Mediaboss Marketing

To the editor: A well-written letter to the editor ("Letter: 'Well-regulated' an important part of 2nd Amendment," Eagle, April 23) pertaining to the Second Amendment of the Constitution was lacking one important fact.

The Second Amendment was submitted for ratification on Sept. 25, 1789, and the ratification was completed on Dec. 15, 1791, taking 2 years, 2 months and 20 days.

Thats 15 years after the revolution and many years before the Civil War. Neither of those conflicts had much more than black powder muskets.

Based on that knowledge, is it possible to assume that the same framers of the Constitution who forgot to include such an important item were never the less considered brilliant enough to foresee the type of weapons available today? How about the many citizens who voted for ratification?

In the late 1950s, after the Korean War, the standard weapon carried by the U.S. soldier was the .30-caliber M-1. Its capacity was nine rounds eight in a clip and one manually inserted in the chamber. Nothing like those magazine-capable, rapid-fire assault weapons available today.

Was the well-regulated militia referred to in the amendment really describing the "Minute Men" of the revolution? Did America at that time have a sanctioned standing military presence, or was it the farmers, merchants and others who rallied to the defense of the nation when its existence was threatened from foreign invasion?

If reasonable people can interpret the word "arms" to include high-powered, multi-shot, magazine-capable assault weapons, then where does it end? How about flame-throwers, grenades, shoulder-mounted guided missile launchers, etc.?

Reasonable people should also be willing to limit if not completely ban the ownership of such unreasonable weapons by other than a completely well-regulated military.

Al Nadeau, Dalton

See the article here:
Letter: More thoughts on the Second Amendment | Letters To Editor | berkshireeagle.com - Berkshire Eagle

Concealed weapons on campus? HB102 directly raises that issue. But in spite of arguments to the contrary this is not a Second Amendment issue as it relates to campuses. What is at issue is the Regents constitutional right to manage Montanas University System.

Our history is rife with examples where politics and vested interests have interfered with our higher education system. In 1915, at the behest of the Legislature and the Anaconda Company ACM University President Craighead was fired for not towing the ACM line. Later a law professor was terminated for the same reason and a popular teacher was forced out for documenting the blatant favorable taxation granted to mining interests. Throughout the 1950s and 60s mineral and timber interests in the state exercised considerable control in the Legislature. Eventually the people had enough.

The frustration of Montanas people about politics in higher education resulted in the 1972 Constitution creating Montanas Board of Regents and granting it full authority over the higher education system: The government and control of the Montana university system is vested in a board of regents of higher education which shall have full power, responsibility, and authority to supervise, coordinate, manage and control the Montana university system . That broad power underwent judicial review and was affirmed in 1975 by the Montana Supreme Court in State ex rel. Judge. That opinion forms the basis for the Regents sole authority over the university system since that time.

The regents and the university system are responsible for more than 50,000 students, faculty and staff statewide. Many students are under the age of 18, making the university system responsible to a degree for these minors. How to manage weapons within this large and diverse population is a serious responsibility, and one which the Regents have embraced to the apparent consternation of certain members of the legislative branch.

With the concealed carry law, the Legislature attempts to substitute its judgement for that of the regents. Knowing that implementing concealed carry will impose costs on the university system, a million dollars was added to the budget bill in a transparent attempt to bribe or extort their way out of their unconstitutional overreach. A caveat to the budget provides that the right to the extra money is void if the regents challenge the constitutionality of HB102. Not win the case, just challenge the Legislature. The Legislature does not want the regents to oppose HB 102, apparently hoping to buy their way out of a constitutional challenge.

The Legislature is going about this backward. The regents are constitutionally charged with management of the university system. If the Legislature believes the regents policies regarding guns on campuses are unconstitutional, as some have asserted, their path is to challenge the regents and university systems rules in court, not to simply substitute their judgement for that of the regents. If a court determines the university systems current gun policies must be revised the regents will follow the orders of the court. The Legislature has no legitimate role in this process.

The long-term efforts of Montanans to remove politics from higher education came to fruition in the Constitutional Convention in 1972. HB 102, along with the million-dollar bribe, invades the province of the regents to manage the university system. If the regents exercise their legal right to challengeHB102 they are punished. This intrusive precedent should not be tolerated. If the budget amendment and HB102 are not constitutionally challenged the regents and the university system can anticipate that future legislative overreach coupled with blackmail funding amendments will become commonplace. The hard-earned and longstanding constitutional independence of the Montana University System from political control is at stake. We shouldnt let that happen.

Steve Barrett is a retired practicing attorney and former chair of the Montana Board of Regents

See original here:
Open carry on campus - Not a Second Amendment issue - The Havre Daily News

Catch up on any news you may have missed. Wochit

Following Saturday's rally in support of the Second Amendment at Salem's Riverfront Park, several people reported on social media allegations of individuals being escorted out of the park or assaulted by rally attendees.

Questions were raised about what appeared to be a lack of obvious police presence. Police and the city were criticized for allowing a group without a permit to gather and then prevent others from using a public park.

The rally attracted about 200people, and Statesman Journal staff in attendance reported seeing few officers during the event.

When asked by the Statesman Journal about the public's concerns, Salem police officials said they did havea presence at the rally andweremonitoring it for violence to keep the downtown park safe.

Salem police spokesman Lt. Treven Upkes said the department is working to set the record straight after disinformation on social media spread during and following the event.

He said the allegations that the department wasn't monitoring the rally and didn't have a planned response simply weren't true.

"We actually assigned around 30 officers to the event," he said, adding that some were on call should help be needed and officerssome visible, some less visible were present throughout the entire rally.

Plainclothes officers may havedeployed depending on the event, Upkes added.

He saidit is standard procedure to avoid deploying uniformed officers into a crowd if there is no counter protest or overt criminal activity.

"We're not going to insert ourselves into those rallies and protests, be itright or left, once again to point out that neutral ideology," Upkes said."We're not going to inflame any situations by our presence or doing things."

During the rally, speakerswarned of a coming civil war, endorsed 2020 electionconspiracy theories and encouraged attendees to run for local elected office.

The Proud Boys, Tick Licker Firearms,Fifty1Fifty Tactical and the Stolen Voices Foundation were among the event's sponsors, with Proud Boys members also providing "security." About 30 people in Proud Boys attire tactical gear andblack-and-yellow clothing were seeing carrying pistols.

Open carry of such firearms is legal in Salem parks.

The rally was supposed to be headlined by Republican Rep. Mike Nearman, but he did not speak.Nearmanwas chargedFriday with official misconduct in the first degree and criminal trespass in the second degree stemming from a riot at the Oregon Capitol building Dec. 21.

Salem did not issue a permit for the Saturday rally due to pandemic restrictions. The city has not given out permits for months in an effort to deter large gatherings that may spread COVID-19.

The date that permits would be given changed from May 1 to May 31 shortly before the Saturday event.

Upkes said the park can be used for events on a first-come, first-served basis.

In a statement, police officials said:

"Please remember, theCity of Salemcannot stop constitutionally protected activities, nor can the Salem Police Department."

Event organizer Magen Marie Stevens speaks at a May Day Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park in Salem, Oregon on Saturday, May 1, 2021. (Photo: BRIAN HAYES / STATESMAN JOURNAL)

Community members expressed concern the Police Department was showing favoritism by not having a heavy presence at the rally.

Those concerns were further compounded by rumorsthat the Proud Boys' security teams were telling people to leave, escorting people out of the public park and had even assaulted someone for taking photos of the event.

Upkessaid the police received a report afterthe event by someonewho said they were harassed by rally attendees and told to leave. The personmaking the reportdeclined to be listed as victim for the prosecution, according to police.

Upkes said police also received a call during the rally that participants were attacking people.

"We were on-site for (that report) and determined it was not occurring, and the caller did not return or answer our calls," he said.

Police officials said the dispatch center also received two separate false reports. One caller reported intoxicated people terrorizing people near the carousel, and another reported Proud Boys with clubs, chains and knives.

Officers in the area at the time of the calls saw no such activity, police said.

Demonstrators gather at a May Day Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park in Salem, Oregon on Saturday, May 1, 2021. (Photo: BRIAN HAYES / STATESMAN JOURNAL)

Upkes encouraged people experiencing or seeing violence to immediately report it to 911 and added that many of the people reporting harassment on social media never reached out to police.

Upkes also pointed to the nuance of whether escorting people out of the park was illegal. Simply telling someone to leave the public area and even walking with them isn't necessarily a crime. But pairing that order with the threat of violence, menacing or harassment is, he said.

Before the rally on Saturday, Salem Police Department officials said their goal was to allow for constitutionally protected activity and prevent or intervene to stop the violence.

Upkes said it feels like people alleging favoritism to the far-right rallies and protests are forgetting the arrests and enforcement actions they've made at recent far-right gatherings.

"I think we're doing our job at this point in that both sides, quote-unquote, don't like how we handle their events," he said.

In a statement, police officials encouraged those who were escorted out of the park to contact the police department at 503-588-6123, option 1to file a police report.

"We understand the concerns of those who read the social media commentary," police officials said."We share those concerns because officers were in the area, and if those circumstances were occurring, any criminal behavior could have been addressed with immediacy."

Reporter ConnorRadnovich contributed to this story

For questions, comments and news tips, email reporter Whitney Woodworth at wmwoodworth@statesmanjournal.com, call 503-910-6616 or follow on Twitter @wmwoodworth.

Read or Share this story: https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2021/05/03/salem-police-respond-complaints-inaction-second-amendment-rally/4930606001/

Link:
Salem police respond to complaints of inaction at Riverfront Park Second Amendment rally - Statesman Journal

Catch up on any news you may have missed. Wochit

A couple of hundredpeople attended a far-right Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park on Saturday where speakers called on them to join together against cancel culture, Oregon Democrats,the coronavirus vaccine, gun controland pandemic-related lockdowns.

They also warned of a coming civil war, endorsed 2020 electionconspiracy theories and encouraged attendees to run for local elected office, especially school boards.

Jo Rae Perkins, a frequent Republican candidate for elected office in Oregon, called the coronavirus vaccines a "bioweapon" and said the state is "going after your children."

"Let's take back Oregon, let's take back this country," she said.

A man holds a flag at a May Day Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park in Salem, Oregon on Saturday, May 1, 2021.(Photo: BRIAN HAYES / STATESMAN JOURNAL)

Other speakers includedProud Boys member Daniel Tooze, conservative radio host Rob Taylor, 2022 Republican candidate for governorPaul Romero and pastor Lew Wootan of The River Church in Salem.

The Proud Boys, Tick Licker Firearms,Fifty1Fifty Tactical and the Stolen Voices Foundation were among the event's sponsors, with Proud Boys members also providing "security."

The rally was supposed to be headlined by Republican Rep. Mike Nearman, but he did not speak.Nearmanwas chargedFriday with official misconduct in the first degree and criminal trespass in the second degree stemming from a riot at the Oregon Capitol building on Dec. 21.

Event organizer Magen Marie Stevens speaks at a May Day Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park in Salem, Oregon on Saturday, May 1, 2021. (Photo: BRIAN HAYES / STATESMAN JOURNAL)

The riot began after Nearman exited a side door of the Capitol which was closed due to the pandemic allowing people to charge inside.

There is one major gun bill under consideration at the Oregon Legislature this session.

That bill, Senate Bill 554, would require firearms to be secured withtrigger or cable lock, in a locked container or in a gun room when not being carried, except in certain circumstances. It sets penalties for failure to securefirearms.

The bill alsobans carrying firearms in the Capitol, at Portland InternationalAirport or on school grounds if the school's governing body sets a policy banning guns.

Flags wave at a May Day Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park in Salem, Oregon on Saturday, May 1, 2021. (Photo: BRIAN HAYES / STATESMAN JOURNAL)

"How do you feel that your concealed handgun license will essentially be nullified?" Taylor asked the crowd."It's getting to the point where you really can't take it anywhere. Just try taking your daughter or your son to school, you could end up with a criminal record, just for taking your child to school and practicing your Second Amendment rights."

The bill passed the House on Thursday by a vote of 34-24 after hours of debate. It must receive a concurrence vote in the Senate before moving to the governor's desk for her signature.

Former Republican Senate candidate Jo Rae Perkins speaks at a May Day Second Amendment rally at Riverfront Park in Salem, Oregon on Saturday, May 1, 2021.(Photo: BRIAN HAYES / STATESMAN JOURNAL)

The bill nearly triggered a Republican walkout when a previous version came up for a vote in March.

Several Senate Republicans face recall attempts due to their refusal to walk out. Signatures for the recall efforts were being gathered at the rally.

Reporter Connor Radnovich covers the Oregon Legislature and state government. Contact him at cradnovich@statesmanjournal.com or 503-399-6864, or follow him on Twitter at @CDRadnovich.

Support local journalism by subscribing to the Statesman Journal.

Read or Share this story: https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2021/05/01/far-right-groups-rally-salem-support-2nd-amendment-against-pandemic-restrictions/7402799002/

Continued here:
Far-right groups rally in Salem in support of 2nd Amendment, against pandemic restrictions - Statesman Journal

HOMER GUNMAN: A man openly carrying two handguns on his belt and a rifle across his chest was contacted by Calhoun County Sheriff Department deputies in Homer on Monday. Deputies were called at 2:30 p.m. said the man from Litchfield was wearing camouflage clothes and walking downtown and in residential neighborhoods. The man was about four blocks from Homer Community Schools, which waswas placed on lock down as a precaution. When deputies arrived the man began recording them and said he was conducting a Second Amendment Audit about the law enforcement response. He said the deputies passed and was apologetic when deputies explained that the schools were concerned because it was near their release time. The man gave his weapons to deputies and the schoollifted the lock down and then the guns were returned, officials said. He later posted the encounter on You Tube.

DOMESTIC ASSAULT: Battle Creek police have reported the following cases:

A warrant is being sought for a man, 35, after his girlfriend, 40, said she was assaulted in the 500 block of North Avenue at 1 p.m. Sunday.

A warrant is being sought for a man, 27, after his former girlfriend, 26, said she was assaulted in the 5700 block of Dahlia Drive at 2:41 p.m. Sunday.

A warrant for stalkingis being sought for a man, 53, after police said he repeatedly attempted to contact a woman, 41. Police were called at 4:15 p.m. Sunday.

ASSAULTS: Battle Creek police have reported the following cases:

A warrant is being sought for a man, 24, after a male friend, 23, said he was assaulted on Columbia Avenue at 11:04 p.m. Sunday. Police said the suspect had been drinking.

A girl, 10, was slapped and thrown to the ground by two other children at a playground near Truth Drive and Jordan Street. Officers were called at 9:10 p.m. Friday after the girl went home and reported the incident to her father. Another girl slapped the victim, believing she was called a name by the victim. Then a young boy stopped the victim from walking home by picking her up and throwing her to the ground. The girl's father said the same children have harassed his daughter before.

A man, 40, told officers he was assaulted by a man and woman outside his home in the first block of Arlington Drive in Bedford Township at 3:09 p.m. Saturday. The man said the couple were angry because the victim had given another man a ride to a party and that man caused some problems. The victim said the man and woman kicked and punched him and then ran off. The victim was not able to identify the couple and police were unable to find them.

HOME INVASION: A man, 26, was arrested after he kicked a door and entered a residence in the 500 block of West Jackson Street at 3:13 a.m. Monday. Police said the man was intoxicated and believed he was entering the home of a friend.

Call Silent Observer at 269-964-3888 or text CRIMES (274637) SOTIP or see http://www.crimereports.com with information about crimes.

Read or Share this story: https://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/story/news/2021/05/04/police-fire-man-guns-homer-testing-2nd-amendment-rights/4935964001/

The rest is here:
Police & Fire: Man with guns in Homer told deputies he was testing Second Amendment rights - Battle Creek Enquirer