CTH Public Relations

• Global Warming Watch by TonyBlair [October 09, 2011, 06:41:37 PM]
• Solar Panel Doubts by TonyBlair [September 02, 2011, 08:25:23 AM]
• China by CO2HOG [August 23, 2011, 12:41:08 AM]
• Barack Hussein Obama, Emp... by TonyBlair [August 10, 2011, 08:57:54 PM]
• National Debt Clocks and ... by Counter [August 08, 2011, 10:30:42 AM]
• Scanner or Pat Down? by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:09:51 PM]
• Rise of the Police State by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:01:03 PM]
• Who can we trust? by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 01:07:59 PM]
• Torture by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 12:40:39 PM]
• Anthony Wiener's wiener i... by CarolinaBuckeye [June 01, 2011, 11:29:22 PM]
• Democrat's Culture of Cor... by TonyBlair [May 18, 2011, 06:55:46 AM]
• Hey Obama..You want Taxes... by Vince the Fox [April 21, 2011, 03:12:25 AM]
• Obama Policy Watch by TonyBlair [April 20, 2011, 06:56:14 AM]
• George W. Obama by TonyBlair [April 19, 2011, 06:11:57 AM]
• The Religion of Peace Upd... by TonyBlair [April 12, 2011, 06:43:20 AM]

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

Members

• Total Members: 329
• Latest: boborians

Stats

• Total Posts: 40600
• Total Topics: 5158
• Online Today: 31
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 29
Total: 29

EducateWorthington.org

The 912 Project - Glenn Beck

912 Group of Central Ohio

Please let me know if you'd like your link added

[Principle is a terrible thing, because it demands not what is convenient but what is right.]

Wow...a liberal admits he's been wrong.  Is hell about to freeze over?

A liberal's lament: The NRA might be right after all
By Jonathan Turley

This term, the Supreme Court may finally take up the Voldemort Amendment, the part of the Bill of Rights that shall not be named by liberals. For more than 200 years, progressives and polite people have avoided acknowledging that following the rights of free speech, free exercise of religion and free assembly, there is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." Of course, the very idea of finding a new individual right after more than two centuries is like discovering an eighth continent in constitutional law, but it is hardly the cause of celebration among civil liberties groups.

Like many academics, I was happy to blissfully ignore the Second Amendment. It did not fit neatly into my socially liberal agenda. Yet, two related cases could now force liberals into a crisis of conscience. The Supreme Court is expected to accept review of District of Columbia v. Heller and Parker v. District of Columbia, involving constitutional challenges to the gun-control laws in Washington.

The D.C. law effectively bars the ownership of handguns for most citizens and places restrictions on other firearms. The District's decision to file these appeals after losing in the D.C. appellate court was driven more by political than legal priorities. By taking the appeal, D.C. politicians have put gun-control laws across the country at risk with a court more likely to uphold the rulings than to reverse them. It has also put the rest of us in the uncomfortable position of giving the right to gun ownership the same fair reading as more favored rights of free press or free speech.

The Framers' intent

Principle is a terrible thing, because it demands not what is convenient but what is right. It is hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/10/a-liberals-lame.html

Principle is a terrible thing...for liberals.
 

[-------------------]

This house protected by Smith & Wesson 5 nights a week.  YOU, guess which 5!

-------------------
Do ya feel lucky!
-------------------

Here is a great place to celebrate your 2nd Amendment right this weekend.

High Court To Rule on D.C. Handgun Ban

Tue Nov 20, 2007
2:25pm EST
WASHINGTON (Reuters)  

The Supreme Court said on Tuesday it would decide whether handguns can be banned in the nation's capital, a case that could produce its first ruling in nearly 70 years on the right of Americans to bear arms.

The nation's highest court agreed to hear an appeal by officials from the District of Columbia government arguing that the city's 31-year-old law banning private possession of handguns should be upheld as constitutional.

The justices said they would review a precedent-setting ruling by a U.S. appeals court that broadly interpreted an individual's constitutional right under the Second Amendment to bear arms and struck down the city's law for violating those rights.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case most likely in late February or in March, with a ruling expected by the end of June. The decision could be a factor in the political debate in the 2008 elections.

complete article

I want a bumper sticker that says,

"I support the 2nd Amendment and I don't hunt."

or...

"The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting."

I believe one that simply reads "No Retreat No Surrender HB541" would be beautiful as well.

Stand Your Ground

Written by Daniel White    
Tuesday, 28 March 2006  

Representative Steve Buehrer has introduced HB541, a bill modeled after Florida’s “stand your ground” legislation.

If the actions of the media and anti-self defense extremists in Florida are any indication of what will happen here, then we should brace ourselves for a highly negative campaign of disinformation against this victim protection legislation.

 In Florida, a nearly identical bill was passed into law recently. It was immediately labeled as “shoot first” legislation as opponents attempted to deceive citizens and tourists into believing that it allowed any person to attack another for any perceived sleight. They passed out fliers at airports and erected billboards claiming that cutting someone off in traffic or giving a stranger the finger was justifiable cause for them to open fire on you under the new law.

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. As of today, the streets are not running red with the blood of innocents being gunned down because of the new provisions. The law simply ensures that you have a right to defend yourself if you are the victim of a violent attack. After Florida’s law was proven to work, South Dakota and Indiana passed similar laws. A myriad of other states, now joined by Ohio, are also considering similar protections for the victims of criminal assaults.
 

A detailed analysis of the some of the provisions of this bill folllows.
 
 

'CASTLE DOCTRINE' laws have been passed in 19 states,Ohio IS NOT one of them.

     The "Castle Doctrine" law removes the requirement that citizens first must seek a safe retreat from an intruder before using deadly force. NRA Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre was quoted "We want to make sure that in America the right to self defense continues to exist and that the American citizens home remains his castle"

    More to the founding intent of the 2nd amendment is the concept that a potentially tyrannical government will be forever respectful of the citizens rights.I have every confidence that the US Supremes will find for the individual and his right to own and bear arms.......and that those rights shall NOT be ENFRINGED !!!

   Puger G Calabalini

Conceal carry is not the panecea to these random shootings at Virginia Tech,Mall in Utah and this last one in the mall in Omaha Nebraska. But one wonders if the amount of damage could be lessened by a citizen "packing" . Yes...you guessed it...... the malls are  so called weapon free zones.

    Another 'Gun-Free Zone'
This week saw another horrific massacre by an apparently disturbed teenager, this time at a shopping mall in Omaha, Neb. The 19-year-old gunman took eight lives before killing himself. In a column for FoxNews.com, John Lott, an economist and gun-rights advocate, notes that the mall where this happened was, like Virginia Tech, a "gun-free zone".

 P.G.C.

A problem that has existed in many of these shootings is that lack of individuals having courage.  People, at times, need to put down there self interest for the sake of others.  I remember a story of an, I believe, Israeli-American Professor at VTech that was exposed to NAZI's if not a Holocaust survivor in his youth.  He actually blocked the doorway so his students at VTech could escape.  I believe he ended up dying, I price he was willing to pay for the freedom and safety of others.  How many in society today are willing to make this sacrifice?

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

Another liberal mugged by reality...

Forgive me, for I have sinned.

An About Face After Being Saved by a Gun Owner

Sent in by Brian Clifford, from his Dear Friend

I am one of those people who you loathe. One of those invisible people who come into your living room without asking your permission. One of those people who follow you while you shop, and make it harder for you to make legal purchases. One of those people who try and tell you how to raise your children, as if you don't know how. One of those who gives ratings to stations that promote our demise as a free nation. I am your enemy. Or at least I was.

I followed it all, all of the propaganda, all of the hoopla. Believed it too. Believed that leaving my house was more dangerous than being in a war. At any given moment one of you evil gun owners would open fire on me. I saw the NRA stickers, the Gun owners of America stickers on the cars that passed, and I thought you were all fools. I did everything in my power financially to try and help more laws pass that would prevent you from owning guns. I wholeheartedly believed that only the Police, and Military should have guns. Every time I heard of a gang shooting, or other criminal act committed with a gun, I honestly believed that if we could curtail the legal sale of guns, we could make a difference.

Boy was I wrong.

I have children, three actually, and to me the only thing more important than raising them properly, was seeing that they aren't hurt in anyway. I wanted to ban guns, save my children, save all children. No child should have to be part of any kind of death, especially the kind that involves being shot. I gave money to all of the anti gun organizations I could think of, went to the "Million" Mom March, even looked at Rosie when she spoke, and actually admire her. Brought the kids as well, and even yelled some not so nice things to those other marchers. I'm sure some of you know who I refer to.

I was on my way back from the march, on my way back to Connecticut, when I stopped off of the highway at a rest stop by one of those McDonalds they have off I-95. By this time I had dropped off two of my kids with their father, and only had my little one with me. I went into the restroom with her, and on my way out noticed two men hanging out by my car. There were only two other cars in the lot at the time that were anywhere near my vehicle. I immediately felt threatened by their demeanor, but continued on to my car. The smaller of the two approached me with a knife as I was about to open the door to put my child in her car seat. He yelled at me to get in the back of the car, they were taking me for a little ride. I obviously told them to just take my keys, they could have the car, but they insisted I get in the back. I then heard a man yelling something I don't quite recall, and saw him running towards me with a gun in his hand. The two men vanished into their car, and sped away. I stood there frozen in time, and by the time the gentleman with the gun got to me I just broke down and cried.

To make a long story short, you were all right, and I'm sorry. This man with a gun saved me, and I just keep thinking if I had gotten my wish and guns were banned, there is no telling where I'd be, and what would've happened to my daughter. The only regret I have is not getting the man's phone number who saved my life. I thanked him over and over again, and told him that he saved me, but he calmly said to me something I'd never forget. He said "That's what people like me are here for Ms., and I'm happy to have been able to help."

"That's what people like me are here for," those words keep on running through my head everyday. Maybe this gentleman by some chance is part of your group, and will read my message. If he does I would just like to say something to him, and to everyone else reading this note.

Thank you for saving my life, and to the rest of you thank you for fighting for this man's right to protect me and my child. Tell him for me that I will no longer be part of the group who invades his home, and tries to tell him how to store his guns. Tell him I will never be part of any group who tries to make it impossible for him to buy his tool he used to save me. And tell him I will never again tell him how to raise his children properly, because obviously I was oblivious to the fact that responsible people such as him know how to raise their children better than I do. I did rectify that situation the other day; I bought a shotgun for home protection, and am in the process of getting my concealed permit. Next time I will be ready to defend myself, or others for that matter. Some of my friends think I'm crazy, but they try their best to understand. I just tell them that as soon as their child's life is put in jeopardy by some criminal with a weapon that they will understand, but until then don't tell me how to live my life. I've lost some friends, but surprisingly most of them understand. If not for this man I could very easily have been killed or raped, and my child could've been taken from me, so once more I need to say thanks for saving me, and with all sincerity to the rest of you, forgive me, for I have sinned.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchive...w&articleid=680

From now on use cash.

The issue arose when Citi Merchant Services, in a letter signed by June Rivera-Mantilla in the "Periodic Review" department, informed CDNN Sports In. of Abilene, Texas, that the company's bankcard processing services were cancelled, and that the banking company was withholding $75,000 as a reserve for "potential chargebacks" and it would be held for six months or longer.

"Your anti-gun corporate policy is based on ignorance of the law applicable to the sale of firearms," the NSSF wrote in response to the action taken by First Data Corp., which operates Citi Merchant Services.

"It is perfectly legal, in fact commonplace, for a federal firearms licensee in one state to sell a firearm to a non-licensee (consumer) from another state," the foundation continued. "What you fail to appreciate is that the firearm is not shipped in interstate commerce directly to the consumer. Rather, as required by federal law, the firearm is shipped by the selling licensee to another federal firearms licensee in the state of residence of the consumer … The consumer acquires the firearm from that licensed dealer in a face-to-face transaction…."
 

[Yes, the lawmaker who helped shore up one of the nation’s most stringent assault weapon bans has been a gun owner for many years; he even had a permit to carry a concealed handgun, although he says he let that lapse a few years ago and wasn’t carrying when he was carjacked in late December. The pistol-packin’ Perata used to drive the National Rifle Association and similar groups wild, but Perata contended it was threats from overzealous gun enthusiasts that had driven him to arm himself.]

See if you can spot the lie(s) and the faulty logic...

State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, who earlier this week was made a lame duck as voters rejected the term-limits reform measure Proposition 93, announced today he’ll kick off a gun-buyback event he helped organize by handing in his own shootin’ iron.

Yes, the lawmaker who helped shore up one of the nation’s most stringent assault weapon bans has been a gun owner for many years; he even had a permit to carry a concealed handgun, although he says he let that lapse a few years ago and wasn’t carrying when he was carjacked in late December. The pistol-packin’ Perata used to drive the National Rifle Association and similar groups wild, but Perata contended it was threats from overzealous gun enthusiasts that had driven him to arm himself.

No more, apparently. Cameras have been invited to watch Perata hand his gun over to Oakland Police Chief Wayne Tucker tomorrow morning, as volunteers will tally his as the first of what they hope will be at least 300 handguns and assault weapons taken off the street.

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

The Republic of Montana....hmmmm.....it has a nice ring to it.

Montanans insist on gun rights

By Valerie Richardson
February 25, 2008

Montana officials are warning that if the Supreme Court rules in the D.C. gun ban case that the right to keep and bear arms protects only state-run militias like the National Guard, then the federal government will have breached Montana's statehood contract.

Nobody is raising flags for the Republic of Montana, but nobody is kidding, either. So far, 39 elected Montana officials have signed a resolution declaring that a court ruling of the Second Amendment is a right of states and not of individuals would violate Montana's compact.

"The U.S. would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the Second Amendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract," Montana Secretary of State Brad Johnson said in a Feb. 15 letter to The Washington Times.

The resolution also was signed by Rep. Denny Rehberg, Montana's lone Republican congressman, and state Sen. Roy Brown, who is running to unseat Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat.

The dispute goes back more than a century. Back in 1889, the settlers of the Montana territory struck a deal with the federal government: They agreed to join the union, and the government agreed that individuals had the right to bear arms.

That has worked fine for the past 118 years, but the Supreme Court is expected next month to hear oral argument in District of Columbia v. Heller, the appeal of a federal court decision striking down the District's gun-ownership ban on Second Amendment grounds.

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a.../757685551/1002

["There is no ultimate right that is not subject to regulation."]

I just finished listening to the oral arguments on C-Span from a Supreme Court Case reviewing the D.C. handgun ban.  Afterward, speaking to the press, one of D.C.'s lawyers argued that "There is no ultimate right that is not subject to regulation."
 :blink:  

Your interpretation of that remark is?