Tag Archive for First Amendment

Michigan Gun Owners Beware!

Big Brother Is Watching

There has been an interesting development in the case of two individuals who were arrested for open carry in the anteroom of the Dearborn, Michigan Police Department Headquarters. Two men from central Michigan were arrested for entering the anteroom of the Dearborn Police Department Headquarters building while carrying, and filming themselves while doing so. They were reportedly using open carry to protest what they believed was a bogus traffic stop which they were subjected to earlier in Dearborn.

James Baker and Brandon Vreeland have been abandoned by Michigan’s open carry movement, probably due to the allegation that they were using open carry to protest something entirely unrelated to Second Amendment rights, but it does not appear that their actions actually violated any Michigan law. At least one of the two was wearing ‘body armor’, which added to the provocative nature of their actions. Carry in police stations is actually not prohibited by Michigan law, and it is a violation of Michigan law to prohibit firearms in a police station outside of secured areas.

Fun side note: When I was a kid in the 1960’s, I used to shoot small bore rifle matches in the basement shooting range of this very building, which was even then the DPD police station. How times have changed!

Now we have a remarkable discovery from Nicholas Somberg (P80416), the defense attorney for Brandon Vreeland of Jackson: The Dearborn Police secretly monitored the two ‘Second Amendment activists’ and essentially ambushed both men as they were filming themselves walking into the Dearborn Police headquarters.

Here is the interesting development, as reported by the Detroit Free Press:

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

Maybe Michigan’s Business Leaders are Just Stupid

You know, it’s been rather entertaining this morning sitting here with a warm cup of joe, flipping through news articles rehashing all the fallout from a disastrous scheme by on his way to the private sector, Rep. Frank Foster’s infatuation with special protections for perverts. Make no mistake – it was epic failure.

GenderBendersBut the ACLU of Michigan, Equality Michigan and others wouldn’t even consider legislation that didn’t specifically name transgender individuals, along with gays and lesbians. They convinced Democrats it was an unacceptable bill and blocked their votes.

So rather than be satisfied with a historic expansion of Elliott-Larsen, the groups decided since they weren’t getting exactly what they demanded, they’d rather have nothing at all.

“The far left killed it,” says one of the leading business backers of the legislation. “They are worse than the tea party.”

That must be tough for the MCWC to swallow (no pun intended) butt (pun intended), all 60 of them made the conscience decision to jump into bed with the transtesticle fringe so, what’s up with the hate? They’re your team, and you all go calling them something lower than a bunch of – teabaggers? Wait .. what? Ya, I know, the irony is thick.

TEA movement folk out there… do file that quote into your memory when encountering their businesses – they are named here. Be sure to note within the names of the *business* Coalition that Jim Murray, CEO AT&T of Michigan, is also a sitting Board Member of the $1.6B “endowment” to play with (nah, his vote won’t be with agenda), which is roughly half of what the Snyder/Calley administration stole from us taxpayers as gift to BC/BS who loves their Snyder/Calley Obamcare Medicaid expansion, and insurance exchanges.

Now to bottom lines.

You Betcha! (29)Nuh Uh.(1)

Yeah, but can we trust him?

Dovetailing on the good news from Trucker Randy yesterday, according to today’s Detroit News, Speaker Bolger has declared that BOTH HB-5959 (Rep. Foster) and HB-5804 (Rep. Singh) to be dead this year.

***Side note to Chad Livengood: Both bills were written to create a protected class in Michigan, NOT prohibit discrimination. I will be more than happy to cite numerous examples in Kentucky, New Mexico, Oregon ,Texas and New York (just for starters) to prove you otherwise. I shouldn’t have to remind you that you are a reporter, not an editorial page writer.***

{Still, I’ve got more after the fold}

You Betcha! (12)Nuh Uh.(1)

Don’t try it, Speaker Bolger.

With the days of the 97th Michigan Legislature winding down, things are beginning to get real interesting in the days leading up to the general.

In an effort to not appear “bigoted”, “mean-spirited”, “close-minded”…pretty much called everything up to (if not) including the Anti-Christ, you really got to hustle to get those thousands in donations from LGBTIQ-groups like Tim Gill Foundation & ATT Michigan (can’t forget the DeVos’), into your Restore Michigan Fund to show some returns.

But you don’t want to infuriate your party’s base any more than they already are and hand over the Governor’s Office and the Michigan House over to the democrats.

Well, Speaker Bolger thinks that he may have found a solution.

{Continued below}

You Betcha! (19)Nuh Uh.(2)

Federal Judge Nullifies First Amendment

Well, here it is. In the Case of Deboer v. Snyder, this is what Federal Judge Bernard Friedman has to say on the issue:

JUDGMENT

The Court in this matter has issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. In accordance therewith,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby granted for plaintiffs and against defendants.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendants are hereby permanently enjoined from enforcing the Michigan Marriage Amendment and its implementing statutes, as they conflict with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

.

Look this decision didn’t really surprise me.

No, it wasn’t because of the other decisions around the country.

Personally, I didn’t feel that they were relevnt to what was being decided here in Michigan.

What did catch my attention though, was this little blurb I found when reading up on the background of this case.

“Judge Bernard Friedman encouraged two Detroit-area lesbians who are raising three children to file a legal challenge to Michigan ban on gay marriage.”

Hmmmm.

Why would a judge, someone who is supposed to be impartial, be advising someone appearing before him to expand the scope of the case they are bringing?

Personal agenda, perhaps?

Stay tuned.
You Betcha! (11)Nuh Uh.(4)