:

Are You Registered?

This may be the most important election this country will have in the 21st century. Are you sure that you are registered to vote? Follow the link below to find out the answer to this and many other questions. By not voting you are allowing someone else to speak for you. Are you that sure that what they say is what you would have said? Voting is important even if you live in a place where you view is not shared by the majority. Many times politicians will look at the vote count difference in a particular election to say that the majority opinion was the overwhelming view of the people in the community. How true or not true that statement may be could depend on you. If you don't share the majority opinion it is still important to register your opposition to let the majority know that there is an opposition.

In most states you must register at least 30 days before an election in order to vote. It is always a good idea to bring with you a picture ID, birth certificate, electric bill or some form of ID when you go to the polls. The right to vote is under attack unlike never before in modern times. There has always been a group of people who don't want to see everyone vote. In a new report from the Brennan Center for Justice. The study found that "thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia reported purging more than 13 million voters from registration rolls between 2004 and 2006." Some groups have tried to make ineligible people who have lost their homes due to the recent banking and credit crisis by saying those people are no longer residents of where they lived.

Other examples of deceptive practices and voter intimidation include fliers distributed in Milwaukee telling voters they cannot vote if they have not paid their parking tickets; fliers in Ohio telling voters that Republicans vote one day and Democrats on the next day; reports of armed gunmen intimidating, mocking and misinforming voters at heavily Latino precincts in Arizona; deceptive fliers in Maryland misleading voters about the party affiliation of candidates for key statewide offices; phone calls telling voters that they were no longer eligible to vote; and emails sent to voters in Virginia providing false information about where to vote.

Have questions about where, when, or how to vote for any state follow the link below or click on the picture above and get up to date voter information. Make sure your vote counts!

Voter Information

If you have a problem voting contact your local county officials and report your experience to Election Protection a non-profit group whose goal it is to protect your right to vote.

The Wild Wild West?

The debate about gun ownership has been going on for a long time and there are strong feelings on both sides. As for myself I am neither a gun nut nor an anti-gun nut. I believe guns have a place in our society and that the Constitution guarantees law abiding American citizen the right to own a gun. Not any and all guns, but certainly weapons used for hunting, shooting sports, and self-defense are definitely covered by the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution. However the second amendment was not unlimited in its endorsement of the right to bear arms.

The Second Amendment: 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.

The phrase "well regulated" cannot be overlooked and is the method by which the federal government can regulate ownership. Period, argument over! That leaves us to decide what regulations are valid and what use is protected under those regulations.

The idea of self-defense is not a new one and why some felt the need to lower the standard for use of deadly force is beyond my comprehension. Have you ever asked yourself the question, when does self defense cross the line into murder? What IS the tipping point? Is just believing that someone has a weapon enough? Does believing that the person you are about to shoot has committed a crime enough? We are going to look at three cases that have recently been in the news. In each of the three cases the questions I previously asked should have been asked by the person holding the gun. Judge for yourself if they did or did not commit murder.

All of the cases we will look at took place in Texas and in all three cases the outcome was clearly wrong. In all three cases the new "Castle" law formed the basis in the shooter's mind as justification for pulling the trigger and taking someone's life.

The new bill S.B. 378 (Castle Law) was signed into law by Governor Perry to overcome perceived problems with the previous version of the Penal Code.

Texas Senator Jeff Wentworth, who sponsored the bill, said in his Sponsor's Statement of Intent for the new changes in the law wrote, "In 1973, the 63rd Texas Legislature imposed a duty to retreat in the face of a criminal attack, permitting the use of deadly force only if a reasonable person in the situation would not have retreated." This problem of having to retreat was what he was trying to "fix" with the new "Castle" bill.

Some highlights of the changes to the Penal Code:

S.B. 378 explicitly states in law that a person has no duty to retreat if the person is attacked in a place where he or she has a right to be present, if he or she has not provoked the attacker, and if the person using force is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the force is used. In addition, the jury is instructed to presume that the victim's actions were reasonable if the victim brings forth evidence that he or she is entitled to the presumption, unless the state can prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt.

• SECTION 1. Amends Section 9.01, Penal Code, by adding Subdivisions
  ( 4 ) and ( 5 ), to define "habitation" and "vehicle".
  
  
• SECTION 2. Amends Section 9.31, Penal Code, by amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsections (e) and (f), as follows:
  
  
• (e) Provides that a person who has a right to be present at the location where the force is used is not required to retreat before using force, provided that the person has not provoked the person against whom the force is used and is not engaged in criminal activity
• (f) Prohibits a finder of fact from considering whether the actor failed to retreat when determining whether an actor reasonably believed that the use of force was necessary, for purposes of Subsection (a).

The List Follows:

• Case 1: Pasadena, Texas -- Man Shoots Two While on the Phone with 911.
• Case 2: Arlington, Texas -- Husband's Shot Sends Wife to Prison.
• Case 3: Fort Worth, Texas -- Suspected Shoplifter Fatally Shot.

Always Been Proud?

Anyone who has been listening to the reporting on this year's Presidential campaign by now has heard at least part of Michelle Obama's comment about finally being proud of America. For those who haven't heard the comment I will list part of the comment here for you.

On February 18, 2008 Michelle Obama said, "For the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback." Later on in Madison, Wisconsin, she said, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change." For these remarks Michelle Obama is being vilified as unpatriotic by narrow minded, myopic, political opportunist. One of those critics happens to be the wife of the Republican Presidential nominee-to-be Cindy McCain.

Later that day Cindy McCain took an indirect swipe at Michelle Obama by saying "I am proud of my country. I don't know about you? If you heard those words earlier, I am very proud of my country." When questioned by reporters later to expand on her comments Cindy McCain said, "I always have been and will always be extremely proud of my country. I have led an extremely fortunate life. It was nothing more than that. I am just extremely proud to be an American."

REALLY Cindy McCain, do you really mean what you are saying? There is a difference between always loving your country and having always been proud of your country. If one takes the time to give any thought at all about American history there are many moments that would tend to not make one so proud. Starting right from the beginning one might look back to the treatment of the Native American. Treaty after treaty was broken anytime land previously reserved for Native Americans proved too valuable. Slavery, the treatment of people as property, by rules that would get you put in jail today, wasn't abolished until 1865, legally. Jim Crow laws ruled the South and were not declared illegal until one hundred years after that. During World War II when we went to war with Hitler's Germany our military was still segregated. Some American citizens couldn't stay at certain hotels, eat in some restaurants, or live anywhere their income would allow. Lynchings were still going on in the South as late as 1968. Add to all of this proud history the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII. Are these proud moments in American history? I don't think so.

I think Cindy McCain is confusing Pride and Love. The words are not ALWAYS interchangeable. I love the United States not because it is perfect, but because I believe that eventually we will get it right. It may take some time but we get it right. I'm proud of that!

Family Birthdays:

New Features!