Constitution Cowboy

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

5-4 Decision Has International Foreboding For RKBA

Justice Kennedy admitted international influence in his decision on ruling the death penalty unconstitutional for anyone convicted of murder for a murder committed prior to their Eighteenth birthday.

Any of the justices who sided with Kennedy on this need to be impeached. These justices took the oath as required by Article VI, Section 3, to support the Constitution. Article III lays out the scope of their power. It is limited to the Constitution and laws of the United States, or any treaties made. If these justices can't find something in the Constitution to support their views, that's just tough.

Where do they even get off allowing and drawing upon their personal views to influence a decision in the first place? They were supposed to have been put their because they could adjudicate in accordance with the Constitution and not be influenced by their personal views!

For Kennedy to come out and openly admit his agenda shows just how stupid this man is to admit wrong doing and how little regard he has for the Constitution and the oath he took! He actually believes he was put there because of his opinions, his agendas, and believes he has the power in his position to implement those opinions and agendas!

There is no way any of this can be considered "good behavior". In my view, these actions are treasonable. But, the mere disregard for the Constitution and the oath are, either one, demonstrably not good behavior, and therefore, impeachable offenses.

Now, imagine the definitive Second Amendment case coming before the Supreme Court, still populated with the likes of Justices Kennedy, O'Connor, and Ginsburg, who have all admitted to an interest in international influence in considering cases. Don't all of you think we should be writing all our congress critters and put our bent into their minds that these errant justices should be impeached? Shouldn't we be reminding them they took an oath same as those justices? Shouldn't we tell them if they will not do the right thing that we will vote for those who will? Or, that we will run for the office they now hold so that we might do it ourselves?

I cannot think of anything more important to our Right to Keep and Bear Arms to prevent having to loose its extreme definitive purpose to preserve it. Impeach these justices so that we might be forever able to keep and bear our arms!

Woody

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

George Bush Right On Target!

I'm proud of our president and all he has accomplished around the world with the devoted help of our troops. This is a man who will take on the bull, by the horns, and win. The problems with Social Security, taxes, and hopefully our rights should get some long needed attention.

I'm taking bets on the sincerity of Nancy Pelosi with respect to her statement that the Democrats have taken the oath to protect our rights and civil liberties. My money says it is flatulence from the left's bovine sphincter.

Harry Reid spoke of how we need to spur the education of our youth........Of course he says this after his party has done everything possible to spur the dumbing down of our youth. That vast left wing conspiracy that has educated our youth into ignorance of our history, ignorance of the Constitution, and ignorance of the principles that made this country the greatest in the world - wants to continue to teach our youth their way. Not a chance in Hell, Harry. You'll not get another chance to gamble away the future of this country by indoctrinating our youth to a course of reliance on the government, giving up rights, destruction of traditional values and marrage, and freedom debilitating taxation. Not as long as there are people like George W. Bush around. Liberalism has failed, its results have failed, and it belongs in the dust bin with communism, socialism, marxism, and all the other failed or soon to fail systems of government in the world.

The only secure, steadfast, successful, and everlasting government is the constitutional republic. It's the only form of government that can oblige and elevate a self-disciplined, self-reliant, principled and hohorable people. Adhearance to the Constitution is essential. Without adhearance, chaos and anarchy lies on the one hand. Tyranny and subjugation lies on the other. As a free people, we must choose.

Woody


Tuesday, January 25, 2005

Golden Goose of Gun Rights

There seems to be increased interest in legislation to enhance our gun rights and our right to self defense such as HR 47. While this particular piece of legislation appears to be the Golden Goose of Gun Rights, it does have a flaw that could make it unconstitutional in that it provides for the ability to sue any state in any federal court. This would be in violation of the Eleventh Amendment unless the state you sued was the state you were a resident of and you brought suit aginst that state in federal court in that state.

With no provision in this law to make the remainder of it effective if a portion of it were declaired unconstitutional, it would fall to the first challenge.

The best and only proper destiny for our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, along with our uneneumerated Right to Self Defense, is to have all infringing law repealed or declaired unconstitutional.

Woody

Wednesday, January 19, 2005

Condi Rice Has Made it!

Condi Rice gets the same disrespect, condescension, and disregard all conservatives get. Racism is dead!

Woody

Sunday, January 16, 2005

We Should Learn A Lesson From The Left

One tactic of the left to ruin gun manufacturers, distributors, and dealers is to drag them into court and bankrupt them with attorney fees. Conservatives should start dragging state and local legislators and other officials into court for violating US Code , Title 18, ยง 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law.

It would seem to me that just about every resident of every state that has unconstitutional gun laws could press charges in federal court aginst every legislator, judge, and law enforcement officer who either passed, enforced, or convicted someone for violation of any of those unconstitutional laws.

I believe a flood of lawsuits aginst these people might effect some positive changes! Please note that it is unconstitutional for an individual to sue a state, but that state officials are fair game!

Here is a link to the code:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000242----000-.html


Woody



Saturday, January 15, 2005

Why Liberals Want Gun Controll

This is an excellent article, pointing out the true intent of liberalism. If we can protect, provide for, and guide ourselves, we have no need for them to be in power. They would have to find more gainful employment. http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_6386.shtml

Woody

We the People retain our weapons to the end of securing our rights and freedom for when governments fail or ignore or endeavor to usurp or delete those rights and freedoms.

Friday, January 14, 2005

HR - 47

This looks like it might be good legislation. It doesn't appear to be a patch on our RKBA, but actual teeth!
Here is a link to an article at RightMarch.com about it. http://www.rightmarch.com/011305b.htm

Woody

"I pledge allegiance to the rights that made and keep me free. I will preserve and defend those rights for all who live in this, the country founded on the belief and principles that those rights are inalienable and essential to the pursuit and preservation of life, liberty, and happiness." B.E.Wood

Thursday, January 13, 2005

Brady Campaign/MMM rate Oklahoma (this is funny!)

From the Brady/MMM release:


Gun violence in Oklahoma could increase in 2005 because Congress failed to renew the federal assault weapon ban, which expired last fall, and Oklahoma has no state law restricting assault weapons or rapid fire ammunition magazines. Oklahoma does not require background checks at gun shows, does not hold adults responsible for leaving loaded guns around children, does not require child-safety locks to be sold with guns, does not have any handgun safety standards and even forces police to let people carry hidden handguns in public. On a positive note, Oklahoma does regulate the sale or possession of guns for kids.

Help me! Help me! Help me! I can't breathe! OH, HHAAA HAAA HAAA! - GASP - HAAA HAAAhAAAaaaa....
From the Brady/MMM release....HHAAA HAAA HAAA! HHAAA HAAA HAAA! HAAA HAAAhAAAaaaa....
"Oklahoma has no state law restricting assault weapons or rapid fire ammunition magazines." .....................BoooWAHHAAAA HHAAA HAAA HAAA! HHAAA HAAA HAAA! HAAA HAAAhAAAaaaa.... GaasP!!! OOOHHHHhhh.... Why aren't these people writing for Leno or Letterman?

Woody

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

What's wrong with this?

Regarding the killing of the thief who robbed Trung Nham Duong's store the other day, District Attorney Wes Lane said that while he has no sympathy for thieves, the law doesn't allow the killing of unarmed shoplifters.

Well, Wes, the law doesn't allow anything. Laws DISallow things. A look at the definition of manslaughter in the first degree in the Oklahoma Statutes 21-711.3 reads: (Manslaughter in the first degree defined) "When perpetrated unnecessarily either while resisting an attempt by the person killed to commit a crime, or after such attempt shall have failed." OK, we can ignore the last part because the crook didn't fail in his attempt. That leaves the first part to discuss. Was it necessary to shoot the crook to stop the crime? Obviously, the crook was still running away with the stolen goods when Trung shot him. It will be necessary for Wes Lane to prove that shooting the crook WAS unnecessary to stop the crime.

A look at 21-1289.16 will show that pointing a firearm in defense of one's property with intention of discharging the firearm is not unlawful. A decent lawyer should be able to quash this travestry before it goes to court. Please note that I like Wes Lane, voted for him, but I believe he is wrong to bring any charges upon Trung.

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

Police State Training/Indoctrination

I've come to the conclusion that ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES in our schools are meant more to indoctrinate our youth to a police state mentality than to protect them. I believe our freedoms and rights are being attacked with this policy. It is another avenue of incrementalism we all should pay more attention to.

Take note of how, step by step, the states and the federal government have attacked our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. First, it was 'no carrying arms in town', then the 1934 taxation and registration of machine guns, the Firearm Owner's and Protection Act of 1968, the The 1986 Amendments to the Gun Control Act, and then the 'Assault Weapons Ban' (AWB). That is how these ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES will eventually lead to the nanny state and the collapse of any adherence to the Constitution and its protection of our many rights.

Like the verbose of us who stopped the extension of the AWB, we all need to get to these school board meetings and voice our opinions as to the folly and societal damage these ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES present. When these elected officials refuse to do what's right, VOTE THEM OUT!

Woody

Friday, December 31, 2004

Happy New Year, Everyone!

Tomorrow I reload windows on the computer. Been gettin' too many blue screens and freeze-ups!

All the best to you all in 2005!

Woody and Suzann

"I pledge allegiance to the rights that made and keep me free. I will preserve and defend those rights for all who live in this, the country founded on the belief and principles that those rights are inalienable and essential to the pursuit and preservation of life, liberty, and happiness." B.E.Wood


Wednesday, December 29, 2004

Great Thread At "Homers Brain"

There is a good discussion that has turned into a discussion of the Constitution and Liberalism/Conservatism at Homers Brain Check it out.

Woody

It is way past time we in this country got back to arming ourselves THE WAY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS SO WISELY SAW FIT TO ENSURE US THE IMPUNITY TO DO SO in the Constitution.   B.E.Wood

Monday, December 27, 2004

Some "Taxing" Thoughts For You...

From Walter E. Williams and from Mike North

Woody

What Is Disparity Of Force?

In some states, you can be charged with a crime if you defend yourself with "too much force". It is nothing more than Prudence! It is bringing the best defense with you. It is being what the Constitution assures you the impunity to be...PREPARED! (That is what the Second Amendment is all about - being prepared.)

Pragmatism is called for here, not level of force. The desired end is to have the means to defend one's self and family from any force bent on harm. How much "reckless disregard for life" should one have to put up with before he halts the reckless disregard for life his attackers are dispensing all over him?

I've only got one defensive weapon on me most of the time. I don't have the luxury of carrying one for each "level" of threat being foisted upon me, nor do I think I (or many of the rest of us) have the luxury of time to decide which level to apply, hoping the perp doesn't raise the level of threat when you start defending yourself with a weapon inferior to what he pulls out after you get started!

I'll defend myself and family with extreme prejudice. I don't go to the mall with a Mini Cooper, a sedan, and an SUV. I cover all my options with the tool that will cover it all. I take the SUV to the mall. Call it prudence. Call it practical. Call it common sense. You can't call it unprepared!

Woody

US DOJ Stance on individual RKBA

The Justice Department has come out with a 90+ page report on their stance on the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. It looks good. Now, let's see what the SCOTUS says!

Link to DOJ report

Woody

Sunday, December 26, 2004

Howdy From Oklahoma

And so it begins, the defense of the Constitution for the United States of America. Welcome to all, pro and con!

Woody