Rights and Powers of The People Themselves

Our Founding Fathers fully understood the nature of our God-given inalienable rights:
 
– It’s why they wrote about them in our Declaration of Independence.
 
– It’s why they enumerated some of them in our United States Constitution
 
– It’s why they specifically secured several key rights and freedoms for us in our Bill of Rights.
 
– It’s why they specifically established the retention by the people of other rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, along with the reservation of powers not specifically mentioned in the Constitution to the states and people.
 
Specifically:
 
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” – Ninth Amendment
 
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” – Tenth Amendment
 
It’s why the courts have repeatedly (mostly) upheld our Constitutional rights, powers and freedoms, not as any sort of “favors” meted out by a “benevolent” or “indulgent” government, but as fundamental rights,powers and freedoms God Almighty fully intended to be held not by any government, but by the people themselves.

Travesty of Justice

This U.S. Justice System FAILURE is all too common throughout these United States:  A man takes a cell phone away from his 12-year-old daughter as punishment for her misuse of the device.  (Story)  The daughter’s mother (married to someone else) files a complaint of theft against the father.  The district attorney offers him a plea deal.  The father refuses.  A judge issues a warrant for the father’s arrest.  Cops arrest the father.  He demands a jury trial.  He wins.
WRONG — WRONG — WRONG!
This is NOT justice!!!  This man should never have been arrested in the first place.
Before anyone in the Justice System acts, they must first ensure compliance with the U.S. Constitution and State Law as demanded by their oath of office and expected by the citizens who pay their salaries.  They have a duty to themselves and the citizens they swore to “serve and protect” to NEVER act in a manner that runs afoul of “the supreme Law of the Land” or any lawfully derived state or federal law.
Thankfully, “Dallas County Criminal Court Judge Lisa Green ordered the jury to find Jackson not guilty, citing insufficient evidence to prove a theft charge.”
 
Unfortunately, “Although Jackson won the case and is allowed to keep the phone, he said he has had to separate himself from Steppe and his daughter because of this incident. ‘I can’t ever have a relationship with them again,’ he said.”
 
This wasn’t justice.  It was a travesty of justice.  The father was acting squarely within his right and responsibility as a parent.  Our Constitution specifically states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” (Tenth Amendment, Bill of Rights).  Nowhere does either the Constitution or the Texas State Constitution give the state the power or authority to second-guess the parent under these circumstances.  Meanwhile, countless precedent established under case law substantiates parental authority over child ownership.  That’s why you never leave any significant sum of money to a child.  One or the other parent can take it.  Instead, you leave it in a trust, to which the child has limited and monitored access until they’re either eighteen or as otherwise specified in the trust.
As a result of this travesty of justice, the father and daughter are now as estranged as were the father and his ex-wife.  The father is out many thousands of dollars defending his rightful actions as a parent.
This comedy of errors could have been prevented at any stage:
 
1.  This error should have ended with the wife backing up her daughter’s father.
2. The wife’s current husband, himself a police officer, should have advised his wife that a parent taking something away from a child is both lawful, and in the case of misuse, morally right.
3. The Dallas County Judge should have REFUSED to issue a warrant for the man’s arrest for taking his daughter’s cell phone. That is not only his right, as a parent, to withhold any and all property from his child in response to inappropriate behavior by the child, but it is the responsibility of the parent to do so.  It doesn’t matter if that property is a cell phone or a car. Ownership is subject to parental consent.
 
4.  If the warrant for his arrest specified the cell phone, the responding officers should have refused to serve it, commensurate with their sworn duty to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.”  What kind of law enforcement officers do We the People want, anyway?  Those who “just follow orders” or those who know and respect the law, beginning with the most important source of all, our Constitution — “the supreme Law of the Land?”
 
5.  The judge heading up the jury trial should have looked into the case and tossed it for being groundless BEFORE it was brought to trial. That alone cost the man thousands of dollars in legal fees and very unnecessarily so.
 
This case is a prime example of what’s WRONG with our justice system today: NOBODY throughout the entire chain is doing their JOB, which is first and foremost to keep things at the lowest possible level. Instead, they allow everything to be elevated, costing INNOCENT PEOPLE thousands of dollars until they’re “cleared.”
I call that “organized crime.”  It’s a FAILURE of RESPONSIBILITY at all levels of the justice system: The cops, the lawyers, the judge who issued the warrant, the arresting officers, and the judge who let it go to trial.

BIG FAT FAIL

And We the People are the ones being screwed out of our hard-earned dollars yet again.
Each and every single individual involved in that chain of errors should be SUED TO KINGDOM COME. This is NOT what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution.  Our system of justice was NOT established to provide lofty incomes for those who ignore common sense while trampling on the Constitutional rights and freedoms of American citizens.
Yes, this is a fairly minor matter.  Yet it happens all the time, often with much poorer outcomes.  It happens all the time in cases involving far more significant sums of money, too.  The problem is that this is happening all the time, at all levels, and once you’re sucked into the system, even the most favorable outcome will cost you thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars.
Ladies and gentlemen, the system of justice as envisioned by our Founding Fathers was true, right, and just.  The system as it exists is a fantastically warped mockery designed to perpetuate and pad the system at the expense — rather than support — of We the People.

Rights are NOT “Privileges” and are NOT lawfully subject to license or licensing requirements

I wrote the following letter to my state representative.  I’ll share the response with you when it arrives, and will let you know if it doesn’t.

I’m writing you today concerning a point of Constitutional law I recently uncovered that appears to put much of Colorado’s licensing efforts in a dim light.  In particular, I’m licensed by the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office to carry a concealed handgun, and fully understand all the privileges and restrictions associated with that permit.  However, I’m also a student of both the words and wisdom of our Founding Fathers, and know full well they never intended any right be reduced to a privilege or subject to license.

I recently came across two U.S. Supreme Court decisions along these lines and wanted to run them by you:

“No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore.” (Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105)

“If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.” (Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262)

Here’s our Founding Father’s take on the issue:  “…the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” (Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution)  That seems abundantly clear to me.

Here’s my take on the issue:  All concealed carry “permits” are licenses of a right (liberty).  The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) that such licenses are illegal.  Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262 (1963) that citizens “can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.”  Combined with fact that the Second Amendment clearly states the act of keeping and bearing arms is a right seems to withdraw all wiggle room for law enforcement to behave otherwise, unless the legal examiner or legislator ignores either the Constitution or the U.S. Supreme Court decision.

Thus, my question to you:  Which States are willing to stand by the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court decisions which support it?  More specifically, when will Colorado stop violating the U.S. Constitution and these U.S. Supreme Court decisions and instead correctly join with the ranks of those states who have passed “Constitutional Carry” laws?

As of July 1, 2015, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, Vermont and Wyoming are considered constitutional carry states. In Wyoming’s case, permitless carry is for residents only; non-residents must have a permit to carry a concealed handgun in that state. Maine will join the list in October 2015.

If I’m not mistaken, these decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court cover the much large issue of licensing efforts in general.  What other Constitutionally-guaranteed rights are illegally treated as “privileges” under Colorado law?  What steps will you take to restore Colorado law to a more lawful basis commensurate with “the supreme Law of the Land?” (Article VI, U.S. Constitution)

Sincerely…

Addendum:  Our Founding Fathers had GOOD REASON to ensure that our Second Amendment was ratified WITHOUT RESTRICTION.  In fact, as it stands, it specifically PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL restrictions:  “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”

Second Amendment – NO RESTRICTIONS!

 

Why?  Because it says so.  That’s why.  Out.