New Hampshires September 8 state primary election is less than six weeks away. The biggest Republican race is for the United States Senate nomination and the unenviable task of trying to defeat Senator Jeanne Shaheen.

The two GOP candidates are Colorado lawyer and recent (really recent) Granite State resident Corky Messner and retired Brigadier General Don Bolduc.

Messner is weak on policy specifics. His web site reads like a checklist of old Republican National Committee talking points: hold the line on spending; the national debt threatens prosperity; stop crime by ending illegal immigration; support the Second Amendment; and, fix health care through the free market.

He says nothing about climate change, the environment, or the cost of college, has no proposals to help working and/or middle class families, does not mention racial justice, and provides no substantive alternatives to the ACA to provide health insurance. I was unable to find any policies supported by Messner regarding the war in Afghanistan, and little about the pandemic.

He touts his endorsement by Donald Trump. This is ironic, given that under Trump the national debt has mushroomed (even before the pandemic). Messner calls for strengthened ties with our allies, yet doesnt mention Trumps effort to blow up NATO and his abandonment of the Kurds.

If you want a Republican who has nothing new to say and appears to have missed the last three years, Messner is your man.

Unlike Messner, Bolduc is a New Hampshire guy who did not move here to run for office. He also has done admirable work on the effect of PTSD on active military and veterans. But much of his web site is also just checking old boxes, while ignoring the environment, climate change and racism.

Unlike Messner, he does address the burden of student debt, proposing a service program through which students can earn reduced tuition. Like Messner, he opposes regulation by the federal government, but suggests replacing it with regulation by individual states.

A patchwork of state regulation seems unworkable when it comes to corporate issues of national impact, but give him credit for at least thinking beyond the talking points.

I listened to their interviews on NHPR, which are available on the NHPR website. Bolduc, who has a bad habit of veering toward fringe notions, was asked about wearing masks to prevent COVID-19. He stated that he is unapologetically of the opinion that masks cause more problems than they solve. I am unapologetically of the opinion that he needs to stop listening to right wing talk shows.

Messner was asked whether he supports Black Lives Matter. He said no, that it was a revolutionary movement.

So was the American Revolution, Corky. Black Lives Matter wants our country to live up to the promise of that revolution that all are created equal.

You can obtain more information about Bolduc and Messner by googling their names, or doing a search of this papers web site. I encourage anyone planning on voting in the Republican primary to do so, as what I say about each of them is through my partisan Democrat lens.

And that partisan lens says neither one will be able to defeat Jeanne Shaheen.

Manchesters Kathy Sullivan is the former chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party.

Read the original here:

Kathleen Sullivan: Either primary candidate will lose to Shaheen, but which still matters - The Union Leader

Sandra Averhart talks to incumbent Mike Hill about his bid to retain the district 1 seat in the Florida House.

The race for Florida House of Representatives District 1, which covers the vast majority of Escambia County, features primaries on both sides of the political aisle. One the Republican side, one-term incumbent Mike Hill faces a challenge from political newcomer Michelle Salzman.

Today, WUWFs series on the 2020 election highlights Hills re-election bid.

Hill is a 10-year Air Force veteran, who spent his formative years at Eglin Air Force Base, when his father was in the Air force. Now 62 years old, he has owned and operated an insurance agency in Northwest Florida for the past three decades.

I am a conservative constitutionalist, declared Hill. Why? Because I said that oath; that is so important to me because of my faith.

Hill went on to say that he believes what the public generally wants from their elected officials is good public policy.

For me, good public policy consists of four things. Number one - is it constitutional? Number two - is it fiscally responsible? Number three will it fix a problem or create a problem? And, number four is it morally sound?

This is Hills fifth run for state office. He was elected twice to the House District 2 seat, lost a 2016 bid for State Senate, and is now seeking re-election to the House District 1 post he won two years ago.

As he did in 2018, Hill is making his final push for votes going door to door. But, like other candidates, hes facing new challenges on the campaign trail in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and the recent spike in cases.

So, we havent been able to have meetings where you can have gatherings to have debates and even for fundraising, cant do that, Hill began. And, even the traditional knocking on doors, we just started that recently; and, it was just before this second wave took over that we started it. Now, we may even need to slow down doing that again because of the second wave that were experiencing.

Hill supports the governors reopening strategy, including the order to reopen schools in August, believing it can be done safely by following CDC guidelines.

In terms of economic recovery from COVID-19, he says the fastest path is to keep businesses open and operating.

Businesses owners will take the appropriate steps to make sure their customers are going to be safe; were seeing it right now, he said. You cant go into Sams or to Walmart without face coverings. They only allow a certain number of people in at a time. They did that without government mandating that that happen. And, I think businesses will take those sorts of steps and thats whats going to turn the economy around.

Sticking with current affairs, Hill was asked about the Black Lives Matter movement and what legislative actions he would propose to address racial injustice.

Hill, whose son works for the Escambia County Sheriffs Office, reflected back on improved conditions for racial minorities due to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. But, for the most part, he believes the existence of racism in government is more of an individual problem, not systemic and not a job for state lawmakers.

I think, first of all, government itself cant stop racial injustice because that is a product of mans nature, Hill declared. There are going to be people who just have that bent toward racism. Thank goodness, in America and in Pensacola and Escambia County, that is not a prevailing sentiment. It may have been in the past, but its not at this time, where racism is really a big issue. So, I think what we have to focus on instead is family values.

A closer review of the history of racial injustice is resulting the removal of Confederate monuments, including plans to relocate the one at Pensacolas Lee Square. On this issue, Hills position has been well chronicled in his online video posts.

Im conservative, Republican Mike Hill. Im here to stand in defense of this Confederate monument, begins one of his Facebook posts.

Hill, a Republican who happens to be black, seems out of touch with the prevailing stance of most African Americans in the area and across the county. He acknowledged the atrocities at the (Pensacola) site over the years, but he disputes historical conclusions that the 1890s monument is a symbol of white supremacy. Further, he believes its removal is illegal. Hes vowed to fight such efforts, and has made preserving all historic monuments one of his platforms.

My bill listed 16 conflicts, major conflicts that the U.S. was involved in, starting with the Spanish-American War and going all the way up to our current conflicts, he explained. And, of course, it had to list the Civil War. In the Civil War, we lost more people, over 600,000, than any other battle we were involved in, so it had to be in there. But, the word 'confederate' is nowhere in that bill.

That bill and the vast majority of others sponsored or co-sponsored by Hill failed to win approval. Further, his critics say hes been totally ineffective.

For his part, he says its not unusual for proposed legislation to fail, noting that more than 3,000 bills were introduced last session and only 200 of them eventually passed.

His plan is to keep trying with the monuments measure and his other priority issues.

Number one is protecting the life of the pre-born, proclaimed Hill as he pointed to his plan to continue pushing for passage of a fetal heartbeat bill to drastically limit abortions in Florida.

Number two, protecting our constitutional rights, in particular the Second Amendment.

Specifically as it relates to the Second Amendment, Hill wants to eliminate gun control provisions included in the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act.

And, number three, trying to get rid of as many unnecessary rules, regulations, taxes and fees, which hinder our economy.

For the third contest in a row, Hill is facing a female opponent, this time from political newcomer, Michelle Salzman.

Following the recent trend for those running on the Republican Party ticket, both candidates describe themselves as conservative.

Hill says for him that term reflects his deep-rooted belief in limited government, low taxes, personal freedom and individual responsibility.

I know why Im a conservative. Its not just because Im just saying so, he declared. Its because I know how Ive studied government that that is what works, and I believe that is going to be best for our constituents.

Hill is seeking reelection to the Florida House of Representatives District 1 seat.

More information about Hills campaign is available on his Mike Hill for Florida Facebook page.

Next time, WUWF will profile his Aug. 18 GOP primary opponent, Michelle Salzman.

See original here:

Hill Seeks Another Term In State District 1 - WUWF

Reporter Lilly Knoepp speaks with Bryson City Police Chief Charles Robinson about the Saturday rally for Trump and the Second Amendment. Local politicians, the Three Percenters and Western North Carolina residents were all present at the rally - many with firearms.

Guns have been present at most protests and demonstrations across Western North Carolina in the last two months. That included a rally for President Trump and the Second Amendment last weekend in Bryson City.

A North Carolina General Statute lists protests as one of many events where it is illegal to open carry a firearm.

Thats not something Bryson City Police Chief Charles Robinson had to deal with until now. He says the Black Lives Matter March last month was the first protest in Bryson City in more than 100 years. Now Robinson says his department tries to balance that state statute against the U.S. Constitution.

We try to come to a happy medium with the second amendment, says Robinson.

This was on the case at Saturdays Armed Patriot Rally. Guns were not allowed on county property but they were permitted on the premises.

Im trying to do something here. Bear with me Oh say can you see by the dawns early light

Thats Mark Day singing.

What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming

He and fellow Bryson City resident Patrick Smith organized the event. Day was one of many people who spoke about President Trump.

It takes a businessman to run this country now, not a politician, says Day.

Go to that table and get registered. That's whats wrong with this country - part of it. Weve sat back too long, explains Day pointing to a table set up for voter registration.

Joining them was Republican candidate Mike Clampitt, running to regain the District 119 in the state house of representatives, as well as Robert Lowe and Graham Allen, both of whom are running for Swain County Commissioner as a Republican and unaffiliated, respectively.

Wheres that Women for Trump flag at? Everyone give them a hand.

Thats Matthew Messin.

Clapping.

He says he is a part of the local Young Republicans and works for the Trump campaign.

This country needs strong women right now to stand up for what they believe in and those women right there are a perfect example. So I say thank you to them, says Messin.

Many of those attending the rally sported Trump hats, American flags and guns. After the crowd did the Pledge of Allegiance, about a quarter raised their hands to say that they were veterans. About 200 people attended the event.

Organizer Patrick Smith explained that the group chose to keep their guns unloaded. He came to the event with an AR-15, a tactical vest and a handgun - all unloaded with the clips visible in the pockets of the vest.

I can surely tell you that I am one ticked off patriot, says Smith to the crowd.

Smith called on the crowd to stop complaining and do something.

If you aint mad about whats going on in your country right now then there is something wrong with you, says Smith.

Smith, who is originally from Louisiana is a detention officer. He says its time for a change in the U.S.

If they dont then things are going to get worse and you are going to see more situations that nobody wants to see. I feel like this is harmless, this is the most harmless manner, he says. Because if things keep going south, if things keep going worse. Im afraid that people are going to take these firearms and use them in manners they shouldnt be used.

The North Carolina Security Force Three Percent was also present at the event. The Southern Poverty Law Center says some Three Percenter groups have ties to racist white supremacist groups. The leader of the statewide militia, who calls himself Captain Infidel, explains this group is part of a national group.

Were here to provide security and support. Anything that these guys may need to have a peaceful protest, he says.

He says many served in the military and drove as much as six hours to attend the event. Their weapons were loaded.

However, the second in command of the operation, Roger Williams lives in Asheville and has worked in security.

We heard this coming on, I saw the Facebook post and got everybody together, got committed. So we brought what guys could come out and show our support, says Williams.

Police Chief Robinson says he had never heard of the group before the Three Percenters let him know that they would be at the event. Overall, he says he would not have banned firearms at the rally.

It made things a bit more uncomfortable and a bit more stressful but we deal with people everyday with loaded firearms, says Robinson. Thats one thing about Western North Carolina - the South - it seems to be a pretty common thing.

Jennifer Brown was one of about six counterprotesters at the rally. Shes from Bryson City.

She came to the event with her friend Tabitha Wiomot. Both were wearing Dolly for President t-shirts and brought a sign: Love is greater than Hate.

She says she fully supports the Second Amendment, but does not support the men dressed in military gear.

I think that they aren't representing all people. They are only representing their own views and the military protects us all. The police protect us all. Thats what I respect about them, says Brown, who says she was at the town's Black Lives Matter rally in June. She sees this event as a counter-protest.

While there were no arrests at the Bryson City protest, there have been at other rallies involving guns. Police in Asheville made arrests for gun possession following two separate rallies last month.

Original post:

Trump Supporters Rally For 2nd Amendment In Bryson City With Firearms - BPR / Blue Ridge Public Radio

By Cal Thomas

For years, conservative groups and especially the National Rifle Association have been warning that the government would find a way to confiscate the guns of law-abiding Americans. Many dismissed what they regarded as a scare tactic designed to raise money.

What is happening in St. Louis should awaken us to the fact that those fears are well founded.

The top prosecutor in St. Louis has charged a married couple with felony unlawful use of a weapon for displaying guns during a racial injustice protest outside their mansion.

Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who the media identify as being white, are in their 60s. Both are personal injury attorneys. Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner says their actions risked creating a violent situation during an otherwise peaceful protest last month.

Doesnt Gardner have it backwards?

The gun owners, who say protesters had trespassed on their property, claim they were protecting their home from what could have turned into a violent mob as they no doubt had seen happen on TV in other cities. A case could be made that their display of weapons prevented violence, which is one of the purposes of the Second Amendment. Having a gun for personal protection can be a deterrent without it ever being fired. The McCloskeys did not fire their guns, but only waved them at the protesters while yelling at them.

The McCloskeys have some powerful defenders, including President Donald Trump and Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican, who has said he will pardon the couple if they are convicted. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-MO, is another supporter. Hawley has asked Attorney General William Barr to begin an investigation to determine whether the McCloskeys civil rights have been violated.

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt is also on the side of the McCloskeys. Schmitt has filed a brief with the court that says in part, The right to keep and bear arms is given the highest level of protection in our Constitution and our laws, including the Castle Doctrine. The Castle law was passed in 2017 and provides for stand your ground protection for citizens who feel threatened by others.

Police seized Mark McCloskeys semi-automatic weapon and Patricia McCloskey later voluntarily surrendered her pistol.

This case is not only important on its own but demonstrates what could happen if Joe Biden wins the presidency. In March, while the COVID-19 virus was beginning to overtake us, Biden said this about Beto ORourke after ORourke dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Biden: Youre going to take care of the gun problem with me. Youre going to be the one who leads this effort. Im counting on you. Im counting on you. He then added, We need you badly, the state needs you, the country needs you. Youre the best.

Last year while still a candidate, ORourke said during a debate carried by ABC News: Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15. And after that, what? Having established a precedent that the government has a right to confiscate a weapon owned by a law-abiding citizen, what other guns would ORourke (and Biden) come for and on what grounds? What would stop them if more liberal judges are named to the courts and they ignore or re-interpret the Second Amendment?

Do any of the shooters in our major cities pay attention to anti-gun laws or laws against murder? By definition, they are lawbreakers and no one has been able to tell me how passing more laws will suddenly turn them into law-abiders.

By brandishing their weapons, the McCloskeys possibly deterred the marchers outside their home from engaging in actions far worse than their alleged trespassing. If they are convicted, they should be immediately pardoned. This should be a lesson about one of the many dangers of a Joe Biden presidency.

Readers may email Cal Thomas at tcaeditors@tribpub.com

View post:

Cal Thomas: Government really is coming for our guns - Salisbury Post - Salisbury Post

My family and I have always proudly counted ourselves among the tens of millions of law-abiding American gun owners. My brother and I grew up shooting, and both of us are avid, lifelong sportsmen. We are not the type of family that buys shotgun shells by the box; we buy by the case and pallet. We are also the kind people who reload for calibers from the most obscure .14 wildcats to the biggest double rifles. If we are not working, we are shootingit is who we are, and is deeply ingrained in our DNA. We are not phonies who champion gun rights for political advantage; we are active participants in every aspect of the shooting sports.

As you may imagine, this is a far cry from the norm in New York City. We grew up unconventionally in an environment full of gun-hating types. We spent summers with my mothers family in communist and post-communist Czechoslovakia. My grandfather took us in the woods, bought us our first BB guns and later our first .22s. The greatest Christmas present Don and I received in those days was the milk carton of Crosman Copperhead BBswe shot them by the thousands. The experience taught us responsibility, discipline and helped forge the bond of brotherhood between us. Don and I are best friends to this day.

Growing up amidst such starkly contrasting worldviews, both as a New Yorker and as a person who saw communism and post-communism firsthand through my grandparents, I came to understand just how special the American right to keep and bear armsand the culture and traditions that come with ittruly is.

Ive long since lost track of how many of my childhood friends sunk into serious drug or alcohol problems that landed them in rehab or worse. My brother and I never went down that road. I credit much of that to my fathers warnings about the dangers of substance abuse, but its also hard for me to imagine that drugs could even remotely compare with our infinitely more rewarding hobby. Looking back, I can credit our immersion in the outdoors and the shooting sports with protecting me and my brother from the excesses of the very culture in which we grew up.

Like all gun owners, Ive long been keenly aware that metropolitan elitists in places such as New York City are committed to stamping out our freedom and criminalizing our way of life. Some are not bad people; they just have little understanding of the sport and tradition that we grew up to love. They have egos the size of the ivory towers in which they live. Many are uninformed. They see a lifestyle that is unfamiliar to them; they fear it and they want the government to get rid of it for them due to misconceptions largely fueled by the mainstream media and Hollywood. I cannot tell you how many times Ive converted people from those viewpoints just by having them shoot a round of skeet or having them plink steel.

As boys, Eric and Don Trump Jr. (right) spent summers in Czechoslovakia with their grandparents. During these summers they, learned to shoot.

Among the ignorant, unfortunately, are many uninformed politicians and elected officials ranting about ghost guns that shoot thirty magazine clips in half a second, as California State Sen. Kevin de Len (D-Los Angeles) said, or calling for high-capacity magazine bans that would make many revolvers illegal. The front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, Joe Biden, is firmly in this camp. Biden has proposed bans on magazines that hold multiple bullets (i.e., all of them) and been seen berating voters on the campaign trail about how he only wants to take away their AR-14s.

Worse still is the stunning degree of dishonesty from these politicians and anti-gun activists. No one is coming for your guns, Biden tells the very Americans who his former boss, Barack Obama, famously said cling to guns and religion. Despite that statement, the man Sleepy Joe announced is going to take care of the gun problem and be the one that leads this effort is Beto Hell yes, were going to take your AR-15, your AK-47 ORourke. I dont have to use my imagination to know whats in store for this country if these people wind up back in the White House.

My home state was the site of a perfect confluence of this ignorance, culminating in the ultimate blueprint for anti-gun inanity: the NY SAFE Act. In 2013, Democrat mega-donor and failed presidential candidate Michael Bloombergs coalition of front groups, including Mayors Against Illegal Guns, exerted so much pressure on New York politicians that they rushed the NY SAFE Act through so quickly, they didnt even realize their magazine restriction banned virtually every police officers sidearm.

Bloomberg just snapped his fingers and lawmakers passed arguably the most-restrictive gun-control package in American historywhich included banning some of the most popular rifles and handgunswithout even bothering to consider unintended consequences. Ruger 10-22s, which chamber the very .22 LRs that were used to teach so many Americans to shoot safely (including Don and me), became illegal overnight if they included a thumbhole stock; now they would be classified as assault rifles. Also, virtually every semi-automatic handgun in the state became legally suspect, as they werent manufactured with seven-round magazinesseven being the arbitrary number set for how many rounds of ammunition New York would allow you to have in your firearm. Such little thought was put into the law that much of it had to be changed, clarified and amendedincluding at the direction of the courts.

As always, their real target wasnt guns, but gun owners. Gun control, as it always has been, is about stigmatizing and destroying a culture and a way of life that some can neither understand nor easily control.

Make no mistake, gun control is about discouraging parents from teaching their children to shoot and hunt. Its about making the shooting sports more expensive and less accessible. Its about stigmatizing gun ownership on social media and in Hollywood until it falls forever out of the realm of mainstream acceptability. At the same time, they do everything they can to close shooting ranges and access to public lands, and encourage boycotts of pro-second amendment businesses. They propose punitive ammunition taxes and everything else they can think of to make it more difficult to own, possess, use, carry and shoot recreationally.

Today, some of the CEOs of Americas largest corporations are either giving in to, or working in concert with, anti-gun politicians and activists who wish to deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights through the back door of businessWalmart, and other major American companies have already caved to these politicians and activists pressure by instituting policies designed to stigmatize gun owners, to alienate shooting-sports enthusiasts and to dredge personal defense from the American mainstream. Dicks Sporting Goods and several financial institutions seem to be helping nurture the anti-gun policies.

The left is engaged in a ceaseless campaign to subject the Second Amendment and Americas centuries-old tradition to death by a thousand regulations. That spiteful spirit has only been bolstered by an anti-gun zeal to punish gun owners for what they see as the unforgivable crime of electing Donald Trump. The good news, however, is if gun owners work together, that death will never happen.

But it wont be easy. Just because Bloomberg, one of the richest men on Earth, couldnt buy the Democratic Partys presidential nomination (despite shelling out a billion dollars) doesnt mean hes not going to throw millions, tens-of millions, or even hundreds-of-millions more against my father and what he and his ilk so mockingly term Americas gun culture.

Any illusions that this anti-gun insanity will remain confined to states such as New York, under a hypothetical Democratic administration were thoroughly debunked by the 2019 elections in Virginia. The home of James Madison, George Mason and Thomas Jeffersonthe men who enshrined the right to keep and bear arms in our Constitutionis now on the front lines of the fight to protect that right from being lost forever. The moment the Democrat Party secured a razor-thin majority in both houses of Virginias legislature, paid for, in part, by Bloomberg and his anti-gun network, it set out to implement a radical gun-control agenda.

The worst of these efforts stalled, at least for the time being, because Virginias gun owners and groups like the NRA stepped up to the threat. The vast majority of Virginias counties and municipalities declared themselves to be Second Amendment sanctuaries in which potential gun bans will not be enforced. Ordinary gun owners made their voices heard at committee meetings and public hearings, and tens of thousands peacefully converged on Richmond for the biggest pro-Second Amendment gathering outside of an NRA Annual Meeting.

But make no mistake, our freedom still hangs by a thread. If we want to avoid replicating the situation in Virginia at the federal level, we must elect pro-Constitution lawmakers to both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, and, more importantly, we must secure my father a second term as president of the United States.

The only surefire way to check the overreach of this new generation of rabid anti-Second Amendment activists in the state legislatures is through the federal court system. My father has made an absolute priority of nominating true constitutional originalists who are committed to upholding the actual meaning of the Second Amendment, and U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made it his personal mission to get as many of them as possible confirmed to the federal bench. In just over three years, President Trump has gotten two outstanding U.S. Supreme Court Justices, 51 appellate court judges and 138 district judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate. There have been few presidents in American history who have done so much to shape the judicial bench of the U.S. These honest judges will blunt the efforts to chip away at the Second Amendment through litigation for decades to come, while also serving as a safeguard against legislative overreach by the states.

Still, the lefts hostility toward gun ownership would become completely unrestrained if Joe Biden were to win the White House in November. A President Biden would set the tone for a concerted, nationwide assault on our Second Amendment rights. Bidens mere presence in the Oval Office would give the hyenas of the mainstream media license to declare open season on gun owners. They would use the bully pulpit to browbeat the cowards of the corporate boardroom into instituting outrageous anti-gun policies and would embolden activist judges across the country to wage war against the Second Amendment. Moreover, in the next four years, there could potentially be three vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The time for any Second Amendment supporter to sit on the sidelines has passed. Our post-Heller vacation is over, and the next few years will see the most ferocious fight over the future of our constitutional birthright of our lifetimes. We cannot win that battle unless we give President Donald J. Trump another four years to secure our liberties for the next generation. We must make it clear that the right to keep and bear arms is not negotiablenot for ourselves and not, as James Madison put it, for our posterity.

To do that, the NRA, my father and I will need your helpnow and in November. (Eric Trump (@EricTrump) is executive vice president of The Trump Organization and the second-oldest son of President Trump.)

View post:

Freedom is on the Ballot This November - America's 1st Freedom

LEXINGTON Two new speculative homes will be coming to Patriot Dr. after Lexingtons Community Development Agency approved a resolution to borrow funds to get the units built.

The CDA met on Monday, July 20, the first time since January 20, to discuss the construction of two new speculative homes and approving a resolution to acquire the funds to do so.

City Manager Joe Pepplitsch presented the housing plans to the CDA.

The speculative homes would be built on lots on Patriot Dr., north of 20th St. Pepplitsch said interest for homes in the area has been growing and City of Lexington staff worked with Mead Lumber to draw up floor plans for the two homes.

Pepplitsch said the building of additional homes will help to fill in the area around Patriot Dr.

One house, to be located at 2503 Patriot Dr., will be a four bedroom unit with a three car garage and partial basement with the rest being crawl space. According to the floor plan, the square footage of the main floor would be 1,673, the garage, 820 and the basement, 768.

The other house, directly south of the four bedroom home, to be located at 2601 Patriot Dr., will be slightly smaller with three bedrooms, two car garage, a deck and a great room area, Pepplitsch said. There would be two bedrooms in the basement, a family room, mechanical room and crawl space.

Pepplitsch said the homes are similar to the other speculative homes which were built in 2018, just with smaller basements.

The pricing for the houses would be in the $300,000 range, Pepplitsch said. He added there already have been people interested even before any dirt was moved.

We want to get to the point where we can borrow the funds, Pepplitsch told the CDA members, we want to get the foundations in before the snow flies.

The city has refined their process since the 2018 and expects this project to go more smoothly, said Pepplitsch.

Of both units, Pepplitsch said, they meet the need, for the demand in housing in Lexington.

The CDA then considered a resolution to authorize borrowing from the project.

According to the resolution, the maximum borrowed funds from Homestead Bank would be $480,000.00 on a term of one year. Upon learning the interest rate for the loan was .99 percent, CDA member Seth McFarland simply said, Build it.

CDA member Steve Smith asked Pepplitsch about the sales of the 2018 built homes. Pepplitsch said the city was, just in the black, after the homes were sold. Smith noted the city didnt build the homes to make money, but to provide more housing units in the community.

The timing is better this time around, Pepplitsch said of the new project.

The CDA approved the resolution.

The last item of business was a second amendment to The Row Redevelopment Project.

On Aug. 10, 2017, the CDA, The Row and Stonyhill Ventures, LLC, entered into a redevelopment agreement.

The original agreement envisioned implementation of The Row Redevelopment Project, in the southwest area of the city, in three phases, including the development of 20 units in the first phase and 12 additional units between phase two and three.

The first amendment to the project was made on June 17, 2019, as Stonyhill sought to consolidate phases two and three into a single phase.

However, according to the new development agreement, delays in construction have made Stonyhill desire to go back to a phase two and three implementation.

The second amendment now will see eight market rate homes built in phase two, with an effective date of 2020. The third phase will see four market homes built by 2021.

The CDA approved the second amendment to the project.

During the roundtable discussion, Pepplitsch said discussion at the next meeting in August will include modular and speculative housing, as well as changes to the citys approach as new opportunities have arisen. Were in a better place than we were before, said Pepplitsch.

Pepplitsch said places where housing units could be located include the Northwest 5th Addition, Independence St., S. 20th and the recently acquired ODonnell property, in the northeast area of the community. The St. Anns Second Addition will also see more housing units built there.

Theres such a need for housing across all areas, Pepplitsch told the CDA.

View original post here:

Community Development Agency approves project to build two new speculative homes on Patriot Dr. - Lexington Clipper Herald

LOVELAND, CO - JULY 25, 2020: Vietnam veteran Charlie Nash holds a sign at a "Back the Blue" demonstration in support of law enforcement Saturday afternoon in Loveland. (Carina Julig / Loveland Reporter-Herald)

LOVELAND, CO - JULY 25, 2020: Kevin Beard holds an American flag while waving to drivers on Eisenhower Boulevard at a "Back the Blue" demonstration in support of law enforcement Saturday afternoon in Loveland. Beard has lived in Loveland for 17 years and said he thinks that local law enforcement does a very good job. (Carina Julig / Loveland Reporter-Herald)

LOVELAND, CO - JULY 25, 2020: Kurt Winkelhake holds a "We heart LPD" sign at a "Back the Blue" demonstration in support of law enforcement Saturday afternoon in Loveland. (Carina Julig / Loveland Reporter-Herald)

LOVELAND, CO - JULY 25, 2020: Loveland resident Kathy Norton holds a sign at a "Back the Blue" demonstration in support of law enforcement Saturday afternoon in Loveland. (Carina Julig / Loveland Reporter-Herald)

LOVELAND, CO - JULY 25, 2020: Fort Collins resident Garrett Hanawatt waves an American flag at a "Back the Blue" demonstration in support of law enforcement Saturday afternoon in Loveland. (Carina Julig / Loveland Reporter-Herald)

Hundreds of people gathered Saturday afternoon in Loveland for a Back the Blue demonstration to show support for local law enforcement.

People lined both sides of Eisenhower Boulevard by Lake Loveland waving American flags, thin blue line flags and signs in support of police, receiving near constant honks of support from passing cars, some of which drove by waving American flags.

At one point a Loveland police car drove through with its sirens blaring, to loud cheers.

Ron Weinberg, one of the organizers of the demonstration, said he counted over 350 people in attendance.

This is phenomenal, he said.

Bob Garner stood at the corner of Dwayne Webster Veterans Park with a Betsy Ross flag, which he said he liked because it represents Americas original principles.

Police have a very dangerous job, he said. Most of them are good men and women who want to do the right thing.

Kurt Winkelhake came to the gathering holding a We heart LPD sign. He said he feels police officers are getting the short end of the stick and he wanted to show his support.

Kathy Norton waved to passers-by while holding a sign saying back the blue. Norton said she interacts with police frequently at her job at Chick-Fil-A and that theyve always been respectful and theyve always done a good job.

Several Loveland City Council members were present, including John Fogle and Steve Olson. Olson said that he wasnt surprised by the large turnout, and wanted to attend to show his support as a council member.

Just yesterday, he said, a Loveland police officer helped his wife after her car overheated at an intersection and made sure that she was safe.

Police departments throughout the nation have taken a lot of heat and we want our department to know that we appreciate them, he said.

Loveland teenagers Josh Kobobel, 18, and his brother Justin Kobobel, 17, came out to counterprotest. The brothers said that they wanted to come out to show that there were people in Loveland with another opinion.

They said that people had expressed anger at their signs, one of which said stop killer cops, and several people followed them around the gathering, including pursuing them back and forth across Eisenhower Boulevard. At one point a man approached them asking if they were being paid to protest.

We have a right to protest too, Justin said.

When they say slogans like black lives matter theyre actually communists, said Jacob Garcia about the counterprotesters.

Garrett Hanawatt, who was waving an American flag and wearing a Second Amendment shirt styled like a football jersey, said he came down from Fort Collins to participate. He said he has several friends who are police officers and wanted to support them.

He was happy with the large turnout, which shows that people who care about and support law enforcement are in the majority, he said.

Lifelong Loveland resident Amy Bonner was at the gathering with a sign expressing thanks to the Loveland Police Department, Larimer County Sheriffs Office and Sheriff Justin Smith, who she said she is a fan of.

She has friends and family in the Loveland police and fire departments, and said she was happy at how many people had attended the event.

This shows how much strength and patriotism we have here, she said.

A similar Back the Blue event will be held Sunday in Berthoud from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Fickel Park at 620 Mountain Ave.

Read the rest here:

Hundreds gather by Lake Loveland for Back the Blue demonstration Saturday - Loveland Reporter-Herald

DEAR EDITOR:

If Democrats win in November, here is what to expect: higher taxes, even on your 401k. First, you lost your pension, now they want more of this. They will change the retirement rules for you in the middle of the game.

The Green New Deal will take the green right out of your wallet! No fracking will bring much higher energy costs, especially gasoline for your SUV and pickup truck. The cost of natural gas to heat your home will go through the roof. Remember paying those winter heating bills back in the 70s and 80s that were in the hundreds of dollars each month? Fracking can be done safely without damaging the environment under the proper laws and government supervision. Congress must stop trying to impeach Donald Trump and do its job!

Kiss the Second Amendment goodbye. Theyre coming after your guns with executive orders. By the time this gets straightened out in court, it will be too late.

Many jobs will go back to China. Do you really think Joe Biden will stand up to China? I dont. Where will your kids work? Your grandkids? They could probably get jobs as police officers because, thanks to the Democrats and national media, no one wants to do that anymore. So much for law and order.

The economy will falter under all the red tape and new regulations. Unemployment will be very high. The printing of paper money to pay for all of the free stuff will cause a big decline in the buying power of the dollar. What you could buy for $1 in 2000 now costs $1.50 in 2020. The higher debt load the country will carry will rapidly accelerate the decline of the dollar, so get ready. In other words, the price of everything will go up dramatically.

Please dont vote based on the candidates personality. I dont like Donald Trump either. He has a very abrasive personality and an ego and pride like Ive never seen. I hate his name calling of anyone who attacks him, but it is a no-brainer that the cost to live in America under this Republican president will be much, much less than it will be with Joe Biden and Democrats.

If youre going to vote Democrat across the board, then be ready for a very expensive life and do not complain about it, as you have been warned what is coming.

Please research what I said here, and you will find it all to be true.

KEITH McCOMBS

Mineral Ridge

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Read more:

Electing Dems will drive up cost of living | News, Sports, Jobs - Warren Tribune Chronicle

GREENVILLE The microphone was disinfected repeatedly, but there was no need to sanitize the candidates comments during a civilized primary election forum Thursday evening.

From left, candidates for Michigans 70th District state representative, Republicans Martin Ross, Pat Outman, Arturo Puckerin, Greg Alexander and Democrat Karen Garvey, sit together as they are introduced to the public during a candidate forum held at Veterans Park in Greenville on Thursday. DN Photo | Cory Smith

An estimated 100 people with their lawn chairs in tow relaxed in Greenvilles Veterans Park while listening to 10 candidates answer questions and share their goals including six 70th District state representative hopefuls, three Montcalm County District Court judge contenders and two Montcalm County clerk candidates.

The event was hosted by the Daily News, the Greenville Area Chamber of Commerce, Montcalm Community College and the Womens Action Network. Roger Coles served as the capable moderator and Chamber Executive Director Gae Wolfe cleansed the microphone with a disinfectant wipe in between each speaker a nod to the coronavirus pandemic which continues to dominate most aspects of life, including Thursdays event.

Christopher Comden, one of five Republican candidates for 70th District state representative, was absent from the forum as he was self-quarantining while awaiting the results of a coronavirus test after noticing some symptoms, which he said may just be the result of bad hay fever.

%curr% of %total%

70th DISTRICT STATE REP

Four of the five Republican candidates for 70th District state representative were present Greg Alexander, Pat Outman, Arturo Puckerin and Martin Ross along with Karen Garvey, the lone Democrat challenger the Republican primary election winner will face in Novembers general election.

Alexander represented himself as a blue-collar man of the people, calling himself a grease monkey, a mechanic.

Your voice is what needs to be in Lansing, not the corporate bigwigs, he said. Im one of you. I do not seek endorsements. I do not want to be one of their puppets. I want to be your guys voice.

Outman also cited his blue-collar roots as a home builder and excavator by trade and said his father, State Sen. Rick Outman, R-Six Lakes, inspired him to run for state rep.

I decided to run for this seat because I thought public service has never been more important to our community and state and country than it has now, he said. Currently, theres a radical push to transform our country. My generation is a big proponent behind that. Its going to be up to my generation to correct the course on that and uphold our traditional values. Its something that Im certainly up to the task for.

Puckerin, the executive director of the Muskegon-Oceana Community Action Partnership, brought his charisma and touted his childhood growing up with parents in the military, along with his current leadership job as his qualifications.

Id like to thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for giving me the opportunity to be here with all you guys, he declared. Its ominous what the futures going to look like. Now is going to be the time that we have to elect and put people in office that have progressive forward-thinking ideas. Im the only candidate that you saw during this pandemic anywhere out helping, out serving, out doing anything I can to see how I can help you. Now walk with me.

Ross, a retired longtime U.S. Post Office employee, positioned himself as the most conservative of the bunch, rating himself a 9 on a scale of 1 to 10 (with 1 being liberal and 10 being conservative).

Im a common-sense conservative, Ross said. Conservative solutions work. The free enterprise system works. Taxes, we want them as low as possible. Freedom, we want them as high as possible. Government is not always the answer. Sometimes its the problem.

In comparison, Alexander ranked himself a 5 while Puckerin ranked himself a 7 or 8. Outman wasnt sure where he would rank on the scale.

Ross noted hes the only candidate of the bunch who was endorsed by Michigan Right to Life and he took a dig at Outman, who has the support of his state senator father, as well as outgoing State Rep. Jim Lower and former State Sen. Judy Emmons.

Many of my competitors may indeed be pro-life but after they (Right to Life) thoroughly vetted us, they decided I would be the best choice for protecting rights of the unborn in Lansing, Ross said. I am pleased to be homegrown, instead of handpicked. I am a candidate not of the Lansing interest, but of the local interest. This seat does not belong to one family. This seat does not belong to the voice of a handpicked few. This seat belongs to us, the people of the 70th District. Its not me thats been sending you 12 and 16 and 18 mailers. I am not the Lansing candidate, I am the local candidate and I hope that you will reward me with your vote.

When asked about his qualifications, Puckerin, who has attended Cooley Law School, replied, A state representative, a legislator, is a lawyer. If you dont have any legal training, I dont believe you have the requisite competency to be in competition with all that we have going on.

Ross called out Puckerin who is not an attorney for this answer.

Art, I couldnt disagree with you more, Ross said. We need citizen legislatures, not more lawyers. I want to be a citizen legislature in the way that our Founding Fathers envisioned that you would serve your friends and neighbors for a time and then return to your plow, return to your mercantile and live under the laws that you have created.

The candidates were asked for their thoughts on mail-in election ballots.

Certainly the concept of mail-in ballots I have no issue with, Outman said. The issue of potential fraud is what concerns me, not around here, but particularly in areas of southeast Michigan and Detroit. The potential for fraud is a concern of mine. Donald Trump won this state by less than 10,000 votes. Every vote counts in this election and I would certainly hope our clerks maintaining the integrity of it.

Ross said during a recent visit to Winfield Township, Clerk Colleen Stebbins explained the process to him.

The clerk was very forceful in saying Michigan doesnt have mail-in ballots the same way that Colorado does, he said. I certainly would not like to move to all mail-in ballots. I would like to see voter ID at the polls.

Puckerin agreed with these thoughts but noted that this year was unique.

Weve got to recognize that these are trying times, he said. Theres a lot of apprehension for senior citizens, a lot of apprehension for all our Montcalm and Gratiot county friends and neighbors with this unprecedented disease. Im willing to consider this year a different kind of year.

Im going to the poll, Alexander declared. If youre scared, mail it in. With the mail right now, the mail is slowed down because of COVID. Theyve lost mail deliveries and everything else. My concern if you mail it in is to make sure it gets to the clerk. Everybody needs to go to the voting poll, everybody needs to show their ID and get checked out so we can be sure whos voting. Id like to see everything back to normal.

The candidates were asked for their views on universal background checks for guns.

Im certainly against any more gun control regulation, Outman said.

I think we have enough burdensome regulations when it comes to firearms, Puckerin said. I find them to be just a bit invasive. We are talking about a federal right, we are talking about a Second Amendment right.

If gun control works, Chicago would be the safest city on this earth, Ross noted. There already are background checks and theyre extensive. I am not for any expansion of or infringement on our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

I dont have a problem with universal checks, but as somebody that has protested at the Capitol for Second Amendment rights, I do not agree with any more checks and balances, Alexander said. Weve got enough. Enforce what weve got.

All four Republican candidates agreed its a problem that Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and the state Legislature are not currently working together amid the coronavirus pandemic.

We need to get to a place where businesses can open again, Ross said. Unless an area is hard hit by the coronavirus, we need to unlock Michigan. Damage has already been done with small businesses being closed for so long. Unlock our economy and let these businesses recover. A governor should not continue to issue herself 28-day extensions of that (emergency declaration). If the governor does not want to work with the legislature, what more can they (the legislature) do?

We need to put people back to work, Alexander agreed. People want to work, thats our nature, thats what we do. We need to unlock the legislation, let us work together. The first thing we need to do is get rid of some of the amendments that shes (Whitmer) running on all by herself and get us all working together. Its not a one-man show.

I would certainly work to restore the proper system of checks and balances in our government, Outman said. Were all in this together and we need to start showing it with effective cooperation between our three branches of government.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE RACE

The three attorneys running for Montcalm County District Court judge Keeley Blanchard, Adam Eggleston and Tom Ginster each worked to stand out from each other at Thursdays forum.

Blanchard positioned herself as the most progressive and community-oriented candidate. One of her goals is to combine the District Court and Circuit Court offices and cross-train clerks to make those offices more efficient, as well as move to electronic filing. Eggleston pointed out that e-filing is up to the State Court Administrative Office, which Blanchard agreed with, but she said she would make it a priority with that Lansing office.

Our courts have contact with a huge number of our community members each year and in a large context thats in criminal cases, Blanchard said. Its important to me that the people who have contact with our court go back out into our community as better people. That will be my focus. I want people to have a positive experience with our courts.

Eggleston touted his local roots hes a seventh-generation Montcalm County resident as well as his many endorsements by local officials and his years of experience working in District Court. He said he likes to take collaborative approaches to court programs with his colleagues and other agencies.

The people who regularly interact with the Montcalm County court system trust me to protect the citizens rights and to keep this community safe, he said. On day one, if elected, I will be able to hit the ground running and take the court to the next level.

Ginster described his judicial philosophy as a law and order judge who strictly interprets the law to its plain meeting and doesnt make the law. He reiterated his three goals reduce the number of people who die in Montcalm County traffic accidents, create a rocket docket to speed up the process of domestic violence cases and to be the hardest working judge in Michigan and also pointed out that he isnt accepting any campaign contributions from attorneys, unlike his two opponents.

Im not accepting any money from lawyers, Ginster said. I was disheartened to learn that both of them are conducting fundraisers in bars with attorneys that are funding their campaigns. I dont think a litigant should be left to wonder which lawyer has given the judge more money. I think that undermines confidence in the judicial system.

Blanchard said attorneys can legally donate to judicial candidates, but she noted that candidates should be aware of how donations may appear to voters.

Its something that you want to not come into your campaign, as far as bias about who donated and who didnt donate, she said. Thats also true, I think, for endorsements. I think that seeking out endorsements of our local officials can potentially create some bias in the way that we decide cases.

Eggleston who has touted his many local endorsements wasnt phased at being called out.

I will take money from lawyers. Ive gotten money from lawyers. Ive also gotten a lot of endorsements from community members and a lot of community support, Eggleston said. I dont really apologize for it. I actually appreciate it. I think its a recognition of my candidacy more than anything. Its not going to affect the way I make any rulings in the court. It doesnt matter what a person feels about me or how a person feels about me. They deserve justice and they deserve to be treated fairly no matter what. I believe that I can put aside any kind of donations.

The candidates were asked how they would work to ensure equality in court for people of all backgrounds.

I believe strongly that every single human being is made in the image of God and a judge should treat every litigant with respect and rule with impartiality, Ginster answered.

I also believe that everybody should be treated equally despite anything in their background or orientation or race or ethnicity, Eggleston responded. I believe that everybody should be treated fairly and honestly and we should do the best that we can.

The reality that Ive seen in our criminal justice system is that racial bias does exist, Blanchard noted. The first step that we need to take is acknowledging that. That means that judges, including myself if elected, will have to look inward and examine my own bias. We also have to work to ensure that everybody working in our court system has an opportunity to examine their own bias so we dont have that in the way of us implementing justice in our court.

COUNTY CLERK RACE

Montcalm County Clerk Kristen Millard touted her 31 years of county clerk office experience 23 years as the elected county clerk while challenger Meg Mullendore cited her extensive public sector experience as qualifications for the office of county clerk.

Mullendore said her experience working for three cities have prepared her for this job.

I bring more than just the clerk knowledge, Mullendore said. There are other skill sets that other departments can utilize. Ive been watching this for the last couple of years, the relationships that are deteriorating and the bridges that need to be repaired. The clerks office has become divisive with the Board of Commissioners and some of the other departments. You dont have to like who you work with, but you still have to work with them.

Millard disagreed that city clerk knowledge is the same as county clerk knowledge.

I have county knowledge, Millard said. Its a whole different ballgame between municipal government and county government. Its nothing like working in a city clerks office or overseeing a city clerk. I think I have done pretty darn good job. I have an amazing team of deputy clerks. We have functioned amazingly with just the limited staff that weve had over the last three years.

Both women said they would like to see the clerks Elections/Vital Records Office open five days a week again that office has only been open three days a week since budget cuts in 2017 but disagreed on whether that office should be merged with the clerks Circuit Court Office.

Millard noted the topic of getting the Vital Records Office open full-time again was discussed at Thursdays Montcalm County Finance & Personnel Committee budget workshop.

The biggest thing that needs to happen is that we need additional staff, Millard said. There are a lot of things that go on behind the scenes that individuals arent aware of. Its certainly not ever anything that we wanted to do, closing the office two days a week. Hopefully, once we get through this budget process, well be hiring staff and reopening our Vital Records back to five days per week. We are going to look at e-filing. We have a very serious space issue. Everything we have in Montcalm County is paper.

I would like to see the office reopen back to five days and I would like to see the consolidation, Mullendore said. I think the big thing is cross-training so that all the employees are cross-trained in the event that something happens. Primarily it is about access and customer service.

I dont believe that the consolidation of the two-county clerk offices is in the best interest of the county and I would not push for it, Millard countered.

An audience member asked the candidates to share their thoughts on a discussion at the Montcalm County Finance & Personnel Committee level about possibly using a voter-approved law enforcement millage to fund some budget requests at the prosecutors office (as reported in Tuesdays Daily News).

Everybody I know that voted for it believed it was dedicated solely to the sheriffs department, Mullendore said. I think by doing that, the Board of Commissioners jeopardizes themselves and their own credibility if they do tap into that by reducing what the sheriffs department normally gets out of the general fund. I think it will impact their credibility and theyre going to lose the trust of the voters and I dont see other millages passing.

If the Board of Commissioners decide theyre going to tap into that and use it for any other law enforcement function, I think theyve lost all public trust, Millard agreed. I dont think were going to see any other millages pass. I would really hope that our Board of Commissioners would not do that.

Here is the original post:

Meet the candidates - Greenville Daily News

The approximately 300 full-time workers furloughed from their jobs at the Remington Arms plant in Ilion are expected to return to work within a month after certain suppliers, shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, can provide raw materials again.

Still, news of the furloughs along with a Wall Street Journal report that the company is preparing to file for bankruptcy for the second time in two years and could be sold to the Navajo Nation has local officials concerned for Remington, Herkimer Countys largest employer. Theyre willing to help if they can.

With the North Carolina-based company in bankruptcy proceedings, however, there isnt a lot that can be done right now, said Herkimer County Industrial Development Agency (IDA) Executive Director John Piseck.

"They havent had any discussions with us," he said. He pointed out that the company partial ownership through a hedge fund also makes it more difficult to get involved.

Local officials "maybe" could work out a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) agreement "if the owners reached out," Piseck said. The IDA offers such tax breaks to assist businesses particularly those that are just starting up or seek to expand.

"Id hate to see (Remington) close," Piseck said, adding he would not want to see the area lose manufacturing jobs. "Weve got a governor whos against firearms even though there are several major gun manufacturers in New York state."

A request for comment to Remington was not immediately returned before press time.

Village limited

Ilion Mayor Brian Lamica said he found out about the furloughs at Remington the same way as everybody else: Through media reports.

And while the IDA could potentially help, Lamica said the Village of Ilion "is not financially able to do anything," but added he would be willing to reach out to the areas state and federal representatives on the companys behalf.

Remington has received such assistance in the past.

This includes a 2008 financial package that included a $1.5 million state grant and $1.5 million from the Empire State Development Corporation to bring jobs to Ilion and help fund upgrades. In 2011, the New York Power Authority approved the allocation of 3,250 kilowatts to Ilion to provide low-cost municipal power to Remington a move then-Mayor John Stephens said would result in a substantial savings for the company.

"If needed, we could offer them a place to have meetings or for people to sign up for benefits," Lamica said.

Lamica said Remingtons struggles are felt at the local level.

"Every time theres a furlough, that takes away 300, 400 or 500 people who would be buying lunch or getting gas while theyre in the village," he said. "That hurts our local economy."

With news headlines about various shootings, Lamica said, he has heard that banks are not quick to lend to firearms manufacturers.

"In a way, thats attacking our Second Amendment rights," he said. "Nobody forces anybody to buy a gun. People who use them in an improper fashion are not the type of people we want to have guns. What we need to do is enforce the laws that are on the books, not create new laws."

Originally posted here:

Herkimer County officials want to help Remington if they can - The Times Telegram

Posted Thu, July 23rd, 2020 1:45 pm by Andrew Hamm

This week we highlight cert petitions pending before the Supreme Court that ask the court to weigh in on a variety of hot-button constitutional and political issues. One petition, in Lieu v. Federal Election Commission, asks the court to decide whether federal limits on political donations can, under the First Amendment, be applied to donations to so-called super PACs. Another petition, in Zoie H. v. Nebraska, asks the court to review, under the Second and Sixth Amendments, a state law that allows juvenile courts, without a jury trial, to bar certain individuals from possessing firearms until age 25. And a third petition, in Blumenthal v. Trump, asks the court to wade into a lawsuit by 29 Democratic senators alleging that President Donald Trump is violating the Constitutions emoluments clause.

These and otherpetitions of the weekare below the jump:

Lieu v. Federal Election Commission19-1398Issue: Whether the federal statutory limit on contributions to political committees,52 U.S.C. 30116(a)(1)(C), comports with the First Amendment as applied to committees that make only independent expenditures.

Hughes v. Northwestern University19-1401Issue: Whether allegations that a defined-contribution retirement plan paid or charged its participants fees that substantially exceeded fees for alternative available investment products or services are sufficient to state a claim against plan fiduciaries for breach of the duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,29 U.S.C. 1104(a)(1)(B).

Zacarias v. Janvey19-1402Issue: Whether a district court in a receivership action has Article III jurisdiction to bar investor claims for individual injuries when the receiver lacks standing to bring those claims himself due to the lack of an injury to the receivership estate.

Rupert v. Janvey19-1411Issue: Whether the standing requirement of Article III limits receivers to bringing claims that are coextensive with the receivership estate and thus whether Article III precludes receivers from bringing, settling and barring claims of third parties against non-receivership entities.

United States v. Cooley19-1414Issue: Whether the lower courts erred in suppressing evidence on the theory that a police officer of an Indian tribe lacked authority to temporarily detain and search the respondent, Joshua James Cooley, a non-Indian, on a public right-of-way within a reservation based on a potential violation of state or federal law.

Zoie H. v. Nebraska19-1418Issue: Whether the Second and Sixth Amendments permit a state to deprive an individual of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms based on the commission of an offense while denying the accused a right to a jury trial for that offense.

Blumenthal v. Trump20-5Issue: Whether legislators have standing to seek judicial relief when their votes have been completely nullified underRaines v. Byrd.

Posted in Lieu v. Federal Election Commission, Hughes v. Northwestern University, Zacarias v. Janvey, Rupert v. Janvey, U.S. v. Cooley, Zoie H. v. Nebraska, Blumenthal v. Trump, Cases in the Pipeline

Recommended Citation: Andrew Hamm, Petitions of the week: Political donations, gun rights, the emoluments clause and more, SCOTUSblog (Jul. 23, 2020, 1:45 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/07/petitions-of-the-week-political-donations-gun-rights-the-emoluments-clause-and-more/

Read the rest here:

Petitions of the week: Political donations, gun rights, the emoluments clause and more - SCOTUSblog

Since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, opportunities to speak to constituents about local government face-to-face have become scarce.

Since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, opportunities to speak to constituents about local government face-to-face have become scarce.

Thats why several candidates for Monroe Township and some county offices jumped at the opportunity to introduce themselves, speak with voters and discuss local issues ahead of the Aug. 4 primary election.

Monroe Boat Club, 7932 Bolles Harbor Dr., hosted a Meet the Candidates event Thursday night, which welcomed local candidates, along with some seeking county offices, for remarks and a question-and-answer period. The event was held outdoors, adhering to recommended social distancing requirements.

Candidates provided brief backgrounds, explained why theyre running for office and provided a few key issues which prompted their decision to run for office.

I thought it was an opportunity to see what other options are out there for me to serve the community, said Jerry Oley, a Democrat and vice-chairman of the Monroe County Board of Commissioners whos running for Monroe County Clerk/Register of Deeds.

I think I have a lot more to offer Monroe County.

His challenger, Sandra Blank, also a Democrat and retired administrative assistant for the Michigan Department of Corrections, hinted at minimal changes she aims to make in the post after becoming familiar with the office and its staff.

My idea, if I win, is to work (in the clerks office) for a little while and get a feel for the opinions of those who work there, Blank said. I will have to give it a try before implementing any changes.

Locally, citizens seemed most concerned about the township making quick improvement to the LaPlaisance Rd. bridge construction, which is expected to include bridge reconstruction and a reconstruction of the I-75 interchange.

Residents also asked candidates about their positions on second amendment rights, and even asked about the recent debate over the Gen. George Armstrong Custer statue, although thats in the City of Monroes jurisdiction.

The following is a roundup of remarks from candidates for Monroe Township offices who spoke during the candidate forum, in alphabetical order, along with their political affiliation and offices sought:

Al Barron, Democrat, supervisor (incumbent)

Updating the public on the LaPlaisance Rd. bridge reconstruction project, discussing the future of medical marijuana facilities in the township and continuing to support the areas public safety forces were at the forefront of Barrons reelection message.

Weve come a long way here, he said. I think the biggest thing (improved) during my term has been the fire department It still should be a main priority.

Barron has served as township supervisor since 1992, seven terms. From 1988-92, he served as trustee.

Wayne Blank, Republican, supervisor

Improving township communication and interaction with citizens are Blanks top priorities in his bid for the supervisors post. For the first time publicly, he announced that hes running for half-pay, stating that hes not in the race for the money.

Ive got a little bit of experience leading, and I think I would bring that to Monroe Township, he said. I would like to see people get involved with the township, the community I plan on making Monroe Township a center for citizens.

Blank has served as a township trustee since 2016. He served in the U.S. Air Force from 1967-71.

Terrance Guido Gerin, Republican, trustee

Better known by ring-name Rhyno, Gerin is a professional wrestler. Moving to the area just two years ago, he said he recently became involved in local politics.

I started going to meetings and thats how I really started getting involved, he said. Some politicians get really caught up in things and dont listen to citizen concerns One of the things Id like to do as trustee is talk with the citizens.

Gerin is the owner of Big Daddys Boat Yard, 13931 Bridge Dr. in Raisinville Township., a marina and boat storage facility. This is his first local political office sought, although he was a 2016 candidate to represent District 15 in the Michigan House.

Richard Janssens, Republican, trustee

If elected, Janssens says he wont miss a beat as trustee, a position he formerly held. Hes known for advocating for fiscal responsibility and wants to ensure essential township services are maintained throughout the coronavirus pandemic.

Hopefully I can pick up where I last left off as trustee, he said.

Janssens retired from DTE Energy and was a farmer. He served in the U.S. Army.

John Manor, Republican, trustee (incumbent)

Monroe is a gateway community, Manor said, but sometimes is treated like a doorstep. Growing businesses in the township, along with supporting nonprofits as the community recovers from COVID-19, are at the heart of his bid for reelection.

What I thoroughly love about local politics is knowing exactly who youre helping, he said. I think, locally, weve had a lot of opportunity to know the people we are helping.

Manor is a current township trustee. He previously worked for the Michigan Legislature.

Kevin Raymo, Republican, trustee

In brief remarks, Raymo said he supports sound fiscal spending in the township. He expressed gratitude for the opportunity to speak to the public in person, a format thats been scarce amid COVID-19.

We need to keep people safe, but not create a panic, he said in a response to a questionnaire from The Monroe News. We need to keep the economy moving forward. Make both parties, Democrats and Republicans, work together for what is best for the citizens we represent.

Raymo is a retired 911 dispatcher for Monroe County Central Dispatch.

***

The following township candidates who are up for reelection did not attend the forum: Clerk Christina Smith, Republican; Treasurer Penny D. Barton, Democrat; Trustee William Heck Jr., Democrat.

Guy Howe, a Republican, also is a candidate for trustee who did not attend.

Katybeth Davis, a Democrat, is running as a write-in district delegate during the August primary and trustee in the November general election. She also was not present.

Annamarie Osmet, a Republican, is running for Monroe County Clerk/Register of Deeds, along with Oley and Blank, but did not attend.

Link:

Meet the Candidates: Monroe Boat Club hosts Monroe Township candidate forum ahead of August primary - Bedford Now

By Isaac HaleDaily Herald

SPRINGVILLE Its a hot, summer afternoon, and a posse of cowboys and cowgirls with aliases such as Lonesome Hart, Tamarack, Anita Gunn and Colt Colton are gathering at the mouth of Hobble Creek Canyon in Springville. Dressed in Old West attire, with single-action six-shooters, rifles and shotguns in hand, theyve come to see who has the keenest eye and fastest trigger finger of the bunch on this side of the Wasatch.

No, this isnt a rerun of some old Western movie, this is a modern-day club shoot for the Hobble Creek Wranglers, Utah Countys only Cowboy Action Shooting Club.

Of all of the shooting sports Ive done, this is by far the most fun, said Springville resident Bob Marshall, who is the groups president.

Cowboy Action Shooting is a sport that incorporates firearms and costumes from the Old West (typically the period from 1860-1900) and aims to bring people together through a mutual love of firearms and preserving the history of the Old West. Cowboy Action Shooting is governed by the Single Action Shooting Society, an international organization founded in 1987.

I think its the hardest shooting sport and the most fun because you dont just master one gun, you have to use four of them in every stage, explained Marshall. Its the best people that Ive ever shot around.

In Cowboy Action Shooting, each shooting sequence is called a scenario, where participants use two pistols, a rifle and a shotgun to hit a series of metal targets in a certain order as fast as possible.

The trick to doing this, at least for me, is counting, explained Michael Snelson, a Springville resident and also the secretary and treasurer of the group. Some people look at the shapes of the targets and they do it by shape, some people count by how many shots have to go on each target. One of the most used scenarios is called a Nevada sweep. There will be four targets set up, well start on target one, sweep the four targets, and then come back and sweep them again.

Each scenario begins with a spotter hitting a timer, and as soon as the scenario begins, shooters pull out their first pistol from their holster and shoot five rounds into the targets, then they pull out their next pistol and shoot five more rounds. Upon shooting all the pistol rounds, the shooter then moves a few feet to the next selection of targets where a rifle is sitting on a table. The shooter fires on the targets until the rifle is empty, then heads to a central table where a shotgun is waiting. The shooter shoots two rounds, loads two more, and then time is called.

For a fast shooter, the whole sequence is usually completed in about a dozen seconds.

Its challenging; it is not easy to go out and do this, said Karen Doty, 79, a resident of Hemet, California, who stopped by the Hobble Creek Wranglers June shoot with her husband, Ron Doty, 82, while in the county visiting family and attending a baby blessing. The two are graduates of Brigham Young University, and go by the aliases Spokane and Colt Colton, respectively.

For Cowboy Action Shooting, its not only about shooting like a cowboy, but also dressing and playing the part, too.

In addition to only using guns designed before 1900, all members of the Single Action Shooting Society are required to make an effort to dress like a character from the Old West period. Their choice of who to role play is up to them. Along with the costumes, every shooter also has a unique alias.

For many, their alias says something about themselves, or their familys history. For others, its an homage to their favorite Old West gunslinger, or even just some silly wordplay or a name that simply sounded cool.

For Karen Spokane Doty, her alias pays tribute to her hometown of Spokane, Washington. I dress like an old schoolmarm from prior to 1900, said Karen with a smile, gesturing to her long, black dress, black vest with a long-sleeved white button-up underneath and a black, flat-brimmed hat atop her head all of which are made from heavy, durable materials.

You kind of come here in a make-believe state, and it kind of stays through the day while youre shooting, said president Bob Marshall, who goes by the alias Hobble Creek Marshal because of his last name, and the fact that he lives in the mouth of Hobble Creek Canyon.

Though the cowboy and cowgirl costumes are a bit of role playing, the camaraderie between shooters is quite real. Several shooters explained that its the people that keep them coming back the second Saturday of each month from March through November for the clubs shoots. Be it some good-natured horseplay or a rivalry, the people of Cowboy Action Shooting keep each shoot fresh and fun.

The second time I shot in the state championship shoot, I won it, said Marshall. The next year, there was a guy that was kind of my nemesis at the time. The day before the shoot I was having problems with my rifle, and he came over and said, Ive got this extra rifle and Id rather you shoot this because if I beat you I want it to be because I outshot you, not because you had problems with a rifle. I didnt shoot good anyway, but thats not the point, he said with a laugh. Thats the kind of people the sports made up with.

Winter Range is the name of the Single Action Shooting Societys national championship, and End of Trail is the name of the groups international championship. Winners dont win any cash prizes, but receive cowboy gear along with trophy-like belt buckles, and of course, bragging rights. Utahs Single Action Shooting Societys state title is also an annual contest, which cycles to different shooting ranges in the state. According to Michael Snelsons last count, there are 16 clubs in Utah, all holding their club shoots on varying days of the month. If we wanted to, we could shoot every week, said Snelson.

Like any shooting sport, gun safety is as integral a part of Cowboy Action Shooting as any of its theatrics.

There are a lot of rules with Cowboy Action Shooting to make sure we stay safe and people dont get shot, said Snelson. There has hardly ever been anyone since the 1980s injured in Cowboy Action Shooting. Everybody understands the safety rules, and theyre watching out for infractions.

For example, guns point into earthen berms when loading and unloading, rifles and shotguns are carried uncocked, vertically with the barrel up, when on range, guns cannot be pointed any wider than 170 degrees from downrange, and only five rounds are loaded into six-shooting pistols so if the gun did fire accidentally, theres an empty chamber up first. Along with missing targets, safety infractions also add time to lower a shooters score. If the safety infraction is egregious enough like dropping a loaded gun the shooter is disqualified from the shoot for the day.

Ive been a shooting cowboy with this club for 14 years, and Ive traveled around to other places, but Ive never seen anybody hurt, Snelson said.

Though Snelson admitted that many of the clubs shooters are older men primarily because of the high cost of buying four firearms, ammo and an outfit to be a regular with the club Cowboy Action Shooting values diversity in its shooters and their skills.

The beauty of this game is that theres something for everyone, said Kirk Ekins, who goes by the alias Rusty Razor, due to his aversion to shaving his long, thick beard. Ekins, and his wife, Lisa, are both Utah state champs in Cowboy Action Shooting. Im pretty competitive and I do fairly well, he said. Theres one shooter where hell shoot a stage in 80 seconds and Ill shoot it in 20 seconds, and he tells me he had four times more fun. Its whatever you want to be. There are people who just love the costumes. Weve got wives that show up for banquet that never shoot a gun, but they love to dress up in Victorian gowns, and then theres the collector that likes his old Colts and original guns. You can be competitive, you can just cheer for the crowd, whatever; theres something for everyone in this game.

However, one common thread among shooters is an appreciation for the Second Amendment. We love our country, and this is one thing that we do to show that support, Snelson said.

We really wish that people who would like to see the Second Amendment not be what it is today, we would like to get them out to the range and let them try this so they can get a feel for it, explained Snelson. For people that havent done it or dont like the Second Amendment, wed like to have them shoot with us and see what its all about. Weve had people come up who think they were afraid of guns because of what theyve seen, and we actually get a gun in their hand and they shoot, and they have a great time doing it.

Read the original post:

Hobble Creek Wranglers target love of firearms and Old West - Deseret News

DANIEL McCAULEY, Staunton Published 11:54 a.m. ET July 24, 2020

The power behind the Stauntons city council is in Rockingham County.

The power is a woman who sees her job as putting conservatives in charge of local governments to further her political power in Virginias 6th District.

The power is Jennifer Brown, who totes a law degree from Pat Robertsons university and has been the Republican chairperson of the 6th Congressional District since 2018. She was behind the election that swept into office one incumbent council member and three new ones because they called themselves conservative.

In exchange, Jennifer Brown gets bragging rights and gets the endorsement for her political manipulation to run the GOP as a Constitutional Conservative. Among her beliefs is the right to carry firearms, so expect another shot at Staunton becoming a Second Amendment sanctuary city. Among her beliefs is Ben Cline needs to be re-elected, so expect our council to be showcased in Clines fall campaign.

Among her beliefs appears to be that she is right and anyone who disagrees is wrong, so expect our city council to fall in line and stifle alternative points of view.

Jennifer Brown has turned the city council from a deliberative body to work out what is best for the citizens of the city to a political organization to ensure the well-being of the Republican Party in this part of Virginia.

While nobody has staked a claim to 21st Century Virginia PAC, that funded mailers for the four winning council members, watch for the connections to lead back to Jennifer Brown, the power behind the council.

DANIEL McCAULEY

Staunton

Read or Share this story: https://www.newsleader.com/story/opinion/readers/2020/07/24/jennifer-brown-out-town-power-behind-staunton-council-letter/5457986002/

View post:

Jennifer Brown, the out-of-town power behind the Staunton council: Letter - The News Leader

Published: 7/23/2020 6:33:14 PM

A neighbor of mine in Amherst has called for a comprehensive review of policing practices in our town. Not very long ago perhaps a couple of weeks ago I might have agreed with him. His recommendations would have seemed sensible and feasible, while calls to defund the police would have sounded like sheer madness.

I have changed my mind and can no longer endorse a review of policing practices, no matter how comprehensive that review may be. I believe that the entire system is rotten, rooted as it is in the oppression of Black, Indigenous and people of color, as well as in efforts to use violence to deny working peoples right to organize into labor unions.

Individual police officers may be blameless; I am sure that most officers are decent, civic-minded people who do their jobs with the best of intentions. It is the system that is corrupt, violent and destructive of the social fabric.

What I have come to understand is that a just and peaceful society cannot be built and sustained at gunpoint, when authority is delegated to people who are charged with enforcing societys rules with firearms and who carry with them at all times the threat of lethal violence. It may have been a police officers knee that choked the life out of George Floyd, but it was the sidearm strapped to the officers hip and the deep racism in his heart that made the knee an instrument of murder.

Defund and demilitarize the police: Regular police officers should not carry sidearms. And if officers feel unsafe and unable to protect themselves and the public without the ready option of deadly force, they should find another line of work. While were at it, the Second Amendment should be tossed into the scrap-heap of history and the American people should be disarmed.

I added my voice to the calls to cut the Amherst Police Departments budget in half. The money saved should be used to hire social and community workers who are trained to respond to the bulk of calls that are currently answered by police: Psychological emergencies, noisy parties, vandalism, and the like. Give these non-police community workers the authority to issue fines for violations.

We will still need some police for moving traffic violations, domestic abuse, robberies, public safety emergencies. Police should be armed only to respond to potentially violent, life-threatening situations, and they should to the greatest extent possible use only nonlethal weapons.

Reallocate money away from the APD and provide it to assist BIPOC people who want to start a business in town, or use the money to finance transitional housing for the unhoused. Use public money to help the public, not to threaten them with violence.

As Simone de Beauvoir famously said of supposedly liberal Frances response to the brutal colonization of Algeria, To protest in the name of morality against excesses or abuses is an error which hints at active complicity. There are no abuses or excesses here, simply an all-pervasive system.

Violence and the very threat of violence only begets more violence. Defund the police.

See the article here:

Guest columnist Alex Kent: Defund and demilitarize the police in Amherst - GazetteNET

In a 9 to 6 vote, the Sawyer County Board of Supervisors on Thursday, July 16, approved a non-binding resolution to reaffirm a commitment to the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and the right to bear arms under the Wisconsin Constitution.

During public comments and supervisor discussion, support for the resolution centered on the importance of the Second Amendment as critical to the existence of all other constitutional amendments, along with the importance of a public affirmation and concern over legislative efforts to diminish Second Amendment rights.

Those opposed to the resolution said the Second Amendment is enshrined in both the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions and the resolution was unnecessary and could provoke unnecessary consequences, such as placing local law enforcement in a position to interpret constitutional law, a role set aside for the courts.

In late 2019 a citizen approached the Public Safety Committee during public comments about creating Second Amendment sanctuary status for the county. Several Wisconsin counties have established Second Amendment Sanctuary status to offer law enforcement discretion whether to enforce laws county supervisors might consider an infringement to Second Amendment rights.

In Wisconsin, the sanctuary movement gained momentum after Gov. Tony Evers (D-Madison) took office in 2019 and proposed legislation requiring that all gun sales, including gun shows, conduct a background check. Evers also proposed red flag laws, which would allow law enforcement or a family member to appeal to a court for the removal of firearms based on a concern that a person is a threat to himself or others.

The resolution passed July 16, however, does not create sanctuary status. It does cite concerns about legislation from the state that would infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

According to the countys minutes and agendas, the first official mention of the resolution appeared on the agenda under Future Agenda Items, for the March 5 Public Safety Committee as Second Amendment Protection, but it wasnt openly discussed until the July 2 meeting under Second Amendment Resolution. At that meeting, after an 18-minute discussion, the committee adopted a resolution to be forwarded to the full Sawyer County Board on July 16.

The adopted resolution re-affirms, in part 1, all constitutional obligations, including the Second Amendment, and also notes, in part 2, its support of the sheriffs office.

In part 3 of the resolution, it notes the county will not support any actions that could infringe constitutional rights for the citizens of Sawyer County and in part 4 states opposition to any state or federal legislation that would infringe upon the constitutional rights of the citizens of Sawyer County.

Public comments

During public comments, five spoke in favor of the resolution and four spoke in opposition.

Harold Miller documented the historical and constitutional importance of the Second Amendment and discussed the importance of citizens being armed in light of recent civil unrest and personal safety, but he did not directly address the resolution.

Fred Briggs, who said he first proposed the sanctuary status, said he represented a Facebook group of 1,200 people, including 850 county residents, who supported the resolution.

Briggs said he had presented a petition to the county with 650 signatures in support of the resolution, including 48 businesses, which were gathered in just over four weeks.

We want our officials to basically uphold their oath, Briggs said. If you look at the resolution, there is nothing in there new.

Jim Miller, representing the Republican Party for the 7th Congressional District, said his party had similar planks and supported the resolution.

Jeremy Stewart, founder of Change for Sawyer County, a new group representing young activists, supported the resolution. He said his support comes after seeing the civic unrest that led to destruction in Minneapolis after the death of George Floyd on May 25. He said the best antidote to social upheaval is peacefully coming together as a community, but he also noted the importance of being armed if unrest does happen.

Bill Schleusner, who initiated the resolution, said he believes there have been efforts to remove Second Amendment protections, and he said he believes the Second Amendment helps secure other constitutional rights.

In the past year or two, we have gotten lot of people in this country who think there are other ways that (are) much better to live and one of the things they are trying to do is take away the right to own a firearm to protect yourself, he said.

He contended more are killed each year by other means than a gun, and he also noted a fear of socialist countries.

I do not want you or my family or anyone else to live like they live, Schleusner said of socialist countries. Im proud of what we have here and a lot of military people have given their lives for our freedom and we need to maintain that.

Lastly, he called the resolution an additional lawyer of documentation to support the Second Amendment, which also supports the First Amendment.

The four who spoke in opposition to the resolution also noted their support of the Second Amendment.

I dont believe this resolution is necessary because the right to keep and bear arms is already well established in the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions, said Thomas Vitcenda of Exeland. This resolution is an unnecessary symbolic gesture that would do nothing to improve the safety and security of Sawyer County residents and visitors. Instead, a statement like this is likely to stoke fear, mistrust and division.

He also feared the resolution would result in discretionary power for law enforcement.

Mary Vicenda, Thomass sister, also from Exeland, also spoke in opposition and called the resolution largely symbolic, but noted it elevates gun rights over other amendments, such as the First Amendment, including freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to choose ones religion and more.

Tish Keahna, a lawyer who lives in Hayward, said she was asked by a county employee signing up those who wanted to make public comments, whether she was for or against the Second Amendment, a question, she said, that was disingenuous and framed the discussion as a political issue on the Second Amendment and not the countys resolution.

She also questioned why the county was devoting time to this issue when there were more pressing maters, and she added it was outside of the duty of law enforcement officers to interpret constitutional law because under it is the domain of the courts.

Joan Cervenka, a leader of Up North Engaged, a local grassroots political action group, questioned if part 3 of the resolution created an unintended financial obligation for the county to take an active role in ensuring all constitutional rights are observed, such as ensuring everything could be done to encourage access to voting.

Cervenka said the way to uplift constitutional rights in Sawyer County is to build the second courtroom and seat the second judge, and she also encouraged higher fees for public defenders so people are properly represented in court.

Board discussion

Supervisor James Schlender, chair of the Public Safety Committee, said there had been discussion of the resolution during the February and March committee meetings. However, there is no record of those discussions in county minutes.

The Record asked Schlender about those February and March discussions and he said there had been attempts to place the issue on the agenda but they had fallen through.

Schlender added that in May a draft resolution was brought forward that was amended as a reaffirmation of the Second Amendment and acknowledge law enforcement during a time of social upheaval.

Schlender asked for a motion to adopt the resolution, but Supervisor Troy Morgan proposed a motion to postpone pending a public hearing.

Theres a lot of passion on this from both sides, Morgan said, and I dont believe the public has had the proper notice to be able to discuss this. I would move that we would postpone this until a public hearing be held, so that we can hear from all relevant parties. I dont believe tonights public comment is sufficient for that, so that is my motion.

Supervisor Ron Kinsley seconded the motion. There was some confusion about the motion because some thought Schlender had made a motion, but Morgan pointed out that he had only called for a motion.

Schlender responded that Morgans motion seemed pre-planned to stop the resolution.

Supervisor Dale Schleeter said the resolution before the board had only been public for a matter of days and added he had received much feedback from those who had just heard about it and were not in favor but hadnt been able to attend a public meeting.

This is a big issue for Sawyer County, Schleeter said.

The vote to postpone the resolution pending a public hearing failed in a close 7 to 8 tally. Voting to postpone were Tom Duffy, Bruce Paulsen, Susie Taylor, Kinsley, Schleeter, Tweed Shuman and Morgan. Voting against postponing were Marc Helwig, Chuck Van Etten, Dale Olson, Dawn Petit, Ronald Buckholtz, Helen Dennis, Jesse Boettcher and Schlender.

After the motion failed, Olson recounted speaking to Schleusner that legally the resolution had no standing, but he would support the resolution because it supports the Second Amendment.

Morgan said he took an oath of office to support the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions, including the Second Amendment, and he also spoke of the resolution having unintended consequences.

Supervisor Helwig asked what those consequences might be.

Morgan said he was concerned law enforcement might not enforce some laws.

There is absolutely nothing in here I disagree with, Boettcher said.

Addressing Cervenkas concern over unintended obligations in part 3, he noted part 3 is a passive statement and did not require the county take an active role.

It doesnt say we are going to actively police and support anything, he said. It just says we are not going to support any infringement on any of those rights. Im not sure why that is so contentious. It seems pretty passive to me.

Supervisor Dennis noted that the resolution had been reviewed by the countys legal counsel, and she contended the resolution had been out in the public for some time.

Schlender said a reaffirming is an action of reassuring oneself. He used the practice of repeating the Pledge of Allegiance as one such reaffirmation.

This resolution is non-binding, Schlender said. It does not create any affirmative action other than that to say that we affirm our constitutional obligation to uphold our oath, and second one is we recognize the work and the sacrifices of the deputies and the sheriff.

Paulsen said as a gun owner he supported the Second Amendment but would not support the non-binding resolution. He said if the board wanted to show its support of the sheriff then it should offer a resolution specifically stating that.

In the final vote, nine supported the resolution and six were opposed.

The nine voting yes included Van Etten, Olson, Petit, Kinsley, Buckholtz, Dennis, Boettcher, Schlender and Helwig.

The six voting no included Duffy, Paulsen, Taylor, Schleeter, Shuman and Morgan.

Read the original here:

EXPANDED: County adopts resolution affirming Second Amendment | National News - KPVI News 6

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

One of the most common defenses of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution rests in the assertion that the people should have the right to bear arms in order to resist a tyrannical government. Asked what a tyrannical government actually looks like, some will explain that a government becomes tyrannical when it restricts ones civil liberties, such as ones freedom of speech and right to peaceably assemble. Yet few are calling for an armed insurrection against the Trump administration for its assaults on Americans civil liberties. After all, many of those protesting against systemic racism and police brutality are probably opposed to an unrestricted interpretation of the Second Amendment, not least because it has historically been invoked by racists to justify the killing of unarmed African Americans.

So when is a government considered tyrannical, and when does the Second Amendment become a necessary safeguard against government transgression? If someone had asked some of the founders, they might have said, abolition.

Its not emphasized in history textbooks enough, but the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights, at least in part, to placate plantation-dominated states in the South, so that slave owners could protect themselves from slave revolts and abolitionists by controlling their own state militias. People have only been misled into thinking otherwise because of a fatal misreading of history and a pernicious disregard for grammatical logic.

For starters, the question of states authority over their militias, not individual gun ownership rights, is at the heart of the Second Amendment. In June 1788, James Madison, one of the principal drafters of the Constitution and a future US President, made his case for ratification before the Virginia state convention. By then, eight of the nine states required to approve the Constitution had ratified it. Because New York, Rhode Island, North Carolina, and New Hampshire leaned anti-federalist (opposed to strengthening the central government), and did not seem likely to ratify it, all hope rested with Virginia. But it quickly became clear that Madison had made a dangerous oversight: he had inadvertently threatened the institution of slavery.

Slavery found its champions in Patrick Henry, the governor of Virginia and the colonies most renowned orator, as well as in George Mason, the intellectual leader of the anti-federalists. They railed against the proposed Constitution, arguing that its original wording, without the later addition of a Bill of Rights, implied that the federal government would be able to control a states militias without the states consent. This posed two problems for slave states. On the one hand, if the United States went to war and levied state militias, it would leave the southern states at the mercy of slave revolts. In some parts of the South, particularly eastern Virginia, white inhabitants were significantly outnumbered by their enslaved counterparts, and state militias were considered necessary to terrorize the slaves into submission. On the other hand, without explicitly extending the right to organize, arm, and discipline militias to the states themselves, the federal government might have been empowered to subvert the slave system by disarming the southern state militias. To this criticism, Madison argued that the states right to regulate their own militias was concurrent with that of the federal government. Nevertheless, Henry and Mason insisted that this was not the case, and nearly prevented Virginia from ratifying the Constitution.

Fear of Black people compelled Henry and Mason to resist the Constitution. And that fear defined the Southern cultural milieu that raised them: Southern colonists were habitually afraid of their human chattel, always fearful that enslaved African Americans would turn against them unless they were violently suppressed at every moment. Such fears were stoked by the Stono Revolt in South Carolina in 1739, after which state militias were increasingly used as slave patrols to subdue and preempt unrest, regularly inspecting slave quarters on plantations to search for arms and ammunition. Indeed, during the American Revolution, the southern states committed far fewer militias to the cause than their northern counterparts, because they feared inviting slave insurrection at home.

That same anxiety dictated their deliberations on the Constitution in 1788. The concern that the northern states might have been empowered to curtail slavery was justified; for as Patrick Henry observed at the convention, slavery is detested the majority of Congress is to the North, and the slaves to the South. In short, the tyranny they feared was a government controlled by northern abolitionists.

In the end, Virginia ratified the Constitution by a thin margin, and, unbeknownst to them, New Hampshire did the same. The Constitution was adopted, in spite of the concerns raised by Mason and Henry. Nevertheless, determined to secure slavery, Virginia proposed that Congress consider a declaration of 20 rights, including a right to bear arms, and 20 constitutional amendments, including one empowering states to arm their militias if Congress did not.

When Madison was elected to Congress in the fall, he was careful to ensure that nothing in the Bill of Rights contradicted the authorities established in the main body of the Constitution. So, instead of explicitly stating that states had the right to arm militias, he made use of the fact that state militias traditionally required members to bring their own guns with them. The people (that is, the free, land-owning white people) would arm themselves and come to the states defense when mustered by the states, if the federal government did not raise them itself. And so, finally, control over the militias really was concurrent between the states and the federal government as Madison had originally intended.

The Second Amendment, then, is a product of Madisons political maneuvering. This inheritance has been misunderstood, because the militia clause is followed by a qualification: that the people have the right to bear arms. However, this clarification was only necessary because state militias enlisted free citizens who were required to bring their own firearms. Of course, it would have also eased states concerns about the tyranny of a standing army, the idea of which provoked images of red-clad British troops marching on colonial liberties. Still, this way of appeasing the antifederalists did not invite every American to overthrow a government that they perceived as tyrannical; it rested in the assumption that states would act as cohesive political units, giving states greater leverage in the national political arena.

Naysayers contend that the Second Amendment was less about regulating militias and instead necessarily about individual gun rights, because colonizing the western frontier posed many dangers, including resistance from Indigenous peoples. But they forget that frontiersmen were originally required to bear arms, as members of the militia, to combat Indigenous inhabitants of the land. They were, of course, regulated accordingly in preparation to fight them following a brutal tradition that started with the first European settlements in the Americas.

An honest consideration of the historical context shows that the Second Amendment was intended to balance states rights and those of the new federal government a particularly important issue to southern legislators who saw a strong central government as a threat to slavery. Yet that historical context has been ignored too often by lawmakers, and most troublingly, even by some of the Justices on the US Supreme Court. As the US reckons with its history of racial injustice and protesters topple statues that glorify racists, perhaps Americans should train their eyes on the Second Amendment that equally enshrines Americas history of violently asserted white supremacy.

This is the first installmentof a two-part series by the author.

Featured Image: Second Amendment by Eli Christman is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Edited by Clariza-Isabel Castro

View original post here:

Thank Slavery For The Second Amendment MIR - The McGill International Review

BARNEGAT, NJ: New Jerseys 3rd Congressional District Independent Candidate Martin Weber is vowing to preserve the spirit and legality of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment needs to be defended for the law-abiding citizens, says Weber. When you look at many gun owners here in the 3rd District, you see people who are hunters and those who use them for sport and recreation.

The candidate does recognize the calls by advocates to ensure there are reasonable regulations and background checks. I firmly believe that if you want to own a gun, you should be trained, certified, and registered, states Weber as he is calling for creating a program that has individuals complete a one-time certification course in which they learn how to properly handle and maintain their firearm. You have people out there who buy a gun and injure themselves (sometimes fatally) while trying to clean it, cites Weber. There is a role for groups like the NRA (National Rifle Association) and even retired military and law enforcement personnel to properly train gun ownersit is all about safety.

Sign Up for Barnegat/Waretown Newsletter

Our newsletter delivers the local news that you can trust.

You have successfully signed up for the TAPinto Barnegat/Waretown Newsletter.

Weber, 56, is the owner of YoBuck Landscaping Company in Barnegat and sits on the Zoning Board in town. He is a U.S. Army Veteran and former Captain of the Barnegat Volunteer First Aid Squad.

Weber will be speaking at a Second Amendment Rally that is being organized by 2nd District Libertarian Candidate Jesse Ehrnstrom. Others scheduled to speak include Second Amendment advocate Anthony Colandro, and 4th District Libertarian Candidate Michael Rufo. The Second Amendment Rally will take place on August 22nd, at 290 Route 72 in Barnegat from 11 AM to 4 PM.

Press inquiries can be directed to the campaign at press@martinweberforcongress.com For more information about the campaign, please visit our Website at martinweberforcongress.com or on Facebook at Martin Weber for Congress.

Original post:

Weber Reaffirms Commitment to Preserving 2nd Amendment Rights - TAPinto.net

SAWYER CO.,WI-- On Thursday night the Sawyer County Board of Supervisors voted on a resolution affirming the countys support of the second amendment.

The non-binding resolution passed 9-6.

"Some may say its merely symbolic but I think it sends a strong message that we support our constitution and we will continue to do that," said Jesse Boettcher, County Board Supervisor for District 2.

Boettcher was one of the 9 board members that voted in support of the resolution.

He said although the resolution is non-binding, it tells residents the county won't support future gun control laws or any law that infringes on constitutional rights.

It doesnt say we are actively going to take measures to prevent any of your rights from being in fringed but it says that if that does happen were not going to support it," said Boettcher.

The resolution has been in the works since last year.

Troy Morgan is one of the 6 supervisors who voted against the resolution.

He thinks the vote may have been unnecessary.

I do believe we are agents of the state and we have this in place already. If we want to change something we do that through our elected officials and through the courts," said Troy Morgan, Board Supervisor District 4.

With everything that is going on right now Morgan said that this was not a priority.

All of the northern counties have so many other issues they need to be working on," Morgan said.

Of the 72 counties in Wisconsin about half a dozen have passed resolutions similar to this.

If you would like to view the resolution you can click here.

Read more:

Sawyer County Board of Supervisors approve resolution reaffirming 2nd Amendment rights - KBJR 6

The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) has announced that the FCC, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (the Parties) have executed a Second Amendment to the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless Antennas (Collocation NPA). The amendment facilitates the collocation of wireless facilities on existing towers by eliminating review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for certain collocations that involve a limited expansion beyond the boundaries of a tower site. The Collocation NPA, executed in 2001 and amended in 2016, excludes collocations that involve a substantial increase in the size of the tower, which includes, among other factors, any excavation outside the current tower site. In contrast, the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Regarding the Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act Review Process (NPA), which was executed subsequently in 2004, includes an exclusion from Section 106 review for the replacement of a tower that involves excavation by no more than 30 feet in any direction outside the boundaries of an existing tower site. For consistency, the Parties agreed to amend the Collocation NPA to exclude a collocation that would not expand the boundaries of the current tower site by more than 30 feet in any direction or involve excavation outside these expanded boundaries, provided that the collocation complies with the other criteria for exclusion. This amendment will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

Here is the original post:

FCC Announces the Execution of a Second Amendment to the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless Antennas - Lexology