Kansas Firearms Freedom Act Passes House

For Kansas Residents:

Kansas --(AmmoLand.com)- HB 2620 was brought for final action in the House yesterday morning and was passed with a roll call vote of 95 – 27.

This bill will now go to the Senate.

Please call your Senator and ask them to urge the Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee to schedule a hearing for this bill before the session clock runs out.

To refresh your memory, this bill does the following:
The Kansas Firearms Freedom Act, House Bill 2620, crafted by The Kansas State Rifle Association was introduced in the Kansas House of Representatives by Representative Ray Merrick and several other co-sponsors.

The Firearms Freedom Act (FFA) is principally a Tenth Amendment challenge to the powers of Congress under the “commerce clause,” with firearms as the object – it is a state’s rights exercise. Originally introduced and passed in Montana, the FFA declares that any firearms made and retained in-state is beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states. Source: Ammoland

Please contact your state senator and ask him or her to approve this important bill.
Complete listing of Kansas State Senators: Click Here.

This week has been a shameful disaster

Commentary

During the past three days in the United States, I witnessed two events, which will make this week go down in history. It will go down in history as the House of Representatives passed the Obama Health Care Bill on Sunday, March 21, 2010. It will go down in history as President, Barack Obama, signed the bill into law on Tuesday, March 23, 2010.

Immediately after the signing of the bill by the president, thirteen states filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming the bill violated Amendment 10, of the U.S. Constitution. The wording of the Tenth Amendment is as follows: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The states maintain that the constitution does not allow the federal government to compel private citizens to buy anything from private employers, such as insurance companies.

To others of us, we believe the process in passing the bill was flawed. The usual procedure is for each house to pass their versions of a bill, and then refer their bills to a committee to work out the disagreements, then send it back to each house for approval. This whole process has been an unmitigated disaster! The Republicans were locked out of discussions, debates, and much of the discussions were limited to Democrats behind locked doors. If the process was not out and out unconstitutional, it was an utter disgrace!

It is incredible to me, that the president, who claims to have been a professor teaching constitutional law, that he would be a part of this process. It is obvious that he either does not know or understand the constitution, or he knows and wants to change it through legislation. His conduct would seem to confirm the claims of those who claim he is a socialist. His actions, and those of a Democratically controlled congress would certainly confirm we are heading in the direction of socialism. And be not deceived: socialism means control, and they will continue to move in other areas of our lives.

November of this year will give us a chance to remedy this dangerous trend. We need to go to the polls and throw out every Democrat and a high percentage of Republicans, and to replace them with constitutional conservatives that will promise to enact term limits, to repeal the seventeenth amendment to begin with (Click here for my previous post on the seventeenth amendment). Both actions will restore states rights, and to destroy political dynasties that unlimited terms allow. The result over time should be less federal control over the states and individuals, less spending, and lower taxes. And hopefully, we will be able to take our beloved country back.

Tonight, the House of Representatives Shredded the Constitution

Tonight, I witnessed the beginning of the end of the U.S. Constitution unless a miracle happens. The House passed Obama's health care bill.

As a former employee of a state affiliate of the Department of Labor for more than 20 years, I can make a comparison to the Carter years, and this bill will cost us thousands of jobs. The only measurable increase in employment will be in federal employment with the eventual hiring of 15,000 additional IRS workers to monitor the health care program. Had the Obama administration not hired thousands of people for federal jobs, the unemployment rate would be higher than it presently is. I believe the unemployment rate will either remain the same or increase for the rest of this year.

Thousands upon thousands of doctors will now retire or resign--as the polls suggested, some to go to government medical facilities, others to sign up with the IRS, and many to retire.

The government has now nationalized banks, become part owners in the automobile industry and insurance companies, and now an additional 18% of the economy.

Industry will not employ workers, even if they are needed, when they have to spend much of their income in taxes. The Caterpiller CEO has estimated that it will cost them an additional $100,000 dollars a month for their employee health insurance program.

The next step is up the the states, many of which are planning on immediately filing a lawsuit in federal court claiming the bill is unconstitutional. I believe it will eventually end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Then, the next step is up to the voters on November 2nd, 2010, just six and a half months from now.

Kansas: Management Plan Underway for Quivira National Wildlife Refuge

NRA-ILA
Friday, March 12, 2010

The Fish and Wildlife Service has announced its intent to prepare a plan to guide management of the Quivira National Wildlife Refuge for the next 15 years.

The Refuge was established in 1955 to provide wintering and migration stopover habitat for migratory birds. The 7,000-acre refuge is located in Stafford, Rice, and Reno Counties and provides a variety of recreational opportunities, including hunting.

Public comments can be submitted until March 26th and emailed to quivira@fws.gov. For further information please call 303-236-4378. The Service is seeking information and suggestions on the scope of issues to consider in developing the plan. It is important that hunters let the Service know what changes should be made to the current hunting programs.

Copyright 2010, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 800-392-8683
Contact Us

Were the founders of the United States Christians?

There are those who would change history to get their way. The progressives in government and education would have us believe our forefathers were not Christians, or at most, deists, i.e., those who believe in some type of God, but not necessary the God of Israel and of the Christians. Following are some representative quotes from some of our founders:

“It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here” (Patrick Henry in May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses).

"And as it is our duty to extend our wishes to the happiness of the great family of man, I conceive that we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world that the rod of tyrants may be broken to pieces, and the oppressed made free again; that wars may cease in all the earth, and that the confusions that are and have been among nations may be overruled by promoting and speedily bringing on that holy and happy period when the kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and all people everywhere willingly bow to the sceptre of Him who is Prince of Peace" (Samuel Adams, Governor of Massachusetts, Proclamation of a Day of Fast, March 20, 1797.)

"I have tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty; through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me" (Dying words of Alexander Hamilton, July 12, 1804).

“I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus. I have little doubt that our whole country will soon be rallied to the unity of our Creator and, I hope, to the pure doctrine of Jesus also” (Thomas Jefferson).

"As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion, as he left them to us, is the best the World ever saw, or is likely to see" (Benjamin Franklin, March 9, 1790 in a letter to Ezra Stiles, President of Yale University).

And finally, George Washington, the first president of the United States:
"I now make it my earnest prayer the God would have you and the State over which you preside, in His holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to government; to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the field; and, finally, that he would be most graciously pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind, which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation" (June 8, 1783 in a letter to the governors of the states on disbanding the army).

I have read multiple dozens of quotations from those who would have us think these men quoted above, were not Christians, by quoting those sayings of our founders warning against religious control, and other negative aspects of religion. They are dishonest. In searching through their quotation, they know that these men were Christians, but they do not want Americans to know the true history of our Christian beginnings.

Stand By Me | Playing for Change

State Sovereignty resolution in Kansas Update!

Wednesday SCR 1615 was tabled.

Thursday, SCR 1615 was untabled and passed out of committee! Rep. Joe Patton made the motion. This shows how important your communication is to legislators, especially when done in a respectful and reasonable way, explaining the importance of the legislation.

Here are the updated votes:
State Sovereignty House Committee Votes. The Democrats are highlighted in yellow so it’s easy to see the party differences.

There have been several questions about the amendments made to SCR 1615 in the House Judiciary committee before the resolution was passed out of committee.
State Sovereignty House Committee Amendments

This resolution, as it left the committee, still conveys a firm message of state sovereignty to the federal government.

Keep in mind that other amendments can and most likely will be offered on the House floor – some good and some bad. This isn’t over yet.

If there is a particular change that someone finds objectionable, they should lobby a House member to attempt an amendment on the floor. However, this resolution now appears “bi-partisan,” because of the committee’s actions and could likely get more votes, which could have the result of sending a stronger message to the federal government.

Thank all of you who contacted your Kansas Representative. Please contact the House Judiciary Committee members and thank them.

State Sovereignty resolution in Kansas needs our help!

I received a newsletter State Senator Mary Pilcher Cook sends to supporters of Kansas soveignty. I want to share it with my followers and others who find this web site through search engines. -- Rick

Yesterday left-wing legislators tabled House Resolution SCR 1615!

During debate in the House Judiciary Committee, Wed., Mar. 3, at 3:30 p.m., Rep. Annie Kuether made a motion to table the resolution, an attempt to stop the message from Kansas to the federal government to respect state sovereignty and recognize the limited nature of its powers.

Every Democrat except Rep. Jan Pauls voted to table the legislation, but so did several Republicans!

State Sovereignty House Committee Votes:

The Democrats are highlighted in yellow so it’s easy to see the party differences.
We need your help!

Please contact the House Judiciary Committee members who voted to table the resolution, or who didn't vote. Let them know, respectfully, you would like them to reconsider their vote, untable the measure and vote to pass this resolution out of committee!

In honor of your liberty,
Mary Pilcher Cook

13910 W. 58th Pl.
Shawnee, KS 66216

P.S. To make sure there isn't any confusion — this is not the Health Care Freedom Amendment. It is the concurrent resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment that would send a message to the federal government.

A Moment of Decision for Americans on Health Care

I just heard President Obama deliver a speech trying to convince the Republicans, Independents, Conservative Democrats, and the American Public, that his modified health care is what the people want, and congress should pass it with an up or down vote, i.e., the nuclear option: conciliation--50 plus one vote in the senate.

No. He just attended the summit with the Republicans and he did not hear a word they said to him. Adding a point of two they suggested is not 'bi-partisan.' He said they debated the bill over and over. Not true. The Republicans were shut out, and in some cased the doors were shut against them.

Polls now definately show that the majority of Americans want to either start over from scratch, or drop it altogether. Yet, he and the progressive Democrats still want to jam it down the throats of Americans.

The President presents a special burden to Christians in this country. We are asked in scripture to pray for him, which I do daily. I do not require my president or congress to agree with me on everything, even if on only a few things. What really bothers me is that I can no longer trust anything my government or the president tells me.

I am a former Democrat, now 78, who quit the party some years ago as they 1) no longer represent the 'classic liberalism' of our forefathers, 2) they have been hijacked by progressives, 3) they have resorted to misleading and or outright lying about issues, and 4) they no longer seem to listen to or have any respect for those who placed them there.

Consequently, I no longer want our government to do anything more for me or to me. I can no longer afford my government. Most have to be removed this November, most Democrats and those Republicans who do not have the cajones to speak out against the chicanery in Washington.

But, good may come out of this. We may actually be able to clean house, as I am beginning to see others as fed up as I am. And after we toss them out, we need to bring charges against them for illegal legislation passed against the principles of the Constitution. Do we have the guts to do this?

Using the 14th Amendment to support the Second Amendment Unnecessary

Commentary--

Talk of SCOTUS possibly using the Fourteenth Amendment to incorporatethe Second Amendment making it applicable to states bothers me a lot.

The Second Amendment stands on its own and needs no help from the 14th Amendment. The Second Amendment, if we read the desire of those who placed it into the Constitution, was intended for use by the states and its citizens, and was to arm the states and its citizens to protect them from an abusive central government. The state governors were empowered by this amendment to raise up 'well-regulated' state militias to defend themselves against an abusive central government and other states who may have a cause against them.

The civil war initiated an improper use of militias. The North used its militias against the militias of the South to 'impose' their will against the Southern States in defending their 'state's rights' under the original federalism promoted by the Constitution. The North used 'slavery' as an excuse to fight the South, as the North could not compete against cheap labor the slaves provided.

When we understand the proper intention of the Second Amendment, we find the 14th Amendment only a hindrance in weakening the Second Amendment by using it as a crutch to 'support' the Second.

When will we ever learn?