Self-defense is a God-given and inalienable right protected in our U.S. Constitution. Yet, if you are under eighteen, our federal laws keep you from arming yourself with a handgun in preparation for fulfilling that duty. If harm comes calling, why should your ability to defend yourself or your loved ones be restricted because of your age when you are a legal adult?
Part of the Gun Control Act of 1968, passed by Congress, placed into law the requirement that a person be twenty-one years of age to legally purchase a handgun. This leaves many individuals unprotected, some whom would benefit the most from the added force that a handgun could provide. For example, girls under the age of 21 attending college. With the rising rate of forcible sex offences on college campuses we should be intent on helping, not hindering, their ability to defend themselves at all times. A handgun in a purse is much closer than a security guard a phone call and quarter of a mile away.
“Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties. 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2dly those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, altho’ not the most wise depository of the public interests.”
A common belief held among our founding fathers was that man is not truly free unless he is secure in his person from unwarranted searches without cause. Their first-hand experience proved its important. In the early 1760’s part of the increasing tension between the Colonies and Great Britain was the use of writs of assistance. These general search warrants were granted to customs officers by the British government, giving them the authority to search any place without cause. On top of that, the searcher was not held responsible for any damages they caused. Colonists protested that the writs violated their rights as British subjects.
The writers of the U.S. Constitution placed great importance on the fundamental right of a person to be secure in his person, papers and effects. Because of this, when they met in 1789, they placed it in the Bill of Rights as the Fourth Amendment.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause…” ~ The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
The fight to protect each person’s right to privacy has never ended. One of the latest chapters in the continuing saga surrounds FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This act was created to provide judicial and congressional oversight of the government’s covert surveillance activities of foreign entities and individuals in the United States, while maintaining the secrecy ... continue reading »
In December 2017, the Republican majority-led Congress delivered an amazing Christmas present to the American people in the form of tax cuts. These rate cuts were bigger than we’ve seen in decades.
Not everyone is happy with the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”. There are those who rail against the tax cuts as only being for the rich. Setting aside the fact that almost every income bracket should see their taxes reduce, these critics do not understand that the wealthy are the funders of growth in our nation’s economy. They are the ones starting companies, investing in small (or even large) businesses, and hiring people. When they see tax rates rising on these money-making endeavors, they divert their capital into other channels, like tax-exempt securities, where it doesn’t see as much taxation. This doesn’t help America’s economic growth or tax revenue. In fact, studies have shown that in the long term tax rate cuts and not tax rate increases grow the government’s revenue.
Looking on another side of taxing you can see a direct connection between lower taxes and higher individual freedom, or vice versa. Put simply: When taxes go up government grows and expands into more and more areas of our life. We lose individual freedoms when government grows. When taxes are cut and government’s take of each of our daily activity’s reward grows smaller, then government has to shrink and freedom abounds.
We should say at this point also that this only works if the federal government ... continue reading »
“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” – The U.S. Constitution
Our most basic right of self-protection is God-given and protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Still, this right must continually be kept safe from those who seek to take away our freedom. This is why Liberty for All supports candidates and elected officials who fight in State Legislatures and Congress to ensure every individual citizen’s right to defend their families and loved ones is kept safe.
Rep. J.R. Hoell currently has a bill moving through the New Hampshire legislative process that would reinforce the state’s law against local municipalities and governments infringing on the ability of New Hampshire citizens to lawfully practice their Second Amendment rights. The bill brings to light that over the past six months there have been a growing number of instances occurring where cities have implemented legislation in direct opposition to New Hampshire’s gun laws. If passed, this bill would put in place fines to deter local governments from persisting in curtailing Second Amendment freedoms.
“The more local the control the better” argument is often thought to be best, and in general we agree. The reality in America, though, is that the states came together to create the federal government and simultaneously reserved all non-delegated powers for themselves. All local governments, cities and counties, are created by state governments and their powers are granted to them by their respective state. Therefore, it follows ... continue reading »
At Liberty for All, we believe it is a noble cause to educate the next generation. Education promotes innovation and growth in the future of our nation, but it can only do this if children are actually learning. And when we look at the results of the American public education system today it becomes abundantly clear that a one-size-fits-all standardized way of teaching does not serve the best interests of our students.
A guy sitting behind a desk in Washington D.C. has no way of knowing what style of learning would benefit each of the children graduating from Kindergarten to 1st Grade at your local school district this year—much less each of the roughly 50+ million children enrolled in public schools across America today. Federal bureaucracy is not a good option for quality control in education, but parents are. They know when their child is learning at their highest potential (and when they’re not!) and, as a general rule, can make the best decisions to help set them on the path to success.
Currently moving through the New Hampshire Legislature is SB 193 which would empower parents to make the best educational choice for their child, without fear of being unable to afford it. Education is best handled at the local and state level, and SB 193 is a big step in the right direction.
Most liberty-minded Americans hate government oversight. More and more local communities have turned into Nanny states. Bureaucrats and politicians want to police your every move. From what you drink to how you drive, government oversight has gone out of control.
Perhaps one of the most abusive practices is the use of red light cameras. These devices have been implemented across the country. Governments claim they help keep the roads safe. But a lack of accountability has led to cities violating state law. And taking cash out of your pocket!
They use red light cameras to hit drivers with heavy fines. Instead of allowing police to keep our roads safe, they spy on every American. Often the fines are not in line with state traffic laws. Not to mention many cities have been caught violating state regulations to use them.
This situation has created a loophole, where local government can scam drivers. But if one lawmaker has his way, it will be a thing of the past.
Senator Don Huffines, a Republican, promised to file new legislation to ban Texas cities from using red light cameras to assess a civil fine in lieu of the state’s criminal traffic charge for running a red light.
The first-term senator said it’s time for voters and state lawmakers to act, “The citizens of these cities need to speak up. They need to go to the polls and vote their conscience about how these cities, these bureaucrats that care more about the money ... continue reading »
There has always been an ongoing struggle between big government and big business. Often it is the American citizen that gets caught in the crossfire.
While we love to see businesses thrive, often the most powerful corporations in America create an uneven playing field that only benefits themselves. The virtues of a free market are compromised as lobbyists sway our lawmakers into creating policy that only helps a few.
If we are to succeed economically in the 21st Century, all businesses must have the opportunity to thrive. That means eliminating outrageous tax breaks that only help a certain segment of private business. Ensuring that all companies—big and small—are paying a fair tax can ensure healthy growth, jobs, and a stronger economic future.
That’s exactly what Eric Brakey hopes to achieve in Maine with his proposed bill.
A Republican state lawmaker says he wants to get rid of what he calls corporate welfare – dozens of tax breaks targeted to help specific industries…
Sen. Eric Brakey, R-Auburn, said his bill would eliminate an array of 47 state tax credits or exemptions for corporations in a range of industries and would result in as much as $225 million a year in additional tax revenue for the state budget. Brakey said ending the benefits would give the state the resources it needs to entirely eliminate its corporate income tax. (Portland Press Herald)
Now the elimination of tax breaks for businesses might seem counter to Libertarian goals, but it will enable Maine to ... continue reading »
Ronald Reagan once said, “education is the principal responsibility of local school systems, teachers, parents, citizen boards, and State governments. By eliminating the Department of Education … we cannot only reduce the budget but ensure that local needs and preferences, rather than the wishes of Washington, determine the education of our children.”
Yet despite his wise words, the federally-controlled Department of Education has continued to control our schools with an icy grip. The freedom of parents to choose what kind of education their children receive has been denied them. Parents have virtually no say in where their kids can go to school and even less say in the kind of curriculum to which they are subjected.
This poses a serious problem to parents who are concerned over what is being taught to their children. In this day and age all sorts of topics are taught in classes, from evolution to LGBT issues. Many parents don’t want these ideas presented to their young children, often because they contradict their beliefs and traditions. Yet the government forces these ideas, without a parent’s say.
Not only that, but many children growing up in the inner city are denied options. Parents struggling to make ends meet cannot afford to put their kids in private schools. The end result is children are forced to attend overcrowded, under staffed, and unaccountable public schools. Education is put on the back burner in such places. Children that could otherwise thrive in academic environments will never know what it’s ... continue reading »
Maine witnessed the advancement of liberty when voters said “yes” to ballot Question 1, paving the way for legal recreational use of marijuana. Adults 21 and over can now posses (though it’s still illegal to sell marijuana at this time) two and a half ounces of marijuana to be used in nonpublic spaces or private residences.
With only 3,995 making the difference, Maine residents in support of legalizing cannabis use won, with a margin of 50.3%. Even after a recount, that vote was confirmed. Adults over 21 can purchase marijuana from social clubs or retail dispensaries. Full retail sales have been delayed until February 2018, but this victory will send a powerful message to the rest of the country. Our criminal justice system has been overburdened, due to the heavy demands of policing drug infractions. Cops are required to arrest and process citizens over virtually insignificant counts of possession. Young men and women are thrown into the system for a harmless act. This takes time away from law enforcement in pursuing truly life-threatening criminal activity. As police and law enforcement are busy busting young adults with small amounts of marijuana, violent criminals flood our streets. Gangs, organized crime, and the rising toll of domestic abuse goes unanswered, thanks to outdated laws that punish everyday citizens. Can any American with a conscience really ignore these realities?
With the victory of Question 1, Maine police will be free to protect citizens from real threats. Valuable resources and man hours that were once ... continue reading »
One of our biggest battles in the fight for American liberty is in the area of taxation. Nowhere else is the icy grip of big government felt than when they go after our wallets.
It is the left’s clever ruse to deprive us of our economic freedom. Our buying power, the ability to make the best decisions for ourselves and our families, is often manipulated by the way state and local government regulates taxes.
Make no mistake, heavy taxation is a way for the government to control what and how you buy. It is also how they fund the ever-growing machine of bloated government programs that hinder our communities’ growth rather than help it.
But for people in Fairfax Country, VA, freedom won over tyranny, as they people voted down an increased food tax.
In the contest that perhaps most directly affects them, Fairfax County residents voted down a meals tax referendum that would’ve imposed up to a 4 percent tax on prepared food and beverages.
The referendum failed 53.8 percent to 46.2 percent…
Opponents called a meals tax regressive, meaning that it isn’t distributed based on income. They worried that it would hurt the restaurant industry as well as lower-income consumers when coupled with an already existing 6 percent sales tax, which predominantly goes to the state rather than the county. (Fairfax Times)
Punishing small businesses in order to help other areas of government is obviously counter-productive. It is a textbook case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. ... continue reading »