Mediaboss Marketing

SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISMThe article youre about to read is from our reporters doing their important work investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers businesses have been impacted. Thats why the SC Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insiders program here. Thank you.

JOIN NOW

I knew it wouldnt be long before the other stalwart of the Guns, God, Gold, Greed, Gerrymandering and Gullible electorate political party would surface, and he didnt disappoint.

We are faced with an inane Second Amendment Sanctuary motion, and now the pivot to God. While reading his letter, I thought, for a moment, that I was at an evangelical revival session, when, in reality, it was just another letter with rather loose facts and strong religious bias.

He has about as good a grasp of history and facts as his close sidekick, Gene James. God did not establish this nationour Founding Fathers did. God will not protect us, not even from ourselves.

The stability of this country certainly does not stem from your Almighty God. In my opinion, church and state must be forever separateread a little history, if you will, and perhaps enlightenment will ensue.

Prayer in public schools is unnecessary and undesirable. Pray at home, in private, or at your church.

Mr. Knoblock alleges that our children and military are being indoctrinated with Marxism and socialism. Again, he has no facts to support that absurd claim. I do believe students need to be educated in those philosophies, so they can understand how capitalism differs.

Then, he launches into legalized abortion, equating that with murder, and makes other spurious statements. Given the makeup of the current Supreme Court, there is a good chance that Roe v. Wade will be rescinded or significantly modified.

As an older physician, I well remember the horror stories from my mentors about back-alley and illegal abortionthe sickness, infertility and death toll was large. This is the place to which the conservatives want us to return.

Mr. Knoblock, when you write another letter, please get your facts straight. Second, please spare us all your Bible-thumping; keep it private in your Bible class or in your church.

You may repent all you wish, but I certainly wont be joining you. I, among perhaps many others, dont appreciate all your religious pontificating.

Related

BECOME AN INSIDER TODAYTrustworthy, accurate and reliable local news stories are more important now than ever. Support our newsroom by making a contribution and becoming a subscribing member today.

CONTRIBUTE NOW

More:
Letter to the Editor: Second Amendment Knoblock Letter - San Clemente Times

"); var pScript = document.createElement("script"); pScript.type = 'text/javascript'; pScript.src = '//embed.sendtonews.com/player3/embedcode.js?fk=' + fkId + '&cid=5945&offsetx=0&offsety=0&floatwidth=400&floatposition=bottom-right'; pScript.async = true; pScript.setAttribute('data-type', 's2nScript'); //pScript['data-type'] = 's2nScript'; elem.append(pHtml); elem.append(pScript); }, insertVideoFuel: function(channelId) { var u = 'https://spreadsheets.google.com/feeds/list/1jVoUBFY2Xpt9g_eSOhoUipSA_OOh7hMbPDYAqYWx3nI/1/public/values?alt=json'; $.ajax({ type: 'GET', url: u, cache: true, dataType: 'json', success: function (response) { if ( typeof(response.feed) !== 'undefined' ) { var img_url = 'https://res.cloudinary.com/review-journal/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto,c_scale,w_1200/v1611081380/webdev/New7at7onGray.jpg'; //response.feed.entry[0]['gsx$imageurl']['$t']; var description = response.feed.entry[0]['gsx$description']['$t']; var elem = $('#stn-in-article-player'); var pHtml = $('',{'data-channel':channelId,'data-poster-image':img_url,'data-autoplay':'true','data-muted':'true','data-floating':'true'}); var click_url = '/7at7/?utm_campaign=7at7&utm_medium=insert_widget&utm_source=article_page'; var f_title = $('',{'class':'f-title'}).append( $('',{'href':click_url, 'alt':'7at7'}).append( $('',{'html':'Watch '}) ).append( $('',{'alt':'logo-7at7','src':'https://res.cloudinary.com/review-journal/image/upload/f_auto,q_auto,c_scale,w_50/v1611100661/webdev/seven2.png'}) ).append( $('',{'html':' now streaming'}) ) ); var f_desc = $('',{'class':'f-desc','html':description}) var pScript = document.createElement("script"); pScript.type = 'text/javascript'; pScript.src = 'https://fuel-streaming-prod01.fuelmedia.io/player/1.0/player.min.js'; pScript.async = true; pScript.setAttribute('id', 'fuel-player-script'); elem.addClass('rj-fuel-77'); elem.append(pHtml); elem.append(f_title); elem.append(f_desc); elem.append(pScript); } }, error: function (xhr, ajaxOptions, thrownError) { console.log('rj_xhr.status:' + xhr.status + '_error:' + thrownError); } }); }, videoIDs: { 'category-local': {'id': '7395798e-4c30-417b-8b1a-b3d7bad8ff98', 'provider':'fuel'}, 'tag-coronavirus': {'id': 'u37v495p'}, 'category-politics-and-government': {'id': 'kqRvD0a8'}, 'tag-mc-opinion': {'id': 'kqRvD0a8'}, 'tag-mc-crime': {'id': 'kqRvD0a8'}, 'tag-2020-election': {'id': 'kqRvD0a8'}, 'rj-main-category--science-and-technology': {'id': 'j88hQyle'}, 'tag-mc-news': {'id': 'pCyFtg5f'}, 'tag-mc-business': {'id': '31shkzyP'}, 'rj-main-category--raiders': {'id': 'bpswZwKM'}, 'tag-mc-sports': {'id': 'dbx2WkwF'}, 'rj-main-category--food': {'id': '3DQjoZb7'}, 'tag-mc-entertainment': {'id': 'YBuF2XdP'}, 'tag-mc-life': {'id': 'aaWqdJ5u'}, 'tag-mc-autos': {'id': 'kag2nBSV'}, 'tag-mc-homes': {'id': 'HPa6ehMQ'} }, getVideoId: function() { //var fkId = false, var vdo_k = false; for (var checkClass in stnInArticleVideo.videoIDs) { if (stnInArticleVideo.wrapper.hasClass(checkClass)) { //fkId = videoIDs[checkClass].id; vdo_k = checkClass; break; } } return vdo_k; //fkId; }, run: function() { stnInArticleVideo.wrapper = $('article.rj-story.rj-story-full'); if (stnInArticleVideo.wrapper && stnInArticleVideo.canInsertVideo()) { var vdo_k = stnInArticleVideo.getVideoId(); if (vdo_k) { if (stnInArticleVideo.videoIDs[vdo_k].hasOwnProperty('provider') && stnInArticleVideo.videoIDs[vdo_k].provider == 'fuel') { stnInArticleVideo.insertVideoFuel(stnInArticleVideo.videoIDs[vdo_k].id); } else { stnInArticleVideo.insertVideo(stnInArticleVideo.videoIDs[vdo_k].id); } } } } }; stnInArticleVideo.run(); });})(jQuery);

Original post:
LETTER: Time to amend the Second Amendment - Las Vegas Review-Journal

The Friday, May 14 issue of The Alpena News contained a guest editorial by Jeffrey Brasie titled, On Americas Second Amendment.

Brasie states in the middle of the article I personally support the Second Amendment and the very next word he writes is However. You either support the 2A or you dont, no however or but.

The 2A was included in the Bill of Rights by our Founders specifically so that if faced with a tyrannical government or an outside threat the citizens could rise up and protect their freedom. There is no mention of hunting or sports use. The 2A states the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Check your copy of the Constitution and see how many times and how the word People is specifically used. The militia when the Constitution was written was every able-bodied citizen. Well-regulated meant that the citizens were supposed to supply themselves with adequate arms and supplies and be able to defend themselves and country. The citizens of that day owed arms equal to or better than many of the militaries of the time. It takes a lot of twisting to ignore the words shall not be infringed written in the 2A.

If you support what actions are being taken now to make the 2A an orphan Amendment as Justice Clarence Thomas calls it, lets look at voting. What ruckus would be raised if you were required to undergo a background check to vote; if you were required to attend and pass an educational program to vote; if you were required to undergo a mental examination to verify your fitness to vote; if your right to vote could be canceled simply on the word of a relative, neighbor, or acquaintance saying you werent fit to vote?

MIKE LOEW,

Rogers City

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Read more here:
No 'howevers' or 'buts' with Second Amendment | News, Sports, Jobs - Alpena News

Texas Governor Greg Abbott is expected to sign the Firearm Carry Act of 2021 (House Bill 1927) into law. Texas will join several other states that have enacted or plan to enact similar permitless, constitutional carry statutes in support of the individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The act, which will go into effect on September 1, 2021, allows individuals 21 years of age and older to possess and carry a handgun in public without a government-issued permit or license, provided they are not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm under state or federal law. The new law still prohibits Texans from carrying a firearm in bars, amateur or professional sporting events, prisons, civil commitment facilities, state-run hospitals and nursing facilities, and amusement parks. However, it is now legal for Texans to carry a firearm at public governmental meetings.

Similar to existing open and concealed carry laws relating to licensed firearm carriers, the act also provides Texas business owners the right to prevent members of the public from bringing firearms into their places of business. The law makes it a Class C misdemeanor for individuals to carry a firearm into a business if they have oral or written notice that entry with a firearm is prohibited. The act provides specific language that business owners can use and post to effectuate this notice.

On the employment front, the act does not substantively amend Section 52.062(b) of the Texas Labor Code, which allows employers to prohibit an employee from possessing a firearm on their premises. An employers premises is defined as a building or a portion of a building, but does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area. The new law also does not affect an employers immunity from civil liability for injuries or deaths arising out of an occurrence involving a firearm or ammunition that the employer is required to allow on [its] property, or the presumption that the presence of a firearm does not by itself constitute a failure by the employer to provide a safe workplace.

The Firearm Carry Act will come almost 10 years after the state allowed licensed Texas employees to store guns in their locked, private vehicles despite their employers ban of possession on their premises. Then-attorney general Abbott was a vocal proponent of employee gun rights, and has only broadened his support for Texans rights under the Second Amendment since taking the states highest office. Nevertheless, the new law that will be signed by Governor Abbott preserves the right of Texas employers to decide whether to allow firearms on their premises.

The Firearms Carry Act is likely to receive significant media attention that will raise many questions from employees. Like many new lawsespecially those involving hot-button issues such as guns in the workplaceemployers may want to get out in front of this act with a clear pronouncement of their positions and policies. In this case, the message can be simple: despite the hype, the new law does not change anything with regard to how we do business.

Read more from the original source:
Texas Firearm Carry Act of 2021: Can Employers Bar Employees From Carrying Guns Onto Work Premises? - JD Supra

A man whose conviction for holding an unloaded shotgun in his home while drunk was upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court is taking his case to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).

The case is State v. Weber, which as has been noted on our site, "involves a situation where despite the defendants wife telling police there was no longer a problem, they pressed their way in. There they found her admittedly inebriated but nonthreatening husband who, while he did have a shotgun, told police it was not loaded, which they proved for themselves."

Weber was charged with violating R.C. 2923.15(A), which states: No person, while under the influence of alcohol or drugs of abuse, shall carry or use any firearm or dangerous ordnance.

After a bench trial, Weber was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days in jail with all 10 days suspended. He also was placed on community control for one year, ordered to complete eight hours of community service, and fined $100.

When the Twelfth District Court of Appeals court upheld his conviction, it ruled as follows:

Furthermore, R.C.2923.15 does not, as suggested by appellant, criminalize the mere presence of a firearm in the home of an intoxicated person. Nor does the statute, as suggested by appellant, prohibit a person from carrying or using a firearm after consuming alcoholic beverages. Rather, the statute only prohibits the use or carrying of a firearm by a person who has imbibed to the point of intoxication.

Mr. Weber appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, and that body narrowly ruled against him as well.

In a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Sharon L. Kennedy and Judith L. French, Justice Patrick F. Fischer write that courts have been divided about the proper way to test the constitutionality of firearm laws since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008. He observed the Weber decision follows an interest-balancing test created by federal courts. He suggested Ohio adopt another approach that focuses on the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment to see if the challenged law or rule is consistent with the scope of the right as originally understood.

Justice Fischer also noted that state and federal courts would benefit from more clarity from SCOTUS on how to evaluate challenges to laws claiming to violate the Second Amendment. He wrote that instead of using the convoluted two-step approach, the Court should follow the Heller and McDonald decisions and look at the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment.

Justice Patrick DeWine concurred in the majority opinion, but also argued separately that the majority's analysis was not protective of Second Amendment rights because it "improperly applied an 'interest balancing' test rather than evaluate the challenged restriction based upon the original understanding of the Second Amendment," according to the court.

If Weber's petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court is granted, those calling for SCOTUS to provide clarity may get their wish. Weber is asking the court to determine the proper standard of constitutional review of a law that impacts the core value of the Second Amendment.

"The disagreement in the Ohio Supreme Court is emblematic of the confusion gripping the nation's lower courts," he wrote. "But confusion is not the only problem. The outcome of a wrongfully applied standard can significantly dilute the core protection of the Second Amendment."

As firearms rights advocate David Codrea wrote when covering this case for AmmoLand.com:

The point of intoxication, as defined by Ohios OVI laws is a Blood Alcohol Content of 0.08, or 0.02 if under 21. Significantly, a citizen old enough to serve in the military can reach that level after only one drink. And its fair to ask how many of us, especially with the holidays approaching, will be inclined to consume several adult beverages over the course of a family gathering. What if youre carrying, and not all blurry-eyed and speech-slurring like the hapless Mr. Weber was reported to be, but just right there at the legal limit for driving? Where is the compelling state interest to define that as the limit point?

...

"Still, this isnt a popular case for most 'gun rights' lobbying groups to make a big noise defendingwho wants to endure the optics of arguing guns for drunks? Regardless, the fact remains that there are already ways to deal with people who brandish, and who attack others with weapons. This isnt about public safety, its about another inroad to citizen disarmament. As for people who have proven they cant or wont control themselves, taking their tools but leaving them able to harm others is never the solution."

Chad D. Baus served as Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary from 2013-2019. He is co-founder of BFA-PAC, and served as its Vice Chairman for 15 years. He is the editor of BuckeyeFirearms.org, which received the Outdoor Writers of Ohio 2013 Supporting Member Award for Best Website, and is also an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Related Articles:

Does Ohio Supreme Court ruling threaten right to bear arms in own home?

Gun and Alcohol Case Could Put Citizens at Risk in Their Own Homes

Go here to see the original:
SCOTUS asked to take up State v. Weber, Ohio case with Second Amendment implications - Buckeye Firearms Association