Daily Archives: June 29, 2010
Chicago Gun Ban Stricken Down By Supreme Court – Richie Daley Will Re-write Chicago Gun Ordinance To Comply
The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to gun ownership applies nationwide. The High Court’s decision is a response to a challenge of gun ban in Chicago and one of its suburbs, and comes two years after the justices struck down a law in Washington, D.C. banning possession of handguns.
The five-to-four decision resulted from a case against the city of Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park. Both have laws that effectively ban handgun possession by almost all private citizens.
The lead plaintiff in the Chicago case, Otis McDonald, challenged the law after he said criminals broke into his home and made repeated threats.
“At least the playing fields will be leveled,” he said. “I don’t have to be concerned about the young dealers and gang-bangers coming in my house, because I believe now that they think twice.”
McDonald v. Chicago: An Exclusive Heritage Foundation Interview
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said guns in the home – even for self-defense – kill innocent people. “I don’t think America should be known for ‘we could kill more people than any other nation.’ We love to kill, we can kill overseas, we export more guns than anybody else, and we buy more guns than anybody else, and ammunition,” Daley said. “That should not be known as a great country.
Mayor Daley says the city will rewrite its gun ordinance to comply with Second Amendment rights, but he offered no explanation of how that might be achieved.
(Guns don’t shoot people by themselves, knives don’t cut people by themselves, blunt objects don’t hit people by themselves and I think you get the idea. While all of these weapons can be deadly – they are only deadly in the wrong hands.)
There are still those who will say that just having these things in one’s possession increases the likelihood of them becoming deadly objects. Then I say, what about hands, scissors, chairs, lamps, bricks, pipes, and so on and so on? They can also injure and cause death. It’s not the weapons or objects that become weapons that cause our problems. It’s US – YOU AND ME! We are responsible for the mis-use of guns.
It’s the heart of mankind that needs changing. If our hearts and minds are changed to respect life, then we will see a change in our behavior; But that’s harder to do. It’s easy to put a law in place to restrict behavior. Only God, can change behavior.
Yes, our world is in great need of strong laws but we are in greater need of changed hearts. Jesus Christ is the only One who can do that …. are you listening, Mayor Daley? He’s ready to help you with Chicago.
Paul Joseph Watson
Friday, June 25, 2010
President Obama will be handed the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without Congressional oversight if the Senate votes for the infamous Internet ‘kill switch’ bill, which was approved by a key Senate committee yesterday and now moves to the floor.
The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency.
Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed in the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor.
In response to widespread criticism of the bill, language was added that would force the government to seek congressional approval to extend emergency measures beyond 120 days. Still, this would hand Obama the authority to shut down the Internet on a whim without Congressional oversight or approval for a period of no less than four months.
(UGGGHHH!!! GOD STOP OBAMA!)
The Senators pushing the bill rejected the claim that the bill was a ‘kill switch’ for the Internet, not by denying that Obama would be given the authority to shut down the Internet as part of this legislation, but by arguing that he already had the power to do so.
They argued “That the President already had authority under the Communications Act to “cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication” when there is a “state or threat of war”, reports the Sydney Morning Herald.
Fears that the legislation is aimed at bringing the Internet under the regulatory power of the U.S. government in an offensive against free speech were heightened further on Sunday, when Lieberman revealed that the plan was to mimic China’s policies of policing the web with censorship and coercion.
“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman told CNN’s Candy Crowley.
While media and public attention is overwhelmingly focused on the BP oil spill, the establishment is quietly preparing the framework that will allow Obama, or indeed any President who follows him, to bring down a technological iron curtain that will give the government a foot in the door on seizing complete control over the Internet.
As we have illustrated, fears surrounding cybersecurity have been hyped to mask the real agenda behind the bill, which is to strangle the runaway growth of alternative and independent media outlets which are exposing government atrocities, cover-ups and cronyism like never before.
Indeed, China uses similar rhetoric about the need to maintain “security” and combating cyber warfare by regulating the web, when in reality their entire program is focused around silencing anyone who criticizes the state.
The real agenda behind government control of the Internet has always been to strangle and suffocate independent media outlets who are now competing with and even displacing establishment press organs, with websites like the Drudge Report now attracting more traffic than many large newspapers combined. As part of this war against independent media, the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers.
Many Americans who voted for Barack Obama did not expect the kind of change he is bringing to America. They have buyer’s remorse now. We must remember …
There are consequences to elections – Like This!
and if course, This
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Solicitor General Kagan lost!)
hat tip: YID With LID
Citizens United v Federal Election Commission, was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment. The 5–4 decision resulted from a dispute over whether the non-profit corporation Citizens United could air via video on demand a critical film about Hillary Clinton, and whether the group could advertise the film in broadcast ads featuring Clinton’s image, in apparent violation of the McCain–Feingold Act. It was a major victory for the free speech rights guaranteed by the first Amendment.
Arguing for the Law to remain as is was Solicitor General, and now nominee to the Supreme Court Elena Kagen. In the video below, we hear Kagen being questioned by the court, asking if the bill could lead to banning other media, like Books, here answer was that yes but that’s OK but we would never really enforce it. Justice Scalia puts her in her place, basically saying, never believe a lawyer who says “trust me.”
Call the following Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and demand that they vote NO AND FILIBUSTER Eleana Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court. She is not fit to serve.
Ranking Member, R-Alabama (202)224-4124
Orrin G. Hatch
R-South Carolina (202)224-5972
posted by rightthingtodo June 29, 2010