The Weekly Sedition

Monday, 20 January 2020

Politicians Need to Follow the Law, Too [ABQ Journal — Letter to the Editor]

Filed under: Media, Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 7:37 PM

In today’s Journal, I read an letter to the editor by Quay County Attorney Warren F. Frost [1] saying that the 29 county sheriffs who prefer their constituents’ individual liberty over Bloomberg-financed victim disarmament dictats from Santa Fe should resign or face the possibility of removal should they refuse to follow those dictats.

Frost cites Article XX, Section 1 of the New Mexico State Constitution [2] as his rationale on this —

Every person elected or appointed to any office shall, before entering upon his duties, take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation that he will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution and laws of this state, and that he will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of his office to the best of his ability.

Where in that clause do public officials, elected or appointed, reserve the right to blow off parts of the State Constitution that they don’t care for, as if those parts don’t exist?

In this case, I’m referring to willful disregard for Article II, Section 6, as repeatedly displayed by Governor Michelle Lujan-Grisham and the Legislature.

Article II, Section 6 reads as follows —

No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

If the 29 of 33 county sheriffs who are opposed to the Bloomberg-financed victim disarmament campaign are subject to removal for refusing to follow its dictats, then why are Lujan-Grisham and her fellow victim disarmers in the Legislature not subject to removal for their refusal to abide by Article II, Section 6?


AS PUBLISHED

LEGISLATURE 2020

RED FLAG DEBATE

Look who’s blowing off the Constitution now

  IN (THE Jan.12) Journal, I read an letter to the editor by Quay County Attorney Warren F. Frost saying that the 29 county sheriffs who prefer their constituents’ individual liberty over Bloomberg-financed victim disarmament dictats from Santa Fe should resign or face the possibility of removal should they refuse to follow those dictats.

  Frost cites Article XX, Section 1 of the New Mexico State Constitution as his rationale on this.

  Article XX Miscellaneous, Section 1 Oath of officer reads that: “Every person elected or appointed to any office shall, before entering upon his duties, take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation that he will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution and laws of this state, and that he will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of his office to the best of his ability.

  Where in that clause do public officials, elected or appointed, reserve the right to blow off parts of the State Constitution that they don’t care for, as if those parts don’t exist?

  In this case, I’m referring to the willful disregard for Article II, Section 6, as repeatedly displayed by Governor Michelle Lujan-Grisham and the Legislature.

  Article II, Section 6 reads as follows: “No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.

  No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

  If the 29 of 33 county sheriffs who are opposed to the Bloomberg-financed victim disarmament campaign are subject to removal for refusing to follow its dictats, then why are Lujan Grisham and her fellow victim disarmers in the Legislature not subject to removal for their refusal to abide by Article II, Section 6?

MIKE BLESSING
Albuquerque


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. If you can’t enforce the law, resign by Warren F. Frost, Quay County Attorney (Albuquerque Journal, Sunday, 12 January 2020, page A11)
  2. Article XX Miscellaneous, Section 1 Oath of officer

Copyright © 2020 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepadqq and Notepad++.

Saturday, 10 October 2015

[ABQ Journal] ABQ mayor’s marijuana veto survives challenge

ABQ mayor’s marijuana veto survives challenge

By Dan McKay / Journal Staff Writer
Published: Wednesday, October 7th, 2015 at 7:26pm
Updated: Wednesday, October 7th, 2015 at 11:09pm

Mayor Richard Berry’s veto of a marijuana decriminalization bill withstood a challenge from Albuquerque city councilors on Wednesday.

Democrats on the City Council failed to persuade one of their Republican colleagues to change positions and join them in favor of a veto override.

But no one changed positions. The override attempt failed on a 5-4 vote along party lines.

It takes six of nine councilors to override a mayoral veto.

About a half-dozen speakers urged councilors to override the veto and enact the legislation – which called for making it a civil offense, not a criminal violation, under city law to possess an ounce or less of marijuana.

A companion bill sought to make marijuana a low priority for law enforcement.

Berry, a Republican, vetoed both proposals. He said they conflicted with state and federal law.

Councilors Isaac Benton and Rey Garduño, who co-sponsored the legislation, said cities have authority to set their own penalties for marijuana possession. That gives police officers discretion to cite people under either a local ordinance or under state law, they said.

Furthermore, the two argued, local voters already support reducing marijuana penalties.

“We don’t have to wait for the federal government or the state of New Mexico to tell us how to govern our own community, or respond to the voice of the community,” Benton said as he read a joint statement.

About 60 percent of Bernalillo County voters last year expressed support for decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana. That was in response to a nonbinding question on the general-election ballot.

None of the council’s four Republicans spoke about the veto Wednesday. But they’ve previously said they don’t view city government as the right venue for changing drug laws.

That didn’t stop people from trying to change their minds.

Mike Blessing of the Libertarian Party of New Mexico told councilors they were supporting organized crime if they refuse to change the law. Support for an override, however, means “you’re standing up for free markets,” Blessing said.

Other supporters said that a marijuana conviction can make it hard to find a job and that enforcement draws resources away from more-serious crimes.

“The war on drugs has been a terrible failure,” Garduño said. “We know this isn’t working.”

In New Mexico, marijuana use is legal only for medical purposes.

Supporting the override were Benton, Garduño, Ken Sanchez, Diane Gibson and Klarissa Peña, all Democrats.

Republicans Brad Winter, Dan Lewis, Trudy Jones and Don Harris voted “no.”


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. City Council on 2015-10-07 5:00 PM – TWENTY-FIRST COUNCIL – FORTY-NINTH MEETING
  2. DPA Statement: Albuquerque Mayor Berry’s Veto of Marijuana Decriminalization Lags Behind History and the Public’s Will

NOTES

  1. Approximate reading level – 13.6
  2. Original article — http://abqjournal.com/656288/news/abq-mayors-marijuana-veto-stands.html
    Archived here — https://archive.is/3NWiF
  3. Reposted –
    1. Libertarian Party –
      1. New MexicoBlog / Facebook page / Facebook group
      2. Bernalillo County, New MexicoBlog / Facebook page / Facebook group
    2. Albuquerque Liberty Forum Facebook page
    3. New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group

Copyright © 2015 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with KWrite.

Sunday, 23 December 2012

Guns aren’t the problem, and never really were

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Fwd: Guns aren’t the problem, and never really were
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:16:38
From: Mike Blessing
To: LPNM Discussion list @ Yahoo!, My Public Email Archive, The Weekly Sedition @ Yahoo!, New Mexicans for Liberty
BCC: [80 individuals]

Re: Gun Arguments Die in Latest Massacre

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Guns aren’t the problem, and never really were
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 01:51:55
From: Libertarian Party of New Mexico <lpnm.chair@gmail.com>
To: <llinthicum@abqjournal.com>, <opinion@abqjournal.com>

“And it’s time for Americans to stop talking about our individual rights and start accepting our collective responsibilities.”

With that one sentence, Ms. Linthicum disavows the one thing that separates America from the rest of the world – the United States is the only country with the notion of individual rights written into its core documents: the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

She says “I don’t want to hear that it’s not guns that are the problem, people are.” Well, she’s going to, and not just from me, from what I see on the Journal’s website. Because it’s the truth. Inanimate objects such as guns, knives and baseball bats don’t cause violent crime, as she alleges. That’s like saying cars cause drunk driving.

Then she says she doesn’t want to hear about how an armed teacher could have prevented the tragedy. Again, she doesn’t want to hear the truth. She’s got an agenda to promote and doesn’t want anything to get in the way.

Fact is, Linthicum’s pet cause of victim disarmament legislation has been a stagnant one since the year 2000. Twenty dead kids in a public school is just what she needed to bring it back to life.

Why hasn’t she asked any questions about Adam Lanza’s psychiatric state at the time of the tragedy? Was he doped up on Ritalin, Prozac or any other anti-depressant?

And about the shootings themselves:

Why is it that not many (if any) people shoot up private schools or religious schools like this? What makes the public schools so special in this regard?

Why is it that there’s never any coverage of these sort of incidents happening with homeschooling families? After all, quite a few of those in the homeschooling movement are also supporters and exercisers of the right to own and carry weapons.

Why is it that these sorts of shootings never seem to happen at gun shows, at gun stores or at shooting ranges? After all, by Linthicum’s brand of thinking, these are the places that they should happen the most at – lots of guns present, lots of ammo present.

Anyway, Linthicum wants us to put our inalienable Constitutional, civil, God-given human rights aside for her notion of “collective responsibility.” Well, what happens when her side loses an election, and she becomes subordinate to someone else’s notion of “collective responsibility” – a version that she doesn’t particularly care for? Maybe then she’ll learn to appreciate that “outdated” notion of individual rights?

I can only hope so.

_______________________________________________________________________

Mike Blessing / Phone – 505-249-1248
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what’s the question?

“If you wanna live long on your own terms
You gotta be willing to crash and burn”– Motley Crue, “Primal Scream”


Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with Notepad++.