Sheriff Richard Mack on Freedomizer Radio
by Greg FarberFebruary 27, 2010
Pt1 Sheriff Mack on Freedomizer Radio
Pt2
Pt3
Pt4
Pt5
Goldwater Institute Admitted As Amicus Curiae In MSSA v. Holder
by Tom RemingtonFebruary 15, 2010
The Goldwater Institute of Arizona has been admitted as an amicus curiae in MSSA v. Holder, MSSA’s lawsuit to validate the principles of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. It is believed that other institutes will offer similar briefs.
Tom Remington
Related Articles
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
by Greg FarberJanuary 24, 2010
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Button Gwinnett Lyman Hall George Walton William Hooper Joseph Hewes John Penn Edward Rutledge Thomas Heyward, Jr. Thomas Lynch, Jr. Arthur Middleton John Hancock Samuel Chase William Paca Thomas Stone Charles Carroll of Carrollton George Wythe Richard Henry Lee Thomas Jefferson Benjamin Harrison Thomas Nelson, Jr. Francis Lightfoot Lee Carter Braxton Robert Morris Benjamin Rush Benjamin Franklin John Morton George Clymer James Smith George Taylor James Wilson George Ross Caesar Rodney George Read Thomas McKean William Floyd Philip Livingston Francis Lewis Lewis Morris Richard Stockton John Witherspoon Francis Hopkinson John Hart Abraham Clark
Josiah Bartlett William Whipple Samuel Adams John Adams Robert Treat Paine Elbridge Gerry Stephen Hopkins William Ellery Roger Sherman Samuel Huntington William Williams Oliver Wolcott Matthew Thornton.
Alaska Gov. Parnell Feeling Squeeze From Feds, Evokes Abuse Of ESA
by Tom RemingtonJanuary 21, 2010
Seeming to follow a pattern that is emerging in this country, Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell told his fellow citizen’s in his State of the State Address that the Federal Government is prohibiting Alaska from developing and growing and using its resources according to the needs of her people. Parnell cited history stating that Alaskans believed when they joined the Union that they would be free to develop resources.
Stating opposition to a plan that would set aside an area of land the size of California to protect polar bears, Parnell said the federal government and others have abused the Endangered Species Act to exert governmental power and take away state sovereignty.
With statehood, the strong assumption prevailed that, as a fledgling state, we would be allowed to develop our own resources without constant federal interference.
Today, however, the federal government’s actions often seem at war with Alaskan interests.
The federal government has misused the Endangered Species Act as a regulatory weapon to delay development of Alaska’s resources. Now, they have proposed setting aside an area larger than the state of California as critical habitat for polar bears. I strongly oppose such overreactive ESA listings and critical habitat designations. These are job killers and beyond the feds authority.
Additionally, when they tried to deny access to lands, I told the Interior secretary how this harms Alaska’s economy and intrudes on the culture and way of life of many Alaskans.
With the Tongass National Forest, I have strongly urged the secretary of agriculture to maintain the current exemption from the national roadless policy. And if that is not enough, my administration will not hesitate to take the issue to court.
And now, the federal government hyperextends its reach by proposing to zone the oceans. They call it “marine spatial planning.” But the wild and shifting seas were never meant to be defined by little square boxes of regulated activity. Fish do not check their maps and get their passports stamped as they swim from zone to zone.
National oceans policy should be rational, should recognize the important role of coastal states, and should strike a balance between our ocean protection and commercial activities, like our fisheries and oil and gas production.
But beyond escalating federal agency intrusion, Alaskans have another fight on our hands – and this time, it is with Congress.
I have expressed great concern to congressional leadership over legislation that would disregard our people’s cultural and economic needs. We can manage our own predator and prey species.
Besides trying to manage our wildlife, they are now trying to manage us.
Citizens of this country are growing weary of the big hand of government overreaching anything that closely resembles the authority given them within the Constitution. Many states are lining up to do as much as they can to reclaim their state’s rights, their sovereignty. Alaska is no different. They all intend to send a message and get back their rights.
Polar bears are not endangered and now we have all learned that the fear mongering over man-made global warming was nothing more than man-made lies. Alaska knows its people and needs far better than some slick dude in Washington with an agenda.
Government has overstepped and the people are now beginning to react. They don’t want that kind of intrusion into their lives.
Tom Remington
Related Articles
Washington Introduces “Firearms Freedom Act” Bill
by Tom RemingtonJanuary 12, 2010
Representative Matt Shea has introduced HB 2709, the Washington Firearms Freedom Act, I believe now the 15th such bill to be introduced copying our Montana Firearms Freedom Act(MFFA).
In MSSA’s lawsuit to validate the principles of the MFFA, we have a preliminary pre-trial conference coming up on February 2. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the United States (defendants in the lawsuit) have not responded to the suit yet.
We will continue to post new information about this movement at:
http://www.FirearmsFreedomAct.com
Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com
Wyoming Introduces “Firearms Freedom Act”
by Tom RemingtonJanuary 7, 2010
Introduced by Rep. David Miller, Wyoming has followed suit with several other states and introduced HB28, their version of a Firearms Freedom Act.
Tom Remington
Related Articles
BIG GOVERNMENT and EnvironMENTAL Illness
by Al RemingtonNovember 5, 2009
What would be the result if someone walked into a psychiatrist’s office and disclosed their belief that the weather is out to get them? Should the doctor be compelled by the state to initiate a competency hearing, or would a prescription for a fist-full of Prozac do?
What if the patient were a cop? Should they lose their badge?
What if the patient were a teacher? Should they lose their classroom?
What if the patient were an entire political movement? Should they lose their credibility and status as an authority on any and all subjects, at least those related to the weather?
Ecoterrorist EPA and Oceana Sue For Clean Air
by Al RemingtonNovember 5, 2009
It happens every time a company wants to drill for the resources in the good earth; EPA sues, Oceana sues, ya’ll come and join in the SUE generation cult. Please do everything possible to keep us dependant on others for OUR resources.
It’s like hiding your lunch at school and making everyone share theirs so you won’t have to – you little brats.
Seventh graders are so smart. Here’s a quote from a source: ‘Opponents of Arctic oil development contend the industry has not proved it can clean up oil spilled in waters clogged with broken ice.’
In all fairness to Shell Oil or Any Oil Company; Who, out there, has proven they can operate clean-up areas surrounded in broken ice? No one thus far – and to date no spills have occurred in the area.
Recently a major spill of oil from a tanker off the coast….., well, somewhere. Did you hear about it? I did. Tucked in the back end of a paper’s report. It wasn’t in the lime-light enough for the Center of Biological Diversity to Sue the bjesus out of the company. But let’s not forget; “all roads will ultimately lead to (legal) challenge,” LAW SUIT.
Is it ecoterrorism to keep america as in this case, Alaska, from it’s right to the resources within it’s boundaries? Sarah Palin as governor, then, sued the federal twits over this oil business and the feds doled out a fenced in area, in affect, for the so-called endangered polar bears; another form of terrorism? Alaska wants to drill, america should want to drill and ecoterrorists are stifling efforts to improve conditions within the state and country. Ecoterrorism is in Alaska and as of late, commercial fishing is haulted in the artic waters so that “WE CAN LET SCIENCE CATCH UP”.
I have a feeling the little brats are making this game up, again. Science never had to “catch up” before. What’s the rush, here? It seems so quick to act to stop everything everywhere concerning livelihood and industry for a little clean air.
Toughen Up, Kids – Or We’ll Smack You
by Al RemingtonOctober 17, 2009
FROM: The AUSTRALIAN
TOUGHEN up, Aussie kids: you live in a country where more than 90 per cent of people are happy to see you smacked.
The naughty corner is out and spanking is in for thousands of parents who overwhelmingly support a swift whack round the rear when children misbehave.
The discipline debate raged today after a nine-year-old girl told her classmates in Year 3 at Yea Primary School her mum had hit her with a wooden spoon.
________
…and the rest of the story; ends in a poll… whether to or not to “smack ‘em”.
Why Do We Need The Fourteenth Amendment To Reinforce The Bill Of Rights?
by Tom RemingtonOctober 7, 2009
*Scroll for updated information*
Next summer the United States Supreme Court will hear the case of McDonald v. Chicago, which is a challenge to the constitutionality of the city of Chicago’s gun ban. Similar to the most recent gun rights ruling of District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Supreme Court declared D.C.’s ban unconstitutional and that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual right to keep and bear arms, the ruling did not define to what extend the states and their local governments can impose their own gun laws.
We have read of late that a Ninth District Federal Appeals Court reaffirmed that the Fourteenth Amendment “incorporates” the Second Amendment, meaning that the 14th Amendment spells out again that the Privileges or Immunities Clause grants the rights of the Bill of Rights to all legal and lawful citizens. It’s a shame that somehow became necessary.
Jacob Sullum, today in his Townhall article, “From Guns to Butter” gives us his interpretation of how the Supreme Court Justices should see the McDonald v. Chicago case while applying the Fourteenth Amendment.
Last week, the Court agreed to hear a Second Amendment challenge to Chicago’s handgun ban. Since that law is very similar to the Washington, D.C., ordinance that the Court declared unconstitutional last year, it is bound to be overturned, assuming the Court concludes that the Second Amendment applies not just to the federal government (which oversees the District of Columbia) but also to states and their subsidiaries.
We know that at least one Justice does not see the Second Amendment as applying to the states. Justice Sonya Sotomayor, the newest member of the court, in previous rulings and statements has openly said that the federal government does not have the power to force Second Amendment rights onto state and local governments.
As Sullum points out, he believes that it was clearly understood during the ratification process of the Fourteenth Amendment what the intent of such an amendment was for.
They perceived the amendment as a remedy for the oppressive policies of Southern states that sought to deprive freedmen of their basic liberties.
The right to weapons was one of the liberties frequently cited by the 14th Amendment’s backers, since disarmed blacks were defenseless against attacks by Klansmen and local officials. As reflected in post-Civil War legislation that the amendment was intended to reinforce, its supporters also were concerned about economic liberty: the right to own and exchange property, make and enforce contracts, and work in the occupation of one’s choice — all freedoms the Southern states tried to deny former slaves.
McDonald v. Chicago has the potential of being an even bigger case than District of Columbia v. Heller. It would certainly appear to me that any ruling will be a two-edged sword. Should the Court rule as Sullum suggests, this would appear to bode well on those seeking enforcement of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. However, to some, the downside would be that the ultimate power is given back to the federal government. Where does this leave states in the bid to reclaim state sovereignty?
Some say this is why the Tenth Amendment is so important. The Tenth Amendment is supposed to limit the authority of the Federal Government to only what it is granted under the Constitution. But we know that our Congress has for decades overstepped their authority in the creation of laws far exceeding anything granted them by law.
History has shown us that not always will the High Court in our land rule according to the law. It is always easy to second guess what the Court will do and why and we can only hope that the system of interpreting the laws of the land is upheld.
*Update* For more about the Fourteenth Amendment, see Greg Farber’s “Fourteenth Amendment Summary“.
