The Clearfield County Commissioners voted unanimously on Dec. 3 to pass a resolution reaffirming the Second Amendment rights of county residents, according to a Courier Express article. They now join Susquehanna County, East Coventry Township and Gilberton as local communities to speak out in defense of the God-given right of self-defense that has been enshrined in the Constitution.Details
On Christmas Eve, Bonner County. Idaho, commissioners unanimously adopted a resolution “calling on the governor and state lawmakers enhance protections for the right to bear arms.”Details
Bill Sage didn’t expect to become a leader in a fight against unconstitutional indefinite detention written into the National Defense Authorization Act.
But he did.
Like most local elected representatives, Sage took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States when he was sworn in as County Supervisor in Allegan County, Michigan, Feb. 14, 2011.
Would Sage uphold his sworn constitutional oath?
Indeed he would.Details
Second Amendment Preservation fever continues to spread across Michigan. with Waterford Township the latest community looking to protect the gun rights of its citizens.
The township council will consider a Second Amendment Preservation resolution on Wednesday.
The natural rights to own property honestly and peacefully acquired, to self defense, and to prepare oneself for that defense according to one’s conscience are under relentless assault on a global basis. In America, the Second Amendment was written to prevent federal infringement of those rights.
Many states, such as Michigan, have strong protections against state and local attacks on these rights. Michigan’s 1963 Constitution states in Article 1, Section 6 that… “Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.” This strong, clear and concise language should guide everyone in the state as they contemplate what actions to take against the rising tide of federal encroachments.
Michigan Tenth Amendment Center‘s state chapter coordinator Shane Trejo was instrumental in getting the resolution introduced in Waterford Township. Trejo hopes to follow in the footsteps of patriotic activists like Doug Davis who helped get governments in the Northern Lower Peninsula to pass the Tenth Amendment Center’s Second Amendment Preservation Resolution. This is the first effort to get this resolution passed in Southeast Michigan. Resolutions such as these, while non-binding, are an important first-step in resisting federal tyranny.Details
Just days after Albany, New York passed a resolution as a statement of intent against indefinite detention, the Town of Oxford, Massachusetts followed up with another.
Under Massachusetts home rule law, a local community organized as a town preserves the open town meeting or the representative town meeting as their governing body rather than by the vote of an elected body like a town council. On Wednesday, by popular vote, the People of Oxford approved – nearly unanimously – a strong resolution primarily drafted by People Against the National Defense Authorization Act (P.A.N.D.A).
NO LEGAL EFFECT
Like the one passed in Albany, the resolution in Oxford is not legally-binding – it is a mere statement of opinion and intent. It holds no force of law over the activities of town employees, or anyone else for that matter. But, it is a strong first step towards resisting and eventually nullifying indefinite detention (and other) unconstitutional federal powers within the Town, and the state of Massachusetts. As noted in our report on the Albany resolution, a non-binding resolution – with no force of law – is an important step because it follows James Madison’s blueprint to resist federal acts within the states. There are 4 steps which James Madison advised for us to take to stop federal powers, and such a resolution is an important piece of that puzzle. (learn more below)Details
Albany resolution against NDAA indefinite detention is a great first step, even though it does not ban indefinite detention as one organization has claimed.Details
Now that the dust has settled a bit after Jerry Brown signed AB351 into law, it’s important to ask, what’s next?
If you thought the work was done and California would be “indefinite-detention” free, you thought wrong. The passage of the California Liberty Preservation Act was an important first step towards the nullification of federal indefinite detention practices in the state, but not the last one.
This advice from Samuel Adams probably sums it up best:
“Instead of sitting down satisfied with the efforts we have already made, which is the wish of our enemies, the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance.”
The enemies of liberty will not rest, and neither can we.
CALIFORNIA LIBERTY PRESERVATION ACT
AB351 now makes it “state policy” to reject “indefinite detention” powers from the federal government. It reads, in part:Details
As we’ve reported previously: in August, Herndon, KS Mayor Kenny Chartier sent an email to “[every] municipality, city and town in the state of Kansas [with] an e-mail address,” urging them to pass ordinances similar to Herndon’s in support of the Second Amendment Protection Act, which was signed into law by Governor Brownback in April. Three cities have since answered that call: Muscotah, Easton, and most recently, Strong City.
At their September 10 meeting, the Strong City city council passed the Right to Bear Arms Ordinance into law with a margin of 5-0.
“No agency of the City of Strong City, KS, or person in the employ of the City of Strong City, KS shall enforce, provide material support for, or participate in any way in the enforcement of any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States regarding personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition within the Boundary of this City of Strong City, KS.” —Right to Bear Arms Ordinance, Strong City, KSDetails
“ANY act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the State of Kansas.” -Second Amendment Protection Act [emphasis added] So echoed the city of Easton, KS on September 3rd with the…Details
Earlier this week, Klamath County, Oregon, took the first step toward nullifying indefinite detention.
Congress codified indefinite detention into law in sections 1021 and 1022 of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. Despite assurances from administration officials and members of Congress that it applies “only to the terrorists,” a federal judge ruled it unconstitutional because of broad language that could apply to pretty much anybody. And the Obama administration has fought hard to overturn that ruling. (Read more about indefinite detention HERE and HERE.)
The Klamath County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution condemning indefinite detention under not only the NDAA, but also under “an authorization for use of military force or any similar law or authority claimed by Congress or the Office of the President,” calling it “unconstitutional and therefore unlawful.” The resolution also calls on the Oregon legislature to interpose on behalf of the citizens.
Klamath County requests the Oregon State Legislature recognize the duty of the state of Oregon to interpose itself between unconstitutional usurpations by the federal government or its agents and the people of this state, as well as the duty to defend the unalienable natural rights of the people, all of which is consistent with out oaths to defend the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of Oregon against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Klamath County joins Coos County in condemning federal kidnapping and calling on Salem to act against it. These Oregon counties join a chorus of local governments across the U.S. opposing indefinite detention.Details