A message to the Supreme Court: But are any of the Justices listening?

Echo opinion published in The Washington Post by Ruth Marcus

In the American judicial system, the lower-court judges take instruction from the Supreme Court, not the other way around. 

In the case of U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, that’s too bad. Walton, appointed to the local court in the District of Columbia by Ronald Reagan and to the federal bench by George W. Bush, has a message for the justices that is appropriate, respectful — and devastating.

Judge Reggie Walton assumed his position as a United States District Judge for the District of Columbia on October 29, 2001,

His messages, actually, delivered in a speech  about the importance of affirmative action, which the high court, as Walton predicted, is about to dismantle; and about the scourge of gun violence, which, as Walton outlined, has been made all the more intractable by the court’s wrongheaded Second Amendment rulings.

If only the justices had been present to hear it. If only they were open-minded enough to take it in.

The power of Walton’s speech, part of an annual lecture series in honor of the late Judge Thomas A. Flannery, derived from the personal nature of his appeal. 

As he told the audience of lawyers and judges gathered at the federal courthouse in Washington, Walton’s is an American success story — far from inevitable, made possible by the existence of affirmative action.

Walton, now 74 years old, grew up in western Pennsylvania. He was a troublesome teenager, arrested for delinquency three times — twice fairly, Walton confessed — while he was in high school. The son of a steelworker who worked two jobs as a janitor after the mills in town closed, Walton went to college at West Virginia State University, as he told it, for the primary purpose of playing football.

Although he knew no Black lawyers — the only one in the area practiced another town over — Walton became interested in law. “I never saw anybody who looked like me who was using their intellectual capacity to make a living,” he recalled.

But he performed poorly on the LSAT, and that is where affirmative action came into play, in the form of a program by the Council on Legal Education Opportunity held at Howard University Law School, in which law schools agreed to consider admitting those who participated and did well.

“When I think back on that experience, it was the opportunity afforded to me … an affirmative action program, that gave me the opportunity I had,” Walton recalled. “And now that I see affirmative action coming under scrutiny, it concerns me.”

Walton has good reason for concern. The Supreme Court, by the end of its term, is likely to declare an end to affirmative action, overruling cases in which it has allowed colleges and universities to take diversity into account in assembling their student bodies.

“I fear that the Supreme Court, from the oral argument that I heard, may likely conclude that affirmative action is unconstitutional,” Walton said. “And as a result of that, if that occurs, the doors of opportunity for young Black guys like me or young Black women may not be available.”

He continued: “When I hear criticism about affirmative action, I say to myself, ‘Well, I was an affirmative action awardee.’ I’m not apologetic for that, and I’m not ashamed of that.”

Conservative justices, ask yourselves: What if Walton hadn’t been able to take advantage of that opportunity? He has spent a career in public service — as a public defender, federal prosecutor, deputy drug czar and highly regarded judge, now on senior status. Were efforts to assure him that chance really repugnant to the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws, as conservatives claim?

Walton’s comments about gun violence were, if anything, even more impassioned — and even more pointed in terms of the role of the court. 

Furthermore, for Walton, the specter of gun violence has personal resonance — one braided into his identity as a Black man. His grandfather was shot and killed by a White man in Macon, Ga., in 1927 when he failed to make way on the sidewalk. When, as a young assistant U.S. attorney, Walton drove his “nice pretty brand-new black Corvette” home to Pennsylvania to show it to his parents, he was stopped by a pair of state troopers who pointed their guns at his head and demanded, “Whose car is this?” and “How can you afford this car?”

“I’ve experienced, personally, what it is to have a gun pointed at your head, and it’s not a pleasant occasion,” Walton said.

And, as he explained, that risk has been inflamed by the court’s recent action. In 2004, four years before the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to have firearms for self-protection, Walton heard a case raising the issue and came to the opposite conclusion.

But the law is what a majority declares it to be. And, as Walton accurately noted, the court’s rulings on the Second Amendment, especially its decision last year requiring that modern-day gun restrictions have a historical analogue, will make it difficult if not impossible to defend measures to stem gun violence, from keeping guns out of the hands of individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders to prohibiting those under 21 from purchasing handguns.

"I think it’s going to be hard to conclude that many of the limitations on the right to bear arms are constitutional,” Walton said. “Is that going to make America safer? I predict not.”

As a judge, Walton vowed, “I’ll do the best I can to fulfill what the Supreme Court tells me to do, even though I may … find it detestable that I have to do what the court tells me to do.”

Detestable is a strong word, indeed. But these are scary times, made scarier by a Supreme Court that ought to take heed when a judge such as Reggie B. Walton so powerfully dissents.

There is zero pro-life message in the Rittenhouse murder verdict

Pro-life gun control zealots are rabid about being pro-second amendment.  This wrong-minded logic is the highest level of hypocrisy.

Pro-life hypocrites are also likely to support the death penalty!

Maine Writer - In my opinion, if Kyle Rittenhouse had been a man of color, he would not have lived long enough to have a trial in Kenosha, WI,  because the police would have seen him as a perpetrator and considered him a threat to the public safety.  Just my opinion. In other words, American justice was not blind in the Rittenhosue jury trial.  Instead, the jury was "blindsided" by a biased judge who was apparently influenced by Second Amendment rights being somehow at risk if the defendant Rittenhouse were convicted. 

Editorial board echo published by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, in Missouri:  The American justice system has performed its job in the murder trial of teenager Kyle Rittenhouse, but in no way can this verdict be deemed to have served the cause of justice. 

Rittenhouse was the beneficiary of a Kenosha, Wisconsin, judge who did everything in his power to ensure Rittenhouse walked free despite clear evidence that the teen had inserted himself into a dangerous situation, goaded confrontation with Black Lives Matter protesters and recklessly endangered others with an assault rifle the boy never should have had.

To the jury’s credit, it deliberated for three days before issuing not-guilty verdicts on all five felony counts. 

The length of their deliberations suggested jury members at least weighed the considerable evidence pointing to Rittenhouse’s guilt in the assault-rifle killings of two men and severe wounding of a third. The video evidence was incontrovertible that Rittenhouse recklessly inserted himself into a violent protest situation while brandishing a fully loaded AR-15 rifle.

A member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority.

The vigilante community across America must be jubilant with the knowledge that it’s possible to go out hunting for violent protesters, provoking confrontation, and then successfully claiming self-defense to avoid prison time for murder.

The weapons possession part of this case alone should have yielded a quick-and-easy guilty verdict since Rittenhouse was 17 at the time and not permitted under Wisconsin law to possess a gun. Rittenhouse violated a curfew in order to join other vigilantes as rioters attacked and burned businesses in Kenosha. But Judge Bruce Schroeder dismissed a misdemeanor weapons possession charge before the jury could hear it. He also dismissed a non-criminal count for violating the curfew.

Schroeder hamstrung the prosecution at every turn. He banned use of the word “victims” to describe the people Rittenhouse shot but allowed defense lawyers to refer to them as rioters and arsonists. Bad guys who deserved what they got, in other words. At one point during the trial, Schroeder’s cellphone rang. His audible ringtone was a portion of “God Bless the U.S.A.,” whose command to “stand up!” has gained particular popularity among conservatives in response to Black athletes kneeling in protest of racism.

Schroeder also blocked the prosecution from showing photos of an unrepentant Rittenhouse celebrating and posing in a bar after the killings with members of the Proud Boys, a group linked to white supremacy.

Even if the jury believed Rittenhouse shot in self-defense, it’s unfathomable how jurors could conclude he had not recklessly endangered others, the topic of two counts against him. There was ample video available with Rittenhouse stating openly that he thought his “job” was to run toward danger. 

No, his job as a 17-year-old was to obey the curfew, stay at home, and leave his assault rifle locked up and unloaded until he was old enough to carry it responsibly.

Teenage vigilante Kyle Rittenhouse quite literally has gotten away with murder.

Maine Writer post script: In my mind, the Rittenhouse jury's verdict just proves that right wing zealots who claim to be pro-life, really love their guns more than they value any kind of life. 

Here is a prime example at this link here. 

"‘Pro-Life’ Texas Representative Threatens Beto O’Rourke With an AR-15", published in The Cut, by Bridget Read.  "Briscoe Cain has been reported to the FBI for his violent speech, which you might think would fly in the face of the 'sanctity of life' –type rhetoric..."

Stop National Rifle Association money funneled to politicians

Listen to 'the voice of the people,' not to money of the NRA: Sioux City Journal echo letter to the editor.

When will we learn. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was never meant to allow anyone to carry a gun. 

Rather, the Amendment states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." 

When this amendment was adopted on Dec. 15, 1791, the United States did not have a standing army, but relied on a militia. Members of the militia were required to provide their own weapons. The amendment was designed to protect that requirement.

Therefore, the United States should join other nations that have reasonable gun control laws. This would not only reduce school shootings, but other violence committed with guns. Our elected officials should listen to the voice of the people and not to the money distributed by the NRA. - Ira Delk, Sioux City

Echo from Colorado ~ Brave March For Our Lives facing challenges

Colorado's opinion published in the Reporter Herald ~ from Ann Harroun, in Loveland Colorado

Congratulations to student marchers. March For Our Lives

Their lives just changed. 

From now on, the students who are fighting against gun violence,  will be involved citizens and voters.

My life changed in 1951, when my classmates and I went on strike over a despotic mayor, a run-down school, and teachers' salaries. Our issues pale in comparison to today's, but we unseated the mayor. Yay! We're still politically attuned, and some of us went on to serve in political office.

Things to know:

The Second Amendment was adopted when the Revolutionary War was over and the army was disbanded. (Our founders were suspicious of standing armies.) That left only a few state militias to protect our people. Hence, "A well-regulated militia. ..."

Second Amendment zealots respond with frenzied responses to every fact that challenges their claims to unlimited access to guns and weapons of mass destruction that kill people.

Follow the money. [Business Insider, "How The Gun Industry Funnels Tens of Millions of Dollars To The NRA," Jan. 16, 2013, et al.] Yet, predictably, usually, after a mass shooting, the NRA shouts, "They're coming for your guns!" 

Supporters rush out to buy more guns and ammo, industry profits rise, they kick back money to the NRA, the NRA buys more legislators. They in turn gerrymander their districts to ensure their re-election, and in all of this the voice of the public is lost. This cycle will not be overturned easily, even though most Americans may agree with the students. 

Unfortunately, March For Our Lives must prepare for a long struggle.

When you estimate votes, know that you will run up against one-issue voters. They will agree with you regarding the best candidates for gun safety, but if your candidates don't also support their one-issue (usually abortion, pro or con) they will vote against.

It is said that facts do not win elections; emotions do. 

Probably true, but decisions based solely on emotion do not hold up over time. So, learn the facts first; then build an emotional case around them.

Don't turn your backs on classmates who disagree with you. They have valid points, too, that may improve your eventual positions.

Ann Harroun, Loveland Colorado

MaineWriter ~ Thank you March For Our Lives, leaders and supporters.  Please continue your bravery in the face of the evil money, and terrorist tactics funded by the National Rifle Association. The only purpose of the NRA campaign to discredit March For Our Lives is to undermine the humanitarian efforts to protect human beings from the morbidity and mortality caused by gun violence. All gun violence is preventable.

Ohio letters challenge automatic weapons - echoes from ordinary people

Published in Cleveland.com ~ two echoes from letters to the editor

The latest mass shooting of high school students and their faculty, in Parkland, Florida, only serves to emphasize what a disastrous situation this country is in, with no leadership in place to grapple with the issue of gun control. 

Effectively dealing with mental-health issues is only part of the problem. My question is, why does anyone who is not in the military or law enforcement have a need to access and carry an automatic or semi-automatic weapon? The issue of gun control must be addressed immediately and decisively for the safety of our children and the future of our country. Sr. Regina Fierman,
Broadview Heights

Assault weapons should not be available to citizens

When our nation's forefathers ratified the 2nd Amendment, the right to bear arms*, in 1791, would they have approved of having private citizens own automatic assault weapons? (Maine Writer- when the second amendment was written, the most deadly gun was a musket that could only fire one round at a time.) 

After the major tragedies involving assault weapon guns, how can the leadership of the NRA, its members, the Congress and Donald Trump, in good conscience, continue supporting the use of this murderous gun?  Ed Oberndorf, Cleveland

* The right to bear arms: what does the second amendment really mean? ~ Published in The Guardian: The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”  But, the law does not automatically give people the unlimited right to own and use rapid fire assault weapons. In other words, the safety of the public can and should be protected against the unregulated use of deadly weapons of mass destruction.

Echoes from Texas- crosses at Sutherland

More memorial crosses, thoughts and prayers but no changes in gun regulations or improvements to mental health care.

Another in my "echoes" series - re-blogs of letters to the editor (LTEs) found while cruising the opinion pages of randomly picked national newspapers. This echo from the Houston Chronicle:

Sutherland Springs church shooting victims of mass murder by gun violence

Fire power

Regarding "Mental health" (Page A14, Thursday), one reader wrote that "improving the nation's mental health care would be more useful than new gun laws." He conveniently ignores the fact that the Republicans killed legislation that would have prevented those with a mental health record from obtaining firearms. They won't even agree to ban firearms purchases by those on the federal air travel watch list!

And while 40 Democrats have co-sponsored legislation to ban the bump stocks that allowed the Las Vegas shooter to turn his semi-automatic weapons into virtual automatics, not one Republican has supported them.
Finally, the Sutherland Springs shooter reportedly left behind 15 empty 30-round magazines. He was able to fire off at least 450 rounds in minutes because Republicans have allowed not only assault-style weapons to be for sale to the general public, but high-capacity magazines as well.

Our family owns multiple firearms and enjoys target shooting and hunting but made the argument with friends and fellow hunters decades ago that there was no reason on earth that kind of firepower should be available to anyone that wants it. 

We're certain the writers of our Constitution in the era of single-shot black-powder firearms never envisioned the proliferation of firearms such as we see today when they added the Second Amendment. And even that amendment includes the phrase "well regulated."

David Kelly, Spring Texas 

Media editors criticize Donald Trump and his ignorance of First Amendment

Obviously, the only person who candidate Donald Trump wants to have as a beneficiary of free speech is his narcissistic self.

Associated Press Media Editors condemn Republican candidate Donald Trump blacklist of media when he is challenged or criticized by the news coverage.

Hypocritical Second Amendment zealots throw around the words in the US Constitution, as though this particular law was the only subject the Founding Fathers seemed to care about. Yet, I doubt many of the rabid "secondamenders" have even read the Constitution. '
In fact: 

US Constitution First Amendment (in other words, the first law the authors and Founding Fathers wrote):

The Associated Press Media Editors have called Donald Trump to abide by the Constitution's First Amendment law.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Now, candidate Donald Trump has decided to trump the First Amendment by denying Freedom of Speech to people and media outlets with which he disagrees. Listen up candidate Trump, you can't endorse the Second Amendment but then ignore the First one.

Donald Trump has revoked the press credentials of The Washington Post and barred multiple major news organizations from rallies and campaign events, while working to become the nation’s next president. This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the rights of a free press, as established in the First Amendment.

The press has an obligation to provide vigorous, thorough and accurate coverage of anyone running for the office of U.S. president. And candidates have an obligation to allow uniform media access to their events, regardless of whether coverage conforms to their wishes.

The Associated Press Media Editors joins other major news leadership organizations in condemning this affront to the democratic process and the very principles on which our nation was founded. We urge the Republican Party and its presumptive presidential nominee to abandon these sanctions and allow full access to all media outlets to protect the public’s right to know.

Some other journalism organizations speaking out are the Society of Professional Journalists and American Society of News Editors

Donald Trump endorsed by National Rifle Association- with Cox & LaPierre

These three smiling men do not believe guns kill people

The NRA’s Endorsement Of Donald Trump 

Chris Cox, DonaldTrump and Wayne LaPierre at endorsement event

The Big Lie- The NRA supported its endorsement of presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump at the group’s annual meeting by repeatedly telling the lie that likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton opposes gun ownership and would confiscate guns as president.

A big lie (German: große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. 

The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."  

In fact, The Big Lie are multiple, as told by Donald Trump magnified in 24/7 media coverage.  

First, Donald Trump told the lie about Democrats being opposed to the 2nd amendment; and the second one, is that guns do  not kill. Unbelievably preposterous!

Today, another mass shooting terrorized Orland, Florida where a man with guns murdered innocent people in a club called "Pulse", a place where people of LTGB people gathered.

In preliminary reports, the now dead gunman was carrying more than one gun.  Obviously, if there were no guns on the murder's person, there would've been 20 people's lives, saved.  

Second Amendment guns everywhere except where lawmakers gather

Menally ill people are somehow getting guns. Today's (March 28th) shooting at the US Capitol is evidence of how easily a mentally ill person obtained a gun.  Neverhteless, right wing Republicans continue to ignore any attempt to reduce the rate of gun violence in America, Oh, wait!  There's one exception.  Republicans want everybody to own guns, except if the weapons risk being pointed at one of them- like at the US Capitol or the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.  

US Capitol experiences another shooting incident- all gun violence is preventable

The Daily Beast reports:

U.S. Capitol Shooter Identified (Clearly, the gunman was delusional and a danger to himself and others- in other words, he should have been in a psychiatric hospital.)
Washington (CNN)U.S. Capitol Police shot a Tennessee man Monday afternoon after he pulled out what appeared to be a weapon at the Capitol Visitor Center, law enforcement officials said.
A female civilian bystander was injured by shrapnel, but no U.S. Capitol Police officers were injured.Multiple news outlets identified Larry Russell Dawson of Antioch, Tenn., as the suspect who alleged drew a gun at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center on Monday afternoon. As The Daily Beast previously reported, in October 2015, the 66-year-old minister was arrested after shouting "I'm a prophet of God" inside the U.S. House, allegedly assaulting a police officer during his removal.

Verderosa would not confirm or deny the suspect’s identity as Dawson, but said the perpetrator was known to police thanks to a previous incident at the Capitol. On Oct. 22, 2015, Dawson yelled “I’m a prophet of God” from the balcony of the House of Representatives.

Hello?  How did this delusional person obtain a gun and return to the US Capitol?  This is plainly ridiculous if not crazy!

Dawson allegedly ran from cops and resisted arrest, according to a police report exclusively obtained by The Daily Beast. Cops cuffed him for assaulting a police officer and unlawful conduct at the Capitol. The Washington Post reports that Dawson missed a court appearance in November, writing a letter to the court that said, "I have been called chosen and sent unto you this day. I am not under the law!. . .Therefore I will not comply with the court order, nor will I surrender myself to your office.” (OMG this is unreal- didn't anybody try to find this guy? He needed hospitalization because, clearly, he was a danger to himself and others.)
— Additional reporting by Betsy Woodruff from Washington, D.C.

Meanwhile- the Secret Service squelched a petition for Republicans to carry  guns to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July 2016.  No kidding?  I wonder if the NRA will sue the Secret Service and take their case to the US Supreme Court to file an injunction against the restriction of Second Amendment rights?

Obviously, Republicans support Second Amendment rights for everybody so long as it doesn't put them in the line of fire or the victims of collateral damage.  More right wing hypocrisy.

In fact, all gun violence is preventable. Those Republicans who refuse to stand up to the National Rifle Association should remember how they, too, are vulnerable to the gun violence they refuse to fix. Although I have no problem with the decision of the Secret Service to keep guns out of the National Republican Convention, the fact is, 43,000 people said they wanted to bring guns to the gathering, for what reason, I have no idea. These right wingers just want to show off their Second Amendmentn Rights, regardless of how offensive they are to others.

It's outrgeous for Republicans to ignore the need for Second Amendment reforms. It makes no sense for a mentally ill man, who was known to the police, to have access to to a gun, whereby he was able to shoot at the US Capitol. Moreover, Republicans who prevent Second Amerndment reforms have no regard for protecting others; while they use the Secret Service to shield them from their own ignorace and to protect them from their incompetence.

Ted Cruz has 10 reasons to loose the Republican presidential nomination

Senator Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz of Texas appears to be "shocked-shocked!" when his political opponents call him a liar.

Of course, "liar" is harsh on anybody's ego, but the facts don't lie when Curz fumbles with his rhetorical political positions.  

Ted Cruz was "born near the USA", but it doesn't qualify him to be President of the nation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSNY_VnysmM

Indeed, chronic hypocrisy and lying are parellel behaviors. There's no doubt about the "birther" Senator's unlimited capacity for hypocritical rhetoric. For example, it's downright hypocritical for Senator Cruz to have wasted time leading a national debate about Barack Obama's birth right, claiming he wasn't qualified to be the President of the United States, because he was supposedly  and erroneously born in Kenya. Incredulously, Rafael "Ted" Cruz, himself, was born in Canada! Now, Cruz is running for the same office he accused President Obama of being unqualified to hold, yet, proof exists of Cruz's Canadian birth. There was never any proof of President Obama having been born in Kenya, as the "birthers" wrongly asserted. In fact, there was plenty of proof about President Obama being born in Hawaii.

In other words, the birthers lied about the location of President Obama's birth place. Therefore, Cruz lied.

Honestly, Cruz only tells the  truth when he's defending the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms or any kind of bullet shooting weapons. Nevertheless, the lies show up when Cruz tries to discredit the intention of other political positions made by humanitarian people who are trying prevent gun violence, by regulating the sale of assault weapons. Abolutely no one is going to erase the Second Amendment out of the Constitution! It's a lie to assume the intent of people who want to save lives by regulating the sale of assault weapons are really trying to eliminate the Second Amendment in the Constitution. Therefore, Cruz lied.

Cruz is opposed to immigration reform, humanely providing a path to citizenship for immigrants who meet certain requirements. Unbelievably, Senator Cruz is himself an immigrant, because he was born in Canada! Although Cruz's mother was an American citizen, she went to Canada to be with her husband at the time Cruz was born. Therefore, it's highly questionable about whether or not Cruz is a natural born citizen of the United States.

Natural born, in my mind, means born as a US Citizens in an American state or terrirtory or when both parents are citizens but living outside the country, due to special work or circumstances. I'm certainly no authority on this issue, but it's virtually impossible for Cruz to unequivically claim he's a "natural born citizen". Moreover, Cruz refuses to clarify this important Constitutional issue. Therefore, Cruz lied.

Here are other reasons why Senator "Cruz to loose" should never be given an opportunity to become our nation's leader:

• Even political colleague Sarah Palin didn't endorse Cruz. Rather, she overtly endorsed Donald Trump "the chump".
• Senator Cruz puts his two young daughters into political advertisements. This is unethical practice, in my opinion, and exploitaton of his innocent children for a purely political purpose. In fact, Cruz's two precious daughters are seen in paid political ads more often than his pretty wife. It's not right.
• Senator Cruz often called his colleagues in the US Senate "a cartel", like they were dealing in clandestine goods, like illegal drugs. This accusation, and the ugly label were unpatriotic and a downright lie. If Senator Cruz believed a "cartel" was running the Congress, he should've reported the activity to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), rather than lie about the "august body" of law makers, of which he is a member.
• Cruz said he'll block any nominee President Obama puts forth to suceed Justice Antonin Scalia, who died (1936-2016). This is contrary to the US Constitution, where the direction is clearly that it's the responsibility of Cruz to join the Senate to "advise and consent" with the President, about the nomination for Supreme Court justice. To overtly block or filibuser any attempt to vote on President Obama's nominee to succeed Justice Scalia is seditious behavior, in my opinion, and therefore, disqualfies Cruz from running for President. In fact, sedition is a federal crime.
• Being pro-life, as Cruz claims to be, he's, also, hypocritically:
• pro-death penalty
• against any Second Amendment changes, whereby lives could be saved from preventable gun violence by assault weapons
• against immigration reform, regardless of how distressed innocent families are about re-uniting with loved ones, who are unfairly deported
• against the Affordable Care Act - ACA, (aka "Obamacare") whereby millions of people pay for and receive health insurance coverage

It's likely I've exceeded the 10 reasons Senator Cruz should never be considered as a candidate for U.S. President. Frankly, any of these reasons should be enough to disqualify the Cruz candidacy. Let's face it, by being born "close by" in Canada, doesn't make the Constitutional qualification cut. In fact, "Cruz to loose" is wasting our time by trying to compete with those who are fundamentally better qualified to be President than he is, because, even the worst of them, at the very least, are not "liars". Born near the USA should be enough of a reason to disqualify "Cruz to loose".

The New York Times front page opinion - End Gun Violence in America

Americans are increasingly being killed by guns because people with an agenda have unbridled access to deadly weapons. Regardless of how Second Amendment gun rights zealots preach self defense, there's virtually no evidence to prove how owning a gun protects anybody from death or injury by gun violence.  

A thank you to The New York Times for a rare front page editorial.

The New York Times

End the Gun Epidemic in America-​It is a moral outrage and national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDDEC. 4, 2015

America is in a state of perpetual mourning caused by preventable gun violence

All decent people feel sorrow and righteous fury about the latest slaughter of innocents, in California. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies are searching for motivations, including the vital question of how the murderers might have been connected to international terrorism. That is right and proper.

But motives do not matter to the dead in California, nor did they in Colorado, Oregon, South Carolina, Virginia, Connecticut and far too many other places. The attention and anger of Americans should also be directed at the elected leaders whose job is to keep us safe but who place a higher premium on the money and political power of an industry dedicated to profiting from the unfettered spread of ever more powerful firearms.

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

Opponents of gun control are saying, as they do after every killing, that no law can unfailingly forestall a specific criminal. That is true. They are talking, many with sincerity, about the constitutional challenges to effective gun regulation. Those challenges exist. They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France, England and Norway that have strict gun laws. 

Yes, they did.

But at least those countries are trying. The United States is not. 

Worse, politicians abet would-be killers by creating gun markets for them, and voters allow those politicians to keep their jobs. It is past time to stop talking about halting the spread of firearms, and instead to reduce their number drastically — eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.

It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has retained its sense of decency?

Maine Writer response - there is a correlation between the volume of assault weapons now owned by too many thousands of people and the increase in mortalities caused by guns of all kinds.  It's time to outlaw the sale of assault weapons designed to kill people and to eliminate the sale of ammunition used by AK47s and look alikes. 

Second amendment zealots don't need and should not own assault weapons to hunt for animals. 

Protect American public safety and save police lives

It's unbelievable, but our inability to fight gun violence, and support for Second Amendment rights, are putting America's public safety police at risk for random assassinations.

Our nation's police unions should be demanding regulations to curb gun violence. Moreover, it's our responsibility as citizens, who pay taxes for public protection, to prevent criminals, who are apparently stalking public safety professionals, from obtaining weapons, for the purpose of killing police. 

The deputy, Darren H. Goforth, 47, a 10-year veteran of the Harris County Sheriff’s Office, pulled into a Chevron gas station at about 8:30 p.m. on Friday along a busy, tree-lined stretch of suburban Houston about 25 miles from downtown.

Deputy Darren H. Goforth 

America seems to be turning into a nation where protecting Second Amendment rights to own guns is more important than protecting public safety and the people who defend our communities from crime.

Deputy Darren H. Goforth was in uniform when he was shot in the back Friday night in what authorities described as an unprovoked killing. The motive in the shooting, which Hickman described as "senseless and cowardly," is still unclear. But Goforth appears to have been targeted "because he wore a uniform," the sheriff said.

A Texas man faces a capital murder charge in the "execution-style shooting" of a sheriff's deputy while he was fueling his patrol car near Houston, authorities said.

"We found no other motive or indication that it was anything other than that," said Hickman, adding that he doesn't believe the suspect and Goforth knew each other.

Cops hunt 3 suspects in shooting of Illinois police officer identified as 30-year vet:

The shooting death of Lt. Joseph Gliniewicz, a 30 year police officer veteran, Tuesday morning, has the community, located an hour north of Chicago, on lock down.

Helicopters circled above Fox Lake, and all law enforcement agencies from the area, along with a regional SWAT team, K-9 units and FBI and ATF agents, hunted for the suspects after Gliniewicz was shot and killed, around 8 a.m. local time.

Two male suspects are white and one is black, according to Lake County Sheriff's Det. Chris Covelli.

These horrible public safety assassinations (and thousands of innocent people) are preventable, if Americans will demand reform of the Second Amendment by preventing the sale, and use of guns produced and owned for the purpose of killing people.

Instead of preventing gun violence deaths, Americans are living in a state of perpetual mourning for the growing numbers of victims. We lay wreaths, conduct public memorial "celebrations of life", and remember their names in wall plaques.  

Nevertheless, Americans simply aren't doing enough to prevent the growing epidemic of gun violence. As this violence grows, we'll soon find it difficult to recruit and retain police officers to prevent us from danger. By allowing assassins and criminals to obtain guns, our nation will descend to a new plateau, where the value of human life will become secondary to the right to own guns.

Something must change, or civilized society, as we know it, will be at risk for degrading our national freedom and pride, faster than any invasion by foreign enemies.

Will freedom of speech trump telling truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

When the US Supreme Court hears arguments about whether or not to allow political lies to be challenged, it seems to me, the justices should go back to law school 101, before deliberations on this case begins. History tells us the Ten Commandments were the foundation of our western legal justice system.  In the document Moses is credited with chronicling, Exodus 20:16- thou shall not bear false witness...., seems to me the high court would be trumping this tenet of the bailiff's swearing in oath and Moses, if the ruling in support of free speech, including the liberty to spread lies, is permitted to overrule what's taught in the Ten Commandments.

Of course, cynics will deny the validity of the Ten Commandments as being the foundation for our western justice system. If so, then what's the basis of the oath all witnesses take before testifying in a jury trial or before a judge?  "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth....". Although atheists are apparently permitted to omit the optional "so help me God" clause, the fact is, witnesses raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth. To do otherwise, or to lie while under oath, is called perjury, which is a crime.

It also seems to me, US Supreme Court rulings supporting Second Amendment rights to own guns, over the right of people to be protected from gun violence, likewise, trumps the Ten Commandment about "thou shall not kill".

Perhaps it's time for our US Supreme Court conservative justices, especially the Roman Catholic Justice Scalia and Chief Justice Roberts, should consider their Judeo-Christian heritage while contemplating how freedom of speech fits with the Ten Commandments.

In other words, perhaps the Supreme Court justices should read a law 101 book. Nearly all professions require refresher courses. It would be reassuring to know how the justices refreshed their judicial roots, before ruling on case law that puts our US Constitutional freedoms of speech and to bear arms, above the traditional enforcement of the Ten Commandments.

Gun violence in America is growing like an infectious disease

Right wing zealots are obsessed with protecting Second Amendment rights while young people are being murdered by the growing public health menace of gun violence.  If the rate of killing young people murdered by gun violence were caused by any other vector, the American public would demand a responsible public health cure. 

It's impossible to understand why Second Amendment zealots are protected by the United States Supreme Court's supportive rulings, when young people are at risk of dying in the US, every day, from guns. Now, Seattle WA has reported yet another in the unbelievable litany of gun violence incidents on a college campus, including the death of at least one of four victims.

Meanwhile, right wing zealots are cruelly attacking the decision to exchange 5 ugly old terrorist Taliban leaders, who were held without trial in Guantanamo, for a young Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, who was held prisoner for 5 years. It's unbelievably hypocritical for the right wing nuts to ignore the deaths caused by growing gun violence, while they waste energy criticizing a humanitarian act to save an American soldier from certain death in captivity.

Although the right wing establishment within the Republican and Libertarian political parties are paralyzed by money the National Rifle Association showers on them to sustain support, maybe young and untainted voters can make a change in this zealotry.  

Let's educate young people about the horrible danger of gun violence in America. This is the fact: guns kill people. 

In the absence of guns, the death rate from gun violence would be reduced to practically zero.

Like any infectious disease, it's time to remove the causation and cure the epidemic. We can enforce gun safety regulations that will protect Second Amendment rights and save our youth from preventable violent deaths.

Violence in America - right wing politicians are accessories to these crimes

Zealous supporters of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and right wing nuts who believe the US Constitution was written for them alone, are accessories to the growing incidence of American violence, particularly correlated to gun violence.

In my opinion, the politicians and US Supreme Court Justices who support Second Amendment rights over the safety of all Americans who are innocent victims of gun violence, are accessories to the preventable murder of thousands of innocent people every year.

Over the weekend, three innocent people in Santa Barbara, California were shot and killed by a 22 year old mentally ill man named Elliot Rodger. Additionally, he gruesomely stabbed three of his roommates before going on the shooting rampage. All of Rodger's murders were preventable, if the required mental health care he needed had been enforced. Tragically, Rodger didn't present as being a danger to himself to others. Obviously, Rodger seriously deceived evaluators.


Today, there are more reports of random gun violence murders reported in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.

(CNN) -- Myrtle Beach authorities responded to six separate shootings Saturday that left three people dead and five people wounded in the popular South Carolina resort city, police Capt. David Knipes said Sunday.

The deadly incident occurred at the beachfront Bermuda Sands motel, where three men were killed and one person was wounded. Knipes said no one has been arrested.

A witness told CNN affiliate WPDE that one of the victims ran after the shooting but eventually collapsed.

"It was like to the point where he had a lot of blood everywhere and he was just trying to breathe" and he died, Jamont Samuel told the station.

At the time of the shooting, people lined the sidewalks of Ocean Boulevard, which was jammed with Memorial Day vacationers and people who came to the area for Atlantic Beach BikeFest.

"I was scared to death. I just took off and started running. I was scared," Debra Lovack told WPDE.

In one of the other nearby incidents, a woman was shot in the chin and a man in the shoulder. There were four other shootings where two people were wounded, police said.

Knipes said police don't believe the shootings are connected.

Shooting rampage in California kills 6

On several US Supreme Court rulings, the justices could have supported regulations to enforce the control of human killing guns. Nevertheless, a majority on the court chose, instead, to support unbridled Second Amendment rights, rather than rule to protect the public from preventable deaths by gun violence.  

Elliot Rodger experienced mental illness, but those who treated him did not, apparently, enforce his compliance with treatment goals. Was he too affluent to challenge his spoiled noncompliance? Perhaps, a mentally ill person must be poor before law enforcement and medical care givers can identify them as being a danger to themselves or others.

Meanwhile, right wing politicians and their constituents continue to be accessories to the crimes perpetrated by deranged people, who are intent on killing innocent victims with guns, because they can.

Worse, no one is leading efforts to end the growth of preventable grief. Rather, politicians are paralyzed by threats to their lives and the National Rifle Association to protect people from public health harm from guns.  

I call on the US Supreme Court to end this insanity by supporting laws to protect people before Second Amendment rights.

Evil in Kansas City on the eve of Jewish Passover - Congress Must Act

Evil infects hate mongers like viruses attack healthy cells in polio or the deadly influenza. When people who harbor evil fueled by hate, and then access guns, the results are as deadly as any lethal disease.

It makes virtually no sense to see gun violence killing more innocent people than some infectious diseases. Consequently, it's incredulous for the US Congress to remain politically paralyzed, being unable to pass laws to regulate the sale of weapons or the ammunition used to kill people.

Tragically, the evil cocktail of hate, racism antisemitism and guns took hold of Frazier Glenn Cross 73, a white supremacist, when he shot and killed innocent Christians at Kansas City, Kansas Jewish Community Centers, on the eve of Passover. 

CNN is reporting that Cross opened fire at two Kansas City-area Jewish centers. But the three people he killed were Christian.

The suspect, Frazier Glenn Cross, 73, faces charges of first-degree murder. Organizations that track hate groups describe Cross, who is also known as Frazier Glenn Miller, as a long-time white supremacist.  At a news conference on Monday, Overland Park Police Chief John Douglass said that investigators had "unquestionably determined...that this was a hate crime."

What's also unquestionable is that Cross (aka Miller) had access to guns. In the absence of deadly weapons, the three innocent Christians, one being a 14 year old young man, who were killed in Kansas City, couldn't have become the victims of this violent hate crime. If the white supremacist had infected the three innocent victims with the plague or a nerve paralyzing toxin, the US Congress would, no doubt, be calling for ways to prevent people from gaining access to deadly biochemical weapons. But, guns are protected by the US Constitution under the Second Amendment so they  don't qualify as being as deadly as biochemical toxins. Although the intention of guns in the hands of a hate filled white supremacist are the same as access to deadly biochemical weapons, the US Congress will, nonetheless, do absolutely nothing to prevent gun deaths, while it's highly likely outrage would ensue to prevent the latter.

We feel tremendous sympathy for the victims of the Kansas City white supremacist killings.It's impossible to understand how evil can so easily overcome innocent people on the solemn occasion of Passover eve. Nevertheless, the mother of the 14 year old killed, who is also the daughter of a second victim, and who found both of their bodies, asks for prayers for herself and the others. As a survivor, she expressed tremendous faith, saying that the killings of her father and son will somehow lead to a spiritual community awakening, by bringing people together in shared grief. She's obviously a lady strengthened by her extraordinary faith.

By continuing to allow guns and ammunition to remain unregulated, our US Congress is behaving irresponsibly. Congress has the means to pass laws to prevent many gun violence deaths but remain unable to act - like they just don't get it....guns cause preventable deaths, it's as simple as that.

Meanwhile, political inaction permits evil, harbored by hate mongers consumed by delusions of power, to access guns for the purpose of infecting harm on innocent people.  

Our sincere sympathy to the innocent Kansas City victims of the Passover eve gun killings.  

Tragic Fort Hood deja vu more preventable gun violence on a secure military base

American news continues to be consumed by preventable gun violence incidents. These seemingly limitless incidents cause deaths and injuries, because of the unregulated access people have to own and use weapons that cause death.

Although we seem to be inoculated against street gun violence caused by gangs, the deadly incidents on military bases are particularly concerning. These bases are supposed to be the places where our nation is being defended against terrorism. Now, the bases are apparently the places where domestic terrorism incidents are clustering.

It's time for the Second Amendment rulings of our United States Supreme Court to be held responsible for individuals who abuse the liberty. I've always been reluctant to hold the high court responsible for an individuals behavior, but when the Second Amendment trumps the rights of people to be protected from those who abuse this constitutional liberty, then the court must be replaced. 

Has anyone thought about a class action suit by victims of gun violence against the US Supreme Court? Of course, such action would just be a gesture, but it would get attention and might even remind the high justices about their moral obligation to balance the law with the protection of innocent people.

Now, Americans are faced with a seemingly deja vu gun violent incident at Fort Hood. This is the same military base where Hasan, the Army terrorist who perpetrated the 2009 crime, has yet punished although, even though he admits to the crime.

Our US Supreme Court has clearly lost it's way as a moral compass for Americans. The Court's libertarian leanings have done nothing whatsoever to support average Americans living in the 21st Century. Deja vu violence is being supported because of concrete interpretations of the US Constitution written to protect citizens who lived in the late 18th century.  

I'm not qualified to be a law commentator, but it's clearly wrong for the Supreme Court to continue supporting unbridled Second Amendment Rights. 

It seems like Americans need to find protection from the US Supreme Court and dangerous rulings by right wing justices.

School Shooting in a Philadelphia Gym - Children Shooting Children

Children have no Constitutional second amendment rights to own guns. Nevertheless, children's shootings at schools, ie, "children shooting children" are becoming alarmingly more frequent. Incredulously, children are killing children. 

Children should have zero access to guns. Every injury and death caused by school shootings are entirely preventable. 

This Friday evening, CNN reports yet another shooting. This time it's in a Philadelphia school gym. Two students were shot by peer who came at them with a gun and fired. Both victims appeared to have been struck once inside the gym of Delaware Valley Charter High School. Police followed up on a tweet around 5:45 p.m. saying they were "still looking for additional suspects."

These kids homicides are linked as copy cat incidents but they're occurring with deadly regularity.  In fact, a study of children's injuries by a team of public health researchers reports how gun violence shows up in childhood morbidity data.

Dr. Angela Sauaia and her colleagues at the University of Colorado's Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora reported: 

"When we started coding the trauma data, which includes all types of childhood injuries that turn up at these trauma centers, and we noticed the morbid pattern of gun violence-related injuries for children ... that shifted the focus of the study to document violence related to injuries involving gunshots." The data showed a surprising number of children are seriously injured by guns.

The bottom line, said Sauaia: "No matter what side you are on in the gun debate, I've never met a person that believes kids should have easy access to guns," Sauaia said. "The data clearly shows this is a real public health concern for children."

The epidemic of preventable gun violence incidents are injuring and killing children. Following the tragic 1999 Columbine Colorado shootings, the frequency of "children shooting children" deaths are accelerating.

This doesn't have to happen. Innocent children should not worry about their safety when they attend school or go to the gym. This wave of violence is harming our nation's educational system.  

Gun violence must stop. In fact, it's preventable if children are prevented from having any access to guns.

Holding adults responsible for the deaths resulting from "children shooting children" should wake people up to this growing public health mortality. Americans have the power to stop the killing of innocent children who are being irrevocably harmed by other children. Our Second Amendment rights gun culture was absolutely never intended to harm children.  But it does.

Americans must change this culture of gun violence. It's harming our international reputation, causing preventable mortality of innocent people and killing our children. All preventable.

Is there something in the law about people who somehow don't prevent crimes being implicit in the perpetrating of the injustice?  I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me a culture that won't prevent gun violence is responsible for every death caused by it.

Pretend Gun Violence is Bird Flu or Tuberculois or Measles

Another deadly shooting in Indiana grocery store. 
But there's a big difference between gun violence and infectious disease:

ELKHART, IND. – Three people are dead, including the gunman, night after a shooting at an Elkhart, Ind., grocery store, authorities said late Wednesday.

Elkhart police received a call about an active shooter at Martin's Super Market about 10 p.m. Wednesday, Indiana State Police Sgt. Trent Smith said at a news conference.

The suspect, in his early 20s, walked into the store and used a semi-automatic handgun to shoot and kill a woman, then walked to another aisle and shot and killed another woman, Smith said. One victim was an employee and appeared to be in her late teens or early 20s and the other was a shopper who appeared to be in her 40s, he said. They were found about 12 aisles apart.

Bird flu is again claiming lives.
Hong Kong officials are reporting that a second patient has died after contracting the H7N9 bird flu virus, according to the South China Morning Post.

The 65-year-old male is believed to have been the third person in Hong Kong to contract the virus during the last month. Authorities reported that all of the patients were exposed to the disease in the neighboring city of Shenzhen in southern China.
Read more: H7N9 Bird Flu: Second Death in Hong Kong | TIME.com http://world.time.com/2014/01/14/hong-kong-records-second-bird-flu-death/#ixzz2qZAnChF8
Tuberculosis is a leading cause of death report from World Health Organization

• Tuberculosis (TB) is second only to HIV/AIDS as the greatest killer worldwide due to a single infectious agent.
• In 2012, 8.6 million people fell ill with TB and 1.3 million died from TB.
• Over 95% of TB deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries, and it is among the top three causes of death for women aged 15 to 44.

Measles is an infectious disease killer of children

Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available.

• In 2011, there were 158 000 measles deaths globally – about 430 deaths every day or 18 deaths every hour.
• More than 95% of measles deaths occur in low-income countries with weak health infrastructures.
• Measles vaccination resulted in a 71% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2011 worldwide.  

But there's a huge difference between deaths by infectious disease and gun violence.

It's a fact:  gun violence is entirely preventable because the vector can be controlled.  Guns cause gun violence deaths.  

Diseases will never be entirely preventable because the influenza virus continues to mutate, tuberculosis becomes resistant to antibiotics and measles continues to erupt especially in third world countries. 

Americans who debate gun owners rights should put an equal amount of time into gun violence prevention.

Gun violence is a public health hazard and an unnecessary cause of preventable deaths.

Gun violence should be treated like deadly disease. Treatment should be the passing of public policies restricting the access people have to guns purchased solely for the purpose of killing people.