Mediaboss Marketing

Put simply, writes Judge Robert King of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war.

In Kolbe v. Hogan, the court upheld Marylands ban on assault weapons, also known as rifles that look scary to people who know nothing about guns.

As talk radio host Darryl W. Perry of Free Talk Live notes, Kings perversely broad statement would cover a ban on the possession of rocks:

And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth. So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him 1st Samuel, Chapter 17

King also displays a poor grasp of history. No judicial power is required to extend the Second Amendment to cover weapons of war, because theyre precisely what it was intended to cover in the first place.

The Second Amendment was ratified only a few years after a citizen army many of its soldiers armed, at least at first, with weapons brought from home defeated the most fearsome professional military machine in the history of the world, the army of a global empire.

The express purpose of the Second Amendment was to guarantee the continued maintenance of an armed populace. In fact, the Second Militia Act of 1792 legally required every adult able-bodied white American male to own and maintain weapons of war (a musket or rifle, bayonet, powder and bullets) just in case the militia had to be called out.

Even in the 1939 case usually cited to justify victim disarmament (gun control) laws, U.S. v. Miller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the reason Jack Miller/s short-barreled shotgun could be banned was that it WASNT a weapon of war: [I]t is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Yes, you read that right: The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment applies ONLY to weapons of war. I think thats too narrow myself, but at least it comes at the matter from the correct historical perspective.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is best understood in terms of a quote falsely attributed to Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto of the Japanese navy at the beginning of World War II: You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.

Shame on King and the 4th Circuit for failing to uphold the plain meaning of shall not be infringed.

(Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism, thegarrisoncenter.org. He lives and works in north central Florida. Follow him on Twitter @thomaslknapp.)

Excerpt from:
The Second Amendment and 'weapons of war' - The Fayette Tribune

Its the Iowa Firearms Coalitions Second Amendment Day at the state capitol and gun rights advocates are ready to watch the Iowa House debate a bill that includes many of their priorities. Kurt Liske, vice president of the Iowa Firearms Coalition,called ita show of appreciation from House Republicans.

The fact that we have a day that we scheduled months out in advance, to have them essentially tailor their schedule to ours is almost unheard of, Liske said this morning. The fact that theyre doing this is a real testament to you guysthe fact that youre out there helping with campaign work, things like that.

More than 70 members of the Iowa Firearms Coalition crowded into a capitol committee room thismorning for a briefing on the bill. Members wore orange stickers that read: I support the Second Amendment and I vote.

Representative Matt Windschitl, a Republican from Missouri Valley who is floor manager of the gun bill, spoke to the group.

A lot of things in this bill, including the stand your ground provisions, have been a long time coming, Windschitl said, and it looks as though weve finally got an opportunity to push this down to the governors desk.

Windschitl is a trained gunsmith and his family runs a gun store in Missouri Valley. He uses the word phenomenal to describe the bill as currently crafted.

With the make-up of the legislature the way it is, we have gotten this bill to a place where I didnt even expect us to as far as the freedoms we have in here, Windschitl said. This sets us up for future successes. This sets us up so we can come back next year and get our freedoms back that have been encroached upon over generations.

Windschitl, whohas received death threats becauseof his advocacyfor the legislation, said theres some hate and discontent out there about the bill. He urged Iowa Firearms Coalition members to lobby theirSenators today.

Weve still got our work cut out for us when we move this over to the senate, Windschitl said. There are a lot of senators that are very eager to get all of this done, but the majority in the senate is new and so some of them have not faced the challenges that go into running bills like this, because they can get kind of controversial.

House debate of the bill is expected to get underway early this afternoon.

Read the original post:
House to debate gun bill on IFC's 'Second Amendment Day' - Radio Iowa

Society

16:10 09.03.2017(updated 16:14 09.03.2017) Get short URL

"When I came toEurope I had lost everything, I had gone fromworking ina Five Star hotel inDamascus, the capital ofSyria, totraveling formonths onend toreach safety inGreece," Mohammad told Sputnik.

Mohammad Al-Masri is a refugee fromSyria; he left Damascus and traveled toTurkey in2015 alongwith millions ofothers, ashe manged tosurvive the perilous journey bysea toGreece. He then ended uptraveling toa small village inthe Netherlands called Ter Apel, fromthere he went onto Amsterdam.

Recalling the time inSyria when he watched the Egyptian movie Hammam inAmsterdam, Mohammed felt likehe knew the city even beforehe arrived.

"After watching that film, I felt likeI knew the place already. It was home tome," Mohammad told Sputnik.

It was atthis stage that he made contact withartists and entrepreneur Teun Castelein, founder ofRederij Lampedusaboat tours. Mr. Castelein had the idea ofbringing awareness tothe plight ofrefugees and decided torun boat tours withrefugees asthe guides, asit was the easiest way tomake a statement and tobring awareness tothe issue ofimmigration.

The result was the resurrection oftwo boats, namedHedir and Meneer Vrijdag, once used totransport refugees toEurope fromTurkey.

"We have all read inthe media aboutrefugees, they were painted ina dark light, however I saw it asa huge humanitarian issue and I felt I had todo something; it had a very personal agenda. I have an entrepreneurial spirit and that is how the idea came about," Mr. Castelein told Sputnik.

The tour group will run daily cruises fromApril, each lasting one hour and costing US$20 per person. They will take passengers throughthe city's world-famous waterways.

Mr. Castelien hopes that the boat tours will bring tothe forefront the plight ofrefugees and migrants inEurope, inwhat he considers a bold statement aswell asan artistic outlet.

"If you put one ofthese boats ontothe canal, what will happen practically withyour audience? The easiest way tomake a statement is toput it inyour face," he said.

Mr. Castelein and Mohammad are now friends, united bya common cause and spurred onwith the aim ofachieving a better tomorrow.

"We are all friends so, we do not want tomake them [refugees] outto be victims likethe rest ofthe media. The boats are a symbol ofbeauty. The history ofour city has been one ofmigration, great philosophers, writers and artists have all been immigrants," Mr. Castelein told Sputnik.

For Mohammad this journey is more thana boat tour, it's aboutraising awareness and being inclusive.

"I hope that people living and visiting the city will see that it is all aboutinclusion and that it is far better tohave an inclusive society then one which aims toexclude," Mohammad told Sputnik.

These boat tours are just the start ofMohammad's new life, he has dreams ofone day owning his own hotel, a social enterprise project which will allow every person staying todo so forfree.

Link:
Dutch Boat Tours With Refugee Guides Put a Human Face on Europe's Migrant Crisis - Sputnik International

Fox News

Illegal immigration from Mexico down 40 percent in Trump's first month New York Post The number of illegal immigrants crossing into the United States from Mexico declined by 40 percent from January to February, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Wednesday. The downturn came after President Donald Trump took office on Jan. How America's Idea Of Illegal Immigration Doesn't Always Match RealityNPR Trump could make courthouse arrests of illegal immigrants the new normalFox News Report: Illegal Immigration Important for Kentucky's EconomyWKU Public Radio Newsmax all 73 news articles »

Read the original here:
Illegal immigration from Mexico down 40 percent in Trump's first month - New York Post

Illegal immigration across the southwest border plummeted in the weeks after President Trump took office, Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly announced Wednesday, calling the drop an early sign that Mr. Trumps get-tough policies are working.

In addition to a drop in the number of illegal immigrants nabbed while attempting to cross, Mr. Kelly said, they have seen a dramatic spike in the rates charged by smugglers paid to sneak people into the U.S.

Routes that cost $3,500 in November now cost $8,000, he said another signal that smuggling cartels business is suffering.

Mr. Kelly called the drop in apprehensions unprecedented. The number of people caught at the border is considered a good indication of the overall flow, so a drop in apprehensions is believed to signal a drop in total number of illegal crossings.

This trend is encouraging because it means many fewer people are putting themselves and their families at risk of exploitation, assault and injury by human traffickers and the physical dangers of the treacherous journey north, Mr. Kelly said.

All told, 23,589 people were caught trying to enter without permission at the border in February. That was the lowest number for the month in years and a 40 percent drop from the 42,504 caught in January.

In fact, its the lowest number for any month dating back at least to 2012, when monthly statistics were first released.

The Obama administration and its allies among immigrant rights groups had long argued that the surge of illegal immigration in recent years, chiefly from Central America, was a result of people fleeing horrific conditions.

Those groups argued that there was little the U.S. could or should do to stem the flow.

But Border Patrol officials, in internal documents, had said the surge was a result of lax enforcement within the U.S. They had predicted that a policy imposing tougher consequences for illegal immigration could stem the flow.

Mr. Kelly said Wednesday that appears to be the case.

The early results show that enforcement matters, deterrence matters, and that comprehensive immigration enforcement can make an impact, he said.

The drop was severe across all categories.

The number of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children caught by the Border Patrol fell below 2,000, while the number of people traveling as families was just 3,124. In January, that number had been 9,300, and in December, it had been more than 16,000.

Even particularly tricky countries such as Haiti saw improvement. In January, more than 1,600 Haitians showed up at ports of entry demanding to be admitted. In February, that number dropped to 218.

Mr. Kelly said the massive changes were the result of Mr. Trumps policies, which have given agents at the border and in the interior more leeway to arrest and deport illegal immigrants.

Mr. Trump has also promised to hire 5,000 more border agents and to build a wall across the southwest border, though neither of those plans has taken shape.

Instead, would-be immigrants appear to be responding to Mr. Trumps get-tough rhetoric.

Mr. Kelly said his department will be monitoring to see what happens in March, April and May, when the number of apprehensions and therefore crossers usually jumps.

President Obama oversaw a major drop in the number of Mexicans coming across the border during his time in office a result of a sour U.S. economy, an improving Mexican economy and a willingness to impose penalties on those nabbed.

But U.S. policy was more relaxed toward illegal immigrants from Central America.

They were generally arrested, given court dates and released into the interior of the U.S., where they often absconded, disappearing into the shadows with the estimated 11 million other illegal immigrants.

See original here:
Trump's get-tough policies credited for sharp plunge in illegal immigration - Washington Times