Mediaboss Marketing

REXBURG Dan Roberts and members of the Second Amendment Alliance are staging a march and rally in Rexburg this Saturday Feb. 21, in support of the House Bill 89, or the Constitutional Carry bill.

Roberts said those participating will meet at 3:30 p.m. at the Madison County Courthouse and all participants are welcome to open carry their favorite firearms.

He said those assembled at the courthouse will then march to the Rexburg Tabernacle, where they will listen to a short presentation and be given the opportunity to sign a petition supporting the constitutional carry bill.

Roberts said House bill 89, or the constitutional carry bill, was recently tabled by the State Affairs Committee in the State Legislature. The bill would enable constitutional carry or concealed carry, without a permit in the State of Idaho.

Roberts also said this demonstration is loosely coordinated with another rally in Boise that is calling for the legislature to take another look at House Bill 89.

Roberts said this rally would be almost exactly the same as the pro-Second Amendment rally two years ago, except with a specific focus on the constitutional carry legislation.

Its a little different focus, you know, last time we were just talking about gun rights in general and not wanting to have more restrictions. This time were looking more at being proactive, trying to get rid of some existing regulations; specifically, we would like to see what they call a constitutional carry, which is basically any law abiding citizen in Idaho could carry within the state boundaries concealed without a permit, Roberts said.

Roberts said this years presentation at the tabernacle will be short, with only a few speakers, including Ron Nate, who represents Rexburg in the Idaho legislature.

Roberts said according to current regulations there are two types of concealed carry permits: one requires no training and a $60 fee and the other is an enhanced concealed carry permit that requires a course in addition to a fee.

Roberts said that since the standard concealed carry permit doesnt require any training, merely a fee for a background check, then the permits are useless.

Read this article:
Open carry rally slated

Remember when Gov. Cuomo suggested last summer that certain people i.e., those who are pro-life, pro-Second Amendment or anti-gay have no place in the state of New York?

Well, California is putting the Cuomo vision into practice, and its not pretty.

The target was the Boy Scouts. In a unanimous ruling, all seven justices on the states Supreme Court accepted an amendment to the states judicial code that has the primary effect of preventing any California state judge from serving as an adult volunteer for the Scouts.

Though the Boy Scouts have lifted the prohibition on openly gay Scouts, they still dont let gay adults serve as, say, Scoutmasters. The court imposed its ban, it said, to preserve the fairness, impartiality, independence and honor of the judiciary.

Of course, it does nothing of the kind.

In the past decade, gay Americans have secured victories once thought impossible: same-sex marriage, the ability to serve openly in the military and so forth.

At least in cases like this one, alas, victory hasnt led to a live-and-let-live approach. To the contrary, these victories seem to be accompanied by an effort to tar anyone who might disagree with bigotry and drive them off the public square basically for holding the same position President Obama held just a few years ago.

We leave it to the courts to settle the larger First Amendment issues here. All we say is that America is better than this.

In the name of tolerance itself, shouldnt it be possible to uphold gay rights without having to crush a venerable American institution in the name of political correctness?

View original post here:
Blacklisting Boy Scouts

Rep. Jenkins Reads Second Amendment on House Floor
U.S. Representative Evan Jenkins (R-W.Va.) read the Second Amendment on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives Jan. 9 during the House #39;s reading of t...

By: RepEvanJenkins

Read more from the original source:
Rep. Jenkins Reads Second Amendment on House Floor - Video

Second Amendment Documentary

By: jasehoward

Excerpt from:
Second Amendment Documentary - Video

PHOENIX Declaring state law to be above all others, a Senate panel voted Tuesday block federal gun laws they believe violate the Second Amendment, and to punish the city of Tucson for enacting its own restrictions.

The votes were part of a series of actions by the same Senate committee asserting state supremacy, including:

All of the votes, along party lines in the Republican-controlled Committee on Federalism, Mandates and Fiscal Responsibility, were based on arguments that the state has to protect individual rights from being trampled.

Potentially the most far reaching is SB 1384, requiring federal officials to get permission from a county sheriff before taking certain actions. Sen. Judy Burges, R-Sun City West, said it simply recognizes the supremacy of the state over the federal government, and that sheriffs are each countys chief constitutional and law enforcement officer.

SB 1384 would make it illegal for any federal employee, including a law enforcement official who has not been first given permission by the sheriff, to make an arrest, conduct a search or seize property.

Burges said the law is needed because it is a duty of the sheriff to protect and defend the citizens business of his county from any and all abuses of constitutional rights and freedoms, even in the name of law enforcement.

Exceptions are provided for incidents on federal lands or where the officer has witnessed a crime that requires immediate arrest. And it would not apply to customs or Border Patrol officers.

Burges said there are things already happening in Arizona that are potential flash points, including federal agencies closing roads, and in one instance, in Greenlee County, the confiscation of cattle and sale of them at auction in a dispute between the U.S. Forest Service and the rancher.

Burges sees her legislation as a way for the state to fight back against things like the federal government requiring that wolves be accommodated in Arizona something two other committees have voted to spend $250,000 fighting in court.

She said there already are problems with wolves stalking children, and her legislation affirms the right of the sheriff to defend Arizonans, including shooting a wolf without fear of a $50,000 federal fine.

Visit link:
Senate panel asserts state law trumps federal rule