North Dakota Bill Would Protect People from Drone Spying

A bill introduced in the North Dakota State House of Representatives looks to protect the privacy of its residents from the police state by making a set of guidelines for the use of unmanned drones in surveillance by law enforcement.

House Bill 1373 was introduced by Reps. Becker, Anderson, Beadle, Heilman, Hofstad, Monson, Rohr, Toman, Hanson and Sen. Sitte. It was first read on Jan. 21 and referred to the Judiciary Committee where no action has presently been taken.

The bill comes in response to the growing national concern over predator drones, the controversial machines used to drop bombs onto people in foreign lands, coming to American skies en masse. Public safety concerns abound after repeated instances of crashes both domestic and abroad. Another troubling bit of information is that the Air Force maintains the right to spy on and collect data from drone missions about American citizens without so much as a warrant for up to 90 days as long as they claim it wasn’t intentional.

The text of HB 1373 states that “except as provided in section 4 of this Act, a law enforcement agency may not use an unmanned aircraft for surveillance of a person within the state or for the surveillance of personal or business property located within the borders of the state to gather evidence or other information pertaining to criminal conduct.” Section 4 of the Act gives law enforcement the right to use drones for weather-related catastrophes, exigent circumstances requiring reasonable suspecion to prevent immediate danger to life or bodily harm and national border patrol.


Indiana State Senator David Long Continues to Personally Block Attempts to Stop Obamacare

Today, Indiana State Senator and Republican majority leader David Long issued a statement attempting to refute the rising chorus of Indiana voters asserting that he’s siding with the Obama administration by blocking a vote,  discussion, or even a hearing on Senate Bill 230 (SB230).

Grassroots activists, however, were not impressed.

If passed, the act would nullify the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, and make it a felony to try to implement it in Indiana.

“A person who knowingly or intentionally implements or enforces a federal law, or attempts to implement or enforce a federal law, that is declared void under section 2 of this chapter commits a Class D felony.”

It also “finds that the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the federal Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 are inconsistent with the power granted to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States.”

On Thursday, Long acknowledged that he has, in fact, placed a “hold” on the bill – preventing it from even being discussed in committee. In order to become law, the bill would first require a committee hearing and vote. Then, if passed, it would require a full debate on the floor of the State Senate, and a vote by the full Senate. Then, it would need to repeat the same process in the House.

While Long has claimed that he does “indentify with the spirit behind SB230,” he’s blocking it because he believes that “it is unconstitutional.”

“So what David Long is trying to tell the People of Indiana is this: individuals have the right to determine if something is Constitutional or not. But only David Long will make this decision in Indiana, and what the rest of the People there think means absolutely nothing to him,”  Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin said. “Long wants you to believe that Supreme Court decisions are not to be resisted by the States. He claims in his statement that last summer’s ruling puts an end to the issue, Obamacare is Constitutional. But, would David had said the same thing about the Dred Scott decision? The Supreme Court ruled that black people basically didn’t have rights.”

Long tacitly acknowledged the popularity of the bill, which already features 11 co-sponsors in the Indiana Senate. His greatest concern appears to be that the bill will actually pass


Arizona Takes Next Step With Nullifying Obamacare

Arizona Representatives Carl SeelSteve SmithAdam KwasmanDavid W. StevensBob ThorpeJudy BurgesBrenda BartonDavid LivingstonDarin MitchellKelly TownsendSonny BorrelliJohn Allen and Kelli Ward have introduced a bill that would prohibit the expansion of medicaid in Arizona.

HB2352 would amend Arizona statutes by adding a section on the expansion of medicaid. The text of the bill simply states:

“Any statutory or administrative expansion of eligible person, as defined pursuant to section 36-2901, shall not take effect until the joint legislative budget committee certifies to the governor, the president of the senate and the speaker of the house of representatives that expansion will be budget neutral for the next twenty fiscal years.”

Leading the long list of sponsor’s on this bill is Representative Carl Seel. Being the first representative to prefile a house bill with HB2001 (state health care exchange; prohibition) his urgency to remedy Arizona’s health care system is obvious! When asked about Jan Brewer’s recent decision to expand medicaid, he stated, “it’s another federal government program we don’t need to be involved in. The reason why Jan decided to expand is because the federal government pays 90% of the fee.”


Ariz. Senate Panel Passes Bill Barring Enforcement Of Federal Gun Measures

PHOENIX — A Republican-sponsored bill barring enforcement of many federal guns laws sparked passionate debate in an Arizona Senate committee that ultimately passed the bill Wednesday.

The bill co-sponsored by state Sen. Don Shooter, four other senators and several members of the House of Representatives would bar enforcement of federal laws affecting semi-automatic firearms or high-capacity magazines in effect on OR after January 1, 2013. It also makes any federal official trying to enforce such laws guilty of a class 6 felony and allows the state Attorney General to defend anyone prosecuted for violating federal gun laws if the gun was made in Arizona, among other provisions.

Wednesday’s Senate Public Safety Committee debate pitted minority Democrats who believe the bill is unconstitutional against Republicans opposed to what they call an overreaching federal government. An identical bill has been introduced in the House, which also has seen several other gun-related bills introduced since the session began Jan 14.  The final committee vote was 4-2 with one abstaining.


Tennessee Legislators Introduce Strong New Legislation to Stop Gun Control

BillofRights+GlockSen. Mae Beavers and Rep. Sheila Butt introduced a bill Tuesday to amend the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act of 2009 so that it adds bold new protections for Tennessee firearms owners.  The original Firearms Freedom Act exempted from federal law and authority firearms that were manufactured, sold, and retained in Tennessee.

Going several steps further, SB 0250 and the companion bill HB 0248 provide protection for all firearms, even those not manufactured in Tennessee.  The bill states:

“The general assembly declares that any federal action prohibited by this chapter relating to firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition, whether made in Tennessee or not, is not authorized by the United States constitution and violates the restrictions contained therein and is hereby declared to be invalid in this state; that said federal action shall not be recognized by this state; and that said federal action is rejected by this state and shall be null and void and of no effect in this state.”

The bill, which is fully endorsed by the Tennessee Firearms Association, was specifically written to cover all of the points in the model legislation released by the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center and more.  It will block all of the following federal attempts at firearms regulation with Class B felony criminal penalties:

(1) Infringe on, ban, regulate, or restrict state government, local government or civilian ownership, transfer, possession or manufacture of a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition in this state;

(2) Require any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition in this state to be registered or tracked in any manner; or

(3) Impose federal taxes, fees or any other charges on any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that are payable to any government entity.

Should any Tennesseans be prosecuted by the federal government for alleged firearms-related crimes, SB 0250/HB 0248 provides for this scenario as well.  The attorney general is authorized to provide defense for the accused and work to invalidate or nullify such federal actions.


Michigan Bills Would Nullify NDAA “Indefinite Detention”

LANSING, Mich. (January 31, 2013) – Yesterday, Michigan joined the swelling ranks of states considering legislation that would effectively block any state cooperation with federal officials seeking to detain Americans under provisions in sections 1021 and 1022 of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

Rep. Tom McMillin (R-Rochester Hills) introduced HB4138. The legislation would prohibit any state agent, state employee or member of the Michigan National Guard from assisting “an agency of the armed forces of the United States in any investigation, prosecution, or detention of any person pursuant to 50 USC 1541, as provided by the federal national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2012, Public Law 112-81”

Fourteen cosponsors signed on to the bill in just the first day. Last fall, the Michigan House passed this same bill, HB5768, by a vote of 107-0. After getting to the Senate near the close of the legislative session in December, it didn’t make it to a floor debate in time for full passage. But, this unanimous vote shows strong support for the bill on both sides of the political aisle.

“Once again we see the bipartisan nature of the pushback against federal kidnapping,” Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey said. “This is not a Republican issue or a Democrat issue. This is an American issue.”

In the State Senate, a companion bill has been introduced as well. SB94 was sponsored by State Senator Rick Jones and six co-sponsors.


“The Power and Glory” of Honorable Men – Utah Sheriffs’ Association

On January 17, 2013 the Utah Sheriffs’ Association penned the 21st Century version of:

We hold these truths to be self-evident...”

This stunningly succinct five paragraph letter is a testament to the virtues inherent with true men of honor.  Countless thousands have taken the Oath of Office to ‘protect and defend the Constitution of the United States‘, but few really understand its meaning.  An even safer bet would be to say that a large majority of said  ‘oath takers‘  have barely taken more than a cursory glance at the document to which they attest.  Rest assured that 28 of the 29  Sheriff’s of Utah do not fall in that category.  As part of their conclusion, they affirm: