Posts Tagged With: Law

Calif. concealed weapon law tossed by fed appeals court……

SAN FRANCISCO –  A divided federal appeals court on Thursday struck down California’s concealed weapons rules, saying they violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

By a 2-1 vote, the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said California was wrong to require applicants to show good cause to receive a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

“The right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable firearm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense,” Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain wrote for the majority.

Judge Sidney Thomas dissented, writing that the good cause requirement limited the number of people carrying concealed handguns in public to those legitimately in need.

“It limits the risk to public safety by reducing the number of guns in public circulation, but allows those who will most likely need to defend themselves in public to carry a handgun,” Thomas wrote.

Awarding concealed weapon permits is the responsibility of each of California’s 58 counties. Officials are required to follow the state rules requiring applicants to show good cause and moral character.

The San Francisco-based appeals court said those requirements were too strict and ran afoul of a 5-4 landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2008 that struck down a Washington, D.C., handgun ban and said law-abiding citizens are allowed to have handguns in their home for self-defense.

The appeals court on Thursday reinstated a lawsuit filed in 2009 by Edward Peruta, who challenged San Diego County’s denial of a concealed weapons permit.

The ruling on Thursday also disagreed with three other federal appeals courts that have upheld permit rules similar to the one in California.

The U.S. Supreme Court often takes cases when federal appeals courts issue conflicting rulings.

Categories: 2nd Amendment, Politics | Tags: , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Federal Judge O’Connor to rule against Obama on Illegal Aliens…or as Judge Judy would say “Whack his pee-pee”

A federal judge has a message for President Obama: Stop bypassing Congress on immigration.

Obama issued a directive in June 2012 halting the deportation of many young illegal aliens after Congress refused to pass the DREAM Act, which would have provided conditional permanent residency to young illegals.

A federal judge in Dallas is now threatening to reverse that directive.

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor said Tuesday that he will likely rule in favor of a lawsuit seeking to overturn the new policy. He has asked both sides to file additional arguments by May 6.

The administration’s policy directs U.S. Immigration and Customs, or ICE, agents to defer deportation for illegal aliens under 30 who entered the country before the age of 16, are in school or have a high school diploma, haven’t been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor or multiple misdemeanors and are not a threat to public safety or national security.

The ICE agent union challenged the policy, arguing that the Obama administration is disciplining agents who enforce federal immigration law.

The president of that union, the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, also said the policy is being abused.

In his April 8 testimony, Christopher L. Crane said, “Officers are applying the directive to people detained in jails, not kids in school.”

He told the court, “It is now the story in the jails for aliens to use to avoid arrest and deportation.”

Those aliens appear to be taking advantage of the policy with great success. National Review found, “Since the policy took effect in August 2012, the Obama administration has approved 268,361 applications for ‘deferred action’ status, and denied just 1,377 – an approval rate of 99.5 percent.”

While critics argue the policy is ineffective in securing the border, Judge O’Connor indicated it’s also illegal for the Obama administration to tell immigration agents not to arrest an illegal alien who is a low priority.

“The court finds that DHS (Department of Homeland Security) does not have discretion to refuse to initiate removal proceedings,” Judge O’Connor wrote.

O’Connor issued a court order stating that Congress, not the president, sets priorities for arresting illegal aliens and that the law requires them to face deportation.

Categories: Politics, Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


(A point of view we seldom hear but worth consideration.)

At this point the following questions might be asked: What about the Indians? Weren’t they here first? Didn’t we (the white race) take this land away from the Indian? Doesn’t the Indian have the rightful title to America?

Since we are dealing with a conflict between two nations or races, the white race and the Indian race, we need to turn to the Law of Nations or International Law for the solution. The following are some basic maxims of the International Law:

FIRST: That every nation possesses and exclusive sovereignty and jurisdiction in its own territory.

SECOND: That no state or nation can by its law directly affect or bind property that lies outside of its own territory, or persons not resident therein.

THIRD: That whatever force the laws of one country have in another depends solely on the municipal laws of the latter.(5)

The first principle listed here would seem to suggest that all of America was the possession of the Indians prior to the age of discovery of the white race. However, the Indians never laid claim to all the “territory” of America because they had no understanding of its size and boundaries. The Indian only claimed the land he was inhabiting and that which he used for hunting, burial, etc. At the time of discovery (circa 1500 A.D.), the American Indian numbered about 700,000 inhabitants, sparsely scattered over what is now America. Thus the Indians never had a legal claim to much more than 3% of the land at any one time. So it can be said that the Indians did have a legal claim to America, 3% of it, which was considered their “own territory.”

In light of this, it cannot be said that the white race violated the second principle of International Law either, since 97% of America was not legally the “property” of anyone. When America was claimed by the English, French, and Spanish, they claimed the entire breadth and width of the land, from sea to sea, from one boundary to the next. However, the lands that the Indians occupied within these European claims were still Indian land.

It must also be addressed as to whether the white man encroached upon and took possession of the lands that were legally claimed by the Indian. The third maxim of International Law says we have to look at the Indian’s law, and that whatever measures or acts the white man took in regards to Indian land must be pursuant to Indian law. The following are some of the laws that were generally held by the Indians:

1. It was a law common among Indians that the stronger of two tribes or people (nations) has the right to conquer and subdue the weaker.

2. Under Indian common law it was understood that land claims existed by inhabiting the land and by any use of the land.

3. When any land was unoccupied or not used for one year, the land was free for anyone to claim and settle.

This first law of the Indian could actually render all other arguments of land rights academic. This law was almost a way of life with the Indian, which is why they were always warring among themselves. The wars and conflicts between the white race and the Indian race throughout history were numerous, and the fact that the white race was the stronger cannot be doubted.

According to the third Indian law listed, the white man, or any man or nation, had the right to possess the vast lands that were uninhabited or unclaimed by the Indian in America. Since the Indians never claimed the American continent from Atlantic to Pacific the lands claimed by right of discovery are valid. Thus, the only legal conflict that can exist lies with the 3% of land the Indian had a legal claim to in America, in accordance to the second Indian law listed.

In spite of the legal right the white race has to America we often are confronted with the anti-American propaganda that the white race wronged the Indian by attacking and killing them and driving them out of their land. We thus need to look at the first conflicts that existed between the Indians and the colonial settlers. A summary of these first conflicts shows they were always initiated by the Indians:(6)

• Shortly after the first colony was established at Jamestown in 1607, the settlers were attacked by the Indians, who wounded seventeen men and killed one boy.

• After the above conflict, peaceful relations prevailed, due to the wise policy of the Captain John Smith and the good will of Powhatan, head chief of the Indian Confederacy. When Powhatan died in 1618, his brother Opechancanough, who disliked the English, began to plot war. In March 1622, the Indian tribes went on the warpath, and swept through a line of settlements marked by a trail of blood. In the white settlements, nearly 400 men, women, and children, were cruelly put to death before the ravages of the Indians could be checked.

• For 22 years after the massacre of 1622 there was peace. But Opechancanouch, at last head chief, only waited for another opportunity. In 1644, there was a civil war in England, and he through the expected moment was at hand. The massacre he waged left over 300 white settlers slain in two days. Again the white took up arms in defense, and in 1646 the aged chief himself was taken and killed – there was never again a general uprising in Virginia.

• In the Plymouth colony, a peace compact was established between the Indian chief Massasiot and Governor Carver. As time went on, the friendly old chief died. When his son, King Philip, came to be ruler of the Wampanoag tribe, trouble began to brew for the colonists. Urged on by his braves, King Philip began sending messages to friendly tribes, inviting them to join in a mighty war on the “pale faces”. The war that followed was a terrible one. The Indians, avoiding the white troops, dodging them, and never meeting them face to face in the open field, carried on the contest in their savage way of massacring the helpless, and burning villages. Many a fair and quite settlement was made desolate. Women and children were ruthlessly murdered, and burned in the houses. But by the end of 1675 the force of the Indians was broken.

• In the New Haven colony the situation with the Indians (the Pequets) was similar. At first there were peaceful relationships between them and the white settlers. During 1637, the Pequots attempted to organize a confederacy, but unable to secure the help of the Narragansetts due to the influence of Roger Williams, they took the warpath alone. They did not come out in open to battle, but waylaid a party of whites and killed thirty of them. In response to this, a small party of English, along with some seventy friendly Indians, attacked the Pequet stronghold, killing over 450 of that tribe. The great Pequet tribe was crushed, and nearly forty years of Peace ensued.

History reveals that all the early hostilities and wars between the American Indians and the white settlers, were instigated or started by the Indians without just cause. Even though the white settlers had legal title to the land by way of purchase or claim of unoccupied lands, the Indian was always the one to disrupt peaceful relations with attacks, massacres, and wars. The retaliation by the white settlers were merely acts of self defense and self preservation in accordance with the law of nature. Thus it was the Indian who was the intruder and violator of land rights and of his own law. It was the Indian who, in the beginning, wronged the white man. The Indian’s treachery, barbaric and warlike manner, and sneak attacks on the colonists was positive proof of the anti-social nature of the red man. This exhibit of the Indian’s character caused much distrust of the Indian, and became the “code of conduct” which the Indians continued to live by and uphold in the future.

Thus, the white race has a rightful and legal claim and title to America pursuant to international law, the Indian’s law, the law of nature, and by a combination thereof.

Categories: Strange News, Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

No smiling – you’re in New Jersey…….

A ban on smiling in driver’s license photos in New Jersey is being frowned upon by the state’s voters.
More than six in 10 New Jersey voters – male and female, rich and poor, young and old, Republican and Democrat – think the ban is a bad idea, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released on Thursday.
The state Motor Vehicle Commission has been cracking down on people making overly expressive facial expressions, saying some smiles can interfere with facial recognition software used to verify a person’s identity.
Elyse Coffey, a commission spokeswoman told ABC News last month the commission is simply requesting that drivers refrain from smiling “as if you’ve just won $5 million in the lottery”.
Just 17 percent of New Jersey voters agree they should be blocked from showing off their pearly whites.
The survey of 1,405 registered voters was conducted from October 10 to October 14 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.

Categories: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Anti-Obama Doc Beats New Films With $6.3 Mil on Eve of GOP Convention

Galvanizing conservatives Dinesh D’Souza and John Sullivan’s documentary 2016: Obama’s America grossed a stellar $6.3 million as it expanded nationwide over the weekend, beating a trio of three new films.

The anti-Barack Obama film, opening last month in only a few theaters, now boasts a domestic cume of $9.2 million, the top gross of the year for a documentary (excluding nature films). Bully was the previous crownholder with $3.5 million.

Among other records, Obama’s America is now the top conservative documentary of all time, beating out Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed ($7.7 million).

Obama’s America — promoted heavily on talk radio and distributed by Rocky Mountain Pictures — timed its nationwide expansion to the Republican National Convention, which gets underway this week in Tampa, Fla.

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

Congressman: Repeal everything Obama signed!

A member of Congress from Iowa, seeking re-election, has given a campaign stop audience in Iowa a hint about what he considers a possible solution for the laws and regulations that have been generated by the Obama administration: blanket repeal.

According to a report in the Messenger News, U.S. Rep. Steve King, who represents a portion of Iowa, made the suggestion this week at a stop in Humboldt.

He said he was thinking about introducing a bill, which if it became law, would repeal everything Obama has signed into law.

The issue arose as part of a conversation King, who is running against Democrat Christie Vilsack in the state’s 4th congressional district, was having over his plans to sue Obama over a White House decision to stop the deportation of some illegal immigrants.

“We’re going to defend the Constitution of the United States and the separation of powers,” King told the audience, according to the newspaper report, which estimated about 60 people were at the county fairgrounds event.

The legal action would address the executive order Obama issued to halt the deportation of illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. before they were 17 – and are not yet 30. Several other qualifications would apply.

King told the audience while the administration has discretion about what cases to prosecute, the president “does not have the ability to grant blanket amnesty to entire classes of people.”

The report said he reiterated his opposition to Obamacare and the massive federal spending that Obama has instituted.

Among the various agenda items from Obama that have proven controversial are Obamacare, the biggest tax increase in U.S., history, the new advocacy for open homosexuality in the U.S. military, and others.

Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

Create a free website or blog at

Riviera Maya Travel Guide

Cajun Food, Louisiana History, and a Little Lagniappe

Preservation of traditional River Road cuisine, Louisiana history & architecture, and the communities between Baton Rouge & NOLA

Jali Wanders

Wondering and Wandering

Southpaw Tracks

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” ~Samuel Adams

Pacific Paratrooper

This site is Pacific War era information

what's the formula?

Nurturing awesomeness: from the parents of celebrities, heroes, trailblazers and leaders

Tarheel Red

A Voice of Conservatism Living in Carolina Blue

cancer killing recipe

Just another site


A great site

Mike's Look at Life

Photography, memoirs, random thoughts.

Belle Grove Plantation Bed and Breakfast

Birthplace of James Madison and Southern Plantation

Letters for Michael

Lessons on being gay, of love, life and lots of it

Sunny Sleevez

Sun Protection & Green Info

Backcountry Tranquility

A journal about my travels and related experiences :)


Art and Practice

Lukas Chodorowicz

Travel, culture and lifestyle experienced on my adventures around the world. All photos taken by me. Instagram: @colorspark

%d bloggers like this: