Avoid systemic failure

 Time and time again laws like SB 1927, the 'Teacher Protection Act ' and SB 1168 "safeguards" keep us afraid.  Yet Juxtaposed to the Mulford Act both sides appear incompetent.  A 'CRAZY gun guy' runs the airwaves. 

  Most do not know the answer to a second grade test question from Illinois. What does the second amendment establish? The answer is the Nations' Guard. Amended from National Guardsmen to allow for women to become enlisted. The armed miltia is the military. So be sure to go to a public taxpayer funded school system.

   Many states require a pledge of an oath of solemnity for those with granted access to firearms. The police have that power. Special access is not permitted in many States. 

  The Concurroto report from the great State of California poses the notion that the conversation be prohibited. It is a quite unintelligent and useless debate. Why many law making bodies are implicit on an, offensive object, being used correctly. The explicit terminolgy being a firearm.

Penal code 30.05 and its misuse, please if I may continue. Refer to Coker v. Georgia No. 5444 paragraph IV line 12-14 maybe if you need precedent. HR 85 SB 1649 for reference. Many are being trespassed from many places who provide service to the public. Yet, many of those trespassed, do not, have direct possession nor knowledge neither, are they intent, or in any control of a firearm. 

Coker v. Georgia was a watershed for 8th Amendment cases. Erlich Anthony Coker broke out of prison and went onto rape another victim. Given Georgia law, it STILL is freakish, cruel, barbaric, UNJUSTIFIED imposition to execute in the eyes of the law. Maybe that's why they crossed out some of House Bill 2?

  The 8th Amendment sets limits on fine, due, or cruel or unusual punishment. Usually defined or broached as death as a form of punishment. The law, being designed to protect is at a loss, in many circumstances, and considers many to be a waste of a valuable jail/prison cell.

   Consider Remington and its recent litigation. California as well followed suit on a individual level. My stance, viewpoint, is that not only does it do a good job of establishing motive, a precept the law is to avoid, yet new California Gun Law simply put is reckless and irresponsible.

    I do find many exceptions to rule. So a good lawyer would be aware of the spectrum of crime we are looking at. At their level seems there is some perception of intent to commit a crime. Inducement maybe, and still enticement is called into question. So assuming the reader cares and is competant to know right from wrong, and please there is some expectation from you that yes you do as well. You know right from wrong. So do not feel the need to commit an unecessary act of violence. Thank you. There is no threat from me or anyone. Contact an emergency number if you are in danger.

  Now back to Texas law.

Dai Vonte Eshaun Titus Ross v. State.
In Ross v. State an alarming display of a firearm, was quashed, to not even a C misdemeanor. To brandish a deadly weapon. Where is the sense in that? I can get a ticket for my turn signal not being on. Yet if have a gun in public in Texas? 

  You get an overreactionary legislature who permit some to allow SOME car owners to drive with a weapon in their glove box. And they are what? Pro life?. And I still find exception to rule. SOME car owners may have a deadly weapon in their glovebox. I'm not being misleading on purpose I simply find in wrongful.

  So please! Fault the law itself. Either that or be aware they want us to foot the bill and pay a price. And align with your parties values.

   The wealth disparity is 400:300,000,000. How many billionaires need a pay cut? To follow the money or not, be led astray.

    We have a supply side demand driven service sector logistical Keynesian economy. Less demand, which is us, and you get what we have been experiencing. A price crisis. When brilliant economist cannot reconcile for all their "losses". 

  Unless we agree that legislation to build highways, and improve our infrastructure  needed government will continue to focus on unecessary safeguards. When government improves business and worries about projects like waste water reduction, pollution, and agriculture we WILL notice real change and progress.

   So do the right thing and ask your law makers to listen to why YOU support wise law making. We need open lines of effective communication. So we should, after our say, get some kind of response. Tell them why YOU will not support, or vote for any legislation that places lives in danger. Its their malpractice we need to decipher. Together we can place the country back in gear and on the right track.

Sail away

The heart of the matter

Call it dreaming