Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Tuesday, 22 September 2020

[Letter to ABQ City Council] Please OPPOSE O-19-82 AND O-19-83

Filed under: Politics, Resistance, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:28 AM (00:28)

From: Mike Blessing
To: Councilor Lan Sena <lansena@cabq.gov>, Councilor Isaac Benton <ibenton@cabq.gov>, Councilor Klarissa Peña <kpena@cabq.gov>, Councilor Brook Bassan <bbassan@cabq.gov>, Councilor Cynthia Borrego <cynthiaborrego@cabq.gov>, Councilor Pat Davis <patdavis@cabq.gov>, Councilor Diane Gibson <dgibson@cabq.gov>, Councilor Trudy Jones <trudyjones@cabq.gov>, Councilor Don Harris <dharris@cabq.gov>
CC: Policy Analyst Diane Dolan <ddolan@cabq.gov>, Policy Analyst Rachael Hernandez <rmhernandez@cabq.gov>, Policy Analyst Susan Vigil <susanvigil@cabq.gov>, Policy Analyst Sean Foran <seanforan@cabq.gov>, Policy Analyst Abigail Stiles <astiles@cabq.gov>, Policy Analyst Aziza Chavez <azizachavez@cabq.gov>, Policy Analyst Laura Rummler <lrummler@cabq.gov>
Date: September 21, 2020, 11:42 AM MST
Subject: Please OPPOSE O-19-82 AND O-19-83

Dear Councilors:

I am writing to you in order to speak up against two pieces of proposed legislation scheduled to come before the Council today, O-19-82 and O-19-83.

Ordinance O-19-82 will attempt to mandate secure storage of firearms.

Ordinance O-19-83 seeks to create a city ordinance out of Keller’s questionable order banning firearms on city owned or leased properties.

Both ordinances would violate the Constitution of the State of New Mexico, Article II, Section 6, which states:

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.

A recent attempt to pass a non-binding resolution to repeal this seciton of the state Constitution failed in the council 5-4.

Let’s make no mistake about it these proposed ordinances are in no way, shape or form about “gun safety” or “gun control”.

True gun safety and gun control stem from the four safety rules, the seven fundamentals of marksmanship, and knowing what is and is not a legitimate target.

If the people backing “Everytown for Gun Safety” truly care about firearms safety, then why aren’t they chipping in towards firearms safety training, as does the group they list as their archnemesis, the National Rifle Association?

If Michael Bloomberg and the other multi-millionaires behind “Everytown for Gun Safety” truly cared about gun safety, they would put their millions behind the construction of MORE shooting ranges, and the maintenance of existing ones. They would chip in for the creation of DVDs and online video shows that provide instruction on the safe and proficient handling of firearms.

Instead, all they do is lobby and agitate for more restrictive laws upon the pre-existing civil, Constitutional, human individual right to own and carry weapons, as supposed to be guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and Article II, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of New Mexico.

Rather, the legislation in question (O-19-82 and O-19-83) is more properly called “victim disarmament,” in that the people most likely to be affected by it are the people who have the most reason to own and carry firearms for self-defense — the little old lady or the paraplegic who lives alone in a bad neighborhood, the five-foot-nothing 100-pound woman being stalked by a six-foot 200-pound deranged ex-boyfriend.

The bad people (the criminals, terrorists, and violence-inclined mental defectives) whom the proponents of this legislation say will be disarmed by it most likely will not be affected in the least. If they want access to a firearm, they will have it, by hook or by crook.

You see, the bad guys have found this massive loophole in the existing restrictions on private civilians’ rights to own and carry weapons called “breaking the law.”

There are already 20,000 to 25,000 existing restrictions upon the pre-existing individual, civil, Constitutional, human right to own and carry weapons, which are supposed to be guaranteed against State infringement by the Second Amendment and Article 2, Section 6 of the State Constitution. None of these anti-liberty statutes has stopped a bad guy from obtaining a firearm when they want it.

Laws already exist that prohibit felons, domestic abusers, foreign terrorists, incurable drug abusers and alcoholics, and mental defectives from obtaining, owning or carrying firearms.

Laws already exist that prohibit the use of firearms (and other objects) to harm other people (murder, assault with a deadly weapon, etc.).

I think it’s safe to say that all these laws have done is keep honest people honest, the same way locks on doors do.

Those who propose further infringements upon individual liberty aren’t truly looking to improve the human condition at all, but seeking more power over others for whatever reasons. No good will come from these infringements — no good has ever come from these sorts of laws, and no good ever will.

As for the phrase “gun violence” —

Why are not criminal stabbings or slashings with knives ever referred to as “knife violence” ?

Why are hit and run murders done with cars or trucks never called “automotive violence” ?

Why are attacks using baseball bats, pry bars, hammers and pieces of steel rebar never referred to as “blunt object violence” ?

Look, no one is trying to take your government away. We just want to have an honest, open, adult conversation about common-sense restrictions on government. If we can save just one child from government violence, it will be worth it.

Mike Blessing

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


RESPONSES FROM THE COUNCILORS [2]

From: Bassan, Brook <bbassan@cabq.gov>
To: Mike Blessing
Date: September 21, 2020, 11:48 AM MST
Subject: Re: Please OPPOSE O-19-82 AND O-19-83

Good morning,

I agree with your statements. I do not believe we should impose more regulations especially at a municipal level and when they appear to work in opposition of the United States Constitution while possibly putting more innocent people at risk. I do not plan on supporting these Ordinances.

Thank you for reaching out.

Brook Bassan
Albuquerque City Councilor
District 4
Office: 505-768-3101
Fax: 505-768-3227
Email: bbassan@cabq.gov

From: Jones, Trudy <trudyjones@cabq.gov>
To: Mike Blessing
Date: September 21, 2020, 11:56 AM MST
Subject: Re: Please OPPOSE O-19-82 AND O-19-83

Thank you for your comments. I do not support this legislation.

Trudy E. Jones


NOTES

  1. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs — Diaspora* / Facebook page / Flote / Gab / Spreely page / Twitter / VK / Wimkin page
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook page / Spreely page / Twitter / WordPress

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, 19 September 2020

Messing About with Article II, Section 6

Filed under: Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:00 PM (22:00)

A few weeks ago, Albuquerque City Councilor Diane Gibson has gotten herself some no-charge campaign advertising, courtesy of the lamestream snoozemedia [1], on account of her calling for a State-level Constitutional Amendment to change Article II, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of New Mexico from its current text:

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.

— to something that gives municipal and county governments more leeway to enact victim disarmament statutes:

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.

Considering that the sorts of victim disarmament statutes desired by Gibson and her hoplophobe cronies only disarm those who need to own and carry weapons the most — the five-foot, hundred-pound woman who’s being stalked by her crazed six-foot, two-hundred-pound ex-boyfriend — and don’t actually disarm the criminal and terrorist types one bit, those of us who support and exercise the individual, civil, Constitutional, human right to own and carry weapons for “…. for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes ….” would prefer that IF Article II, Section 6 must be amended, that it should read like this afterwards:

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. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Albuquerque Journal — New vote sought on firearm provision

    KRQE News — Albuquerque city councilors seek new vote on firearms provision

NOTES

  1. Submitted to the Albuquerque Journal — Tuesday, 18 August 2020 at 8:57 AM
  2. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs — Blogspot / Diaspora* / Facebook page / Flote / Gab / Gorf Social / Liberty.me / Minds / Pocketnet / Spreely page / Twitter / VK / YouMe Social
    2. Absurdist Discordian Party of New Mexico — Facebook page / Spreely page
    3. A Bias Toward Liberty — Facebook group
    4. Albuquerque Liberty Forum — Facebook page / Spreely page
    5. Discordian Absurdist Party of New Mexico — Facebook page / Spreely page
    6. Freedom Rally Point New Mexico — Facebook group
    7. Gun Owners of New Mexico — Facebook group
    8. KCUF Media — Facebook page / Spreely page
    9. Libertarian Second Amendment Caucus — Facebook page / Spreely page
    10. New Mexico Dissent and Expose — Facebook page / Spreely page
    11. New Mexico Gun Rights — Facebook group
    12. New Mexico Lest We Forget (voters remorse) — Facebook group
    13. New Mexico Libertarians — Facebook group / Facebook page / Minds group / Spreely group / Spreely page
    14. Resist Marxism New Mexico — Facebook page
    15. Sons and Daughters of Liberty New Mexico — Facebook group
    16. Split the State New Mexico — Facebook page / Spreely page
    17. Stupor Bowl Sundae Feetball Shoot — Facebook page / Spreely page
    18. The Old Drunken Old Irrvelivents — Facebook page / Spreely page
    19. The Weekly SeditionFacebook page / Spreely page / Twitter / WordPress
    20. Vote Dumpster Fire — Facebook page
    21. Vote the Air — Facebook page
    22. Vote the Air NM — Facebook page
    23. Wood Chipper — Facebook page

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, 4 July 2020

“No one wants to take your guns,” v. July 3, 2020

Filed under: Media, Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 7:16 PM (19:16)

From the Albuquerque Journal, Friday, 3 July 2020, p. A11 OP-ED (“SPEAK UP!”)

KUDOS TO the Santa Fe County Commission for passing on the purchase of AR-15 weapons for the Santa Fe sheriff’s department SWAT officers. . . . Instead of just waiting, as Sheriff Mendoza seems inclined to do because of “the current climate in the nation,” I recommend the funds be redirected to a buyback and destruction of this type of weapon from civilians who have no legitimate need for them. AW


NOTES

  1. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Blogspot / Diaspora* / Facebook / Flote / Friendica / Gab / Gorf Social / Liberty.me / Minds / Pocketnet / Spreely / Twitter / VK
    2. A Bias Toward Liberty — Facebook group
    3. Absurdist Discordian Party of New Mexico — Facebook page / Spreely page
    4. Albuquerque Liberty Forum — Facebook page / Spreely page
    5. Discordian Absurdist Party of New Mexico — Facebook page / Spreely page
    6. Freedom Rally Point New Mexico — Facebook group
    7. KCUF Media – Facebook page / Spreely page
    8. Libertarian Second Amendment Caucus — Facebook page / Spreely page
    9. New Mexico Dissent and Expose — Facebook page / Spreely page
    10. New Mexico Gun Rights — Facebook group
    11. New Mexico Lest We Forget (voter remorse) — Facebook group
    12. New Mexico Libertarians — Facebook group / Facebook page / Spreely group / Spreely page
    13. Pink Pistols – Albuquerque — Facebook group
    14. Resist Marxism New Mexico — Facebook page
    15. Split the State New Mexico — Facebook page / Spreely page
    16. Stupor Bowl Sundae Feetball Shoot — Facebook page
    17. The Old Drunken Old Irrvelivents — Facebook page
    18. The Weekly SeditionFacebook page / Spreely page / Twitter / WordPress
    19. Vote Dumpster Fire — Facebook page
    20. Vote the Air — Facebook page
    21. Vote the Air NM — Facebook page
    22. Wood Chipper — Facebook page

Wednesday, 24 June 2020

“I CAN’T LOOT THOSE PEOPLE’S STUFF AND I’M MAD”

Filed under: Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 4:12 PM (16:12)

Fellow members of the Productive Class, allow me to present to you the core constituency of the Political Classholes.

While I’m sure that the person in the video clip probably wouldn’t be welcome at most if any of the cocktail parties on the DC circuit, the state capitals, or major metropolitian regions, still, she does rather nicely sum up the attitude that they display towards the rest of us — “We should be able to take your stuff when we feel like it.”

If ANYTHING on the internet should convince you of the importance of the right to own and carry weapons, it’s that clip right there.

H/T IBeezy[1] via Oleg Volk at Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 12:51 PM


NOTES

  1. Ignorant ghetto lady mad that she that she can’t rob and loot from armed store owners [YouTube]

Monday, 1 June 2020

Meet Roofus Wolfinhousen, Self-Professed Ass-Kicker for COVID-19 Safety

Filed under: Politics, Resistance, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:15 AM (00:15)

While skimming Facebook, you can come across the most insane thngs —

Facebook — Sunday, May 31, 2020 at 7:09 PM

Going to Wolfinhousen’s Facebook profile, I found more of the same sort of . . . rhetoric.

Original post on Facebook — Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 2:34 PM

Here’s the text typed by Wolfinhousen at the top of that post.

Have Some Respect…
If Can Not Have Respect..
Then You Are Risking A Serious Ass Kicking..

How is that not a veiled threat?

It gets “better” as Wolfinhousen says that “What You Do To Them Next Is 100% Justified” [I’m guessing Wolfinhousen is referring to physical violence or property damage here.]

Original post on Facebook — Tuesday, May 12, 2020 at 7:26 PM

Again, here’s the text at the top of that post.

Paying Attention ..
When Some Loser Politician, Or Even A Friend Of Your’s Tells You To Get Back To Work Before The Medical Experts Say That It Is SAFE..
What That Weak Ass Politician Or Friend Is Telling You, “Is That Your LIFE Has No Value To Them”..
They Neither Care About You Or Have Any Respect For You..
What You Do To Them Next Is 100% Justified..

Think about that for a second — “What You Do To Them Next Is 100% Justified.”

What else could Wolfinhousen be implying there besides physical violence?

As pitchmen Billy Mays and Anthony Sullivan would often say, “But wait, there’s more!” —

Original post on Facebook — Saturday, May 9, 2020 at 7:49 PM

If You See Any Of The Trumpy Squad In Public, Attack First…
Do Let The Maga’cowards Ambush Or Sneak You…
Hit Them First & Hit Them Hard..
They Are Weak Minded & Easy To Crush…

It should be noted that the Facebook system considers Wolfinhousen’s implied threats and advocacy of violence to be acceptable.

But just remember — no one needs a gun, and no one wants to take your guns away from you.


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Facebook / Spreely / Twitter
    2. Absurdist Discordian Party of New Mexico — Facebook page, Spreely page
    3. Albuquerque Liberty Forum — Facebook page, Spreely page
    4. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Spreely / Twitter / WordPress

Saturday, 29 February 2020

“No one wants to take your guns,” NM v. 02-28-2020

Filed under: Media, Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 8:46 PM (20:46)

From page A15 of the Friday, 28 February 2020 edition of the Albuquerque Journal, we have not one, but two “gems of wisdom.”

First, the writer labels anyone that owns or carries a firearm a “gun possessor,” and makes NO attempt to distinguish between criminal misuse of firearms and safe and proficient defensive uses.

So drug testing for welfare recipients, or as a condition of employment is unConstitutional and a violation of rights, but perfectly OK if you want to purchase a firearm?


NOTES

  1. Published in The Libertarian Enterprise [TLE] — Number 1,060: Sunday 1 March 2020 (as “Letter from Mike Blessing”)
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page, profile] / Flote / Friendica / Gab / Minds / Pocketnet / Spreely [page, profile] / Twitter / VK
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Spreely / Twitter / WordPress

Thursday, 27 February 2020

Summing Up the Hoplophobes and Victim Disarmers in a Paragraph

Filed under: Media, Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 5:29 AM (05:29)

Today’s Albuquerque Journal, fresh from the driveway, has the following in the “Speak Up!” section of the Op-Ed page (A13)

BACKGROUND CHECKS can help reduce mass shootings if they are combined with other strong measures. Close the loopholes and make purchases that are now legal, illegal. MY

If that doesn’t sum up the hoplophobe and victim disarmer mindset, I don’t know what does.

This is why I am not fond of the phrase “law-abiding” when used by right-to-own-and-carry-weapons advocates in relation to gun owners. The openly-stated intent of the victim disarmers is to make it more difficult and more expensive to own any sort of firearm in a legal manner.

Y’all do realize that calling yourself a “law-abiding” gun owner while simultaneously sporting any “I WILL NOT COMPLY” graphics or signage is idiocy. For the very essence of “law-abiding” is compliance with every little asinine, ridiculous, burdensome edict put out by the Political Classholes?!


NOTES

  1. Published in The Libertarian Enterprise [TLE] — #1,060: Sunday, 1 March 2020 – (as “Letter from Mike Blessing”)
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page, profile] / Flote / Friendica / Gab / Minds / Pocketnet / Spreely [page, profile] / Twitter / VK
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Spreely / Twitter / WordPress
    3. New Mexico Gun Rights Facebook group
    4. Gun Owners of New Mexico Facebook group
    5. Libertarian Second Amendment Caucus Spreely page

Monday, 17 February 2020

Mike’s Birthday Fundraiser for Firearms Policy Foundation

Filed under: Life, Networking, Organizing, Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:29 PM (23:29)


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page, profile] / Flote / Friendica / Gab / Liberty.me / Minds / Pocketnet / Spreely [page, profile] / Twitter / VK
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Spreely / Twitter / WordPress

Friday, 7 February 2020

Please Vote “NO!” on SB 5 (the “red flag” bill)

Filed under: Politics, Self-Defense — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 8:59 AM (08:59)

From: Mike Blessing
Date: Fri, Feb 7, 2020, 08:59
Subject: Please Vote “NO!” on SB 5 (the “red flag” bill)
To: John Arthur Smith <john.smith@nmlegis.gov>,
     Mary Kay Papen <marykay.papen@nmlegis.gov>,
     John Sapien <john.sapien@nmlegis.gov>,
     Pete Campos <pete.campos@nmlegis.gov>,
     Benny Shendo <benny.shendo@nmlegis.gov>,
     Gabriel Ramos <gabriel.ramos@nmlegis.gov>,
     Richard Martinez <richard.martinez@nmlegis.gov>,
     Roberto Gonzales <roberto.gonzales@nmlegis.gov>,
     Shannon Pinto <shannon.pinto@nmlegis.gov>,
     Clemente Sanchez <clemente.sanchez@nmlegis.gov>

Dear Senators,

I am writing to thank Senator Richard Martinez for voting against SB 5 in the previous committees, the “red flag” bill, and to urge the rest this committee and the State Senate to vote likewise against this atrocious, anti-freedom piece of legislation.

SB 5 tramples the freedoms that are supposed to be protected by the Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments, as follows:

* It allows for the forcible disarmament of people who need to have firearms the most — the five-foot, 100-pound woman being stalked by a deranged, six-foot, 200-pound ex-boyfriend who calls law enforcement and tells them that she’s “suicidal.”

* The bill allows for ex parte proceedings to take place, where the respondent is not only denied the right to offer a defense to the court, but the respondent is not even aware that the proceedings are taking place. Thus the respondent is denied the chance to confront his or her accuser, or to call witnesses in his or her defense.

Thank you for listening to my views.

Mike Blessing
Albuquerque, New Mexico


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. New Mexico State Legislature, 2020 Regular Session: SB 5 Extreme Risk Protection Order Act

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 @ 8:00 PM (20:00)

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

ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL

MONDAY, JANUARY 20, 2020 A11

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

NOTES

  1. Published in Albuquerque JournalMonday, 20 January 2020, p. A11 (as “Look who’s blowing off the Constitution now”) [scanned from paper copy]
  2. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs — Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook: page, profile / Flote / Gab / Liberty.me / Minds / Spreely: page, profile / Twitter / VK
    2. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Spreely / Twitter / WordPress

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: