to this post is a list of the votes on this matter and that will be added to the bottom of the post as soon as I find it or one of our readers provides it.  I will be adding the link and a list of all the names and how they voted because this vote will be a bellweather vote just like the Bush Bailout and the Obama Stimulus votes.

Please read Jeannie’s entire post and allow a tear to fall;  then get on your knees and pray because we need a mighty miracle of awakening and repentance in our land!  We need to both understand and appreciate and protect the Rule of Law.  Empathy?  Whose and when and for what purpose?

It is a Sad Day in America . . .

Sotomayor post with Jeannies blog

For Life and Liberty,

Sandra Crosnoe for

R3publicans

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Vitamin D: Magic Bullet? — Dr John Cannell Video and more!

Vitamin D: As Close to a Magic Bullet as you can get

Search for Truth: Health & Environment Links

Dr Mercola confirms here as well / and details on toxic dose of mercury and other toxins (Editor’s note – suggest you state that you are allergic to mercury if someone ‘asks’ you to take the vaccine!  Personal responsibility needs to kick in here; get educated fast.):

For more information visit:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles link
http://www.mercola.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/mercola

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Chaordic Slime Mold —– or —– What I love best about the RonPaulLiberty Movement!

axxiom banner cropped

Chaordic Slime Mold

– or –

What I love best about the RonPaulLiberty Movement!

I have been studying slime molds, the structure of AA , Chaos Theory, open source software and the structure of the world wide web itself trying to grasp the nature of the phenomenon demonstrated by the Ron Paul inspired movement. I found that the common elements of it exist universally and the principles create many of the most durable organizations. The concept is new to me but this “emergent intelligence” is as old as it gets. From single celled independent organisms to great networks of people worldwide, a common theme appears. I may have stumbled upon the term to describe the quality that makes the aesthetically unappealing example of the slime mold uniquely successful. Chaordic.

What is Chaordic organization?

Here it is in a nutshell; System of organization that exhibits characteristics of both chaos and order but is dominated by neither.

The term was coined by Dee Hock, founder and CEO of VISA USA and VISA international. He paired two seemingly polar terms, chaos and order, to describe a system that encompasses both but is dominated by neither. In his book Birth of the Chaotic Age, chaordic is defined in this manner:

1. The behavior of any self-governing organism, organization, or system which harmoniously blends characteristics of order and chaos.

2. Patterned in a way dominated by neither chaos nor order.

3. Characteristic of the fundamental organizing principles of evolution and nature

http://www.amazon.com/Birth-Chaordic-Age-Dee-Hock/dp/1576750744

The structure as well as the nature of this movement is as fascinating as its unifying principle. The individuals that comprise the liberty movement are, by far, the most noble group of people I have ever had the pleasure of mingling with and they have earned my faith in them. Every obstacle they have encountered has been surmounted in the most reasonable, ethical manner possible proving to me that the tenants of individual freedom are truly born of the natural order of existence. What I hope to gain by studying slime molds and the emergent organizational structure of self-help groups like AA is a solid understanding of this “unstructure” so that I can better maximize our strengths and avoid the pitfalls that inevitably lead to the destruction of artificially imposed hierarchies. Natural law is simply benign justice and nothing will survive for long that tries to operate apart from that principle.

If you are curious about slime molds, here is a link that gives a brief explanation of Steve Johnson’s concepts based on his book Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software.

http://contemporarylit.about.com/od/socialsciences/fr/emergence.htm

I have a copy of a paper that goes into more detail if you are interested. Just email me and I will gladly send you the file.

The Twelve Traditions of AA are a large part of that organizations longevity. I don’t think all of them are applicable to this movement but there are some operational tenants they espouse that are priceless.

http://silkworth.net/aa/12traditions.html

If form truly does follow structure then we will benefit from examining this subject immensely.

AxXiom

Leave a comment

Filed under Grassroots, Patriots, Statesmen

Obama’s Orwellian Health Care Reform

This picture appears in an old acreditation fo...
Image via Wikipedia

Obama’s Orwellian Health Care Reform
Written by Steven Yates
29 July 2009

President Obama promised the country healthcare reform. With the number of uninsured or underinsured Americans now exceeding 45 million, the country’s mood appears ready to accept his plans. In fact, he has continued to make any number of promises regarding health care reform, e.g., that under “his” plan you’d be able to choose your primary care physician, or through your employer, the insurance plan that best fits your needs. Now, however, as we read the fine print of the two 2,000-plus page bills currently before each of the two branches of Congress, evidence is emerging that “Obama care” would make George Orwell spin in his grave.

Our current health care system is far from perfect, but does afford consumers a range of choices such as those mentioned above. These choices would disappear in the long run under “Obama-care.” The present plan under consideration amounts to a federal takeover of the entire health care industry in America. Under it, you would lose many more freedoms than you would gain.

Fortune at CNNMoney.com recently took us on an excursion through the fine print of “Obama-care.” Their conclusion is that you would lose five specific freedoms under the plans currently being considered by Congress:

(1) You would lose the freedom to choose what is in your plan. The bills before both houses would require you to purchase insurance through “qualified” (by government) plans offered by health care “exchanges” to be set up in every state. The federal government would impose a minimum list of benefits each plan must offer. Many states already have such a list in place, and such policies have driven up health-care costs. The bills before Congress would allow the Department of Health and Human Services to add to the list of required benefits based on new recommendations from a panel of “experts,” meaning that the costs to Americans could be ratcheted up after a final version of “Obama care” is signed into law.
(2) You would lose rewards gained for not smoking or otherwise pursuing healthy lifestyle options as an individual. “Community rating” (already existing in 11 states) requires all patients to pay the same rates for their level of coverage regardless of age or medical condition. Younger and healthier people are forced to pay more than their actual cost, while older workers who can afford to pay more are afforded discounts. Under “Obama-care” this system would be federalized. Moreover, the bill specifically bars rewarding people who pursue healthy lifestyles such as participating in worksite exercise programs as being no different then barring insurance companies from charging higher premiums for customers with known health conditions such as diabetes.
(3) You would no longer be able to chose high-deductible coverage to lower your rates. Hundreds of employers offer employees Health Savings Account plans. Employees can deposit portions of their paychecks into the account with matching contributions from their employers. The employees can use their deposits to purchase a high-deductible plan for major medical costs (e.g., over $12,000) while also using the fund to pay for routine doctor’s appointments. HSAs prompt cost-consciousness. The bills before Congress endanger consumer cost-conscious health care. The required minimum packages would prevent patients from choosing plans covering only major medical expenses. Again, the federal government could set low deductibles that would eliminate HSAs after the bills are signed into law, according to John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis.
(4) President Obama has insisted that under “Obama-care” you would have the freedom to keep your present plan. Those who have closely read the bills before Congress contend that over the long run the reality would be otherwise. The legislation divides the insured into two main groups—employees covered by the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) as part of their benefits packages from their employers, and those not covered by ERISA but who have private insurance or through small businesses. The former may indeed “keep” their existing plans, but only because they have been “grandfathered” for five years. Afterward their employers would have to offer government-approved plans through the “exchanges” with all their rules and restrictions noted above, and below. The legislation would require all insurers offering plans to the second group to offer the government-approved plans. Employees who purchased their plans before the law goes into effect could again “keep” them, but with a major restriction: if their plan changes in any way, e.g., through switching coverage for a drug, the employee would be forced to drop out and seek coverage through the “exchange.” Millions of employees would lose their freedom to keep their existing health care plans within the first year. (You would not, it should go without saying, be allowed to choose to be uninsured under “Obama care.”)
(5) President Obama has maintained that under “Obama-care” you would retain the freedom to choose your own doctor. The Senate version of the bill requires that Americans buying health insurance through “exchanges” must obtain care through what it calls “medical home”—the Obama-care equivalent of an HMO. You would be assigned (not allowed to choose) a doctor, and that doctor would control your access to specialists if needed. Health care gatekeepers would guide patients to tests and treatments that have proven cost-effective. The danger here is obvious: patients could be denied necessary care if it couldn’t be shown to be cost-effective.

The present system has its faults. Some of us are wondering if the coupling of health care benefits to employment, a practice dating back to the 1930s, was a good idea to begin with. Our problem in a nutshell has long been that we Americans have wanted quality health care but have not wanted to pay for it, and have instituted mechanisms of avoiding paying for it. Consequently the system has delivered services at below-market-value rates. Moreover, the offering of health care services at below-market rates has failed to encourage healthy behavior within the population. Basic economics dictates that the costs have to be made up somewhere, and the consequences of offering health care services at below-market rates has been the explosion of costs we have seen recently—along with many employers no longer offering health care benefits to their workers.

What are we to conclude from this excursion? Perhaps that in true Orwellian fashion, Obama has said one thing while the massive proposal for health care reform will actually do something quite different — possibly moving us closer to the sort of society in which the elderly and others not contributing directly to the economic system would technically be part of the health care system but be denied crucial medications or procedures not deemed “cost-effective” — euthanasia without its name, in other words.

What can we do? First, we must go back to basics and realize that health care choices are decisions that stem from an individual’s basic and unalienable rights to life and liberty. As such health care decisions and expenditures should be made by individuals of their own free will. That won’t be the case under the Obama plan.

Steven Yates earned his Ph.D. in philosophy in 1987. He is the author of one book, Civil Wrongs: What Went Wrong With Affirmative Action (San Francisco: ICS Press, 1994) and numerous articles both in academic journals and elsewhere. He has taught philosophy at Clemson University, Auburn University, Wofford College, the University of South Carolina, Southern Wesleyan University–Columbia, and Midlands Technical College, and has held fellowships with or worked on projects with the Institute for Humane Studies, the Heritage Foundation, the Heartland Institute, and the Acton Institute for Religion and Liberty.

Author of this article: Steven Yates
Show Other Articles Of This Author

* What Is the Bank for International Settlements? (30 June 2009)
* Real Danger From the Extremists (04 June 2009)
* Police Interfere With Emergency Medical Vehicle (01 June 2009)
* Supreme Court Pick: Sonia Sotomayor (26 May 2009)
* New Restrictions on Credit Card Industry (22 May 2009)

Powered by ScribeFire.

2 Comments

Filed under Grassroots, Patriots, Uncategorized