Grandfathered Benefits Certification Process By Renewal Month: Fill & Download for Free

As an American Citizen, I’d be dishonest if I kept it to just one. There are a whole list of them, and I’m seeking to make contact with the right people to get amendments to the Constitution added.Why? Because Congressional scumbags CANNOT BE TRUSTED to keep their word, let alone comply with the law, hence the need for constitutional amendments to keep congressional weasels from welching on their word.Found my original notes. Here is my list of proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States…AMENDMENT XXVIIIACCURATE UNITED STATES CENSUS AMENDMENT(Written on a dinner napkin in Oklahoma City in 2009 during a political lunch; ran this past an AUSA friend of mine; he found it 100% bulletproof as to any legal or constitutional challenges.)Section 1. The Decennial Census of the United States and of the individual states and territories within shall be an actual head count to include only those persons who either are citizens of the United States at the time of census, or those who are legal permanent residents thereof.Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.Section 3. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXIXLEGISLATION CRAFTING AMENDMENTSection 1. No legislative bill is to exceed ten (10) pages.Section 2. All bills must be accompanied by the Constitutional article authorizing said bill.Section 3. No content in the bill that does not pertain to the title of the bill.Section 4. All bills are to be written in layman’s terms and posted online for ten days prior to introduction on the floor.Section 5. All bills requiring expenditures must disclose Total Costs, How the Bill Will Be Funded, Who the Beneficiaries Are, Who Will Pay, and a Sunset Date.Section 6. Each legislator shall read the proposed legislation thoroughly, and sign a certificate of understanding certifying under penalty of perjury, immediate loss of congressional seat, and five years in federal prison, that they understand the bill they are voting on.Section 7. This amendment shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXESSENTIAL PROTECTION OF THE UNITED STATES MEDICAL SUPPLY CHAIN AMENDMENTSection 1. The medical supply chain of the United States shall be purged of all foreign influences, specifically all sources outside North America. This includes all medications, face masks, ventilators, all medical and surgical equipment, and every facet of hospital or medical and/or dental office construction, remodeling, or demolition.Section 2. In light of the essential need to the national safety, security and interest, these occupations and those supporting them are deemed national-security essential,Section 3. All employees involved in this national-security essential industry shall be either United States citizens or legal permanent residents thereof. In addition, they shall be required to undergo security clearance screening to the SECRET level; failure to qualify is grounds for automatic termination of employment, with only acknowledged administrative errors as sufficient grounds for reversal of a termination decision.Section 4. All employees in this profession and its related industries are subject to routine background monitoring, to include unannounced inquiries of their financial records at any time.Section 5. The importation of pharmaceuticals of any kind from any country other than Canada is prohibited.Section 6. This amendment shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXILIFETIME CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS AMENDMENT(Based on a public referendum put together in the form of a State Question at the polls to Oklahoma voters in 2010 which amended the Oklahoma Constitution to affect these term limits. Statewide offices had already been term-limited to four-year terms, which in Oklahoma are already renewable only once.)Section 1. No member of Congress, be they a Senator or Representative, shall serve in Congress for longer than a total cumulative period of twelve years, whether it be two six-year terms in the Senate, or six two-year terms in the House of Representatives. This will allow for both a continuous infusion of new talent, as well as for servants of the people to know that public service is for a season, and not a lifetime.Section 2. In the event a Representative is either appointed or elected to a Senate seat, the twelve-year total period of service is cumulative, effective upon taking the oath of office. Should the member reach twelve years in office while a Senator, they shall stand down at the end of that term of Congress, and the remainder of that Senate term shall be filled by special election. The Governor of that Senator’s state shall then place that senator’s seat up for election to serve the unexecuted portion of that Senator’s term.Section 3. There will be no provision allowed for grandfathering within this amendment. In other words, full retroactivity applies, with the 12-year provision including all cumulative time spent in office up to and including the time this amendment is ratified and takes effect. In addition, the practice of congressional pensions is discontinued, effective the date the amendment takes effect, with incumbent congressional members encouraged to plan their own retirement, beginning the day they declare their candidacy. ***Section 4. This amendment will take effect immediately following the first general election and conclusion of the Congress following ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXIIVOTING PHOTO IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENT AMENDMENTSection 1. No person 18 years of age or over within the United States, its territories or any part of its jurisdictions thereof, may vote in any elections of any kind, unless they first provide photographic proof of United States Citizenship. In addition to providing positive photo identification in the form of a government-issued identification card, with a United States Passport Book or Passport Card fulfilling the requirement, they must also provide verifiable proof of residence. Proof of citizenship plus a driver’s license or state identification card meets this requirement.Section 2. United States Citizens 18 years of age and over, who are living outside the United States, may vote by absentee ballot, provided they meet guidelines as provided for in the Federal Voter Absentee Program (FVAP), and send both their absentee ballot to the county in which they were last registered in the United States, along with either a photocopy of their identification page of their passport or photocopy of both sides of their United States Passport Card, so as to provide indisputable proof of United States Citizenship, in order that the vote may be both eligible and valid for purposes of counting the vote.Section 3. An acceptable alternate proof of citizenship would be a driver’s license or state-issued identification card from a state compliant with REAL ID licensing requirements, containing the voter’s photograph, full name and current address on it, that the voter would present their voter reminder card at the polls on Election Day. It must also indicate US Citizenship on the front thereof, with three-letter indicators to indicate YES for Citizens, LPR for Legal Permanent Residents, or NON for Non-Citizens, those on Visas or Work Permits, or the like.Section 4. The YES in the Citizen block would confirm both voter eligibility, and that the voter also appears on the electoral rolls for the polling station to which they are assigned. The real ID form will also have a GOLD star in the top right-hand corner for United States Citizens; a SILVER star in the top right-hand corner for Legal Permanent Residents of the United States; and a BRONZE star for non-citizens of the United States who are in the country legally, for work, education or other legal and legitimate purposes.Section 5. Those licenses or other REAL ID documents expire on the date their visas expire. Only those persons with a GOLD STAR on their REAL ID documentation may vote in any election in the United States, be it a federal, state, county, city, or other local. This constitutional amendment supersedes any and all state laws, or other local ordinances that otherwise have allowed non-citizens to vote in any other way, shape, form or fashion. The practice of vote harvesting is now a felony criminal offense, carrying with it a minimum ten-year federal prison sentence, with lifetime disenfranchisement, and potential loss of citizenship, and conferral of statelessness for so doing.Section 6. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation that is compliant with this amendment, which prohibits Congress in any way from relaxing in any measure the distinction between citizen, permanent resident, and non-citizens, who, if not legally in the country, will be removed from the United States safely, swiftly, and with all due speed..Section 7. This article shall take effect immediately after an election has intervened following its ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXIIIBALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT (Draft)This has been touched on and drafted previously by Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX, Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY). It is essential in my view that a responsible bipartisan approach be taken on the issue of a mandatory annual balanced federal budget, with automatic rainy day reserve amounts put aside, and only with a two-thirds or a three-quarters super-majority vote can they deficit spend, and that it be done before the end of the second term of Donald Trump.AMENDMENT XXXIVNATIONAL DEBT ELIMINATION ACT/THE GREAT AMERICAN LAND SELL-OFFSection 1. Under the direction of the Department of the Interior, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Defense, the Government of the United States will begin selling off excess land holdings at market rates at dates to be determined. With as much as 85% of the land in the Western United States being federally-owned and not being utilized, this is the perfect time to return the ‘power to the people’.Section 2. 100% of the proceeds of these sales will be deposited in a dedicated account, used specifically for and solely to pay down the National Debt and which Congress cannot under any circumstances have any access to, which in tandem with a Balanced Budget Amendment, will bring the United States to living well within its means, much like over 30 states are currently required to do.Section 3. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXVLAND SALES EXCLUSION ZONE AMENDMENTSection 1. The sale of land to foreign nationals—that is, non-citizens or other non-permanent residents of the United States—within defined exclusion areas of the United States, is prohibited. There will be set in place a 100% prohibition of the ownership of any private property by foreign nationals, to include non-legal permanent residents of the United States, within defined exclusion zones.Section 2. Exclusion zones are defined as those areas are within 100 miles of any United States coastline, any land border, or within a 100-mile radius of any United States military installation, so as to preserve both national sovereignty, as well as legitimate national security needs.Section 3. Landowners selling property or properties must ensure and certify under penalty of federal perjury laws, as well as penalties of either sedition or treason, that their prospective buyer(s) meet eligibility requirements as to citizenship or other eligibility to either buy in an exclusion zone, or otherwise certify that the proposed property is outside the exclusion zone.Section 4. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AND YES, AMENDMENTS 33, 34, AND 35 ARE CONNECTED…AMENDMENT XXXVINATIONWIDE CONSTITUTIONAL CONCEALED CARRY AMENDMENTSection 1. The right to keep and bear arms as stated in the 2nd Amendment is extended to include the right to carry concealed weapons in all 50 states and territories of the United States, without delay or hindrance by any and all agencies at or below the federal level. While such is the case for United States citizens exclusively, constitutional concealed carry protections do not extend to any foreign nationals, whether legal permanent residents, those on work or student visas, or especially those in the country illegally, or otherwise without status, especially those who have been disqualified from possessing either firearms of any kind, or ammunition as well.Section 2. The current prohibitions against convicted felons possessing firearms remains in place pursuant to existing state and federal laws.Section 3. The penalties for domestic violence under what had previously been known as the ‘Lautenberg Amendment’ are hereby modified, so as to retain the right to keep and bear arms for those who have been or were previously convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence on the first offense only, but only after a five-year possession ban has passed and expired for conviction on the first misdemeanor offense only. In the event of a second domestic violence misdemeanor, or any felony domestic violence offense, as with all other felony convictions, such would be sufficient grounds for lifetime disqualification from any firearms or ammunition possession.Section 4. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXVIIRESIDENT-BASED TAXATION AMENDMENTSection 1. Effective the date of ratification, taxation by the United States of its citizens will apply only to those citizens of the United States residing within its borders for more than 183 days within a given 365-day period. The United States is the only industrialized nation in the world that taxes its people based on citizenship, not on residence, as other modern developed nations do.Section 2. The practice of potentially double-taxing United States citizens simply because they are citizens living in a foreign country violates their rights under both the Eighth (cruel and unusual punishment) and Ninth Amendments (deny and disparage rights, such as opening foreign bank accounts) which denies them to due process of law under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Constitution—in other words—the right to individual privacy, as an extension of the Privacy Act of 1974, which is exactly what FATCA seeks to do, by unlawfully and illegitimately meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation, unless they can satisfy both an American, as well as a foreign judge, that more than sufficient cause exists as part of a legitimate criminal investigation acceptable to the laws of both countries.Section 3. If federal investigators have sufficient cause, they should seek a warrant and follow due process to obtain the information needed so as to secure needed evidence and a legitimate, untainted conviction that holds up on appeal.Section 4. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXVIIICONGRESSIONAL SECURITY CLEARANCE AMENDMENTSection 1. Effective the date of ratification, any and all United States Citizens elected to Congress—be it the House of Representatives or the Senate—along with any individual hired as a staff member to either chamber must qualify prior to the beginning of the incoming term of Congress for a security clearance, based on a background investigation. Members of Congress, as well as staff members must qualify for a SECRET security clearance prior to the beginning of the upcoming Congress and the taking of their oaths of office (the following January 3rd), in order to continue employment.Section 2. If for any reason a negative report, specifically one including disqualifying information that could jeopardize national security is received, the incoming member would resign before taking office, and that state’s governor would be immediately notified in order to schedule a special election be held to elect a successor, and that incoming seat would thus become immediately become vacant.Section 3. Once sworn in as Members of Congress, elected senators and representatives would have to have their full special background investigations completed to obtain their final versions of a TOP SECRET security clearance (with renewals every three years) within 12 months, as failure to do so after nine months would restrict their ability to view certain data, be present in, or for certain hearings, would deem them ineligible to perform the full scope of their congressional duties. If not fully cleared for an unrestricted TOP SECRET security clearance after 15 months, then they would be precluded from seeking re-election and be required to stand down at the end of their term, with the governor of their state being so notified.Section 4. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XXXIXRIGHT TO PRIVACY AMENDMENTSection 1. The right to be forgotten—or in other words—the right to individual privacy, as an extension of the Privacy Act of 1974, is extended to include the right to be forgotten online by those seeking to be anonymous, whether online through the Internet, or through other means offline.Section 2. The major search engines—and other online locators—will have 15 calendar days to remove the personal information of those persons who request removal thereof.Section 3. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***AMENDMENT XLACCUSED RIGHTS PROTECTION AMENDMENTSection 1. Effective the date of ratification, any and all persons accused of crimes against person, especially sex crimes that often, but do not always involve children and which are almost always sensationalized, solely for the purpose of increasing advertising revenues, will have an automatic gag order mandatorily imposed on all parties to the case from moment of initial arrest or indictment until completion of all trials and appeals upholding conviction.Section 2. In such cases that are deemed high profile and where a wide populace is aware of the case, both a change of venue out of the county, as well as the television market will be done for the benefit of the accused, thus protecting the rights of the accused, who is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.The rationale on this is that all too often, innocent people have their lives completely destroyed on suspicion and innuendo alone, with presumption of innocence and truth being the first factors being completely destroyed in the process. Yet despite the presumption of innocence, and the pervasiveness of prejudice within the nation, accused persons must be protected from vigilantes and/or other self-appointed ‘administrators of justice’.Section 3. Upon indictment, the accused will be identified by age and gender only, but not by race. In these cases, shield laws will either be tightened, or activated in all 50 states and territories of the United States so as to protect all parties in criminal matters of a sexual or otherwise nature. Either everybody gets named, or nobody gets named. Feminists cannot have it both ways, as such is both suggestive of cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, as well as discriminatory in violation of the equal rights under the law clause of the Fourteenth AmendmentSection 4. This article shall take effect immediately upon ratification. ***“It’s all good and well to focus on leaving the one to go after the ninety and nine; but you cannot go after the one at the expense of the ninety and nine, not to mention identifying and casting out predators who may arise in your midst, so as to preserve, protect, and defend the rest of your flock.”—Timothy Rollins, American-Canadian philosopher, columnist, and stroke survivor (1959-)AMENDMENT XLITRADE SECRET AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION AMENDMENT (AIMED AT COMMUNIST CHINA)Thank you for asking, Marie! ***

Guadalajara TodayMay – July 2017The State Capitol of Jalisco MexicoIs Like Living in Any City in The USA,But More Economical!By Carlos TurverIntroduction1. Keeping busy.2. I no longer miss living in the USA.3. US TV in Guadalajara.4. Public Transportation.5. Owning a Car in Mexico.6. Where can I meet North Americans?7. Health care in Mexico.8. A recent hospital experience.9. Assisted living.10. Dentistry.11. What it costs me to live in Guadalajara.12. Staying safe in Guadalajara.13. Emigrating to Mexico.14. Language.Conclusion.IntroductionAlthough I have been living in Guadalajara since 1970, I make it a point to kept myself informed about what is happening in the USA. Quite frankly, with all that has been going on up north, it surprises me that I have not seen any significant increase in the number of Americans retiring to this city.Prior to the two major devaluations of the Mexican peso in September of 1975 and in August of 1982, it seemed that every other automobile had US plates and were driven by fair skinned North Americans. However, when they lost approximately 50% of their assets over night, they cashed in their pesos for dollars and returned home.The following cycle of US plated cars that were in abundance throughout the city, were driven by Mexican nationals who had returned home to take advantage of the increased purchasing power of their hard-earned dollars.Since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a large variety of foreign automobiles can now be purchased here on credit. Consequently, US plated cars are now seldom seen.------My parents retired to Mexico in the summer of 1969. A few months later, my father passed on. Although I was a few months shy of completing my four-year enlistment obligation, the US Coast Guard gave me an early honorable discharge so that I could be with my mother while she was recovering from her loss. Shortly after I arrived, I also made the decision to make Guadalajara my new home.------Soon after my military discharge, I married a Mexican National. I got a job as an account manager for an investment house whose clients were primarily English-speaking North Americans. A few years later I owned and operated two small American style food restaurants that were both named Uncle Sam’s Kitchen. The first was patronized by students from the USA who attended the AMA accredited Autonomous University school of medicine. The second restaurant was initially supported by North Americans and other foreign executives who came to Guadalajara to manage the numerous industries that had been allowed to operate in this city because of NAFTA.Prior to the implementation of this free trade agreement, it was extremely difficult to get working papers. Only foreign-born language teachers and those who were married to Mexican nationals were permitted to work. The exception to this law was for those foreigners who invested a minimum of $100,000usd into businesses that created jobs.Those foreigners who were 55 years old and provided proof of a specified minimum monthly income that was required at that time, could obtain temporary residency, but were not allowed to work. However, after 5 annual referendums, the temporary residency papers were upgraded to permanent resident and foreigner was then allowed to work in Mexico.There was a time when it virtually took a presidential decree for foreign males to obtain Mexican citizenship. However, foreign females who were married to Mexican males could apply. In 1975 a supplement to this law was added that allowed foreign males to become citizens when they were married to Mexican females.As I met this condition and as I had decided to live permanently in Mexico, I applied for and received Mexican citizenship that same year. At the time, it was required that I surrender my US passport, birth certificate, my temporary resident papers and a copy of my marriage certificate. The attorney’s fee was $1,000usd. One month after these papers were submitted, I became a legal Mexican citizen. I was recently informed that it now takes a few years to obtain this privilege.Soon after I received my naturalization papers, I was visited by a US government official who informed me that it was very likely that I would lose my US citizenship unless I could provide an adequate explanation of my actions to the Department of State, as it was called at the time. However, even after I had informed this government agency that it was never my intention to lose my US citizenship, I still received a CERTIFICATE OF LOSS OF NATIONALITY OF THE UNITED STATES that was approved on Nov. 17, 1978. This document stated that I had taken an oath of allegiance to Mexico on Nov. 25,1975. As I had signed a document of allegiance to Mexico that enabled me to receive my citizenship papers, I reluctantly accepted their decision. However, in 1990 the law regarding dual citizenship with Mexico was modified. I applied for and received a new US Passport in 2009 and retained my Mexican nationality.During my non-US citizen years, whenever I visited the United States, I had to stand in the line for foreigners and enter with a USA visitor’s visa stamped in my Mexican passport.Whenever I decide to revisit the USA, I will be required show the Mexican immigration authorities my Mexican passport as proof of legal residency in Mexico. My US passport must be shown to the travel agency prior to the issuance of an airplane ticket, as one is required for all US citizens reentering the USA.------Whenever I am asked why I decided to stay permanently in Guadalajara, I previously gave three reasons. Now I give four:1. The weather. Decades ago I learned that Guadalajara had the world’s second-best climate with Nairobi Africa being the first. Guadalajara was closer.2. The Pacific coast is less than 3 to 4 hours when traveling by car or by bus.3. Guadalajara is known for its beautiful women who concentrate daily in any one of the many modern shopping malls that are located throughout the city.4. As my wife and I own our home, our monthly combined income of $25,068 pesos or $1,355usd more than covers our needs.The reason that brought my parents to Mexico is explained in the Conclusion section of this booklet.Unless otherwise specified, the exchange rate of $18.50 pesos for $1.00usd will be used for converting pesos and dollar currency throughout this booklet. In most cases, the currency conversions will be rounded off to the nearest dollar or peso.------Keeping busy.When I retired 10 years ago, I made my goal to get out of the house every morning for at least a few hours.My daily routine is walking to and from the buses I take to meet friends for breakfast and/or coffee. Current events and a variety of other topics are discussed daily except for sports and personal health issues. However, brief updates these two are permitted.Every afternoon I watch less than one hour of Main Street Media, prepare lunch and then take a one to two-hour siesta. Prior to the evening meal, I turn on my computer and listen to informative documentaries and later read the various points of view offered by the alternative media. Before the day’s end, I spend a couple of hours watching episodes or movies on Netflix and You Tube.My hobby for the past 5 years has been writing booklets about an improvement that I made to the martingale betting system that have also been self-published on Online Shopping for Electronics, Apparel, Computers, Books, DVDs & more. The time spent on the keyboard helps to fill in a few hours of each day and helps to keep my mind distant from the mornings conversations that invariably cover doom and gloom topics.Now that I have written all that I care to about gambling, I have diversified from that subject matter. I recently wrote a booklet that explains a diet that I follow daily titled “A Diet for The Body’s Needs, Not for Its Wants”. After self-publishing this booklet, I have an idea for a non-religious short story that I may title “Life After Death, Eternal Revelations of What Could Have Been”.I hate to admit it, but if it were not for the many hours that I spend on the Internet the days would be very long! The computer has become my main source of entertainment and has been well worth the $389.00 pesos or $21usd monthly fee for the telephone and for modem. Also included with these services are all local, national and international land line calls to the USA and Canada. These services are all included with my subscription to Telmex and Infinitum, Mexico’s largest telephone and Internet network!I no longer miss living in the USA.Since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Guadalajara offers much of what can be found today in any given metropolis in the USA: Shopping malls, movie theaters, cultural events, gambling casinos, convenience stores, super markets, fast food establishments, restaurants, car dealerships etc. For example:In Guadalajara’s high-end Andares Plaza, there are many familiar brand name stores: Calvin Klein Jeans, Victoria’s Secret, Dockers, Nespresso, Brooks Brothers, Subway, Great American Cookies, Pretzel Maker, GNC, Apple MacStore, Best Buy, AT&T, Steren Shop, Radio Shack, Movistar, Starbucks Coffee, Krispy Kreme, Levi’s, Rolex and others that I am not familiar with as I have not returned to the USA for the past 28 years nor have I lived there for any length of time during the past 47.Throughout the metropolis, there are many other well with known outlets: Walmart, Sam’s, Costco, Office Depot, Home Depot, Office Max, Outback, Red Lobster, Chilis, I Hopp, UPS, Federal Express, DHL, Waldo’s, Dairy Queen, Black Coffee, 7 Eleven, Ford, Chevrolet, Jeep, Mini, BMW, Mercedes Benz, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Pizza Hut, Dominoes, Little Ceaser’s, McDonalds, Carl Juniors, Burger King, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Applebees, Dennys, Sirloin Stockade etc. And when take out with home delivery is preferred, just call UberEATS.Many American foods can be found in a few stores that specialize only in products from the USA. There are even “As advertised on T.V.” stores that can be found in a few shopping malls. Many US companies that previously exported their products to Mexico, are now being manufactured here: IBM, Flextronics, Hewlet Packard, Herbalife and many others. Several North American products are manufactured in Mexico under licensing agreements with reputable Mexican companies: Pringles potato chips, Mars and Hersey chocolates, Coca and Pepsi Cola, McCormick Mayonnaise, Del Monte Catsup, Kraft Cheese, Campbell´s soups, an assortment of Great Value and Procter&Gamle products, Crosse&Blackwell, Hunts BBQ sauce etc.The Americanization of Guadalajara gradually began prior to the North American Free Trade Agreement. However, consumers could only purchase large ticket items with cash. Since the implementation of NAFTA, many jobs have been created and the standard of living for many Mexican nationals has improved. Just like in the USA, a considerable percentage of Mexico’s population can now purchase anything that they want on credit.Welcome to the country of the Mexican Dream!US TV in Guadalajara.Twenty-four seven, 365 days of the year, most, if not all, US TV programing can be accessed and watched in the comfort of one’s home. There are several satellite and cable networks to choose from that offer news, movies, sports, sitcoms and documentaries on well-known channels such as Warner, Disney, History, Discovery, Cinemax, Showtime CBS, NBC, ABC FOX, CNN, ESPN and MSNBC, all transmitted in English. And if cable is not wanted, multiple US news channels can be seen at http://www.zahipedia.net.Depending on the company contracted, a basic package, that offers a limited choice of sitcom and movie channels in English, start around $245 pesos or $13usd/month.A few free channels can be watched on http://watch.ustvnow.com “TV for U.S. Military Service Members and Americans Abroad”. A variety of additional channels can be subscribed to for a monthly fee.Netflix is also available.Public Transportation.Regardless of where anyone lives in Guadalajara, a bus stop is usually only a short walk away. Students and the elderly ride for free with special “transvale” tickets. A one-way fare is $7.00 pesos or $0.39usd. For those in possession of a federal INAPAM (Instituto Nacional para las Personas Adultas Mayores) senior citizens discount card, the price is reduced by 50%. As I take an average of 3 busses, my daily transportation expenses total $10.50 pesos or $0.58usd.There are a few bus lines that charge $10 and $12 pesos, $0.54 and $ 0.65usd respectively, that offer more comfortable seating, air-conditioning, fewer stops and more direct routes, but no discounts.Upon presenting the INAPAM card with a pictured ID, traveling to any destination throughout the country is also half the normal price. On a recent trip to Puerto Vallarta, the round-trip fare that costs $1,080 pesos or $58usd was only $540 pesos or $29usd.Graffiti free, clean and modern, the above and below ground Metro Buses, electric trains “tren lijeros”, taxis and Uber services provide economical travel to any part of Guadalajara.A 20-mile cab fare to the international airport on the opposite end of town from where I live costs $280 pesos or $15usd. A ride to a terminal that will get me on a bus to P.V. costs $120 pesos or $6.47usd. For $90 pesos or $4.87usd a cab will take me to a closer location where I can access buses to points south of Puerto Vallarta.In a few designated zones on the outskirts of the city, a relatively new form of transportation service is available: Three-wheel motor vehicles that can carry up to 4 passengers, including the driver, for short distances.Owning a Car in Mexico.My wife recently upgraded her 2007 Nissan Sentra to a 2012 Honda Civic. Full insurance coverage on this vehicle for one-year cost $5,666 pesos or $306usd.It appears that an important part of the NAFTA will soon be implemented that will allow foreign oil companies to compete with Mexico’s Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX. As there is currently no competition to this federally owned gasoline monopoly, the cost per liter was recently increased. The PEMEX Magna now costs $16.26 pesos or $0.88usd per liter and the PEMEX Premium $18.19 pesos or $0.98usd per liter. The price per gallon cost is approximately $3.33 and $3.72usd respectively.The annual registration fee for the Honda was for $450 peso or $24usd. There is also a yearly emissions test that usually requires a major tune-up. This once a year expense was for $1,500 pesos or $81usd.Toll roads are much safer, but costly. For example, according to Mexico’s SCT (Secretaria de Comunicaciones y Transportes) the cost for a round trip visit to Puerto Vallarta from Guadalajara for tolls and gasoline is for approximately $1,486 pesos or $80usd for a 4-cylinder automobile.Driving in this city is no longer fun! Total concentration is required to maneuver through Guadalajara’s heavy traffic. Since the implementation of The North American Free Trade Agreement the streets have been literally inundated with automobiles and motorcycles as these vehicles can now be purchased on credit.With so many vehicles on the streets, body shops are doing a thriving business! When involved in any accident, even the tiniest of fender benders, the law requires that the vehicles involved remain exactly where the accident occurred until the proper authorities arrive to fill out the paperwork. This can take a few hours and will pretty much ruin anyone’s well planned day along with those drivers who are unable to get past this potential crime scene.The country’s judicial system continues to be based on Napoleonic law. Whenever any blood is shed, the accident becomes a felony.Where can I meet North Americans?The weekly Guadalajara Reporter at http://theguadalajarareporter.net/ lists the time and dates of many social activities that take place in the city or at nearby Lake Chapala some 50 kilometers or 30 miles south, where many Americans and Canadians have opted to reside.Several expatriates can be found at the luncheons offered by the American Society (AMSOC) on Thursday afternoons. Open mornings Monday thru Saturday from 10am to early afternoon, this nonprofit organization offers a 60-inch TV screen for those who want to keep abreast of world events. There is also a large English book and movie library for its members. AMSOC can be contacted at 312-123-95, [email protected] or at The American Society of Jalisco, A.C.. At Lake Chapala, there is a similar organization called the Lake Chapala Society. There is also an American Legion.Health care in Mexico.Before visiting Mexico, it would be advisable to read your health insurance policy to be well informed of your coverage prior to traveling outside of the USA.Citizens and legal residents of Mexico have several choices for their health care needs. There are many pharmacies in this city that offer a consultation with a licensed doctor for as little as $30.00 pesos or $1.62usd. Once an ailment has been diagnosed, the patient is given a prescription that can be filled at that pharmacy.Guadalajara offers two inexpensive hospitals for those who have no health insurance and are short of cash. Reasonable fees are charged for consultations with specialists, lab work, X rays etc. For example, the following prices are for a few of the services offered by these Jalisco state run Civil Hospitals:Consultation with a specialist: $80 pesos or $4.32usd.Cost per night in a shared room: $600 pesos or $32.43usd.Lab tests: $100 to $1,500 pesos or $5.41 to $81.08usd.X rays and magnetic resonance: $300 to $5,000 pesos or $16.22 to $270,27usd.The Cruz Verde is unique to the State of Jalisco offering inexpensive 911 emergency response medical services. This organization has their own outpatient ward and charges modest fees for their services. The ambulance is free.Since the Vicente Fox administration, any citizen or resident throughout the country can be accepted into the Seguro Popular that is essentially a free health care system. An 80 plus year old lady friend of mine who had registered for this program recently underwent major surgery and chemotherapy at no cost to her.Across the street from the McDonalds that my friends and I frequent, there is a Dairy Queen, Jeffrey’s Pasteleria, a North American owned cake, pie and cookie store, Pizza Hut, a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet, and a laboratory named Salud Digna. Prescription eye glasses start at $180 pesos or $10usd. A second pair can be purchased at a 50% discount. An electrocardiogram costs $100 peso or $5usd; X rays go for $140 pesos or $8usd each; Blood tests range from $130 to $360 pesos or $7 to $19usd.The I.M.S.S. (Instituto Mexicano Del Seguro Social) that has many hospitals and clinics nationwide, is the working man’s health care and pension program. However, those individuals who work independently can be covered by the same health care program by paying a yearly fee. My brother in law who is 72 years old, recently paid $7,600.00 pesos or $411usd, for one year’s coverage. He is coverage for any contingency with the exception of a precondition. This will be covered when he has been affiliated with this institution for a minimum of two years.The Instituto del Seguro Social para los Trabajadores del Estado, I.S.S.T.E. is primarily for those employees who work for the state government.As my wife, brother in law and a few of my friends who are now older than 65 years of age, have cancelled their private health care insurance policies because of the expensive premiums that are substantially increased every year. A few of them have recently enrolled into the IMSS and a few of them have decided to use the Seguro Popular or the Civil Hospital health care systems.A close friend of mine who is also 72 years old, recently dropped his private health insurance and will opt for the same IMSS coverage as my brother in law by paying a yearly premium of $7,600 pesos. As he has decided that it is very unlikely that he will ever return to the United States, he is in the process of canceling his Medicare part B coverage for $113usd per month as it cannot be used in Mexico. Once cancelled, a portion of this additional income will be used to pay for the $411usd IMSS coverage. In the meantime, he has signed up with the Seguro Popular.To lessen the financial burden upon my demise, every year I renew my funeral expense policy that will cover all costs related to this event except for a burial plot. I recently renewed this policy that cost me, a 71-year-old man, $1,350 pesos or $72.97usd.------A recent hospital experience.A few weeks ago, a close friend who had been suffering from chronic back pain, acute anemia, type 2 diabetes and prostate cancer, was unable to answer his telephone or to open his front door. Fortunately, he had disclosed the hiding place of a spare key to a mutual friend who was accompanying me that day. Upon entering the house, we found him sprawled on the floor where he had fallen several hours earlier. As he was too weak to stand he was unable to access his phone to call one of us or 911. He knew that both of us were coming over for coffee that morning so he impatiently waited for our arrival.We called an ambulance and 45 minutes later he was in the emergency room at the nearby Arboledas Hospital. The ambulance service charged $1,100 pesos or $59usd. As he had no health insurance nor a credit card, a $15,000-peso or $811usd cash deposit was required for his admission to a private room.An endoscopy procedure for $9,500 pesos or $514usd and $1,000 pesos or $54usd for the anesthetic resulted in a stomach ulcer discovery. A back-X ray that cost $590 pesos or $32usd, detected a vertebral hernia. He also had two blood transfusions for $5000 pesos each or $270usd. The overnight charge for a private room was for $1,650 pesos or $89usd.His blood sugar levels were far from normal when he arrived but after a two-night stay for $44,135 pesos or $2,386usd, his blood sugar count was back to normal, the stomach ulcer was healing and the pain killers for his back kept him comfortable while he regained enough strength to be discharged.His internist prescribed the following medicines that were purchased at a nearby branch of Farmacias Guadalajara. The doctor’s consultation fee at the hospital totaled $4,000 pesos or $216usd during my friend’s recovery period of approximately 45 hours. Future consultation fees at the doctor’s office would be for $700 pesos or $38usd each.1. Glucerna SR powder400gr $335.98 or $18usd.2. Ulsen PCS 40mg 14 capsules $275.10 or $15usd.3. Paracetamol 500mg 20 tablets $12.50 or $0.68usd.4. Tradol 50mg 10 capsules $270.75 or $15usd.5. Metformina 850mg 30 tablets $13.49 or $0.73usd.6. Galvus Met 50mg/850mg compressed 30 tablets $397.67 or $22usd7. Two liquid Enemas of Fosfato Fosfanema (Phosphate) 133ml each having a of cost $76.08 or $4usd. These 8 items totaled $1,382 pesos or $75.41usd.------Last week, my friend had a relapse.Since his release from the hospital, we noticed that his strength was slowly diminishing. When we were informed that he had fallen two times the night before, we returned him to the same hospital where he spent 3 nights. The cost for this visit that included three blood transfusions was slightly above $32,000 pesos or $1,730usd.On the day of his discharge, he was able to walk confidently with the aid of a walker. The following day, we took him to a urologist who charged $700 pesos or $38usd for the consultation. He prescribed the following three medicines for the prostate treatment:1. Zoladex 10.8mg, one every 3 months. $10,940 pesos or $592usd.2. Calutol 50mg tablets, one/day. $1,653 pesos or $89usd.3. Zometa 4mg solution, one/month. $6,717 pesos or $363usd.These three items totaled $19,310 pesos or $1,044usd.Assisted living.Although he was improving at a noticeable pace, his three children flew in from Toronto and Utah after they had been notified of his condition. They insisted that he spend at least one month in an assisted living facility until he regained his strength. He is now staying at the Casa Eugenia, [email protected], another property of theArboledas Hospital owners that is located one block away.A private room at this facility cost $1,000 pesos/night or $54usd for short stays, $16,000 pesos/month or $865usd for a semi private room, $21,000 pesos/month or $1,135usd for a private room and $23,000 pesos/month or $1,243usd for a slightly larger private room.Dentistry.Yesterday at our Saturday morning coffee/breakfast gathering, I saw something that I had never seen or heard of before. A bite guard. The granddaughter of one of our group had just recently been fitted for this thin transparent bite guard. I asked the young child’s grandmother what it was for. She told me that it was for giving support for a loose tooth.This device was exactly what I needed as I also had the same problem. She told me that it cost $500 pesos or $27usd.On the way home, I stopped at Especialidades Odontológicas, that can be contacted at http://especialidades-drrex.com. While there, I asked the receptionist for prices. My bite guard was going to cost $800 pesos or $43usd. Fillings cost $600 pesos or $32usd and a root canal for $3,500 pesos or $189usd. An X ray cost $200 pesos or $11usd and a bridge for one front tooth is going to cost $2,500 pesos or $135usd.------What it costs to live in Guadalajara.A few years before I received my first benefit check from the Veterans Administration in June of 2007, my wife received an inheritance that was used to purchase our home. Our combined monthly income from Uncle Sam and the Mexican Social Security pension program is more than enough to cover our needs. We each receive a monthly deposit of $2,721 pesos or $147usd from the Mexican government. I receive a monthly income of 1,061usd or $19,629 pesos that is deposited to a Texas bank. From this amount, I give my wife $4,767 pesos or $258usd that gives her a combined monthly income of $7,488 pesos or $405usd.With a declared total monthly income of $25,071 pesos or $1,355usd, less my wife’s monthly income, a balance of $17,583 pesos or $950usd remains for our fixed and miscellaneous expenses.When there are no major household or auto repairs, occasionally I have been able to save up to $2,500 pesos or $135usd in one month. There are some months when I have increased my Mexican peso savings by taking advantage of a strong dollar and weak peso rate of exchange.These savings pay for restaurant outings or for short inexpensive trips to Puerto Vallarta, Cuyutlan, or Barra de Navidad, all located on the beautiful Pacific coast only a few hours away by car or by bus.The Mrs. saves most of her monthly income for car upgrades that takes place every few years.Based on the above numbers, the combined fixed and miscellaneous expenses average $27.17/day totaling $815usd/month.Monthly expenses:Telephone and Internet:$389 pesos or $21.03usd.Cellular phone:$60 pesos or $3.24usd.Gated community maintenance fee:$580 pesos or $31.35usd.Electricity: $157 pesos or $8.49usd.In our residential area, the government owned electric company CFE, Comision Federal de Electricidad, subsidizes 85% of the cost.Natural Gas: $183 pesos or $9.89usd at $7.07pesos/liter. This expense will increase by approximately 14% when the tank is refilled this year as the price is now $8.08 pesos/liter or $0.44usd.Four days per month maid service:$1,125 pesos or $60.81usd.Basic cable service for two TVs:$245 pesos or $13.24usd.My wife’s income:$7,488 pesos or $405usd.Yearly expenses:Water: $750 pesos or $41usd ($62.50 pesos/month).Property tax on our one million pesos or $54,054usd house: $486pesos or $26usd ($40.50 pesos/month).We carry no household insurance.Auto collision and liability insurance: $5,666 or $$306usd ($472.17 pesos/month).Tune up with emissions verification: $1,500 or $81usd ($125 pesos/month).Auto registration: $450 or $24usd ($37.50 pesos/month).Gross monthly income = $25,071 pesos or $1,355usd.Less the Mrs.’ income = $7,488 pesos or $405usdNet monthly income = $17,583 pesos or $950usd.Total monthly expenses = $10,965 pesos or $593usd.Miscellaneous expenses = $4,110 pesos $222usd.Average monthly surplus = $2,500 pesos or $135usd.Staying safe in Guadalajara.In my personal situation, my wife and I have resided in a gated community for the past 4 years. We have 24/7 security guards that work closely with the local police. Our home security consists of two chihuahuas who bark at any noise.For those of you who are concerned about the violence in Mexico, you are not alone. As much of it appears to be drug related, simply avoid those areas where that kind of trouble occurs. When we do find ourselves at the wrong place at the wrong time, it is just part of living that can happen in any city, state or country that we choose to visit or to live in!When driving, it is advisable to keep the car doors locked and the windows rolled up. When walking, stay on the main streets. An evening strolls depends on the security of the area. I find it best to avoid this nocturnal activity. The rule of thumb of course, is to always use your street smarts.------Depending on the emergency within the Guadalajara Metropolitan area, calling 911 will send the police, firemen or an ambulance.The American Consulate can be contacted at 326-821-00 for advice on handling other problems.------Emigrating to Mexico.I am by no means an expert in Mexican immigration law. Therefore, it would be advisable, and in some instances necessary, to first contact a Mexican Consulate and/or an immigration attorney for a consultation concerning your specific needs and who can also offer assistance in obtaining resident, working or citizenship papers.According to “Mexico On My Mind”, at https://www.mexicoonmymind.com , to become a temporary resident in Mexico one needs to present proof of income for approximately $2,000usd for an individual, $3,000usd for a married couple and an additional 25% for each family dependent.I have heard that these amounts can vary when an applicant is married to a Mexican National, owns a home, or choses to reside in a small or medium size town.For approximately $22usd, a 180-day tourist visa can be obtained upon entering Mexico. I have been told that this amount is included in the airline fare or is paid separately when crossing the border by car or by bus.Prior to making any decision about permanently moving to Mexico, I strongly suggest using the full six months of a tourist visa. Since 1970 I have known several expatriates who have gotten frustrated with the different aspects of the Mexican culture after having gone through the immigration process. I have always suggested that any major decision such as buying a home or marrying a Mexican national should not be made until a minimum of 6 to 18 months have been spent getting familiar with the ways of the people and getting to know what the country has to offer. Mexico is not for everyone!Since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement I have been told that it has become much easier to acquire papers to work in this country. However, there are still several hoops that need to be jumped through.An immigration lawyer will prove to be invaluable for obtaining legal status in Mexico. If the plan is to start a business, a good accountant will also be needed!Language.Do not be too concerned if you do not speak Spanish. Most residents of Guadalajara have a fair knowledge of English. Spanish courses are readily available throughout the city for a reasonable per hour price.In Conclusion.Both of my parents were born in the State of New York. My father taught high school biology and every summer he would take my mother and myself on a two-month cross country drive to California.My grandfather was of Spanish- Mexican decent and graduated from the Chapultepec Castle in Mexico City when it was a military academy. He graduated in the late 1800’s or in early 1900’s and then deserted.For graduation, his parents bought him a round trip steamer ticket to New York City. Instead returning to fulfill his 8-year military obligation that he owed Mexico for his schooling, he cashed in the return ticket and taught Spanish and fencing in NYC.He married a woman who had recently arrived from Spain by the name of Martha Fox and then moved to Buffalo, NY. – I have always wondered if his wife’s family was related to Vicente Fox, a fairly recent president of Mexico.As this story goes, I was told that my grandfather asked my parents to visit Mexico to look up his relatives and let them know that he was alright. He had not communicated with them since his desertion for fear of being tracked down by the Mexican authorities. If found, he could have been forced back to Mexico, stood trial for desertion and would have probably served a long prison sentence.I was probably 8 years old when my parents first visited Mexico in 1953. Our first stop was Guanajuato where my grandfather used to live. I mention this only to point out that the family of the former president Vicente Fox was also from Guanajuato.After locating his relatives in Mexico City, we traveled throughout Mexico and discovered Guadalajara. Until their passing some decades ago, every summer vacation was spent in this city. We lived here for two years from 1956 through 1958 when my father took a two-year leave of absence from his high school teaching position. While I was completing my four-year enlistment in the US Coast Guard, my father retired in the summer of 1969, sold our home and brought my mother to live permanently in Guadalajara.My father passed on during the following month of October. I was given a four month early honorable discharge and returned to Guadalajara to be with my mother. I have been here ever since.Guadalajara has been my home for approximately 50 years and I have never regretted leaving the USA nor for having made the decision to live here permanently. When I initially moved here, there were a few things that I missed from the USA. These can now be found in Guadalajara. What I do not miss is the cold, rain, sleet, snow and constant overcast that prevailed in my hometown of Endicott, New York!The author can be contacted at: [email protected]

We certainly can.Gun control advocates should stop wasting our time, you don’t have the votes to have it your way to use the force of government.Gun advocates have history and the constitution on there side.First the Constitution:2/3rds Majorities in Both houses of Congress signed by the President and ratified by 2/3rds of the states is needed to repeal the second amendment to US Constitution. Gun Control is about political repression by government.Second The History of gun control in AmericaGun Control in America is a legacy of the disenfranchisement of African Americans by the Democratic party in the post Civil War Era.The Racist Origin of America’s Gun Control LawsWritten by Thomas R. Eddlemfont size decrease font size increase font size Print EmailThe Racist Origin of America’s Gun Control LawsA freed slave and tenant farmer, Roda Ann Childs of Griffin, Georgia, testified on September 25, 1866 before the Freedman’s Bureau in her state of what happened when eight armed men barged into her home one evening:We were called upon one night, and my husband was demanded; I said he was not there. They then asked where he was. I said he was gone to the watermelon patch. They then seized me and took me some distance from the house, where they “bucked” me down across a log, stripped my clothes over my head, one of the men standing astride my neck, and beat me across my posterior, two men holding my legs. In this manner I was beaten until they were tired. Then they turned me parallel with the log, laying my neck on a limb which projected from the log, and one man placing his foot upon my neck, beat me again on my hip and thigh. Then I was thrown upon the ground on my back, one of the men stood upon my breast, while two others took hold of my feet and stretched my limbs as far apart as they could, while the man standing upon my breast applied the strap to my private parts until fatigued into stopping, and I was more dead than alive. Then a man, supposed to be an ex-confederate soldier, as he was on crutches, fell upon me and ravished me. During the whipping one of the men ran his pistol into me, and said he had a hell of a mind to pull the trigger, and swore they ought to shoot me, as my husband had been in the “God d***ed Yankee Army,” and swore they meant to kill every black son-of-a-b***h they could find that had ever fought against them. They then went back to the house, seized my two daughters and beat them, demanding their father’s pistol, and upon failure to get that, they entered the house and took such articles of clothing as suited their fancy, and decamped.Mrs. Childs’ husband had been entitled to own a gun as a soldier in the Union army during the war, but pre-war Georgia law had banned even free blacks from owning guns. Such laws threatened to leave millions of newly freed slaves to the ravages of savage men, some of whom worked with local police, others who worked openly in unofficial gangs, and still others who worked secretly behind the white sheets of the Ku Klux Klan.Already by 1866, the carnage suffered by black Americans was massive, numbering in the thousands across the former slave states. Former Mississippi Provisional Governor William L. Sharkey — a pre-war Supreme Court judge in the state and unionist during the war — testified before Congress in 1866, “I believe that there are now in the State very little over half the number of freedmen that there were formerly of slaves — certainly not more than two-thirds. They have died off. There is no telling the mortality that has prevailed among them; they have died off in immense numbers.” Sharkey — whose numbers are clearly exaggerated unless they include refugees who fled the state — concluded to Congress, “My expectation concerning them is that they are destined to extinction, beyond all doubt. We must judge of the future by the past. I could tell you a great many circumstances to that effect; I am sorry I did not come prepared with means to state the percentages of deaths among them. It is alarming, appalling. I think they will gradually die out.”Sharkey — who had been appointed governor by President Andrew Johnson and elected in 1865 to the U.S. Senate by Mississippi (but not seated because the Reconstructionist Congress refused to seat congressmen from confederate states) — wasn’t the only one to predict extermination of African-Americans in the postwar environment. Rev. Joseph E. Roy of the American Home Missionary Society told Congress of his six-month-long mission across the South after the war: “I heard very many persons remark, with great satisfaction, that the negroes would become extinct in a few years,” including many people willing to do the job themselves.That “extinction” could only take place if the armed African-Americans who had been in Union army service were first disarmed, a movement well under way by the time of Mrs. Childs’ brutal rape. South Carolina Freedman’s Bureau official Assistant Commissioner Rufux Saxton testified before Congress in 1866 that he also had documented numerous attempts by white supremacist gangs, calling themselves “regulators,” roving about South Carolina to disarm black freedmen. “I have had men come to my office and complain that the negroes had arms, and I also heard that [a] band of men called Regulators, consisting of those who had been in the late confederate service, were going around the country disarming negroes. I can further state that they desired me to sanction a form of contract that would deprive the colored men of their arms, which I refused to do.”America’s First Racist Gun Control LawsThe very first gun control laws in America were slave codes that banned African-Americans from owning or bearing arms. As early as 1640, the Virginia legislature passed an ordinance stating that African-American slaves — then numbering fewer than 300 in the British colony — would be exempt from mandatory militia service. The Virginia slave code of 1680 made disarmament of all black people mandatory, ruling, “It shall not be lawfull for any negroe or other slave to carry or arme himselfe with any club, staffe, gunn, sword or any other weapon of defence or offence,” a prohibition repeated in the 1705 Virginia slave code, written in more modern language, requiring that “no slave go armed with gun, sword, club, staff, or other weapon.”The prohibition against slaves owning or carrying guns or other weapons in Britain’s American colonies preceded other gun control laws across the British empire, including the penal laws against the Irish, which in 1695 required that “All papists [Catholics] within this kingdom of Ireland shall before the 1st day of March, 1696, deliver up to some justice of the peace or corporation officer where such papist shall dwell, all their arms and ammunition, notwithstanding any licence for keeping the same heretofore granted.”The rules against owning guns were aimed not just at those nominally deemed “slaves” in America; they were aimed at all subjected peoples. The text of Virginia’s first slave code applied the same restriction to “free” blacks and indentured servants (mostly Irish Catholics and Scotch Presbyterians, but also criminals). Nearly all other Southern slave-holding states copied Virginia’s lead, passing laws banning the ownership of guns for both slave and free African-Americans. These laws stayed in effect and were updated after independence from Britain. Georgia’s 1833 slave code required that “the free persons of color, so detected in owning, using or carrying fire-arms, shall receive on his bare back, thirty-nine lashes.” Alabama’s 1833 slave code was nearly identical, with exactly the same punishment. North Carolina’s 1855 slave code simply stated: “No slave shall go armed with gun, sword, club or other weapon, or shall keep any such weapon.” The state omitted the mention of free blacks, largely because North Carolina had so few free African-Americans.Texas may have been alone among slave states not to pass an outright ban on slaves bearing arms, perhaps in part due to legislative fidelity to the 1836 state constitution that mandates, “Every citizen shall have the right to bear arms in defence of himself and the republic.” Though blacks were not considered citizens in antebellum Texas, the legislature was assumed not to have the power to pass legislation prohibiting any ownership of guns.The reason slave codes denied the right to keep and bear arms to slaves is easily understandable. The whites feared the slaves would rebel. Arming slaves may have led to a revolution the slave-masters did not want. But that didn’t explain the ban on free blacks owning guns. The deeper purpose behind the ban on owning and bearing arms was to take away any thought that those people had individual rights. And it went far beyond the practical denial of a long-held individual right among Anglo-American people; the deeper issue had to do with placing the master as a god above the slave, with the power of life and death.This point was brought home in the 1830 case of North Carolina v. Mann, when the Supreme Court of North Carolina defended the right of a master who had shot his slave named Lydia while she was trying to run away. The case established that slavery was less about labor than about dehumanizing power. “The slave, to remain a slave,” Justice Thomas Ruffin wrote in his decision, “must be made sensible, that there is no appeal from his master; that his power is in no instance, usurped; but is conferred by the laws of man at least, if not by the law of God.” The words of Ruffin blasphemously perverted the words of St. Paul in Chapter 13 of his Letter to the Romans: “Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God … for he beareth not the sword in vain. For he is God’s minister: an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil.”Ruffin hadn’t really made any innovation of law in the antebellum South, as laws in many states implicitly — and sometimes explicitly — gave masters the power of life and death over their slaves. For example, Virginia’s slave code of 1705 stipulated that “if any slave resist his master, or owner, or other person, by his or her order, correcting such slave, and shall happen to be killed in such correction, it shall not be accounted felony; but the master, owner, and every such other person so giving correction, shall be free and acquit of all punishment and accusation for the same, as if such accident had never happened.” In early America, slavery quickly came to be divided between traditional slavery practiced in almost every nation and culture — what the English sometimes called “indentured servitude” and today is called “white slavery” — and the “chattel” slavery that bound African-Americans. The distinction became a gulf by the mid-1700s, as indentured servants traditionally had some rights and were generally only bound for a limited time (and this system was abolished after the War for Independence from Britain). African-American “chattel” slavery — a word that means “moveable property” and is derived from the English word “cattle” — was for the life of the slaves and all of their descendants. In such a system, it was vital the slave-owner be the only one bearing the “sword,” and to be the god-figure with the power of life and death over the slave.The ban on ownership of guns by nominally free African-Americans in most states had the same purpose as slavery. In essence, a ban on ownership of weapons is the ultimate badge of slavery and inferiority to the higher power that bears the “sword.” Whether it was the “free” African-Americans in Virginia or the Irish tenant under penal laws as an indentured servant, the purpose behind gun control was to keep them in a state of slavery with or without the name.Establishing the right to keep and bear arms was a key fight in the Anglo-American tradition, and an important part of the English Bill of Rights signed by William of Orange in 1689. That document stipulated “the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.” The document was a predecessor of the U.S. Second Amendment, the former passed in part because the deposed Catholic King James II had deprived some Protestants of weapons. The British Bill of Rights complained James II had caused “several good subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and employed contrary to law.”Persons possessing rights have historically been capable of owning and bearing arms, while slaves have not. The complete subjugation of all blacks — whether “free” or slave — was driven home by Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney in the infamous Dred Scott case in 1856. Taney stressed in his Dred Scott v. Sandford opinion that if African-Americans could be admitted as citizens in any state, “It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right … to keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Taney correctly noted that even in some Northern U.S. states, blacks were denied the right to keep and bear arms. “By the laws of New Hampshire, collected and finally passed in 1815,” Taney wrote, “no one was permitted to be enrolled in the militia of the State but free white citizens, and the same provision is found in a subsequent collection of the laws made in 1855. Nothing could more strongly mark the entire repudiation of the African race.” Not surprisingly, blacks had few rights in those Northern states before the Civil War — being without the right to keep and bear arms — and were reduced in many instances to a state of near-slavery.In his Dred Scott opinion, Taney also claimed, falsely, that African-Americans were denied both citizenship and the right to keep and bear arms in every state, a point Associate Justice Benjamin Curtis refuted in his dissent. Taney wrote of blacks in his decision: “We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word ‘citizens’ in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States.”But the reality was that blacks were considered full citizens in Massachusetts before adoption of the U.S. Constitution, and in Vermont as soon as it joined the union. Shortly after Massachusetts ratified its 1780 constitution declaring that “all men are born free and equal,” the state courts were beset with slaves demanding their freedom under that provision of the constitution.The state constitution deemed them “free and equal,” protecting for them all the rights possessed by white people, including both the right to vote and the right to keep and bear arms. In fact, Revolutionary War veteran and freed slave Toby Gilmore owned a cannon on his Raynham, Massachusetts, farm and, according to local tradition, publicly fired it off during annual Fourth of July celebrations. Gil­more’s cannon — which stands as a thundering refutation of today’s gun control lobby argument that the Founding Fathers did not intend the Second Amendment to protect citizen ownership of “military-style assault weapons” — currently resides in the Old Colony Historical Society in Taunton, Massachusetts.Black Codes After the Civil WarEven after abolition of slavery with the 13th Amendment, racist gun control laws were used to keep African-Americans in a state of subjugation. Across the former Confederate states, reconstituted legislatures in 1865 passed laws designed to reduce the status of African-Americans back to slaves without the name. These laws became known as the “Black Codes,” and even some of the Northern states — such as Oregon — enforced Black Codes for decades. In the South, many of the old slave codes were simply re-enacted, with the word “slave” struck out and “negro” or “freeman” inserted. Most also passed apprenticeship and vagrancy laws that placed African-Americans in long-term, forced agricultural contracts unless they carried work papers with a plantation.Even their right to freedom of worship was taken from them under the infamous Black Codes. Ever since the abortive Gabriel Prosser slave revolt in Virginia in 1800, organized under the auspices of religious meetings, slave codes restricted black people’s religious gatherings. Mississippi’s Black Codes of 1865 likewise prohibited African-Americans from “exercising the function of a minister of the Gospel without a license from some regularly organized church.” Freedman’s Bureau Assistant Commissioner Thomas Conway testified to Congress on February 22, 1866 that in Louisiana, religious meetings were often broken up under a similar law that banned religious meetings after 9:00 in the evening: “There was an order issued at all the station-houses of the city, that the police in their various beats should break up any meetings of colored people held after 9 o’clock, and in some places meetings were broken up and the worshipers were all carried off to jail. This was done violently, and, on account of it, the city was almost reduced to a state of riot and revolution, the colored people having been unwilling to endure the persecution.”But there was no armed resistance, since only the white population possessed guns. And the recently freed population of ex-slaves were often slaughtered by new secret societies bent on terrorism and murder, such as the Ku Klux Klan and the White Leagues (and after 1875, the less secret Red Shirts).Mississippi’s Black Codes provided a $10 fine (about $650 in today’s money) for black ownership or possession of guns, but in Florida the penalty for an African-American owning a gun was positively medieval. Florida stipulated that black gun owners would be required to “stand in the pillory … for one hour, and then whipped with thirty-nine lashes on the bare back.” Thirty-nine lashes was also the standard penalty under slave codes in many of the Southern states for gun ownership. South Carolina also prescribed “corporal punishment” for blacks owning guns.Even African-American soldiers on duty in the U.S. Army were subject to persecution under the Black Codes. Conway also testified of vagrancy laws: “In the city of New Orleans last summer [1865], under the orders of the acting mayor of the city, Hugh Kennedy, the police of that city conducted themselves toward the freedmen, in respect to violence and ill usage, in every way equal to the old days of slavery; arresting them on the streets as vagrants, without any form of law whatever, and simply because they did not have in their pockets certificates of employment from their former owners or other white citizens. I have gone to the jails and released large numbers of them, men who were industrious and who had regular employment; yet because they had not the certificates of white men in their pockets they were locked up in jail to be sent out to plantations.... Some members of the seventy-fourth United States colored infantry, a regiment which was mustered out but one day, were arrested the next because they did not have these certificates of employment. This was done to these men after having served in the United States army three years.”Some Relief Under the 14th AmendmentWhen the 14th Amendment was declared ratified in 1868 (the reconstructionist Congress forced former Confederate states to ratify it as a condition of renewing congressional representation), the Black Codes — including the race-based prohibition of keeping and bearing arms — became instantly unconstitutional. The amendment granted citizenship to blacks and stipulated that no state could “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”The amendment required at least nominal equality under the law, but attempts to prohibit black citizens from obtaining firearms for their self-defense continued under new Jim Crow laws. Dubbed “separate but equal” by its proponents, only the first half of the proposition under Jim Crow was ever designed to be true. The new racist laws in many states took on a nominally even-handed appearance, even though they were designed to subjugate black Americans. In order to stop blacks from voting, a literacy test was enacted in many of the Southern states where it had been a crime for decades to teach slaves how to read. And to ensure that illiterate whites could continue to vote uninterrupted, the same legislatures enacted the “grandfather clause.” The grandfather clause stated that if a person or his father or grandfather could vote in the United States before 1860, they wouldn’t have to take the literacy test in order to vote. In other words, the literacy test would only apply to blacks.That’s how Jim Crow worked toward disarming black Americans. A year after Homer Plessy, who was black, was arrested for boarding a segregated white train car in Louisiana in the famous case that eventually added a Supreme Court imprimatur upon Jim Crow, Florida passed a law that incorporated gun control into Jim Crow by prohibiting the carrying of handguns and repeating rifles without a license. And just as Homer Plessy paid extra for a ticket to the first-class car and was told there was no first-class car for African-Americans, the “separate but equal” gun control laws were likewise only half true because they weren’t applied equally. Florida Justice Rivers Buford’s concurring opinion Watson v. Stone (1941) stated of the 1893 law: “The original act was passed when there was a great influx of Negro laborers … and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the Negro laborers.... The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied.” The law was set aside in the 1941 Florida court decision, but not because of its racism.In the history of gun control elsewhere across the globe, there have been many examples of genocide where the victim race or ethnic group has been disarmed before the genocide took place. One particularly valuable scholarly analysis of this trend was the 1994 book Lethal Laws by Jay Simkin, Alan Rice, and Aaron Zelman, which analyzed the gun control laws of six national genocides. In each of the six cases, from the Turkish slaughter of the Armenians to the Nazi annihilation of the Jews to the Rwandan Hutus killing the Tutsis, strict gun control laws were in place for the victim populations before the genocide. America avoided genocide, but historically its gun control laws served a similar racist purpose by subjugating African-Americans legally andThe Dark Secret of Jim Crow and the Racist Roots of Gun ControlThe Dark Secret of Jim Crow and the Racist Roots of Gun ControlBy Dave KopelAmerica's 1st Freedom, March 2011. More articles by Kopel on civil rights and gun control are available here.Jim Crow is alive and well.School children today are taught that "Jim Crow" was the name for a legal system of racial oppression, which began after Reconstruction, particularly in the South, and reached its nadir in the early 20th century. Children are also taught that Jim Crow was banished by legal reforms such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education.Yet in one important part of American life, Jim Crow continues to thrive--the legal foundation of restrictive and oppressive gun control that was built by Jim Crow. The Jim Crow cases continue to hobble the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.Shockingly, the Jim Crow laws and legacy are lauded by some persons who consider themselves liberal and tolerant. In the 2010 Supreme Court case McDonald v. Chicago, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a dissent that asserted that District of Columbia v. Heller should be overturned, and that state and local governments should be allowed to ban guns. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined the dissent. That dissent included a litany of restrictive American gun control statutes and court cases, many of them the products of Jim Crow.Previous issues of America's 1st Freedom have told the story of how the defeated Confederate states enacted the Black Codes, which explicitly restricted gun possession and carrying by the freedmen. Sometimes these laws facilitated the activities of the terrorist organization Ku Klux Klan, America's first gun control organization. The top item on the Klan's agenda was confiscating arms from the freedmen, the better to terrorize them afterward.Outraged, the Reconstruction Congress responded with the Freedmen's Bureau Bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1870--every one of them aimed at racial subordination in general and racist gun control laws in particular.President Ulysses S. Grant (1869-77), who would later serve as president of the National Rifle Association, vigorously prosecuted Klansmen, and even declared martial law when necessary to suppress KKK violence.Reconstruction formally ended in 1877 with the inauguration of President Rutherford B. Hayes and the withdrawal of federal troops from the South. Even before that, white supremacist "redeemer" governments had taken over one Southern state after another.Because the new 14th Amendment forbade any state to deny "the equal protection of the laws," gun control statutes aimed at blacks could no longer be written in overtly racial terms. Instead, the South created racially neutral laws designed to disarm freedmen. Some laws prohibited inexpensive firearms while protecting more expensive military guns owned by former Confederate soldiers. Meanwhile, other laws imposed licensing systems or carry restrictions. As a Florida Supreme Court justice later acknowledged, these laws were "never intended to be applied to the white population" (Watson v. Stone, 1941).Southern courts generally upheld these laws. In the 19th and 20th centuries, these court precedents played a substantial role in maintaining white supremacy by facilitating unofficial--but government-tolerated--violence against blacks and civil rights advocates. Today, these racist laws are the foundation of continuing infringements of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.Let's take a state-by-state look at how the system worked--and continues to work.TennesseeSetting a pattern that was typical in the South, Tennessee courts initially protected the right to arms, but then abandoned the field as Jim Crow took over. In 1870, the Tennessee Legislature prohibited the carrying of "a dirk, sword-cane, Spanish stiletto, belt or pocket pistol or revolver," either openly or concealed. The Tennessee Supreme Court addressed the ban in the well-known and still-influential 1871 case, Andrews v. State.The Andrews court stated that people had a right to arms, including the right to buy guns and ammunition, to take guns to gunsmiths and to carry guns and ammunition for purposes of sale and repair.The court rejected the notion that the right to arms was a "political right," like voting or jury service, which belonged to only a subset of the people. Rather, the right to arms was a civil right to be enjoyed by all citizens.The right to carry in public could be regulated, but not prohibited: "The power to regulate does not fairly mean the power to prohibit; on the contrary, to regulate necessarily involves the existence of the thing or act to be regulated."In this particular case, Andrews had been carrying a repeating pistol (what we would today call a large revolver). The legislature could not ban the carrying of this type of arm, which was particularly useful for militia service: "The pistol known as the repeater is a soldier's weapon--skill in the use of which will add to the efficiency of the soldier. If such is the character of the weapon here designated, then the prohibition of the statute is too broad to be allowed to stand. ..."The legislature, however, was determined to stamp out the right to carry. So it promptly passed a new law banning the carrying of any handgun "other than an army pistol, or such as are commonly carried and used in the United States Army, and in no case shall it be lawful for any person to carry such army pistol publicly or privately about his person in any other manner than openly in his hands."The new statute contradicted Andrews' affirmation of the right to buy any type of handgun in a store and carry it home. The law still allowed any model of handgun to be taken home, but the buyer would have to put the gun in a cart or wagon, rather than carry it. While the law allowed the carrying--for any purpose, and in public--of army model handguns, the requirement that the gun be carried "in his hands" was likely to provoke fear and almost certain to cause accidents. In effect, the law went as far as possible to outlaw all handgun possession while maintaining a pretense of honoring the right to bear arms.Unfortunately, the Tennessee Supreme Court upheld the ban without even discussing whether the law violated the Andrews standard (State v. Wilburn, 1872).Then in 1879, the legislature banned the sale of all handguns "except army or navy pistols." The obvious effect was to prevent freedmen from owning handguns. Almost all were poor and could not afford the expensive Army and Navy models. Meanwhile, the ex-confederate soldiers already had plenty of Army and Navy models that they had been allowed to take home under the surrender terms for the Confederate army.ArkansasLike Tennessee, Arkansas had an unusual constitutional right to arms, which guaranteed the right only for the "common defense"--this was the basis for limiting the right only to militia-type arms. Notably, when the U.S. Senate was considering the Second Amendment, it had rejected Sen. Roger Sherman's proposal to impose a similar limit on the federal right to arms.As Reconstruction was ending, the Arkansas Supreme Court upheld broad gun controls while still respecting core rights. But as Jim Crow spread its tentacles, Arkansas degenerated into near-nullification of the right.The 1876 decision Fife v. state held that a ban on open or concealed carry of pistols was too broad. Citing the Tennessee case Andrews v. State, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that only militia-type arms were protected and that the right to carry militia arms belonged to all people, not just militiamen. The court held that "the rifle, of all descriptions, the shot gun, the musket and repeater, are such arms, and ... under the Constitution, the right to keep such arms cannot be infringed or forbidden by the legislature."While large handguns ("repeaters") were protected, the "pocket revolver" was not, because the pocket revolver was not "effective as a weapon of war." The court overlooked the point that the "common defense" is enhanced by personal self-defense, because responsible gun ownership and self-defense against criminals deter crime in general, aid the police and make the public at large safer.Consistent with the Fife case, the Arkansas court later struck down convictions for carrying concealed army pistols. (Wilson v. State and Holland v. state, both in 1878.) Wilson held that carrying handguns in the course of one's daily activities in ordinary public places (but not in churches or polling places) was a constitutional right.The remedy to abuse of the right was not prohibition against the innocent but punishment of the guilty: "If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege."But the Arkansas Legislature would not quit. The carrying of most handguns was already outlawed. Then in 1881 the legislature copied the Tennessee law and banned "the carrying of army pistols except uncovered and in the hand."The next year, the Arkansas Supreme Court upheld the "in the hand" requirement in Haile v. State. Ignoring the court's own precedents, and relying on the "common defense" language in the state constitution, the court said that the right to arms was not for personal defense, but solely for the resistance of tyranny.The court acknowledged that the purpose of the "in the hand" law was to discourage gun carrying. Such discouragement was for the benefit of "timid citizens." (Some today call a person with an extreme fear of guns, such that the fear interferes with normal daily activities, a "hoplophobe.")In essence, the court had now agreed with the legislature that the right to bear arms was a bad idea. Rather than force the legislature to seek a constitutional amendment to repeal the right, the court accepted the legislature's practical nullification of the right to bear arms by requiring that bearing be done in the most inconvenient and dangerous manner possible.Another 1881 statute prohibited the sale of any pistol other than those "used in the army or navy of the United States and known as the navy pistol." The Arkansas court upheld the ban in Dabbs v. State(1882).OklahomaAt the 1907 Oklahoma constitutional convention, the delegates rejected a proposal to include "common defense" language in the constitutional protection of firearm possession. Instead, the delegates copied nearly verbatim from the Missouri and Colorado constitutions, explicitly protecting "defense of home, person and property" in the right to arms.The following year, however, the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Ex parte Thomas declared that the right was only for militia-type arms, and that a "pistol" was not within the right to arms. Despite what the Thomas court claimed, there was not a single precedent for the proposition that all handguns could be banned. The Thomas court ignored the Missouri Supreme Court's precedent that revolvers in general (not just the Army and Navy models) were protected by the state right to arms (State v. Shelby, 1886).The Oklahoma Supreme Court strangled the state constitution's right to arms shortly after birth. The outrageous Thomas opinion remains the leading precedent in Oklahoma, and thus for more than a century has deprived the people of Oklahoma of the protection of the strong Right to Keep and Bear Arms that they wrote into their constitution. Fortunately, as of 2011, the Oklahoma Legislature has reformed most of the bad gun laws from the Jim Crow era, but the people of Oklahoma suffered decades of deprivations of their rights--including the Right to Carry--before the legislature finally acted.TexasMost people would be surprised to learn that Arkansas and Tennessee were the gun-ban capitals of the United States during Jim Crow, and that Oklahoma was not far behind. People would likewise be surprised that, by the early 20th century, Texas had joined the trend.The Texas Legislature imposed a 50 percent gross receipts tax on the sale of handguns. An intermediate court of appeals upheld the punitive tax (Caswell & Smith v. State, Tex. Civil App., 1912). The court reasoned that handguns, like alcohol, are socially harmful and therefore may be taxed severely. The court added in dicta that prohibiting the sale of handguns would not violate the state constitution.GeorgiaIn 1910, the Georgia Legislature enacted a licensing requirement for the open carry of handguns. The 1910 law was not like the licensing laws in effect today in Georgia and most other states--the modern laws use objective criteria to grant carry permits to adults who meet certain specific standards, such as passing a fingerprint-based background check and a safety course. In contrast, the 1910 Georgia statute provided almost limitless discretion to the licensing authority so that, in effect, political cronies could get licenses and others (especially blacks) could not. Because the legislature had previously outlawed concealed carry, obtaining an open carry license became the only way for a person to lawfully exercise the Right to Carry a handgun.In Strickland v. State(1911) the Georgia Supreme Court upheld the licensing statute. Admitting that the Georgia right was not limited to "common defense," the court said that the carry ban was authorized by the general "police power" of the state--that is, the power to make laws for health, safety, welfare and morals. Yet the very purpose of enumerating rights in a constitution is to limit the police power of the state on certain subjects.Throughout the 20th century, many courts in other states used Georgia's "police power" rationale to uphold a wide range of anti-gun laws, thus turning those states' constitutional right to arms into a practical nullity.FloridaIn 1893 the Florida Legislature adopted a gun control law--that it revised in 1901 and 1906--that prohibited the carrying of handguns and repeating rifles, openly or concealed, with ex­ceptions for peace officers and persons licensed by a county commissioner.A 1941 opinion by Florida Supreme Court Justice Rivers Buford provided a frank explanation of why the carry ban was enacted and how it had actually been enforced:"I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of Negro laborers in this state drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the act was amended in 1901 and the act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied. We have no statistics avail­able, but it is a safe guess that more than 80 percent of the white men living in rural sections of Florida have violated this statute. It is also a safe guess to say that not more than 5 percent of the men in Florida who own pistols and repeating rifles have ever applied to the Board of County Commissioners for a permit to have the same in their possession and there has never been, within my knowledge, any effort to enforce the provisions of this statute as to white people, because it has been generally conceded to be in contravention of the Constitution and non-enforceable if contested" (Watson v. State, concurring opinion).Justice Buford pulls back the curtain on the racist gun control statutes and cases discussed here. The statutes never used the word "negro" and the cases upholding those statutes scrupulously avoided any racial language. Yet the purpose and application of those laws was well known.New YorkBy the turn of the century, Jim Crow was spreading beyond its Southern roots. An 1897 New York statute outlawed the possession of a "slungshot, billy, sand club or metal knuckles"--even if nefarious intent was absent. The New York Court of Appeals upheld the ban in 1912 (People v. Persce). The court ignored the fact that the first three of the banned items, at least, have legitimate protective uses, as shown by the fact that police officers often carried them.The next year, New York's intermediate court of appeals, in a 3-2 vote, upheld the infamous 1911 Sullivan Act. That law required a license to possess a handgun in the home, and made the licensing process difficult and highly arbitrary. The act was upheld in spite of the existence of the New York Civil Rights Law, which includes a verbatim copy of the Second Amendment (People ex rel. Darling v. Warden of City Prison). Though unstated, the Sullivan Act targeted blacks as well as Italian and Jewish immigrants.OhioSimilarly, in 1920 the Ohio Supreme Court brushed aside the Ohio Constitution in State v. Nieto to uphold the conviction of a Mexican employee of an Ohio railroad who possessed a concealed handgun in violation of an absolute ban (with no licensing provision) on concealed carry.In dissent, Justice J. Wanamaker's dissent discussed the racial issue that underlies much of gun control history in the United States. He wrote:"I desire to give some special attention to some of the authorities cited, supreme court decisions from Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, Kentucky and one or two inferior court decisions from New York, which are given in support of the doctrines upheld by this court. The Southern states have very largely furnished the precedents. It is only necessary to observe that the race issue there has extremely intensified a decisive purpose to entirely disarm the Negro, and this policy is evident upon reading the opinions."The majority decisions in Nieto, Darling, Thomas and many of the other cases discussed above provided the foundation for state courts nullifying the right to arms in state constitutions. These cases are still cited extensively by the gun prohibition lobbies and their judicial allies.These cases are the product of one of the most shameful periods in American judicial history, when judges put aside the constitutions they had sworn to uphold and instead made themselves into tools of white supremacy and Jim Crow.The battle against Jim Crow has been going on for well over a century, and it will not be completed until the Jim Crow gun control cases are recognized for the constitutional abominations that they are, and are placed on the ash heap of history, along with Plessey v. Ferguson and the rest of their ilk.