Showing posts with label constitutional. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitutional. Show all posts

Saturday, January 27, 2018

Sheriff Mack leads crowded field of Republicans – Arizona Special Election

Sheriff Richard Mack leads a crowded field of Republicans in the Arizona Special Election to replace Congressman Trent Franks.  With the election fast approaching at the end of February he needs the support of Constitutional Conservatives from across our nation.


PHOENIX (AP) — Thirteen Republicans and three Democrats filed enough signatures to make the ballot for a special primary election to replace former U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, state elections officials said Wednesday evening.


The Republicans include former state Sens. Steve Montenegro and Debbie Lesko, former state Rep. Phil Lovas and former state utility regulator Bob Stump. Also making the GOP primary ballot are Clair Van Steenwyk and former Graham County Sheriff Richard Mack.


The other seven Republicans are Chad Allen, Kevin Cavanagh, Brenden Dilley, Stephen Dolgos, David Lien, Christopher Sylvester and Mark Yates.


The Democrats are Dr. Hiral Tipirneni, Brianna Westbrook and Gene Scharer. Two Green Party candidates failed to file qualifying signatures by Wednesday evening’s deadline.


The heavily Republican 8th Congressional District covers much of the western and northwestern Phoenix suburbs, and the winner of the GOP primary will be strongly favored to win the seat outright. Democrats are holding out hope that a surge of opposition to President Donald Trump’s policies could drive turnout and give them the chance to pull off a stunning upset.


The special primary election is set for Feb. 27, with each party’s top vote-getter advancing to the general election on April 24.


Read more here.





About Sheriff Richard Mack
Champion of Constitutional Values









  • Led a Supreme Court victory for state sovereignty

  • Author of several books on freedom, government and gun control

  • Consultant on constitutional issues

  • Tea Party activist

  • Public speaker

  • Crusader for liberty

  • Trainer in constitutional issues for law enforcement


Sheriff Mack is best known for challenging the Brady Bill, a gun control scheme requiring local law enforcement to perform background checks on prospective gun purchasers. He maintained that the Federal Government had no authority to command local officials, and became the first sheriff in American history to sue the Federal Government (under the Clinton administration) and win at the US Supreme Court. The case was based on the Tenth Amendment, states rights and local sovereignty.


Mack is the son of an FBI agent and began his own law enforcement career as a street cop in Provo, Utah. After graduating from BYU in 1978, Mack became an officer with Provo P. D. He was soon promoted to corporal, sergeant, and detective. He spent one year as an undercover narcotics agent. In 1988, Mack moved home to Arizona where he ran for sheriff. He was elected Graham County Sheriff and served as such for eight years. It was during this time – in 1994 – that federal agents informed all sheriffs that they would be required to work for the Federal Government under the mandate of the Brady Bill, and Mack’s court case began.


Since that landmark ruling Mack has written six books and appeared at over 175 Tea Party rallies nationwide. He has stood against the incursions of the Federal Government and has fought for civil rights from Hawaii to Bangor, Maine. He is the Founder and President of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA) and has been inducted into the NRA Hall of Fame.



Sheriff Richard Mack






 


 


The post Sheriff Mack leads crowded field of Republicans – Arizona Special Election appeared first on Oath Keepers.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Can Concealed Carry Be Banned? Supreme Court May Decide

Can Concealed Carry Be Banned? Supreme Court May Decide

Image source: Pixabay.com



WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court may decide in its next term if citizens have a constitutional right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.


Earlier this month, the court “relisted” the case, Peruta v. California, meaning the justices are still considering it


“I suspect they’re going to grant it,” John Eastman, director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence and the former law dean at Chapman University, told Fox News.


The lawsuit was filed by a California man, Edward Peruta, who challenged San Diego County Sheriff William D. Gore’s denial of concealed carry permits to applicants who did not show “good cause.” Gore does not consider self-defense to be good cause for a concealed carry permit.


The Self-Defense Weapon That Doesn’t Require A Firearms License!


Peruta’s attorneys want the justices to overturn a U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the Second Amendment does not grant the right to carry a gun outside the home, Off The Grid News previously reported. The Ninth Circuit ruled against Peruta in a 7-4 decision in June 2016.


“The right of a member of the general public to carry a concealed firearm in public is not, and never has been, protected by the Second Amendment,” the Ninth Circuit’s majority opinion read. “Therefore, because the Second Amendment does not protect in any degree the right to carry concealed firearms in public, any prohibition or restriction a state may choose to impose on concealed carry — including a requirement of ‘good cause,’ however defined — is necessarily allowed by the Amendment.”


Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement challenged that ruling in January 2017, The Union Tribune reported. Second Amendment activists and gun control advocates are watching the case closely, not only because of the issue but because it could be the first major firearms decision heard by new Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. Although Gorsuch has been a federal judge for years, he’s never ruled on a Second Amendment case.


Peruta could be the most important gun-rights case since the 2008 Heller decision, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment grants Americans the rights to keep guns in their homes, UCLA Law Professor Adam Winkler told The Los Angeles Times. Heller overturned the District of Columbia’s ban on private ownership of handguns.


What do you think? Should concealed carry be a constitutional right? Share your thoughts in the section below: