Monday, October 12, 2015
Deadly Facts: Guns vs Government Healthcare
We had an even higher death rate using Dr. Lucien Leape's 1997 medical and drug error rate of 3 million.
Each one of
these 16.4 million lives was affected in a way that could have a
fatal consequence. Simply entering a hospital resulted in the
following (out of 16. 4 million people):
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
More Guns Less Crime
An interview with
John R. Lott, Jr.
author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws
Question: What does the title mean: More Guns, Less Crime?
John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. Thirty-one states now have such laws—called “shall-issue” laws. These laws allow adults the right to carry concealed handguns if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness.
Question: It just seems to defy common sense that crimes likely to involve guns would be reduced by allowing more people to carry guns. How do you explain the results?
Lott: Criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent.
Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.
Question: What is the basis for these numbers?
Lott: The analysis is based on data for all 3,054 counties in the United States during 18 years from 1977 to 1994.
Question: Your argument about criminals and deterrence doesn’t tell the whole story. Don’t statistics show that most people are killed by someone they know?
Lott: You are referring to the often-cited statistic that 58 percent of murder victims are killed by either relatives or acquaintances. However, what most people don’t understand is that this “acquaintance murder” number also includes gang members killing other gang members, drug buyers killing drug pushers, cabdrivers killed by customers they picked up for the first time, prostitutes and their clients, and so on. “Acquaintance” covers a wide range of relationships. The vast majority of murders are not committed by previously law-abiding citizens. Ninety percent of adult murderers have had criminal records as adults.
Question: But how about children? In March of this year [1998] four children and a teacher were killed by two school boys in Jonesboro, Arkansas. Won’t tragedies like this increase if more people are allowed to carry guns? Shouldn’t this be taken into consideration before making gun ownership laws more lenient?
Lott: The horrific shooting in Arkansas occurred in one of the few places where having guns was already illegal. These laws risk creating situations in which the good guys cannot defend themselves from the bad ones. I have studied multiple victim public shootings in the United States from 1977 to 1995. These were incidents in which at least two or more people were killed and or injured in a public place; in order to focus on the type of shooting seen in Arkansas, shootings that were the byproduct of another crime, such as robbery, were excluded. The effect of “shall-issue” laws on these crimes has been dramatic. When states passed these laws, the number of multiple-victim shootings declined by 84 percent. Deaths from these shootings plummeted on average by 90 percent, and injuries by 82 percent.
For other types of crimes, I find that both children as well as adults are protected when law-abiding adults are allowed to carry concealed handguns.
Finally, after extensively studying the number of accidental shootings, there is no evidence that increasing the number of concealed handguns increases accidental shootings. We know that the type of person who obtains a permit is extremely law-abiding and possibly they are extremely careful in how they take care of their guns.
The total number of accidental gun deaths each year is about 1,300 and each year such accidents take the lives of 200 children 14 years of age and under. However, these regrettable numbers of lives lost need to be put into some perspective with the other risks children face. Despite over 200 million guns owned by between 76 to 85 million people, the children killed is much smaller than the number lost through bicycle accidents, drowning, and fires. Children are 14.5 times more likely to die from car accidents than from accidents involving guns.
Question: Wouldn’t allowing concealed weapons increase the incidents of citizens attacking each other in tense situations? For instance, sometimes in traffic jams or accidents people become very hostile—screaming and shoving at one another. If armed, might people shoot each other in the heat of the moment?
Lott: During state legislative hearings on concealed-handgun laws, possibly the most commonly raised concern involved fears that armed citizens would attack each other in the heat of the moment following car accidents. The evidence shows that such fears are unfounded.
Despite millions of people licensed to carry concealed handguns and many states having these laws for decades, there has only been one case where a person with a permit used a gun after a traffic accident and even in that one case it was in self-defense.
Question: Violence is often directed at women. Won’t more guns put more women at risk?
Lott: Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but a gun represents a much larger change in a woman’s ability to defend herself than it does for a man.
An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3 to 4 times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men.
Question: Aren’t you playing into people’s fears and prejudices though? Don’t politicians pass these shall-issue laws to mollify middle-class white suburbanites anxious about the encroachment of urban minority crime?
Lott: I won’t speculate about motives, but the results tell a different story. High crime urban areas and neighborhoods with large minority populations have the greatest reductions in violent crime when citizens are legally allowed to carry concealed handguns.
Question: What about other countries? It’s often argued that Britain, for instance, has a lower violent crime rate than the USA because guns are much harder to obtain and own.
Lott: The data analyzed in this book is from the USA. Many countries, such as Switzerland, New Zealand, Finland, and Israel have high gun-ownership rates and low crime rates, while other countries have low gun ownership rates and either low or high crime rates. It is difficult to obtain comparable data on crime rates both over time and across countries, and to control for all the other differences across the legal systems and cultures across countries. Even the cross country polling data on gun ownership is difficult to assess, because ownership is underreported in countries where gun ownership is illegal and the same polls are never used across countries.
Question: This is certainly controversial and there are certain to be counter-arguments from those who disagree with you. How will you respond to them?
Lott: Some people do use guns in horrible ways, but other people use guns to prevent horrible things from happening to them. The ultimate question that concerns us all is: Will allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns save lives?
While there are many anecdotal stories illustrating both good and bad uses of guns, this question can only be answered by looking at data to find out what the net effect is.
All of chapter seven of the book is devoted to answering objections that people have raised to my analysis. There are of course strong feelings on both sides about the issue of gun ownership and gun control laws. The best we can do is to try to discover and understand the facts. If you agree, or especially if you disagree with my conclusions I hope you’ll read the book carefully and develop an informed opinion.
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html
To guarantee our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we will elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
Stay in touch for our Constitutional Solutions to America's most pressing problems of peace, power and prosperity, immigration, jobs, justice.
Share with family, friends, neighbours for better results.
We pray these posts inspire you right now to Circulate, Donate, Register, Volunteer and Vote Silver Senator 2016 for True Constitutional Government, of the people, by the people and for the people.
To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you. Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but an active firm lasting commitment to Constitutional Independent principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
 |
Question: What does the title mean: More Guns, Less Crime?
John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. Thirty-one states now have such laws—called “shall-issue” laws. These laws allow adults the right to carry concealed handguns if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness.
Question: It just seems to defy common sense that crimes likely to involve guns would be reduced by allowing more people to carry guns. How do you explain the results?
Lott: Criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent.
Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.
Question: What is the basis for these numbers?
Lott: The analysis is based on data for all 3,054 counties in the United States during 18 years from 1977 to 1994.
Question: Your argument about criminals and deterrence doesn’t tell the whole story. Don’t statistics show that most people are killed by someone they know?
Lott: You are referring to the often-cited statistic that 58 percent of murder victims are killed by either relatives or acquaintances. However, what most people don’t understand is that this “acquaintance murder” number also includes gang members killing other gang members, drug buyers killing drug pushers, cabdrivers killed by customers they picked up for the first time, prostitutes and their clients, and so on. “Acquaintance” covers a wide range of relationships. The vast majority of murders are not committed by previously law-abiding citizens. Ninety percent of adult murderers have had criminal records as adults.
Question: But how about children? In March of this year [1998] four children and a teacher were killed by two school boys in Jonesboro, Arkansas. Won’t tragedies like this increase if more people are allowed to carry guns? Shouldn’t this be taken into consideration before making gun ownership laws more lenient?
Lott: The horrific shooting in Arkansas occurred in one of the few places where having guns was already illegal. These laws risk creating situations in which the good guys cannot defend themselves from the bad ones. I have studied multiple victim public shootings in the United States from 1977 to 1995. These were incidents in which at least two or more people were killed and or injured in a public place; in order to focus on the type of shooting seen in Arkansas, shootings that were the byproduct of another crime, such as robbery, were excluded. The effect of “shall-issue” laws on these crimes has been dramatic. When states passed these laws, the number of multiple-victim shootings declined by 84 percent. Deaths from these shootings plummeted on average by 90 percent, and injuries by 82 percent.
For other types of crimes, I find that both children as well as adults are protected when law-abiding adults are allowed to carry concealed handguns.
Finally, after extensively studying the number of accidental shootings, there is no evidence that increasing the number of concealed handguns increases accidental shootings. We know that the type of person who obtains a permit is extremely law-abiding and possibly they are extremely careful in how they take care of their guns.
The total number of accidental gun deaths each year is about 1,300 and each year such accidents take the lives of 200 children 14 years of age and under. However, these regrettable numbers of lives lost need to be put into some perspective with the other risks children face. Despite over 200 million guns owned by between 76 to 85 million people, the children killed is much smaller than the number lost through bicycle accidents, drowning, and fires. Children are 14.5 times more likely to die from car accidents than from accidents involving guns.
Question: Wouldn’t allowing concealed weapons increase the incidents of citizens attacking each other in tense situations? For instance, sometimes in traffic jams or accidents people become very hostile—screaming and shoving at one another. If armed, might people shoot each other in the heat of the moment?
Lott: During state legislative hearings on concealed-handgun laws, possibly the most commonly raised concern involved fears that armed citizens would attack each other in the heat of the moment following car accidents. The evidence shows that such fears are unfounded.
Despite millions of people licensed to carry concealed handguns and many states having these laws for decades, there has only been one case where a person with a permit used a gun after a traffic accident and even in that one case it was in self-defense.
Question: Violence is often directed at women. Won’t more guns put more women at risk?
Lott: Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but a gun represents a much larger change in a woman’s ability to defend herself than it does for a man.
An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3 to 4 times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men.
Question: Aren’t you playing into people’s fears and prejudices though? Don’t politicians pass these shall-issue laws to mollify middle-class white suburbanites anxious about the encroachment of urban minority crime?
Lott: I won’t speculate about motives, but the results tell a different story. High crime urban areas and neighborhoods with large minority populations have the greatest reductions in violent crime when citizens are legally allowed to carry concealed handguns.
Question: What about other countries? It’s often argued that Britain, for instance, has a lower violent crime rate than the USA because guns are much harder to obtain and own.
Lott: The data analyzed in this book is from the USA. Many countries, such as Switzerland, New Zealand, Finland, and Israel have high gun-ownership rates and low crime rates, while other countries have low gun ownership rates and either low or high crime rates. It is difficult to obtain comparable data on crime rates both over time and across countries, and to control for all the other differences across the legal systems and cultures across countries. Even the cross country polling data on gun ownership is difficult to assess, because ownership is underreported in countries where gun ownership is illegal and the same polls are never used across countries.
Question: This is certainly controversial and there are certain to be counter-arguments from those who disagree with you. How will you respond to them?
Lott: Some people do use guns in horrible ways, but other people use guns to prevent horrible things from happening to them. The ultimate question that concerns us all is: Will allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns save lives?
While there are many anecdotal stories illustrating both good and bad uses of guns, this question can only be answered by looking at data to find out what the net effect is.
All of chapter seven of the book is devoted to answering objections that people have raised to my analysis. There are of course strong feelings on both sides about the issue of gun ownership and gun control laws. The best we can do is to try to discover and understand the facts. If you agree, or especially if you disagree with my conclusions I hope you’ll read the book carefully and develop an informed opinion.
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html
To guarantee our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we will elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
Stay in touch for our Constitutional Solutions to America's most pressing problems of peace, power and prosperity, immigration, jobs, justice.
Share with family, friends, neighbours for better results.
We pray these posts inspire you right now to Circulate, Donate, Register, Volunteer and Vote Silver Senator 2016 for True Constitutional Government, of the people, by the people and for the people.
To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you. Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but an active firm lasting commitment to Constitutional Independent principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
Does Our Congressperson Show Up for Work?
A U.S. senator with one of the worst voting records in recent history was the junior senator from Illinois who was elected president in 2008.
Mark Fahey | Nicholas Wells
CNBC.comMark Fahey | Nicholas Wells
8
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion
Daniel Acker | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Sen. Marco Rubio, a 2016 presidential candidate, speaks during the inaugural Roast and Ride in Boone, Iowa, on June 6, 2015.
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio may be catching flak for
missing so many Senate votes, but it's House Democrats that seem to have
the most trouble showing up for work.
The Big Crunch pulled the voting records for the last 25 years and found that Democrats in the House of Representatives tend to miss votes more often than their colleagues across the aisle (even voting "present" was enough for a representative to get credit for being there).
In the past year, 70 percent of Republicans showed up to vote for the vast majority of the more than 500 roll calls, while only 39 percent of Democrats had such solid voting records.
And out of the 50 representatives with the worst absentee records, all but 16 were Democrats, despite the fact that Republicans hold the majority in the House.
The Big Crunch pulled the voting records for the last 25 years and found that Democrats in the House of Representatives tend to miss votes more often than their colleagues across the aisle (even voting "present" was enough for a representative to get credit for being there).
In the past year, 70 percent of Republicans showed up to vote for the vast majority of the more than 500 roll calls, while only 39 percent of Democrats had such solid voting records.
And out of the 50 representatives with the worst absentee records, all but 16 were Democrats, despite the fact that Republicans hold the majority in the House.
Republican representatives missed about 2 percent of their votes in 2015, while Democrats missed about 4 percent.
That pattern seems to hold true over not just the 114th Congress, but most groups of representatives since 1990. The only time that Democrats on average showed up more than Republicans was the 110th and 111th Congresses from 2007 to 2011, when the Democrats controlled both chambers for the first time since 1995.
Still, both groups are doing better than they were a few decades ago.
So what about the Senate, where it's more common for presidential hopefuls like Rubio to miss roll calls while out on the campaign trail?
In fact, a U.S. senator with one of the worst voting records in recent history was the junior senator from Illinois who was elected president in 2008.
The overall rate of absenteeism is lower for the smaller and more prestigious chamber — just 3 percent compared to 4 percent for the House.
Republicans also hold the Senate, but on average they have had a lower attendance rate than Democrats in that chamber in 2015.
That's largely because of the outsize field of Republican presidential candidates. The three most absent senators this year are Rubio, Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham, all of whom are running for president.
Over the past years, the Senate shows an opposite pattern as
the House. Generally, the minority party tends to show up to vote more
than the majority party. That could be because in the smaller body, each
vote means more and the minority party wants to maintain whatever
influence it has.
To guarantee our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we will elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
Stay in touch for our Constitutional Solutions to America's most pressing problems of peace, power and prosperity, immigration, jobs, justice.
Share with family, friends, neighbours for better results.
We pray these posts inspire you right now to Circulate, Donate, Register, Volunteer and Vote Silver Senator 2016 for True Constitutional Government, of the people, by the people and for the people.
To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you. Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but an active firm lasting commitment to Constitutional Independent principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
Saturday, October 10, 2015
Dear Congress, Court and President
Hat Tip to Uszly
Dear Mr. President, Part 2: You Are Not My President
There's an op-ed on Fox this morning that you should read.
There's an op-ed on Fox this morning that you should read.
Christians are being beheaded in the Middle East and you have lectured us about the Crusades. Christians have been killed in Charleston and you have preached to us about the National Rifle Association. Christians have now been singled out and murdered in Oregon and mum’s the word. Why?We already know that, don't we? Remember Mr. Zimmerman, who I remind you was acquitted of shooting Mr. Martin because he fired in self-defense after having his head bashed against a concrete sidewalk and in response exercised his God-given right to live instead of die at the hand of a thug who attacked him.
What would you have said, Mr. President, had the victims been Muslims? What would you have said had they been targeted because they were transgender, gay, or wearing a hoodie? Would you have condemned it? Would you have called for hate-crimes legislation? Would you have confronted the ideology that led to the crime? Would you have lectured us about phobias and bigotry?
You, Mr. President, along with many others, first tried to paint him as a "white man" (false, he's Hispanic) and when that didn't work you called him a bigot anyway and supported those who took that view. You even said you considered the dead Mr. Martin someone who could be "your son."
Indeed, you personally, Mr. President, fanned the flames of racial hatred in that circumstance, and despite your best effort both personally from your bully pulpit and in the press a jury of Mr. Zimmerman's peers found him not guilty.
There has not been one word about the fact that those who were Christian were targeted for execution in Oregon while others who professed some other faith, or none at all, were spared.
NOT
ONE
WORD.
Then there are reports that members of the military which you command were ordered to ignore Muslims sexually assaulting young boys in Afghanistan. One service member who ignored that order and intervened anyway has been discharged for doing so. Got that folks: This man was discharged from the service for attempting to stop a young boy from being sexually assaulted in his anus by a Muslim Afghani thug.
Obama's military discharged this man from the service for his ethically and morally correct act and Obama, who has the authority as Commander in Chief to rescind that discharge and eject from the service anyone and everyone involved in it, has refused to do so.
Why?
Virtually every one of these shootings has taken place in a "Gun Free Zone", otherwise known by deranged criminals as a TARGET RICH ENVIRONMENT WITH UNARMED VICTIMS.
Despite this fact Obama has done exactly nothing to remove those signs and demand repeal of the laws on the books enforcing same.
Instead he has threatened "executive action" to make a widow who sells her former husband's large and lawfully-owned gun collection a felon unless she first obtains a BATFE license as a gun dealer and complies with all of the commercial requirements for same.
Further nearly all of the shooters in these incidents, including the most-recent in Oregon and going all the way back to Columbine, were either on or withdrawing from drugs that have a black-label warning for suicide and uncontrolled rage among the specific age group of 15-25. These shooters are virtually without exception in that age bracket.
The only exceptions of note that I'm aware of have been those who murdered in the name of Islam.
Mr. President, you have not said ONE WORD about removing those drugs from being able to be prescribed to persons aged 15-25 except where 24x7 monitoring can be provided, even though the correlation between people in that age group, the use of those drugs and these incidents is statistically off-the-charts in terms of the likelihood of that association not being a matter of random chance.
Instead what this President has done is demand that the people be disarmed while both dangerous thugs and those mentally addled by known dangerous substances handed out like candy are given posted places in which to go to and murder innocent, peaceful people who are obeying the law. Worse, these are places that have a gross overrepresentation of our children present in them.
The Second Amendment does not exist so people can punch holes in paper or hunt for food. That's a beneficial side effect. The Second Amendment exists as a formal recognition of every human's Creator-Endowed Right to protect their own life in the gravest extreme, irrespective of why that extreme situation exists, when, or where.
You, Mr. President, are both trying to infringe on and deprive the American people of their GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO LIVE and at the same time you are sitting silently, despite the government having the regulatory power to put a stop to it, while others potentiate that threat to the people's lives for profit.
Your continued action and inaction is outrageous and it has gone on for long enough. If you won't stop this crap then you must be impeached RIGHT DAMN NOW. If Congress will not impeach for the high crime of intentionally endangering our youth among others and silently allowing the creation of these rage monsters to continue then the people must remove Congress from office en-masse and replace all of them with office-holders who will.
Mr. President, you may desire a socialist utopia in which there are no weapons (other than those possessed by your Secret Service agents) and thus you are the only one who can defend your life while the rest of us are defenseless but that's the position of a despotic King, not the President of a Constitutional Republic.
This nation is the latter, not the former, and you swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and defend same.
https://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=230772
To guarantee our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we must elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
Stay in touch for our Constitutional Solutions to America's most pressing problems of peace, power and prosperity, immigration, jobs, justice.
Share with family, friends, neighbours for better results.
We pray these posts inspire you right now to Circulate, Donate, Register, Volunteer and Vote Silver Senator 2016 for True Constitutional Government, of the people, by the people and for the people.To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you.
Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but a firm lasting commitment to Constitutional principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by
choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay
Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
Sunday, September 13, 2015
Call for Circulators in 17 Nevada Counties
The Original Silver Senator:
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/Featured_Bio_Stewart.htm
We now welcome your help restoring Constitutional Government to these United States of America, including and especially Nevada.
By Monday 4 January 2016 we need Circulators in all 17 Nevada Counties to gather 10,000 Independent Candidate US Senate Petition Signatures.
The Circulator is not required to be a registered voter in Nevada (Attorney General Opinion #99-37, dated 12/1/99)
http://www.nvsos.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=2990
The more the merrier.
Please email us your qualifications, first come, first served.
Thank you.
To guarantee our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we must elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you.
Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but a firm lasting commitment to Constitutional principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by
choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay
Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/Featured_Bio_Stewart.htm
We now welcome your help restoring Constitutional Government to these United States of America, including and especially Nevada.
By Monday 4 January 2016 we need Circulators in all 17 Nevada Counties to gather 10,000 Independent Candidate US Senate Petition Signatures.
The Circulator is not required to be a registered voter in Nevada (Attorney General Opinion #99-37, dated 12/1/99)
http://www.nvsos.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=2990
The more the merrier.
Please email us your qualifications, first come, first served.
Thank you.
To guarantee our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we must elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
Stay in touch for our Constitutional Solutions to America's most pressing problems of peace, power and prosperity, immigration, jobs, justice.
Share with family, friends, neighbours for better results.
We pray these posts inspire you right now to Circulate, Donate, Register, Volunteer and Vote Silver Senator 2016 for True Constitutional Government, of the people, by the people and for the people.To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you.
Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but a firm lasting commitment to Constitutional principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by
choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay
Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
Fallon Did Trump Tonight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2DgwPG7mAA 5:48
To save our future, we first and foremost will elect the right people to represent US.
It's well beyond time for more common sense majority in government.
For this to happen, we must first elect principled Independent Constitutional Candidates of character, unbeholden to special interest lobbyist funding or owned by billionaires.
Stay in touch for our Constitutional Solutions to America's most pressing problems of peace, power and prosperity, immigration, jobs, justice.
Share with family, friends, neighbours for better results.
We pray these posts inspire you right now to Donate, Register, Volunteer and Vote Silver Senator 2016 for True Constitutional Government, of the people, by the people and for the people.To register non-partisan:
http://nvsos.gov/index.aspx?page=703
Otherwise it's more politics as usual.
Let US know now how we can make Nevada and America better for you.
Drop us a line. We read them all, thanks.
Join and tweet our Silver Senator 2016 Campaign for Constitutional Government now:
https://twitter.com/RichardCharlesI
We welcome your donations, passions, talents, time.
You can read, review and share our Campaign Works here:
http://amzn.to/1IfaiC9
http://amzn.to/1eOqAr1
Successful governing is not a popularity contest, but a firm lasting commitment to Constitutional principles.
Donate here now for our better future:
($27 to $2700 per election by law, individuals only, by
choice)
Thank-you.
Regards,
Richard Charles
Silver Senator 2016
PO Box 1018
Crystal Bay
Nevada 89402-1018
silversenator2016@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)