Internet Sales Coming To a State Near You

While we are all focused on the Boston Islamic Terrorist bombings (yes that's right, Islamic Terrorist), Harry Reid has been trying to push an internet sale tax bill through the Senate.

From the WSJ:

As early as Monday, the Senate will vote on a bill that was introduced only last Tuesday. The text of this legislation, which would fundamentally change interstate commerce, only became available on the Library of Congress website over the weekend.
For Senators curious about what they're voting on, it is the same flawed proposal that Mike Enzi (R., Wyo.) introduced in February. It has been repackaged to qualify for a Senate rule that allows Majority Leader Harry Reid to bypass committee debate and bring it straight to the floor.

Mr. Enzi's Marketplace Fairness Act discriminates against Internet-based businesses by imposing burdens that it does not apply to brick-and-mortar companies. For the first time, online merchants would be forced to collect sales taxes for all of America's estimated 9,600 state and local taxing authorities.  

Who's behind this rush to tax? Wal-Mart and other big retailers that can more easily absorb the costs of collection than can smaller competitors. 

That issue, however, is Wal-Mart is in every state in the union and operates brick and mortar store in those state and therefore are required to collect the sales tax for the state that they operate in and that you reside in.

Also supporting the bill is Internet giant Amazon, which coincidentally now sells its own tax compliance service to other merchants. Adding to the lobbying muscle are state and local governments. The politicians believe they'll collect tens of billions of dollars in taxes that are already owed by shoppers on remote sales but rarely paid.

 This rush to tax is an attempt to overturn the Supreme Court's 1992 decision in Quill v. North Dakota that forcing businesses to collect and remit taxes to jurisdictions where they have no physical presence was too big a burden. Though that ruling applied to catalogs in the pre-Internet age, it established an important principle of cross-state tax accountability.

And what does the White House say about this?:

Because these out-of-state companies are able to play by a different set of rules, this disparity undermines the ability of cities and States to invest in K-12 education, police and fire protection, access to affordable health care, and funding for roads and bridges. 

There's that word again, "Invest". Well obviously the White House has forgotten that funding for K-12 education and police and fire protection come from property taxes most of the time. Affordable health care has been rammed down our throats and paid for by working Americans from Obamacare (So they said) and roads and bridges are paid for by tolls and fuel taxation. So this is a lame, dumbass excuse.

Regardless of how you might feel about this, there is one thing to keep in mind.... That is, Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution, which states:

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

One may wonder that this only applies to the US Congress.
Well, if you consider that the SCOTUS as ruled many times on the 1st Amendment and the right to freedom of religion, as in their Lemon Test  ruling and that local and state government displaying of a nativity scenes, for example, as an establishment, by government, of religion, then it should apply here. In all essence, Congress has been interpreted to mean government at any level.

Lastly, some will argue that since you are in one state, the merchant is in another state, once you click submit, that sale commenced with in the boundaries of the state.
However, the transaction actually takes place on the sever and if that server is in another state for which the merchant has a brick & mortar, that's where the sale took place.

This is really a no brainer, and each and everyone of you should demand that Congress needs to standby Article 1; Sec 9 of the Constitution!

Ricin Mailer Arrested

Mississippi man arrested in connection to ricin letters sent to Obama and Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and a Mississippi official that initially tested positive for ricin.

The suspect has been identified as 45-year-old Paul Kevin Curtis of Tupelo, Miss. Tupelo is also the hometown of Wicker and his wife.

The FBI confirmed earlier Wednesday that a letter addressed to President Obama had "preliminarily tested positive" for ricin, a day after lawmakers said another letter sent to the Capitol Hill office of Sen. Roger Wicker tested positive for the same substance.
The warnings came amid a flurry of reports on suspicious packages. Fox News learned of several suspicious packages or envelopes in various Capitol Hill office buildings, and Capitol Police said three packages that were flagged had been removed.
Separately, the office of Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., reported a "suspicious-looking letter" at one of the senator's Michigan offices; and a spokesman for Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., reported a "suspicious letter" was intercepted at Flake's Phoenix office. Authorities were also called to the Dallas office of Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, over what was described only as "a piece of mail" -- but field tests later came back negative.

Here is his Facebook page:

And some of his posts

 

Left Warns Not To Succumb To 9/11 Type Reaction To Boston

Oh, PLEASE!
When will the left get a grip on reality, that war has been waged against us by radicals?

MSNBC host Alex Wagner said here that the “silver lining” in the Boston attacks can be found the “sense of community” that has followed the attack.



The Nation magazine editor Katrina vanden Heuvel added that she hopes the ultimate response to this act of terror is a measured one. She implies that America’s years-long response to the attacks of 9/11 as an example of an American response to terror that was not measured and was, in fact, disproportionate.

Disproportionate? 9/11? 9/11 was too large of a loss of life of Americans, and that we, as a nation need to repay these terrorist acts against us. With resounding might and with unwavering prejudice!

“My hope, (vanden Heuvel continues), is that the community spirit – the resilience of the American people, which the president spoke so well to – is what comes out of this, and not the overreaction to fear which think we have seen, for sure, in the wake of 9/11 when this country overreacted.”

THIS COUNTRY OVERREACTED?
It's THIS attitude that has brought on the terrorist attacks within our boards, folks!

Why Gun Control Doesn't Work

This is what happens when you severely limit law abiding citizens their constitution rights.
This store owner in Chicago was not able to obtain a gun to protect his store, after it had been robbed many times before.
So what did he do to fight off a robbery this time?
He took a Louisville slugger against a gun wheeling thief. And the would-be thief won this battle, but the store owner didn't. He was shot in the leg.



And now the list of turncoats in the US Senate today who voted to proceed with debate on their gun control legislation.
This is an act of war on our Bill of Rights.

• Lindsey Graham (SC)  (202) 224-5972
• Lamar Alexander (TN)  (202) 224-4944
• Kelly Ayotte (NH)  (202) 224-3324
• Richard Burr (NC)  (202) 224-3154
• Saxby Chambliss (GA)  (202) 224-3521
• John McCain (AZ)  (202) 224-2235
• Tom Coburn (OK)  (202) 224-5754
• Susan Collins (ME)  (202) 224-2523
• Bob Corker (TN)  (202) 224-3344
• Jeff Flake (AZ)  (202) 224-4521
• John Hoeven (ND)  (202) 224-2551
• Johnny Isakson (GA)  (202) 224-3643
• Dean Heller (NV)  (202) 224-6244
• Mark Kirk (IL)  (202) 224-2854
• Pat Toomey (PA)  (202) 224-4254
• Roger Wicker (MS)  (202) 224-6253 

NY- Gun Confiscation Underway

Ammoland.com is reporting that under the new law Governor Cuomo signed recently, that the state is now conducting medical background checks. And if you are found to have been seen and treated by a Dr.  you can have your handgun license taken, along with your weapon.

Highlights below:

Remember all those who denied that firearms confiscation as a result of New York’s new gun laws was too “insane” to even consider?
That it was strictly in the realm of paranoid conspiracy theorists and the “it cant happen here crowd”?

It seems those that tried desperately to warn of such an insidious plot had hit the bullseye with their warnings after all. News came from multiple NY State based firearms enthusiast websites late Friday that confiscations of Pistol Owner ID Cards, as well as firearms and accessories has commenced in NY under the provisions of the horribly flawed, draconian and blatantly unconstitutional NY SAFE Act.
From NY http://tiny.cc/nyfirearms

“John Doe, an upstanding professional with no outstanding criminal convictions and no history of violent action received a letter from the Pistol Permit Department informing him that his license was immediately revoked upon information that he was seeing a therapist for anxiety and had been prescribed an anxiety drug. He was never suicidal, never violent, and has no criminal history. The New York State Department of Health is apparently conducting a search of medical records to determine who is being treated for anxiety drugs and using this as a basis for handgun license revocation.

Those are the facts. Nothing more, nothing less.”

Now, before anyone trots out the old saw about how this is nothing more then a paranoid, unsubstantiated rumor on a “gun nuts” internet forum. I spoke to the Attorney of Record in this matter on the phone this morning and he confirmed that the above snippet is accurate and these cases are happening!
James Tresmond Esq confirmed in our conversation that the above mentioned case is occurring in Erie County NY, it is his client that has been effected, and as yet unknown sources have seen fit to take it upon themselves to share confidential medical records with NY State Officials without authorization, a massive HIPPA violation.

It seems these supposedly confidential records are then compared against a list of known NY pistol license holders and letters are sent out demanding their Pistol Owner ID Cards be surrendered, as well as any firearms and accessories.

This is an unprecedented violation of a Citizens 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendment RIGHTS.

The rest can be read here.
Warning to New York Residence. Do NOT relinquish your rights, NOR your weapons!

Gun Violence Prevention- Connecticut Legislature proposals

On the night of April 2, 2013, the Connecticut Legislature’s Bi-Partisan task force on Gun Violence Prevention released its proposal for gun-control legislation. It sheds light on a few of the proposals that are being talked about in Washington and other parts of the country.

I will highly some key points, that I feel could be shot down by a Supreme Court challenge.
Here’s a snapshot of some of what their proposal seeks to accomplish.

1. Requires a “universal background check” for all firearm sales or transfers
   1. All gun sales or transfers must be preceded by the buyer passing a national criminal background check.
2. Bans the sale or purchase of large-capacity magazines (LCMs) that have a capacity of more than 10 rounds and requires all currently owned LCM’s to be registered with law enforcement
   1. In addition to banning the sale, import, or purchase of LCM’s, this law states that you must register all LCMs that were legally purchased prior to the law going into effect. Additionally, the law states that owners of LCMs are only allowed to load more than 10 rounds in their LCMs if they are in their home or at a shooting range.
   2. Concealed carry permit holders with firearms purchased with LCMs prior to the ban are not allowed to carry more than 10 rounds in the magazine.
3. Expands the Connecticut Assault Weapons Ban
   1. The current assault weapons ban is being expanded to include a ban of any weapon that has one or more of the characteristics often found on military weapons. Residents who already legally possess weapons that fit the expanded definition with have their weapons grandfathered but will have to register their firearms with law enforcement and the transportation and use of these weapons will be very limited.
4. Requires a state-issued eligibility certificate to purchase long-guns, ammunition or magazines.
   1. To purchase a long-gun, the purchaser must complete a firearms safety training course, be fingerprinted, and undergo a national criminal background.
   2. To purchase ammunition or magazines, the buyer must possess an eligibility certificate that shows that they have passed a national background check.
5. Denies eligibility certificates to those who have been involuntarily confined or voluntarily admitted to a hospital for persons with psychiatric disabilities.
   1. Those involuntarily confined will not be allowed to possess or purchase firearms or ammunition for 5 years after their release.
   2.  Those voluntarily admitted will not be allowed to possess or purchase firearms or ammunition for 6 month after their release.
6. Establish a dangerous weapon offender registry
   1. Offenders who have been convicted of weapons offenses or some offenses where they have threatened to use a weapon would have to register with law enforcement for five years.

This would NOT have prevented Newtown, Aurora or AZ/Giffords shooting.
That is pretty broad, intrusive, but most importantly, a clear violation of the right to Keep and Bear!

Chris Mathews Needs a Dictionary

Chris Mathews made this statement on his show yesterday, when responding to Rush Limbaugh comments about the Rev Dr Leon sermon this past Easter Sunday.

“Racism Is The Belief That One Race – Whites – Should Rule All Others. Get your definition straight”

Mathews, like most liberal progressive, socialist hacks in America, try to redefine many words in our society. Marriage. Regulate. Racism.

I think this soon to be 67 year old sh*t for brains can use a new Dictionary. 
Maybe a Merriam-Webster, no less?

1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2: racial prejudice or discrimination 

Nope nothing there that indicates the belief that one race, whites, should rule all others.

Second Amendment Required

Now here is a breath of fresh air and positive news about the right to keep and bear arms, in a time when government, at least at the Federal and state levels, are trying to limit our second amendment right.

Nelson GA, a little town of 1300 and 50 miles north of Atlanta, voted unanimously to require, if you don't object, to owning a fire arm.

The measure requires every head of household to own a gun and ammunition to "provide for the emergency management of the city" and to "provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants."

AP Reports:
The ordinance exempts convicted felons and those who suffer from certain physical or mental disabilities, as well as anyone who objects to gun ownership. The ordinance also doesn't include any penalty for those who don't comply.
But backers said they wanted to make a statement about gun rights at a time when President Barack Obama and some states are pushing for more restrictions in the wake of the Connecticut elementary school massacre in December that left 20 children and six educators dead.
Councilman Duane Cronic, who sponsored the measure, said he knows the ordinance won't be enforced but he still believes it will make the town safer.
"I likened it to a security sign that people put up in their front yards. Some people have security systems, some people don't, but they put those signs up," he said. "I really felt like this ordinance was a security sign for our city. Basically it was a deterrent ordinance to tell potential criminals they might want to go on down the road a little bit."

The city council's agenda says another purpose of the measure is "opposition of any future attempt by the federal government to confiscate personal firearms."

(But there is always one in the bunch)
Nelson resident Lamar Kellett was one of five people who spoke during a public comment period and one of two who opposed the ordinance. Among his many objections, he said it dilutes the city's laws to pass measures that aren't intended to be enforced.
"Does this mean now 55 miles an hour speed limit means 65, 80, whatever you choose? There's not a whole lot of difference. A law's a law," he said.
Kellett also said the ordinance will have no effect, that it won't encourage people like him who don't want a gun to go out and buy one.

The proposal illustrates how the response to the Newtown, Conn., massacre varies widely in different parts of the country.

While lawmakers in generally more liberal states with large urban centers like New York and California have moved to tighten gun control laws, more conservative, rural areas in the American heartland have been going in the opposite direction, seeking to loosen restrictions, arm educators or even require gun ownership.
Among the other efforts to broaden gun rights that have surfaced since the Newtown killings:
-- Earlier Monday, lawmakers in Oklahoma scuttled a bill that would have allowed public school districts to decide whether to let teachers be armed.
-- Spring City, Utah, passed an ordinance this year recommending that residents keep firearms, softening an initial proposal that aimed to require it.
-- Residents of tiny Byron, Maine, rejected a proposal last month that would have required a gun in every home. Even some who initially supported the measure said it should have recommended gun ownership instead of requiring it, and worried that the proposal had made the community a laughingstock. Selectmen of another Maine town, Sabbatus, threw out a similar measure. The state's attorney general said state law prevents municipalities from passing their own firearms laws anyway.
-- Lawmakers in about two dozen states have considered making it easier for school employees or volunteers to carry guns on campus. South Dakota passed such a measure last month. Individual communities from New Jersey to Colorado have voted to allow administrators or teachers to carry guns in school.

Located in the Appalachian foothills, Nelson is a tiny, hilly town with narrow, twisting roads. It's a place where most people know one another and leave their doors unlocked.
It used to be a major source of marble, with the local marble company employing many in town. But that industry is mostly gone now, Mayor Mike Haviland said. There are no retail stores in town anymore, and people do their shopping elsewhere. While the town used to have an internally driven economy, just about everyone leaves town for work now, making it a bedroom community for Atlanta, Haviland said.
The mayor said he never dreamed his small city would be the focus of national and international media attention, but he understands it.
"It bumps up against the national issues on guns," he said.
Nelson resident Lawrence Cooper and his wife, Nanette, sat on their front porch Monday morning, enjoying a pleasant breeze and listening to the radio show of conservative Herman Cain, who unsuccessfully sought the 2012 Republican nomination for president. The Coopers support the ordinance.
"It's supporting gun rights flat out, and there is so much -- not antipathy -- but antagonism against gun ownership these days," Lawrence Cooper said. "And this is a very conservative small town, and they are fully in support of this."
The couple doesn't own any guns, but 52-year-old Lawrence Cooper said he grew up with them, and this ordinance might inspire him to go out and buy one. He chuckled as he pulled out a small black-and-white photo from his wallet. It shows him at 3 years of age, in front of a rack of hunting rifles and shotguns.
Police Chief Heath Mitchell noted that the city doesn't have police officers who work 24 hours a day and is far from the two sheriff's offices that might send deputies in case of trouble, so response times to emergency calls can be long. So having a gun would help residents take their protection into their own hands, he said.