Tuesday, January 05, 2016
Immediately upon being sworn in, the new, GOP, President should sign a previously prepared “Executive Order” suspending all such Orders inflicted on the People during the prior eight years.
After that and asap the following “Executive Orders” should be totally vacated and that in the following order:
1. Those which violate the letter of the Constitution OR the documented intent of the Authors of that, most basic law and of The Bill Of Rights (And, later amendments);
2. Those which deal with subjects properly under the authority of The Congress;
3. Those which are opposed to the security and common good of the People; And,
4. Perhaps, those opposed to the official “Platform” of the GOP as expressed before the prior national election.
Remaining, if any, “Executive Orders” may be modified-and-reissued if they serve a public interest OR be properly assigned “to the dustbin of history”.
GOP candidates for election to the Presidency should now be asked to very publicly proclaim their commitment to the above actions
Friday, January 01, 2016
I am becoming more-and-more disturbed about the far too many politicians, news commentators/reporters, those opposed to the fullest exercise of Second Amendment rights and others of that ilk who loosely substitute the terms "mentally ill" OR "emotionally disturbed", for the more accurate term "dangerously mentally ill" as to those who should not be allowed to obtain firearms.
It is fit-and-proper and legally/constitutionally-sound that someone should be declared "Dangerously Mentally Ill" only after a fact-based and contested hearing before a judge-and-jury, in accordance with our 1000 year old system of laws and our Constitution. Why? Because to tag any citizen as being "dangerously mentally ill" takes from such citizens as many civil and political rights as a conviction of a felony---And, deserves the same legal protections.
At this time there are too many government units (eg -- The FBI) who will accept the unverified and non-judicial comments of some (Anonymous?) Psychologist/Psychiatrist/Other-persons as sufficient "Proof" to deprive citizens of a basic civil right. Even super-sane me (If, and only if, you accept my self-diagnosis) once consulted a psychologist, with my wife, to iron out some marital problems---Which smoothing did occur. .
Should I or some child with home/school problems who sees a school psychologist or some active-duty member of the Armed Forces/Veteran for whom war/other-problems has resulted in s/he seeking counseling, and other like and law-abiding citizens be deprived of a basic civil right without "due process of law"? [I believe we have another, of too many Federal Laws which provides for both criminal and civil prosecution for "Deprivation of Civil Rights Under Color Of Law" which should deal with and punish those who would do so to those who are not dangerously mentally ill.
The FBI has reportedly placed entire groups of innocent military veterans on the "no buy" list and that without "due process of law".
April, 2013 Note: the New York State Police are seizing guns from citizens who are lawfully taking anti-depression medications without any prior “due process of law”. After the death of my beloved wife I took such “meds” for a short time which, in NY, would have led to my being deprived of my rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution by violating my other rights to “due process of law”. Such are unconstitutional acts of tyrants---About which see President Jefferson’s comments as to tyrants, guns and citizens—As attached..
THE “SOVIET SOLUTION”: As the old USSR developed, a political decision was made to deal with those who “dissented” by considering-and-declaring them, per se, mentally ill for doing so. Such persons were involuntary confined in prison like “hospitals” and subjected to “aggressive” treatment”
It appears that too many (Chiefly, but not universally Democrats) consider anyone who wishes to fully exercise their rights (And, implied duties) under the “Second Amendment” as likewise “mentally ill”. I suspect that many Democrats consider anyone who opposes any of Mr. Obama’s extra-constitutional actions as likewise “crazy”.
LIKEWISE DOCTORS & JOURNALISTS: Doctors and “journalists do NOT “see” the very many whose lives and “bodily integrity” are safe-guarded by the private use (Most often “mere” display) of guns by citizens. They treat and report on only those events as where medical attention is needed OR “politically correct” reporting had.
THOSE WHO ARE NOT CURRENTLY DANGEROUSLY MENTALLY ILL DESERVE THE PROTECTION OF ARMS PROVIDED IN THE SECOND AMENDMENT..