Home

Right to fish: California violating its own Constitution

August 24, 2013

ppjg Corrupt courts, water rights , , , , , , , 13 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25Don Bird

patriot@rtr.net

_________________________________________________________________________________

How Clear Can Law Be?

We all know what the term, Supreme Law of the Land, means. Well, every one of the fifty states have a supreme law of the state, which is its Constitution, to which every state official is bound by an Oath of Office. The California State Constitution sets forth in Article I, Sec. 25, “The People shall have the right to fish upon and from the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof, excepting upon lands set aside for fish hatcheries, and no land owned by the State shall ever be sold or transferred without reserving in the People the absolute right to fish thereupon; and no law shall ever be passed making it a crime for the People to enter upon the public lands within this State for the purpose of fishing in any water containing fish …”
Nonetheless, a criminal complaint is proceeding within the Tehama County Superior Court, California, seeking prosecution of Don Bird for executing his constitutional right of fishing upon the open waters of California. Below is his argument in his defense;

*                  *   *

Fish  & Wildlife Finally Hooked

I have a mandatory appointment with the Tehama County Superior Court    September 23, 2013 at 1:30 PM. My “Fishing Without A License” citation (so called infraction) will be my  showcase Declaration of Three of our Constitutional Rights. The following Quotes should enlighten the Judge to  dismiss this citation because my plea will be “Innocent”  until Proven Guilty.

“The  state cannot diminish rights of the people”  And in Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60,

“Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void.”

Would we not say that these judicial decisions are straight to  the point – that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or limitations on rights belonging to  the people? Other cases are even more straight forward:

“The assertion of Federal Rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under name of local practice.” Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24

“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate  them.” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.

” The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” More

The Emperor Has No Clue

August 24, 2013

ppjg HEALTH , , , , , , , 6 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25By Marilyn M. Singleton, M.D., J.D.,

________________________________________________________________________________________

When President Obama hawks the wonders of the misnamed  Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, I’m reminded of those “As Seen on  TV” products.

True believers ridiculed critics of the Independent  Payment Advisory Board and its unchecked power to ration health care. They were  impressed by the $575 billion cut to Medicare, although lower payments lead  physicians to accept fewer Medicare patients. They cheered because 11 million  Americans will be added to the Medicaid rolls over the next ten years. While  Medicaid looks like is a good deal with its low co-pays, provider payments are  so low that only one-third of physicians accept new Medicaid  patients.

True believers scoffed at claims of loss of privacy.  After the NSA snooping revelations, a Pew survey revealed that 70 percent of  Americans believe the government is using data for purposes other than fighting  terrorism. Not only could unethical employees misuse health and financial  information, the health “Data Hub” can be shared among seven federal agencies  for ill-defined “routine uses.” According to a former HHS general counsel, the  federal government’s computer program for insurance exchanges lacks privacy  safeguards and could expose applicants to identity theft.

President Obama has repeatedly promised that “if you  like your health care plan, you can keep it.” Even his Praetorian Guard has now  defected. The National Treasury Employees Union—which represents the IRS folks  who are ultimately in charge of ObamaCare—does not want its members to be  “pushed out” of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and into the  insurance exchanges. More

%d bloggers like this: