To Concerned Members of the Senate:

SB 427, aka AB144, is probably the most UNCONSTITUTIONAL anti-gun bill I've ever heard of, and hence it is TREASONOUS to vote "yea" on it. To lawfully pursue an anti-gun agenda, one must first repeal the Second Amendment. Otherwise, one is attacking The People's Constitutionally protected rights, and thus attacking the sovereignty of the United States, and attacking the sovereignty of The People.

I support the death penalty for "legislators" who vote affirmatively for blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL bills, or blatant human rights violations, in general.

Dishonoring/dismantling of the Second Amendment, by ignoring the fact of its existence, is a human rights violation, not protection.

A REMINDER:

1. The idea of a freedom charter is to protect the people from the government, not to protect people from each other.

2. A government that "protects the people from each other" is OPPRESSION.

Also, a militia comprised of government employees/officials is OPPRESSION. Neither government officials or government employees are "the people," but the minions of government OPPRESSION. It's universal.

Sincerely,

[my personal info]
ps: Ballistics testing of fired rounds, in criminal investigations, should also be ruled unconstitutional, since is renders ineffectual The People's complaint department.

To Concerned Members of the Senate:

SB 427 is blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and hence it is TREASONOUS to vote "yea" on it.

I support the death penalty for "legislators" who vote affirmatively for UNCONSTITUTIONAL bills, or human rights violations, in general.

Dishonoring/dismantling of the Second Amendment is a human rights violation, not protection.

A REMINDER:

1. The idea of a freedom charter is to protect the people from the government, not to protect people from each other.

2. A government that "protects the people from each other" is OPPRESSION.

Also, a militia comprised of government employees/officials is OPPRESSION. Neither government officials or government employees are "the people," but the minions of government OPPRESSION. It's universal.

Sincerely,

To whom it concerns at BATFE:

You must ceast and desist from monkeying with the people's Right to Keep and Bear Arms. What you don't seem to get is that the regulation authority of the government is NOT a license to interfere with the public's constitutionally guaranteed rights. You DO NOT have the right to substitute your political opinion in place of simply what the Second Amendment spells out as the right of the public to Keep and Bear Arms. The Second Amendment DOES NOT say anything about "sporting purposes," and you ARE NOT authorized to make such a stipulation, nor anyone in the legislature. The framers of the constitution clearly WERE NOT intending the Second Amendment to refer only to sporting purposes. You, and all anti-guners, are blatantly disrespecting the Second Amendment rights of the whole public. Again, cease and desist!

In summary, NOT SHOTGUN REGULATIONS, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!

Sincerely,
Steve

To Gov. Schwarzenegger,

re: the "motorcycle muffler law"

I am so ANGRY at the passage of SB435 in California. I just read that it's on your desk for signature. What I have to say is that if you were to sign it into law, I would be very angry at you as well. Don't do the will of California's communist totalitarian legislature. You and I both know that California's legislators don't belong on the street without medical supervision, let alone in the legislature. They must not be giving authority to manufactures, making their designs the law of the land. In fact, that can be used in court, to repeal it, if it were to become law. It is another mean-spirited law passed by mean-spirited officials, and it is definitely UNCONSTITUTIONAL. PERIOD.

To knowingly pass or sign an UNCONSTITUTIONAL measure into law is TREASON against the people.

DON'T SIGN IT! PERIOD!!!

As you may know, the 2009-2010 legislative session ended on August 31st, at midnight. As a fellow supporter of our Second Amendment right to bear arms, I wanted to be sure and keep you updated on a few important bills that we were all watching this session.

FAILED: AB 1810, which would require California residents to register their shotguns and rifles in addition to their handguns, and would require law enforcement to permanently keep records of anyone who buys a gun from a dealer or an individual.

Though this bill passed out of the Assembly, the Senate failed to gain enough votes of support before the 12:00am deadline.

More Information: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/08/bill-requiring-shotgun-and-rif.html

FAILED: AB 1934, which would make it an offense to carry firearms openly in holsters.

This bill went through many revisions. Though it initially passed out of the Assembly and then the Senate with amendments, the Assembly failed to approve these amendments before the 12:00am deadline.

More Information: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/09/01/2998092/assembly-session-ends-in-acrimony.html

FAILED: AB 2223, which would prohibit the possession or use of any shotgun shell loaded with anything other than nontoxic shot when hunting.

This bill passed through the Assembly but failed to get through the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee.

I want to extend my deepest gratitude to all of you who continue to fight for our 2nd amendment rights. It is because of your support and resolve that we were able to rally to defeat these harmful proposals. It is outrageous that these kinds of bills are even being considered. We need to focus our efforts on strengthening the economy and creating jobs, not punishing and regulating law abiding citizens.

Please continue to spread the word and educate others when our basic rights are challenged. Together, we can prevail. I will not give up the fight to protect our basic rights and I hope you will also continue this cause. Thank you for your support.

It is an honor to serve you.

Sincerely,

Assemblyman Curt Hagman
District 60

To Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger,

Fabulous!!! AB1506, the take-your-IOU-and-shove-it bill, just UNANIMOUSLY passed both houses in the Golden State. You know what that means. It means that all of California is counting on you to sign it into law. You'd be Calfornia's extreme, record-holder black sheep if you didn't sign it into law, considering its overwhelming approval. Time to exercise those fingers. Think of it as an alternate, extra, body-building exercise for fingers. With the lack of a budget, they must be in great need of the exercise.

you were heard!!

Over 2,200 Support Letters for AB 1506 (the IOU Bill) Played Key Role in Senate Committee Hearing Success - Thank You!

After a grueling nine-hour hearing Monday, Assembly Bill 1506 unanimously passed the Senate Appropriations Committee thanks to your overwhelming support.

Legislators saw your letters and realized the IOU Bill offers key protections to taxpayers, businesses, non-profits, and local government from the State's "forced borrowing" policy.

When California issues IOUs, the recipients still must pay taxes and fees to the state of California without the benefit of actually receiving the money they earned.  The IOU Bill provides an easy way for them to meet their state obligations without running afoul of the law.

Some Legislators have publicly advocated for the "forced borrowing" policy and don't believe taxpayer relief is necessary.  

However your towering stack of thoughtful letters left the committee members with little choice but to recognize the dire need for the IOU Bill.

Your continued support and dedication to this no-nonsense legislation is turning the tide in favor of Californians. I appreciate the opportunity to stand by your side.  By working together, we can change California.

To make sure this bill passes into law and protects the hardworking taxpayers of our state, if you haven't already done so, please go to my website www.ab1506ioubill.info/support or email me at Assemblymember.Anderson@assembly.ca.gov with your letters of support.

Assemblyman Anderson presents your 2,200 letters of support to the Senate Appropriations Committee

Presuming it to just be Naïvte on the part of officials, concerning "wild" fires, here's what you need to know. There is no such thing as a "wild" fire. They are ALL arson, universally. They are NEVER accidental or wild, ever. Furthermore, most of those arsons are the handiwork of "firefighters," who are interested in more hours and overtime to pad their wallets with.

If one had the totalitarian power to do something really effective, the imposition of life sentences and death sentences on ALL "firefighters" would turn off the "wild" fires, like turning off water at a spigot. That would work, and it's virtually certain that nothing else would ever work.

Ruminate on that one.

Sincerely,
Steve M.

To both Sen. Boxer and Sen. Feinstein,

There is a measure that must NOT become law. Namely, the Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill, S. 3194. I shall hold responsible all those who vote in the affirmative on that measure. It must NOT pass, PERIOD!

You, like liberals in general, along with other totalitarian-leaning politicians, are deliberately misleading the public about "environmental issues." Firstly, the BP spill was not an accident, but an event staged for dirty political reasons. Now, the liberals in particular are pointing to it as pseudo-evidnce of a need to stop using oil. It's part of a totalitarian abolishment of freedom-of-lifestyle, through staged events, to fake out the public, to falsely present a picture of the "need for change." The dirty politics of the Obama Administration is sickening, evil and inexcusable. If Obama really wants to kick ass over the spill, he ought to bend over and take his punishment, because he, among others, is guilty.

Any government, eg the U. S., that maximizes its own power over personal freedoms cannot be deemed legitimate. The oppression-creating loophole built into the U. S. Constitution is the authorization to regulate, which absolutely eclipses and renders ineffectual all freedoms and rights in the rest of the document. The only way to fix the U. S. government is to strike out the Constitutional authorization to regulate. There's no other way to achieve real personal freedoms, and that includes freedom of arms.

To Rep. Anderson,

Providing tax credits, or better yet, lowering taxes, in one thing. What's wrong with AB2278 is that it invites dirty politics and shams and myth crafting, a la "global warming" mythologies and lies and frauds and misinterpretations. Such shenanigans shouldn't be encouraged as a tool for economic survival or further monetary self-enrichment.

My suggestion is go back to the drawing board, and devise a plan that doesn't encourage or reward gargantuan dishonesty, under guise of "improvements," and "innovations."

Such improprieties are not fairly harmless. They're absolutely ruinous to the interests of freedom and to the quality of life people have come to enjoy.

Subject: RE: ILA Contact - State or Local Legislation
Date: Monday, May 03, 2010 7:45 AM

Dear Mr. Malinowski,

Thank you for contacting NRA-ILA. This is federal law and there is an exception for people who live within 1,000 ft. of a school which allows them to own firearms. Please let us know if you have further questions or concerns.

Best regards,
Miranda Bond
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division
www.nraila.org

In reading the latest, April 30, 2010, Grassroots newsletter, I paused on the Louisiana section. What I'm wondering is: Why isn't the NRAILA disputing the Louisiana state law's legitimacy, the one that denies possession of a firearm within 1000 ft. of a school. It's unconstitutional. They can't call that security. It's a deprivation of people's Second Amendment rights, of anyone who lives that close to a school. It's also an unconstitutional deprivation of those same Second Amendment rights of anyone who may normally store a firearm in their vehicle. The NRAILA is stopping well short of fully protecting Second Amendment rights. The NRAILA should not be resigned to acquiesce to such unconstitutional encroachments. To let it go without even arguing the matter makes me suspect a covert anti-gun sentiment running through the works of even the NRAILA.

To all concerned Assemblymembers:

All three anti-gun measures are wrong, and unconstitutional.

AB1810 is harassment of those trying to exercise their constitutionally protected rights. Officials are not entitled to make anyone's rights contingent on ANYTHING. The public's rights are NOT negotiable. ALL registration requirements are harassment of the public. Attainment of office is not an authorization to harrass anyone, ever.

AB2223 is based on lies, which pretend lead, a natural substance which comes from nature, to harm its natural source, the land. It is entirely IMPOSSIBLE for lead to damage/pollute the environment. Lead is entirely natural, a product of nature itself. The measure is harassment of those trying to exercise their constitutionally protected rights.

AB1934 wrongfully insinuates it to be the right of California sheriffs to say "no" to constitutionally protected rights. Sheriffs are not entitled to deny anyone's constitutional rights, and no law should be passed to make it easy or convenient for any sheriff to violate anyone's rights.

I support the death penalty for any and all politicians who attempt to interfere with anyone's rights, through attempts to pass laws against, or to weaken, anyone's rights.

To whom, in the California Republican Party, it concerns:

Heads ought to roll in California. In this year's California governor's race, there are no real Republicans in the running. There are Poizner and Whitman, who, judging from the campaign announcements on tv, are both democrats in disguise.

To sum up, the three strongest candidates at this time are three liberals:

1. Jerry Brown (who overstayed his welcome in the governor's office)
2. Meg Whitman (a democrat in disguise)
3. Steve Poizner (a democrat in disguise)

So now I ask you: "Where are the Republicans? Is there not going to be a real Republican running for governor this round?" Even Schwarzenegger is not a true Republican. Calling himself a Republican is another one of his true lies.

Judging from all this, the liberals have overthrown the state of California. There ought to be public hangings, or public guillotinings, to rectify this criminal political situation.

I aim to found a Lucifer's Party, to kick corruption out of office, nationwide. If it's going to be a one-Party nation, my Lucifer's Party MUST be the one.

Sincerely,
Satan, His Very Self
California Division of Hell, Incorporated (Yes, Hell is incorporated in the scheme of life.)

To all "officials," charged with voting on AB1810,

Although I originally used the following indented matter to decry the possible passage of AB1934, its priciples apply equally well to AB 1810. Read it.

1. The Second Amendment is an absolute right, NOT a relative right. IT'S NOT NOGOTIABLE. The passage of AB1934 would constitute the COMPLETE, ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL denial of the public's ABSOLUTE Second Amendment RIGHTS.
2. Since it is virtually impossible to get a concealed carry permit, the outlawing of open carry rounds out the UNCONSTITUTIONAL denial of the people's Second Amendment RIGHTS. By analogy, 2 - 1 - 1 = 0. How possible would it then be to exercise one's ABSOLUTE RIGHT to carry a gun, if AB1934 were to pass?
3. The Second Amendment was, and is, intended to protect the public from government, not as an "authorization" for officials to be armed.
4. In view of the immediately above, the passage of ANY anti-gun "law" can be considered prima facie evidence of the intent, on the part of the "official," who'd voted in the affirmative for an anti-gun measure, to overthrow the government of the U. S. A.
5. In view of the above, it may be considered, deemed, the crime of HIGH TREASON, under penalty of death, for an "official" to vote in the affirmative, to render ineffectual, the PUBLIC'S Second Amendment RIGHTS.
6. In view of the immediately above, it may be considered, on an individual and collective basis, genuine and legal SELF-DEFENSE, to summarily strike dead, on the spot, any such "official" who had voted in the affirmative for ANY anti-gun "law," EVER.

It's an interesting coincidence that the number of this bill is "1934." That's the year Charles Manson was born. A bill like this one tends to leave the people defenseless again such extreme crimes, and can be considered the capital offense of aiding and abetting such activities.

So, in summary, voting in the affirmative on AB1934 is a capital offense under more theories of law than one, as I have just elucidated, above. I do not claim those two theories to be the only ones making such an affirmative vote a capital offense.

Anti-gun "authority" is ILLEGITIMATE. Cease and desist from your false personation of authority.

Sincerely,
Satan, His Very Self
California Chapter of Hell

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to AB 1810 (Feuer) which would require California residents to register their shotguns and rifles in addition to their handguns, and would require law enforcement to permanently keep records of anyone who buys a gun from a dealer or an individual.

On April 13th, this bill was presented to the Public Safety Committee and unfortunately passed. The votes were as follows:

- Chair Assemblyman Tom Ammiano – AYE

- Vice-Chair Assemblyman Curt Hagman – NO

- Assemblyman Jim Beall, Jr. – NOT VOTING

- Assemblyman Danny Gilmore – NO

- Assemblyman Jerry Hill – AYE

- Assemblyman Anthony Portantino – AYE

- Assemblymember Nancy Skinner – AYE

I urge you to contact your State Assembly and Senate Representatives and urge them to OPPOSE AB 1810 if/when it reaches the floor for a vote. You can determine your representatives by going to www.asm.ca.gov and clicking on “Find My District” in the left hand column.

It is outrageous that legislation such as this is even being considered. We need to focus our efforts on strengthening the economy and creating jobs, not punishing and regulating law abiding citizens.

I would like to extend my thank you to all of you that continue to support our Constitutional right to bear arms. I will not give up the fight to protect our basic rights and I hope you will also continue this cause. Thank you.

It is an honor to serve you.

Assemblyman Curt Hagman

District 60

To all concerned "politicians":

It's about time California, and the country, had RETROACTIVE laws making it a capital offense for a politician to vote for an anti-gun law.

It's definitely NO on the rifle registration idea.
It's definitely NO to any hunting licensing requirements.

Sleep tight, all you anti gunners.

Thank you for contacting my office to express your support for AB357 which would give Californian’s a license to carry a concealed firearm without having to establish “good cause.” This law would extend the license availability to the majority of California’s law abiding citizens.

I support this bill and strongly support our Constitutional right to bear arms. As a Vice-Chairman of the Public Safety Committee, I was the only Assemblyman to support this legislation when it was presented to us last year. As AB 357 is reconsidered this session, I will urge my colleagues to send this bill to the floor so that California’s citizens can exercise their right to protect themselves and their families.

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to serve you.

Sincerely,

Assemblyman Curt Hagman
District 60

To: All California legislators:

You must support the feature of AB357, which repeals the unconstitutional provision that one must show cause to be granted a concealed carry permit. That clause is every bit as unconstitutional as a law that would only allow voting if one could show cause sufficient to be granted a voting permit.

Legislatures nationwide must stop disrespecting the people's constitutional rights. I support a law which would make it a capital offense for a legislator to propose or vote for an unconstitutional law. That would light the fire under the legislatures' asses to heed the people's constitutional rights.

Wake up now, or die for your oppression crimes.

If my German were better, I'd write this in German. Every indication marks you as anti-German; a product of the fall of WWII era Germany. Hitler was not right about everything, but neither was he all wrong. Actually, Hitler was betraying Germany from the start, secretly. Well, the German people and soldiers, and even the higher military officers were better than they've been given credit for, in the postwar years. I have to consider you to be a communist outtake from the Soviet Union, who wants nothing more than to create a one-world gloabal communism, which I stongly oppose. Suffice it to say, I shall oppose you at every turn. If you're really a scientist, you know full well that "greenhouse gases" are a myth, and so is the whole idea of "global warming" likewise a myth. Furthermore, I tentatively plan to write the official sequel to Hitler's Mein Kampf. The main difference between me and Hitler, besides age, is that he was also a traitor (yes, I'm calling you a traitor), and I'm not a traitor (to Germany). If I ever rise to the position of German Chancellor myself, a la Hitler, I think you would want to remain in hiding, as I consider you to be my, and Germany's, enemy.

Sincerely,
Steve
California, U. S. A.

ps: Don't let my Polish surname fool you.

pps: I'd really like to rule Germany, in the grand Hitler style, to thoroughly uninstall all the damage the Allied system wreaked on Germany and the rest of the world. Germany needs me, whether or not German knows it.

ppps: I'm very disappointed to learn that naturism has been discontinued in some parts of Germany. The one thing the Soviets did right was allowing naturism. Christianity leads one into Hell, not to Heaven. The prudes must be relieved of their duties, forthwith.

To each and every justice of the California Supreme Court (and whomever it may concern):

There is absolutely no excuse for declining to review the Cahill Policy decision, by the California Parks Dept., who got an appellate court to rule in their favor, UNJUSTIFIABLY. Prudery of government is 100% unconstitutional, and it's organized crime (interests of strip joints, prostitution and so on). REGULATION, by nonlegislative persons, is an unconstitutional violation of the principle of separation of powers. Everything about the overturning of the Cahill policy is dirty politics. You had better make public nudity FULLY LEGAL, in all circumstances, and for all reasons, PERIOD. You haven't heard the last of it. Prudery also is a BLATANT violation of the constitutional protection of separation of church and state. Prudery of government officials is necessarily to be interpreted as prima facie evidence of being a muslim terrorist, in a grand conspiracy to overthrow the U. S. and its freedom. Everything about the court's disregard for the true human right of public nudity is, and must be, considered an intolerable capital offense, which must be punished swiftly and surely, in the interest of preserving freedom and reason. You had better fix the faux pas, and but quick.

Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown are boneheads, who must be deposed, to spare the people from their transgressions against freedom, in this and all other matters.

Steve [some personal info deleted]
---sent list (not part of message) sent just after midnight of Oct. 23, 2009---
President pro Tem of the California Senate Darrell Steinberg
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Speaker of the U. S. House Nancy Pelosi
U. S. President Barack Obama

To Gov. Schwarzenegger,

I am very disappointed at your signing AB962, the ammo bill, into law. I even saw you lie on tv afterwards, saying that it's been demonstrated that ammo control has increased safety or reduced crime.

I intend to join the effort to repeal that bill. If it's repealed, it will reflect on your ineptitude in signing it.

The Second Amendment must be respected. AB962 is blatant disrespect for the Second Amendment. You, along with the offending legislators, have committed a crime against the rights of the people.

If I support any active efforts to maintain ineligibility of foreigners to the presidency, part of the reason would be to keep you out of the whitehouse.

California was in bad shape when you became governor. California is in horribly worse shape, now that you've served most of your combined term.

Sincerely,
Steve

From: Senator Cox
Subject: RE: AB 962 and SB 585 Gun Legislation Update
Date: Friday, September 11, 2009, 1:45 PM

After a push by the democratic leadership in the State Senate, Assembly Bill 962 and Senate Bill 585 passed yesterday afternoon with the bare-minimum 21 votes. No member of the Senate Republican Caucus voted to pass either bill. Assembly Bill 962 (De Leon), a bill relating to ammunition, is similar to Assembly Bill 2062 (2008) and Assembly Bill 362 (2007) by the same author. AB 962 passed the full Assembly on June 3 by a vote of 42-31 and was passed by the Senate on September 10 by a vote of 21 to 18. The bill will return to the Assembly for a concurrence vote. AB 962 is a far-reaching measure which implements extensive reporting and record-keeping requirements for all licensed gun dealers who sell handgun ammunition. The bill also requires handgun ammunition sales to occur in face-to-face transactions, effectively prohibiting internet sales to residents of California. The requirements listed in this measure are impractical and would do more to inconvenience lawful gun owners more than deter criminals. Prior versions of the bill outlawed the transfer of more than 50 rounds of handgun ammunition in a month; however, that provision was removed from the final version of the bill. I voted against AB 962 when it came before me. Senate Bill 585 (Leno), a bill which would prohibit firearms sales at the Cow Palace in San Francisco. The language in SB 585 is virtually identical to the final language contained in Assembly Bill 2498 (Leno) from the 2007-08 legislative session and would prohibit firearms sales at the Cow Palace in San Francisco. SB 585 is an effort to allow the City and/or County of San Francisco to discriminate against legitimate gun show participants and vendors who must comply with stringent state regulations affecting licensing, sales, background checks, liability and other provisions of state law governing gun shows, although the property in question is owned by the state, not the county. SB 585 passed from the Assembly on September 9 by a vote of 45 to 33, and passed from the Senate on September 10 by a vote of 21 to 18. I voted against this bill when it came before me. Both of these bills will likely be headed to the Governor’s desk for either his signature or veto. It is my recommendation that you contact Governor Schwarzenegger’s office to express your displeasure with these two measures. He can be reached at 916-445-2841. My commitment to protecting the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens remains strong. I continue to oppose legislation that will negatively impact gun rights in the State of California.

Sincerely,
DAVE COX
Senator, First District

Below are links to the most recent vote sheets for the respective bills:

AB 962 Senate Floor:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_vote_20090910_0500PM_sen_floor.html

AB 962 Assembly Floor:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_vote_20090603_0614PM_asm_floor.html

SB 585 Senate Floor:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0551-0600/sb_585_vote_20090910_0459PM_sen_floor.html

SB 585 Assembly Floor:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0551-0600/sb_585_vote_20090909_0809PM_asm_floor.html

Feb/06/2009 14:49
To: The California Fish and Game Commission:

No regulatory powers can be interpreted as authorizing the bypassing or voiding of the people's Constitutional rights, eg the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The idea that lead ammunition could be endangering the condor population is preposterous. I think the story that broke, a while back, claiming that a condor died from swallowing a lead bullet, probably wasn't even true. The anti-gun people would stoop to any lie, to get their way, in disrespecting the Second Amendment. Even presupposing, for the sake of argument, that one condor did die that way in such a freak occurance, the idea that the entire condor population is in mortal jeopardy from lead poisoning from bullets is ludicrous. Any politician who goes along with that lead poisoning idea ought to be made into a laughing stock of public ridicule, and booted from office as not having normal reasoning ability to comprehend simple reality. Politicians are not entitled to iron-handed power, through the effective abolition of the Second Amendment, through loopholes and dirty politics. Sen. Feinstein, perhaps accidentally, portrayed the power-grab situation well, recently, in commenting on the Blagojevich thing. She said the Illinois government should not show weakness, in a way that sounded like she favored communistic levels of iron-handed rule. All politicians in the U. S., who have their heads in the clouds, ought to be forcefully demounted from their high horses, and put in their proper place, in prison, if need be, to show them who's really the boss. Their high-and-mighty attitude isn't cutting it, big-time. Being in government, in the U. S., in not reflective of being relatively honest. If anything, it's reflective of being relatively dishonest. They know where they can stick their "superior" attitude, and that certainly goes for Feinstein, too.

In summary, as if it's not obvious by this point, I DO NOT favor a ban of lead ammunition. Even if I were to conclude there to be a better material for bullets than lead, that doesn't imply that I'd support a ban on lead bullets.

To C. Carcamo (who wrote the article about San Onofre),

I've had long experience with nude beaches, in California. Black's Beach is a good case in point. Many years ago, I met an older man at Black's, who told me that beach has been used clothing-optional since the 1940's, and he was old enough to have experience there, that long ago. The point is that naturism is a proud tradition of freedom, that neither the DPR nor anyone else has the right to undo, with prudist human rights violation agenda. Nudity is truly a human right, which no man hath the right to take away with their sneak political agenda. It's the prude who is violent, not the naturist/nudist freedom lover. San Onofre is the same basic situation. They've had a good thing, and the political criminals are always on the lookout for a way to undo any progress that has been made in the direction of freedom. If you want to be technical, all nudity bans are unconstitutional. If one takes the time and effort to examine the issue objectively, one can't help but conclude that. The Huntington Beach city council passed a municipal ordinance, using unconstitutional reasoning. They figured that the police should be given free reign to decide anything and everything, but that's an unconstitutional policy, which violates the separation of the three branches of government. Neither the police, nor anyone pretending to be them, have the right to supercede the legislative branch of government. THEY ARE NOT THE "LAW," as some have described them. They must cease and desist from acting like they are.

Steve

[To Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger,]
and to the Speaker of the U. S. House, Nancy Pelosi:
[Originally, and also, to each and every California Senate Appropriations Committee Member.]

As you perhaps remember, you've heard from me before, on Second Amendment issues. I want to first point out that my reasoning finally convinced the U. S. Supreme Court that the Second Amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right.Here's an except:

Well, first of all, I need explain to you that you are misinterpreting/ignoring the Second Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. Are you REALLY so naïve as to think that the founding fathers were considering whether or not to "allow the federal government to bear arms?" Is it not OBVIOUS that they would have been intending to allow the U. S. government to bear arms?

The point I was making, in the above excerpt, was that the Second Amendment guarantees "the right of the INDIVIDUAL to bear arms." The 2nd Amendment is an INDIVIDUAL, constitutionally protected right. So, why are some politicians continuing to intentionally weaken that right, by harassment strategies, like requiring a license to buy ammunition, and with other comparable inconveniences, through legislative bodies?

To go one step further with this reasoning, the 2nd Amendment guarantees the public's right to assassinate oppressive politicians, through their 2nd Amendment right to defend their rights, any way they may need to, including summary execution and assassination, as emergency measures, to stop the oppression. Any and all subsequent American Revolutions are a constitutionally protected right of the public, implicitly, by way of the 2nd Amendment, by ordinary reasoning and in the spirit of the founding of the U. S., in general. Politicians, at all levels within the U. S., may not act as haughty cocks of the walk, who refuse to deign to seriously consider allowing the public to exercise their rights. Basically, politicians, in the U. S., have been exercising authority that is not really theirs to exercise. As an alternative, maybe such politicians could be placed on an exercise program in prison (to burn that fat-cat excess weight off), after they're locked up for false personation/abuse of authority, or for treason.

Sincerely,

Steve

To all U. S. politicians, concerned with legislation of so-called "public health" issues:

Apparently, all politicians, in the U. S., are my own children, whom I must lead around by the ear, to point out the facts of life to them. Can't you people stick to the honest facts, and not create oppressive rules, which take away the freedoms we, the people, are supposed to be entitled to?

I've kept my silence too long, on the produce recalls, which have insinuated that people can't be allowed the concession of the real truth, regarding so-called "public safety." The finding of salmonella on an item of produce does not justify a produce recall. Period. It's really basic. You politicians are trying to take away the freedom of interpersonal relations, which man has enjoyed since prehistoric times. You're insinuating that sex, and related interpersonal contact, which include contact with germs, to be undangering public heath, and "consequently disallowed." That's utterly hypocritical of you, and you must immediately desist from making, or trying to make, normal healthy, personal-contact relationship details illegal. How people relate to each other is clearly none of your business. It is perfectly safe, and more healthy, to do all the personal attentions that lovers have done for each other, for countless thousands of years. Such details as rimming, and drinking urine, and even eating shit. That is all traditional and time-honored, within the human race, and even in the animal kingdom in general. You have no right to discontinue man's right to show affection to one another in such important, traditional and healthy ways. Politicians are obviously intending to make everything on earth illegal to the masses, while planning to sneak everything they want, behind people's backs. You are not entitled to your hypocrisy, and you are not entitled to legislate such matters, PERIOD.

Getting back to the produce recall issue, you are committing fraud, to say a recall to be warranted, because a speck of a germ were found on an item of produce. There are ALWAYS germs on everything, including produce, which it's normal practice to wash off, prior to consuming, and the fact that you are insinuating otherwise is a glaring testament to the fact that you are committing massive frauds against the public, and against human rights. You are not entitled to make health decisions for people. PERIOD. If you don't get with it, and desist from menacing the public with burdensome restrictions on lifestyle, you ought to be executed in public, to make an example out of you.

Furthermore, AIDS is an obnoxious oppressive myth, that you pseudo-heros have put on society. There is absolutely no such thing as AIDS, and anyone, including and especially you politicians, who furthers that myth, ought to be executed in public, to help set the record straight. Your lies are heinous, and I have no intention of letting you get away with "public health" m. o. bullying of the pubic.

Steve

To select members of the California Senate:

As you must know, the U. S. Supreme Court finally acknowledged the second amendment right as being for people who aren't in a militia. I suspect my reasoning in my messages helped sway that decision.

Now, I'm asking you to respect the people's second amendment right, by refraining from creating loopholes, which would sidestep the public's right to bear arms. All those measures, like microstamping and smart gun technology and sales restrictions of amunitions and guns, have all got to be abandoned. Those loopholes are attempts at curtailing the rights of the people, and must be avoided and eliminated. They are aimed at making it so inconvenient, as to effectively reduce our second amendment rights.

I hope Mayor Daley, of Chicago, has learned some respect for the second amendment, from the recent Supreme Court decision, but I don't think he respects it. Don't follow his lead. He's a poor example to follow. San Francisco must reform it's second amendment policies and laws too, to match this recent pro-gun ruling by the Supreme Court.

Sincerely,
Steve

Sent to:

Senator Tom Torlakson (Chair) Senator Dave Cox (Vice Chair) Senator Samuel Aanestad Senator Roy Ashburn Senator Ellen Corbett Senator Robert Dutton Senator Dean Florez

Senator Sheila Kuehl Senator Jenny Oropeza Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas Senator George Runner Senator Joe Simitian Senator Mark Wyland Senator Leland Yee

To the above named senators:

I recently sent a fax to members of the public safety committee, which characterized my attitude towards second amendment matters. Well, this time I'm passing it along to you, since is appears you could be about to vote on three second amendment bills: AB2062, AB2235, and AB2948. My sentiment holds about equally well for all bills related to the second amendment. The following is that fax message, which I want you to read as well.

---------------------

[Previously sent to Sen. Romero, Sen. Margett, Sen. Cedillo, Sen. Cogdill, Sen. Perata, Gov. Schwarzenegger.]

This is in regard to AB2062, which was intended to mandate the licensing of handgun ammunition. Well, first of all, I need explain to you that you are misinterpreting/ignoring the Second Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. Are you REALLY so naïve as to think that the founding fathers were considering whether or not to "allow the federal government to bear arms?" Is it not OBVIOUS that they would have been intending to allow the U. S. government to bear arms? What part of that idea is so hard to comprehend? So, you think that that Second Amendment was to "all of a sudden, out of the clear blue, allow the U. S government to bear arms?" Are you kidding? Don't you think they presumed that to be the case, without belabouring the issue. Have you ever heard of a government EVER disallowing itself to bear arms? Don't you really think that the Second Amendment was referring to the PUBLIC'S right to bear arms? Do you really think the founding fathers were second-guessing about "whether or not the U. S. government should be allowed to bear arms?" Don't you think it's rather OBVIOUS? Don't you think it was OBVIOUS to them? Do you really think that they were contemplating the possibility of the U. S. government operating unarmed? Is that really plausible to you? If so, maybe YOU ALL would disqualify for bearing arms, under the mental issues clauses.

In conclusion, you are impersonating authority, to pretend to have the authority to disregard the Second Amendment. Until and unless the Second Amendment is repealed, you ARE NOT AUTHORIZED to disrespect the public's Second Amendment rights. You ARE NOT AUTHORIZED to interfere with the Second Amendment right of the public to bear arms, by harassing them, by making it difficult for them to exercize their Second Amendment right, by requiring licensing or by taxation or other meddling. How would you like to be required to obtain an expensive license to eat dinner, one that could take up to 30 days to clear? Does that seem reasonable to you?

You must immediately CEASE AND DESIST from impersonating authority. You are not authorized to disrespect the public's right to bear arms, PERIOD! By the way, legislatures have routinely disrespected the Bill of Rights, in the U. S. In doing so, legislatures ought to be found guilty of treason, and EXECUTED accordingly. That legal issue is coming down the pike, and it could, and should, run over you like a juggernaut. You'd better shape up now, if you're to have any mitigating argument in treason proceedings. If you're such cocks of the walk, that you think you're above honoring the Bill of Rights, I've got news for you. You're lower than all members of the animal kingdom, in my book. Did you see the video of the execution of Saddam Hussein? The hangman's noose TORE his head CLEAN OFF. I assure myself, that if I'm the judge presiding over YOUR treason trials, your sentence shall be AT LEAST that horrific.

Steve

To all members of the so-called "Senate Public Safety Committee:"

This is in regard to AB2062, which was intended to mandate the licensing of handgun ammunition. Well, first of all, I need explain to you that you are misinterpreting/ignoring the Second Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. Are you REALLY so naïve as to think that the founding fathers were considering whether or not to "allow the federal government to bear arms?" Is it not OBVIOUS that they would have been intending to allow the U. S. government to bear arms? What part of that idea is so hard to comprehend? So, you think that that Second Amendment was to "all of a sudden, out of the clear blue, allow the U. S government to bear arms?" Are you kidding? Don't you think they presumed that to be the case, without belabouring the issue. Have you ever heard of a government EVER disallowing itself to bear arms? Don't you really think that the Second Amendment was referring to the PUBLIC'S right to bear arms? Do you really think the founding fathers were second-guessing about "whether or not the U. S. government should be allowed to bear arms?" Don't you think it's rather OBVIOUS? Don't you think it was OBVIOUS to them? Do you really think that they were contemplating the possibility of the U. S. government operating unarmed? Is that really plausible to you? If so, maybe YOU ALL would disqualify for bearing arms, under the mental issues clauses.

In conclusion, you are impersonating authority, to pretend to have the authority to disregard the Second Amendment. Until and unless the Second Amendment is repealed, you ARE NOT AUTHORIZED to disrespect the public's Second Amendment rights. You ARE NOT AUTHORIZED to interfere with the Second Amendment right of the public to bear arms, by harassing them, by making it difficult for them to exercize their Second Amendment right, by requiring licensing or by taxation or other meddling. How would you like to be required to obtain an expensive license to eat dinner, one that could take up to 30 days to clear? Does that seem reasonable to you?

You must immediately CEASE AND DESIST from impersonating authority. You are not authorized to disrespect the public's right to bear arms, PERIOD! By the way, legislatures have routinely disrespected the Bill of Rights, in the U. S. In doing so, legislatures ought to be found guilty of treason, and EXECUTED accordingly. That legal issue is coming down the pike, and it could, and should, run over you like a juggernaut. You'd better shape up now, if you're to have any mitigating argument in treason proceedings. If you're such cocks of the walk, that you think you're above honoring the Bill of Rights, I've got news for you. You're lower than all members of the animal kingdom, in my book. Did you see the video of the execution of Saddam Hussein? The hangman's noose TORE his head CLEAN OFF. I assure myself, that if I'm the judge presiding over YOUR treason trials, your sentence shall be AT LEAST that horrific.

Steve Malinowski
Fullerton, CA 92832-3112

To Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne:

I'm glad to hear that you are in favor of the right to carry, in national parks. I'm hoping you'll maintain that stance, and not cave in to pressure from anti-gun advocates, who've been going wild for years. Government officials must DEFEND our Bill of Rights, not erode it. Thanks.

Steve

To committee members assigned to AB2948:

It has come to my attention that you are again considering AB2948, which is a bill to ban the sale of firearms and ammunition at the Cow Palace. It is clear that this bill is another harassment measure, intended to chip away at the U. S. 2nd amendment. Although I'm not personally familiar with the Cow Palace, in general, gun shows must be allowed, and must be allowed to sell both firearms and ammunition. Please retire this needless bill, and thereby let gun owners relax in the knowledge that the 2nd amendment has again been upheld against anti-gun interests.

Sincerely,
Steve Malinowski

recipient list:

Assembly Member Fiona Ma (D-12) Fax: 1 916 319 2112
Assembly Member Jose Solorio (D-69), Fax: 1 916 319 2169
Assemblyman Ted Lieu (D-53) Fax: 1 916 319 2153
Assembly Member Mike Davis (D-48) Fax: 1 916 319 2148
Assembly Member Paul Krekorian (D-43) Fax: 1 916 319 2143
Assembly Member Mark Leno, Fax 1 916 319 2113
Assembly Member Anna M. Caballero, Fax: 1 916 319 2128
Assemblyman Mark DeSaulnier, Fax: 1 916 319 2111
Assembly Member Warren T. Furutani, Fax: 1 916 319 2155
Assemblyman Jared Huffman, Fax: 1 916 319 2106
Assembly Member Pedro Nava, Fax: 1 916 319 2135
Assemblywoman Mimi Walters, 1 916 319 2173
Assembly Member Bill Emmerson, 1 916 319 2163
Assemblyman Doug La Malfa, 1 916 319 2102
Assembly Member Alan Nakanishi, 1 916 319 2110 Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, Fax: 1 916 319 2136
[Assembly Member Betty Karnette, not contacted due to absence of fax number or email address.]

To: Senator Debbie DeFrancesco Halvorson (D), 40th District, Senate Majority Leader, fax: 1 708 756 0885:

HB5191, which has now moved on to your committee, appears to be another lame anti-second-amendment harassment measure. The legislators should and must desist from using a loophole, namely their government position, to nix our second amendment rights. This bill must be defeated, in respect of the second amendment of the U. S.

Steve

To Gov. Napolitano:

I was thinking of moving to Arizona. Now, if I do, I'll have at least three reasons to NOT EVER vote for you for any office, whatsoever:

1. You're a democrat
2. You're anti-second-amendment
3. You vetoed, recently, an important gun rights bill.

Sincerely,

Steve
ps: I'm convinced that women are some of the worst politicians of all time. I'm now over half convinced that women shouldn't even have been given the right to vote, let alone be an official.

It is important to allow OHV use in national parks and forests.

1. It allows access to experience those public lands in person
2. It allows exercise of the second amendment right, in allowing freedom to retrieve game

Without the right to enter such land by OHV, it is effectively the barring of access, since hiking isn't a realistic option for many people. Dirt road access by 4-wheel-drive vehicles should be univerally allowed also. The "environment" cause is mostly a special interest ruse, which has been used to keep the public off public lands. Use of public land should really be allowed to the public.

Steve

We must not lose our second amendment rights on BLM lands. Second amendment rights should be honored at ALL national parks and forests, as well as ALL BLM lands. I'm in particular and especially referring to the Caliente Resource Management Plan (RMP), which is up for possible revision. Our second amendment rights must stay put, in any readoption or revision of this plan.

Steve

[also sent to V. P. Dick Cheney 1-202-456-2461]
Dear House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, [1 202 225 8259]

I've long known how abusive the corrections system is, in the U. S. Sweeping reform is needed to make the jails and prisons more humane and adherent to civil and human rights of all inmates.

I Urge You to Support H.R. 4109, the Prison Abuse Remedies Act of 2007.

I am writing to urge you to support and co-sponsor H.R. 4109, the Prison Abuse Remedies Act of 2007. This important and timely bill would extend the rule of law to our nation's prisons and jails by making some much needed reforms to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), while maintaining the law's stated purpose.

The PLRA was originally enacted in 1996 to reduce the number of "frivolous" lawsuits being filed by prisoners. Since that time, the law has prevented many seemingly meritorious claims involving violations of religious freedom, due process, free speech, and other fundamental constitutional rights, as well as cases of physical and sexual abuse from ever being given a fair hearing in court.

Two provisions of the PLRA that have proven particularly problematic warrant fixing. First, the law's exhaustion of administrative remedies provision requires prisoners to exhaust their facilities' grievance process no matter how legitimate the reasons for failing to follow the procedures might be. Prison and jail grievance systems have created a baffling maze in which a barely literate, mentally ill, physically incapacitated, or juvenile prisoner's procedural misstep in a facility's informal grievance system forever bars even the most meritorious constitutional claims. Moreover, grievance deadlines are often a matter of just a few days, with no exceptions for prisoners who are ill, hospitalized, traumatized or otherwise incapacitated. As a result, serious prison abuses frequently go unheard and unaddressed.

In addition to the problems stemming from the exhaustion provision, the PLRA's "physical injury" requirement has proven to be especially cruel in its application. Under the law, prisoners can be raped and sexually assaulted and not have access to the range of remedies available to most civil rights plaintiffs because some courts have found that they did not suffer actual physical injuries. Other forms of cruel and unusual punishment, such as grossly unsanitary conditions and cavalier disregard of prisoners' medical needs also have been found to not meet the physical injury requirement. However, a violation of a constitutional right or an attack on human dignity does not necessarily entail physical injury.

Over the last twelve years it has become clear that the PLRA is a deeply flawed law that denies incarcerated adults and youth meaningful access to the courts. It is now time for Congress to reevaluate the PLRA and repair its flawed application . As time goes on and serious rights abuses mount and go unheard, the need to fix the PLRA becomes even more urgent. H.R. 4109, the Prison Abuse Remedies Act of 2007 addresses the law's many unintended consequences, while maintaining its original intent. This legislation is desperately needed and deserves your full support. Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this important issue.

Feel free to pass a copy of this to Pres. George W. Bush, and members of the House and Senate.

Sincerely,

Steven A. Malinowski aka Steve Bray

To:
State Assembly Member Jose Solorio (D-69), Chair Fax: 1 916 319 2169
State Assembly Member Greg Aghazarian, (R-26), Vice Chair Fax: 1 916 319 2126
State Assembly Member Joel Anderson (R-77) Fax: 1 916 319 2177
State Assembly Member Hector De La Torre (D-50) Fax: 1 916 319 2150
State Assembly Member Fiona Ma (D-12) Fax: 1 916 319 2112
State Assembly Member Anthony J. Portantino (D-44) Fax: 1 916 319 2144

The "Smart" Gun Bill, Assembly Bill 2235, is another attempt to dishonor the U. S. second amendment, by creating a loophole to effectively ban the common people from utilizing their civil right to bear arms. To put this into perspective, one should picture the idea of a law being passed to allow only firearms that are built with a barrel pointing forward, and a barrel pointing backward, and mandated and built to be fired ONLY in both directions at the same time. Well, that in effect is what restrictions on the second amendment are comparable to. To have the right to use a gun, the legislators have been trying to build in "shoot yourself" technology, so that there is no realistic opportunity for use of a gun. This has the effect of 18th century England banning guns, so that freedom cannot be had in America. Fortunately, that didn't happen, so the current situation is far worse, because the U. S. government has never respected civil liberties of any kind whatsoever. Now the people are completely barred from doing anything about the utter tyranny that has been passing itself off as government in the U. S. It is utterly not a reasonable conclusion that ANYONE in government in the U. S. is more honest that anyone picked at random on the street. The job of government official tends to be sought primarily by those utterly selfish people who insist on bullying everyone within their jurisdiction. In reality, those in government in the U. S., and especially the so-called police, are definitely less honorable and less honest than the average citizen of the U. S. The legislators, at all levels of government in the U. S., must desist from maximizing their stranglehold on the people, and stop disrespecting people's second amendment rights. Legislators may not use their office to maximize their power and wealth and advantages to the detriment of the people. Government offices in the U. S. are NOT for the benefit of the officeholder, but for the benefit of the people. Stop implementing piracy against the people. Stop restricting the U. S. second amendment.

Steve

To:
California Assemblyman Ted Lieu (D-53) Chair Fax: 1 916 319 2153
California Assembly Member Sam Blakeslee (R-33) Vice Chair Fax: 1 916 319 2133
California Assembly Member Anthony Adams (R-59) Fax: 1 916 319 2159
California Assembly Member John J. Benoit (R-64) Fax: 1 916 319 2164
California Assembly Member Wilmer Amina Carter (D-62) Fax: 1 916 319 2162
California Assembly Member Mike Davis (D-48) Fax: 1 916 319 2148
California Assembly Member Felipe Fuentes (D-39) Fax: 1 916 319 2139
California Assembly Member Paul Krekorian (D-43) Fax: 1 916 319 2143
California Assembly Member Tony Mendoza (D-56) Fax: 1 916 319 2156
California Assembly Member Loni Hancock (D-14) Fax: 1 916 319 2114
California Assembly Member Todd Spitzer (R-71) Fax: 1 916 319 2171
California Senator Don Perata President Pro Tempore Fax: 1 916 327 1997
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Fax: 1 916 558 3160
California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi  Fax: 1 916 323 4998

The legislative process in the U. S., on all levels, is out of control. The legislative officials are blatantly ignoring the U. S. Bill of Rights, and in this particular message, I mean in particular the Second Amendment. It seems many of the legislators need to be led around by the ear, and have civil liberty guarantees continually pointed out to them, because they do not take the initiative to observe peoples rights. A legislator has violated your rules, by illegally reintroducing approximately the same anti-gun legislation within the same legislative period. It seems many legislators are pulling out all the stops to illegally canceling our national Second Amendment. The microstamp technology constitutes harassment, as a loophole to disrespect the Second Amendment. Micorstamping of cartriges is wrong, and must be defeated at all levels of government. Similarly, local government must not be allowed to decide constitutional issues, either Second Amendment or other matters. I cite as one reason, that local government does not tend to lure people into its ranks that are more honest than anyone else. Furthermore, local government does not deserve to preempt competition, by monopolizing fire power for themselves only. If England had made personal firepower illegal, the American Revolution could never have happened, and the U. S. would still be under British rule. The concept of freedom is for people to be free to defend their own rights, not for government to be free to wield all power preemptively and absolutely, with no recourse for people to demand what they really want. I bet that if a law were passed, which sentenced a legislator to death by torture in a public square, if he were to propose unconstitutional bills, or try to put such up for a vote of the legislature, the legislators would be a far sight more careful about what they tried to force on the people as law. Is this what it takes to stimulate legislators into full respect of the Bill of Rights? I wouldn't stop short of that measure, and I'm not sure most people would either. Sleep on that one, if you can. You want to play tough? I've got tough; tough shit. And I mean it. Any government official who disrespects people's rights is attempting to overthrow what's good about the U. S. ideal, and is thusly guilty of national treason, and therefore deserves to be put to death. The legislators and other officials have to get it through their thick heads that disrespecting the Bill of Rights is not an option, that disrespecting the Bill of Rights is a high crime, that disrespecting the Bill of Rights is treason. End of discussion.

Steve

To:
State Assembly Member Jose Solorio (D-69), Chair
State Assembly Member Greg Aghazarian, (R-26), Vice Chair
State Assembly Member Joel Anderson (R-77)
State Assembly Member Hector De La Torre (D-50)
State Assembly Member Fiona Ma (D-12)
State Assembly Member Anthony J. Portantino (D-44)

---

DON'T PASS AB2062 (about registration of hand gun ammunition).

The Second Amendment to the U. S. Constitution mentions "militia," but it was likening the public to militia (PUBLIC = MILITIA). It's the idea that a militia should be armed, and THE PEOPLE ARE THE MILITIA, IN THE U. S. The people have the undeniable right to bear loaded arms, without restriction. Measures against the 2nd Amendment increase crime, and are also unconstitutional. People should not be harassed when trying to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms. The democrats are betraying the people, in denying the right of the people to bear arms AND AMMUNITION.

ps: I appear to be the only one to accurately interpret the wording of the 2nd Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

I think you were the one who posted the video about the New World Order, many months ago. Well, I just happened upon a website that mentions that, as well as a federal department or agency called Northern Command, which it claims is set up to integrate all of North America as one military state, outside of constitutional constraints. Here's the link to that website:
"federal" Northern Command

Steve

To Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger:

On tv, just now, it sounded like you're trying to get a bill passed to forbid violence in video games. The idea is outrageous. If you're here to take away freedoms from the people, why don't you go back to Europe, and leave us here alone. Freedom is not what's wrong in this country. As a matter of fact, the people here have never lived freedom before, because the politicians act like they're in the business of oppressing. Every law passed in unconstitutional, by reason of violating the federal Bill of Rights. I've had it up to my neck with politicians legislating their lies, by taking away freedoms.

All politicians must be held accountable. All of them that favor taking away any freedom, by passing laws, should be executed with the same guillotine that was used to chop off heads in France, during the French Revolution. It's not open to discussion. You oppress, you die. Period.

This idea of freedom through government is that of protecting the people from government itself, not from other people. Government so-called protecting the people from other people is a farce, and it's OPPPRESSION.

Physical sciences are religion. There is no such thing as "hard science." Government must be prevented from operating the religion called science, as the official religion.

Steve

Don't let H. R. Clinton throw away your personal freedoms, by making you sign contracts of insurance. Any politician who tries to coerce the public, or anyone, into signing a contract, is a criminal, who must be stopped. An insurance policy puts one in a conflict of interest with the insurer, and possibly with others, like the medical people. What you'd have with mandated health insurance is a hospital for a government, where the medical people manage your every daily matter, without your being able to stop them. Don't let this happen in the U. S. Help me put an end to her oppressive plan now, before it's too late. If mandated health insurance passes, you've lost your last bit of freedom in this country. This is NOT a trivial matter. It's life-and-death.

Dear Rudy,

I was originally for Hillary, however embarrassing that may be now. I should have checked out her platform in advance. I've got two disagreements with her:

1. Insurance should never be mandated (It's coercion into signing a contract. No matter how many choices there are for insurance, mandating insurance still constitutes coercion to sign a contract. The mandate on auto insurance must also be abolished, for that reason and also because it is otherwise unfair.)

2. I don't want Bill Clinton back in the whitehouse, even as Vice President.

Here are more reasons:

3. The democrats are ferociously proferring global warming propaganda, with pseudo-facts and pseudo-science. They are trying to pseudo-justify taking away the right to personal transportation. Don't let them. Stand up for our rights.

4. The democrats are proponents of gun control. They are disrespecting our second amendment, which the Supreme Court blatantly misinterpreted.

5. The minorities have taken over our country with dishonest employment discrimination. It is the whites who have been viciously discriminated against.

I feel like I should be running for president, because the government, so far, has not been honoring the Bill of Rights.

Steve

To Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger:

I just sent this fax to Sen. H. R. Clinton. This message applies equally to all politicians in the U. S. Here is the fax I just sent:

------------------
------------------

To Sen. H. R. Clinton:

I just sent the following bulletin to hundreds of friends:

---------------------

All mandatory insurance is government-sponsored COERCION into signing contracts. Don't fall for their tricks. It is unconstitutional. They have no right to COERCE anyone to do anything. Force Hillary to stop the COERCION platform of her campaign. She must do better than that, or she shouldn't be in office, PERIOD !!!

Help me say NO to mandatory health insurance.

Help me say NO to mandatory auto insurance (They've already been getting away with it for a long time.)

Steve

---------------------

The Democrats must stop using lies and coercion to get their dishonest way with things. It's like the Democrat politicians are bullying the people into voting Republican, to avoid the curses Democrat politicians deliver when in office. Maybe people are too stupid to realize that they don't need to be dictated to by medical people or insurance people. Maybe people are too stupid to realize that they don't need to be coerced into signing contracts, and being made to fork over money.

The mandating of insurance is PIRACY, and piracy is STILL a capital offense, by rights. You all, PUT DOWN YOUR SWORDS OR DIE, right now !!! This is no joke, and you're not going to get away with it, I certify it.

Steve
Fullerton

------------------
------------------

Get busy. If you snooze, you loose.

Steve

Sent to (so far): Gov. Schwarzenegger (CA), Sen. H. R. Clinton (NY)

Dear Rep. Pelosi,

After the way the politicians effectively canceled my ability to live, by mandating auto insurance years ago, I can't tolerate another kind of mandated insurance, namely health insurance. What I mean to say is that I can't support Hillary for president, unless she drops the mandating-of-insurance cause. That system is piracy, and unconstitutional, in more ways than one. I hate to say it, but the sciences, including and especially medical science, are religion. The U. S. is effectively the church state of the religion of science. The U. S. is NOT separation of church and state. The U. S. IS, in effect, a branch of the religion that science is. I know it is dangerous to say so, because it is dangerous to criticize the official philosophies of the U. S. The politicians are enforcing their ideas, not merely allowing them. The U. S. is the very violent implementation and enforcement of the religion of science.

Sincerely,
Steve

Who to (so far): Sen. H. R. Clinton (fax)

To V. P. Dick Cheney (email):

I just sent an angry fax to Sen. H. R. Clinton, of New York. It is about the mandating of insurance. The following is what I faxed to her:

To Sen. H. R. Clinton:

It's an emergency to convince you that mandating insurance is a violation of the Bill of Rights. Insurance shouldn't even be allowed, let alone mandated. Insurance is like one of the roots of all evil. The interests of insurance companies should not be dictating, to anyone, what's a law and what isn't. The same goes for the medical industry. The politics of the medical practitioners should NOT be determining what is a law and what isn't. Medical practitioners are violent criminal goons. When are you going to stop legitimizing them? They must be forcefully retired, the hard way, if need be. The medical industry shouldn't even be allowed, let alone mandated. You must get off of your high horse attitude of thinking you can force anyone, let alone everyone, to pay for anyone else's imagined financial security. Government is NOT a right. Government is still very much an oppression crime, more than ever, especially considering the whimsical mandate-anything attitude of current U. S style government. You may not mandate anything to anyone. When is the politician going to get that simple FACT through his thick skull? You may NOT mandate auto insurance either. Government has been violating people's civil liberties by its excercise of bogus authority to mandate ANY kind of insurance, period.

Furthermore, those so-called "scientists," who cite so-called "scientific facts" to support the erroneous idea that CO2 causes global warming, need to be sent to their final resting place in a box, if they won't stop their political crime. They are lying their heads completely off. CO2 is NOT capable of causing global warming. PERIOD. Get that through your thick heads!!!

You illegitimate swine, who are parading around as government officials, are doing everything you can to keep the poor people from being able to have personal transportation. You are not entitled to pull that crime on people. You are NOT entitled to lie about anything, in order to pseudo-justify oppressive laws. You are not entitled to insinuate that the public cannot be allowed to have personal transportation, because it gets in the way of emergency vehicles, or because it so-called "causes global warming." Emergency vehicles all have to be retired, because they are a violation of the people's civil liberties, a violation of the Bill of Rights, because they are FORCING their "services" on people. They are forcing their "services" on people by pretending those "services" to be services, rather than the crimes they are. YOU MAY NOT CLEAR THE ROADS OF PERSONAL TRANSPORTATION TO MAKE ROOM FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES!!! It's real goddamn simple. You either get that, and get it NOW, or you ought to be retired in a box, to make an example out of you and your COHORTS!!! If you have to have your disrespectful, oversized smart mouths shut completely up the hard way, so be it!!! YOU HAVEN'T GOT IT, BIG-TIME!!! Go the fuck home and shut that mouth the fuck up!

THE BILL OF RIGHTS IS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM THE GOVERNMENT, THIS GOVERNMENT, NOT FROM OTHER PEOPLE OR OTHER GOVERNEMENTS. When are you politicians going to stop lying about it? YOU MAY NOT MISINTERPRET THIS FACT, AS I'VE DESCRIBED IT!!!

You political criminals have destroyed my ability to live for decades, with the mandate of auto insurance. YOU HAD NO RIGHT TO DO THAT!!! You had better be planning to cancel the auto insurance mandate. I don't have to forgive you for committing that oppression crime against me. The same guillotine ought to be pulled out of retirement, to chop the disrespectful heads off of the smartass politicians who participated in the mandating of auto insurance. You won't get out of the guillotine appointment, if I have anything to say about it, I GUARANTEE IT!!! I'm middle-aged, and I've yet to be able to even START living. I have no intention of forgiving you, or any of your insurance-mandate oppression criminal cohorts. I have no intention of forgiving the politicians' disrespect for MY right to live a personally meaningful life, MY OWN WAY. You have no right to force your politics on me. I don't want your obnoxious oppression.

Steve

Unless Sen. Hillary Clinton stops supporting mandatory insurance, I feel compelled to withdraw my support for her bid for the white house. There is no excuse for mandating financial or any support for that violent fraud crime syndicate euphemistically known as medical staff. The same goes for insurance staff; they are not entitled to make anyone buy into their financial success. Those in those two areas of work are not rightfully entitled to make anyone guarantee their financial success. End of discussion.

Help me battlle those biting dinosaurs, so to speak, trying to make everyone buy them insurance. Mandating insurance is piracy, plain and simple. The politicians ought to be sent to prison or executed for legislating piracy. Let's stop them, ASAP.

The above blog entry was made on September 17, 2007.

I've been busy with various human rights causes. Government in the U. S. functions solely to undo the bill of rights, by being devoted only to that end. Every law passed is a weakening of the bill of rights. It's government that is the real public enemy number one, in the U. S. and elsewhere. It's a big job trying to keep the politician from undoing the bill of rights. The bill of rights should be considered the only valid portion of the U. S. constitution. The rest is relative hogwash. It's freedom from government that people need. Meddling obviously is not needed. Why would anyone want to be forced into any financial or other burden. Those who think they need obligations and burdens are seriously mistaken.

The above blog entry was made on August 29, 2007.

The prude law advocacy creeps got another prude law passed in Huntington Beach. That proposed city ordinance against public nudity was passed on Monday, the 6th. All prude laws are piracy and anti-human rights violations, and a deprivation of rightful civil liberties.

The above blog entry was made on August 7, 2007.

Possibly irreparable damage against the interest of maintaining personal liberties in this country has occurred during the Bush administration. The U. S. government has broken all previous records for being the most utterly oppressive system on earth. More law equates to more oppression. Let that sink in, and spare us from your psychiatric ward custodian attitude. Government is only freedom to the extent that it protects people from itself. Government so-called protecting people from people is oppression. If this is what the U. S. is putting into Iraq, to replace Sadam's regime, maybe they are better off without U. S. intervention.

The above blog entry was made on August 1, 2007.

I just read an early U. S. propaganda message, about the so-called justification of government. Here's my response:

That's sheer hypocritcal propaganda. Government is not protection; it is organized crime. Anyone who defends and strengthens governmental power is himself guilty of that particular system of organized crime against human rights. The U. S., in practice, is utterly the opposite of a real protector of human rights. They've been constantly accelerating the rate of the disappearance of human rights by enacting laws, which are clearly oppression. When are people going to wake up, and stop blaming anarchy? No one alive today has ever experienced anarchy, so they can't talk from experience of evils it doesn't even possess. LAW is the annihilation of human rights, not the protector of human rights. You have oppression in the amount you have law. You have human rights in the amount you have anarchy. Period. The world did perfectly fine for millions of years without government. Then came government, and now everyone in the world is at each others throats, and destroying the quality of life on earth. The world can't continue this way. The bozos calling themselves government have to be fired, the hard way if necessary, so that man can once again regain his dignity of self-determinism. Government is not protection. Government is the very principle, mechanism and act of crime itself. Don't be guilty of the crime of government. Earn your right to self-determinism by firing the politician. ONLY anarchy is humman rights. ONLY. The politician's neck belongs on the chopping block.

Even the legend of Santa Claus is more credible than the so-called need for, or so-called justification of, government. As an adult, you'd be embarrassed to profess a belief in Santa Claus, so why aren't you embarrassed to profess a belief in the so-called need for government. Grow up, world. I'm your grade school teacher of social science, and you're still trying to pass this class. No one gets out of this class until a passing grade is achieved. No one.

The above blog entry was made on July 31, 2007.

Now, for the Los Angeles, channel 13, 11:00pm news email question of the night (07-18-07): Should automakers supply GPS info, to help catch fugitives, or should they stay out of it? They didn't read my email response on the air. They've never read my particularly revolutionary comments on the air, I suppose because they'd be trying to keep their bozo pseudo-do-good points, which they are not truly earning, by their reluctance to report honestly accurate points of view. Here's the response I sent in:

THEY SHOULD STAY OUT OF IT, ABSOLUTELY, BY ALL MEANS !!! The system spawns all trouble and crime on earth. If it weren't for government, there wouldn't be crime as we know it, or as we envision it. Industry must not betray the consumer, and they must not be called upon to betray the consumer. PERIOD !!!
 
Steve

Did I state this forcefully enough, or should I have said what I wished I could say? See, keep this in mind: Government is the main crime on earth. Every other so-called crime is just someone minding his own business, trying to get by, by comparison. This reminds me of the Gadsden flag, of early New England history. Here it is:

This also reminds me of the comments, in recent times, by those of the Los Angeles so-called police department, with regard to hidden cameras, to the effect that, "if you didn't do anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about." Well, that is sheer rubbish, as there is no such thing as honesty; human nature doesn't contain that property. So, what we've got, parading around as authority, are incredibly violent gangsters, who ought to be stripped of their power through execution. Nothing less could possibly suffice. I don't care who in the hell they think they are, they haven't got it. All government people are false personators of authority. They should all be axed. There is no excuse for their parading around, pretending to have character superior to anyone else's character. They are all utter frauds. They have earned no mercy, and should be shown no mercy. So, what answer should one have for those who uttered the above crime against reason, about not having anything to worry about? Well, action speaks louder than words. If they want to talk like they don't know, it's kind of tough shit. They shouldn't be spared. They are the violators against reason and against man. They deserve no answer in words. The only answer they should have coming is execution for crimes against freedom and against reason. They are not the good guys, clearly. They are not entitled to circumvent real freedom, by calling it, or implying it, to be a safety violation. They ought to have their utterly criminal, disrespectful asses kicked, thoroughly. I've said this many times: They are all false personators of authority; all authority is bogus. By rights, they shouldn't survive their punishment. Piracy can still be considered a capital offense, and they are all pirates. Does that explain it any better? Their uniforms are, in effect, a wearable version of the Jolly Roger pirates' flag. The squad car is the same, as far as being a symbol of piracy. The other members of government ought to be executed alongside of them, for legitimizing them. That's complicity in that piracy crime. Either you're for real freedom, or you die. It couldn't be any simpler. It's beyond the imaginings, of the typical person, how criminal so-called government really is. The typical life-term prison inmate is far more honest than the typical government person. Why would you want to put such inhuman living shit in uniform, to lay down the law for the rest of us?

The above blog entry was made on July 19, 2007.

The prude law gang attacked again, this time in Huntington Beach. They just created a city ordinance, to make public nudity illegal in Huntington Beach. May Satan have severe punishments for all who participated in the creation of that ordinance. They should burn in hell, for going backwards. Law is not a human right; it's oppression. They are guilty of capital oppression. May Satan not spare them any suffering in hell, for they have earned no mercy.

The following message is in response to a query bulletin from someone, which stated just, "Hey, talk.":

I'd love to. So, you're militant about drugs? Know what I'm militant about? Prude-law advocacy. As a case in point, the prude gangsters just made public nudity illegal in Huntington Beach. Did you see that story on the tv news the last couple of days? They were really misreporting the quality of the so-called law-enforcement, by making it seem like the so-called police were observing the letter of the law, which of course is shear bullshit. The so-called police have always been violent enforcers of that prudishness, even without a law. As the official Satan, I have officially sentenced all those responsible for the passing of that so-called law to eternity in the bad version of Hell. They get no mercy from me.

So, now you'd probably tell me you're glad they passed that so-called law. What do you say?

Steve
ps: I really am officially, genuinely Satan; the Satan. I take my bow.

They can go to hell, pun (as in punishment) intended.

The above blog entry was made on July 17, 2007.

What is mandatory insurance? It's a front and m. o. for armed robbery under color of office. Actually, it can tend to be as bad as mass murder under color of office, because it adversely affects some people that way. First there was mandatory auto insurance. It's still true that those who pioneered mandatory auto insurance ought to be executed, because they have destroyed the lives of some. I'm one whose life they have destroyed with that unbearable financial hardship. They are not entitled to cite mass transit as an excuse. Any politician who says mass transit is an excuse for mandatory auto insurance ought to be stripped of their right to drive for the remainder of his live. If it's so damn good, use it yourself, EXCLUSIVELY. They used to hang horse thieves. Why not hang advocates of mandatory auto insurance? It's basically the same crime, in effect. Now, they are trying to stuff mandatory health insurance down the throats of the public. When are they going to learn that government is organized crime, not a human right. They are using the false reasoning that just because some people want to force something on those who don't want it, that it's their right. What does popularity have to do with fairness? One is forced to believe that the politician is literally insane, and that they must be kept from making decisions for the rest of us. Democracy is NOT freedom any more than any other form of government. The U. S. has to stop bullying the world with it's false premise of superior character and authority. The U. S. is the implementation of the "biggest gang wins" idea, which is definitely a crime against the world. Popularity is NOT freedom. Popularity is NOT fairness. If the politician does not comprehend that, he ought to be executed, because he isn't sophisticated enough to be consided human, and he's been mass-murdering those who were sophisticated enough to comprehend that truth. But, of course, this still gets back to the issue that no form of government is fairness or freedom. Here are the three f's: Fairness, freedom, and farce. They are all farce, as far as government is concerned. Fairness and freedom don't take the form of government, so they are also farce. Here's the corrected list of what government is: Farce, farce and farce. People need anarchy. Anarchy is not to blame for evil. No one alive today has lived through anarchy, to be able to talk from experience about what anarchy is like. Why do some tout government? Because they are extremely violent mass-scale criminals who what to perpetrate the crime of government FOR THEMSELVES (the big kickback system idea). It's real simple. That's it. Sure, there are some who would abuse anarchy, but they are the same ones who would tout government, and want to convince people of the so-called need for government.

Additionally, the so-called medical profession is the classic crazy weirdo crime against the public, that it was once thought to be. The medical profession is an oppression branch of government. Government is not entitled to it. The medical profession doesn't even allow the freedom to think, let alone the freedom to decide anything for oneself. The medical profession manufactures myths of diseases, in order to force themselves on people. The medical profession ought to be recognized as the crime it is, and not legitimized by government. If anything on earth ought to be disallowed, it ought to be the medical profession that's disallowed. The medical profession is mega-crime. The medical profession is not entitled to force the public to fund them, willy-nilly.

Now, as far as Tom Cruise goes, it serves him right that he's debarred from acting in Germany. I believe Germany psychically tuned into my thoughts on this one, and took heed of my opinion on this. I'm glad. If Tom Cruise wants to participate in the oppression crimes of Scientology, which is a world oppression organization (which I believe has been oppressing me, personally), then that's what he gets. I wish I had a way to stop Scientology from adversely affecting me. Religions are not innocent bystanders. Religions tend to be unmerciful perpetrators of the crime of oppression. Scientology has a political agenda. I want to stop them.

The above blog entry was made on July 2, 2007.

I wrote the following, and faxed it to V. P. Cheney on June 22, 2007:

The criminal attitude of modern government has got to stop. Global warming is a fraud. GREENHOUSE GASES DO NOT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING!!! Greenhouse gases cause global cooling. The politician is not entitled to pseudo-justify oppressive laws, to deprive people of their rights to do for themselves, by using pseudo-science. The proposed refrigerant ban in California is yet another case in point. The detail that scientists and politicians are misinterpreting, on purpose, is the fact that the blocking of radiant energy is in two directions, not just in one direction. The more significant direction of blocking action, of greenhouse gases, is in the cooling direction, not the warming direction. PERIOD. This must sink in to those thick, profoundly stupid heads, or they ought to have their criminal heads cut off. Believe it or not, this is important. Al Gore ought to be executed for his disrespectful, international fraud crime against the world.

The related frauds are manifold. The scientists are pretending a level of accuracy of so-called measurements, from space, that they are not capable of. They are outright lying. They are pretending to be able to measure the thickness of the ice of Greenland from space, and hence the diminution of that ice. They say they can do that by using light beams, in a fashion similar to radar, between space satellites, to detect microscopically small variations in distance between those satellites in relation to each other. They claim to be able to measure the thickness of Greenland ice masses from that. It is false. They are lying. I am enough of an expert in science to know that they are lying their heads off. Their frauds against civil liberties have got to come to a grinding halt, but now! I mean now! The so-called measurements of that ice, from a century or more ago, weren't accurate to begin with. Now they are using those so-called measurements to further fake the whole global warming idea. If global warming is happening, it has nothing to do with greenhouse gases. The more likely cause would be the ice-age cycle, which has a period of approximately 100,000 years. We are still in the warming phase of that ice-age cycle. The politician and the scientist do not have the right to ignore that fact. Additionally, it is likely that the so-called temperature measurements, at various locations around the world, are being lied about, to further the whole global warming fraud.

One of their main motivations for that fraud system is to ban the poorer people from driving. That is clearly not right. If they want to reduce traffic congestion, why don't they give up driving only themselves, and stop taking away the rights of the poor. They are not entitled to saddle the poor with such grinding oppression. It's bad enough that the politician is causing the poor to be poor to begin with. It is even worse that the politician is insisting on taking away more and more rights from the poor, through elaborate frauds like that.

If I ever become world Stalin, I guarantee they are going to have to hide, because I'd execute those patently disrespectful oppression criminals, in the street, to make an example out of them, like Stalin did, to those he opposed in Russia. I know what Stalin was so forcefully opposed to. I'm every bit that opposed to the very same thing, as well. Those fraud criminals are not honest enough to be government. Their crime is a capital offense. Period. I've been deprived of my rights to live, all of my life, by personators of government, who have effectively and sytematically kept me from even having my own home, and have kept me from making a living. Their execution would HURT. I gurantee it.

The above blog entry was made on June 24, 2007.

Enter your search terms Submit search form   Web stevenbray.com manson.stevenbray.com