Michelle Moquin's "A day in the life of…"

Creative Discussions, Inspiring Thoughts, Fun Adventures, Love & Laughter, Peaceful Travel, Hip Fashions, Cool People, Gastronomic Pleasures, Exotic Indulgences, Groovy Music, and more!

  • Hello!

    Welcome To My OUR Blog!


    Michelle Moquin's Facebook profile "Click here" to go to my FaceBook profile. Visit me!
  • Copyright Protected

    Protected by Copyscape Plagiarism Checker
  • Let Michelle Style YOU!

    I am a "Specialist in Styles" Personal Stylist. Check out my Style website to see how I can help you discover, define, and refine your unique style.
  • © Copyright 2008-2023

    All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008-2023. All material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don't post it to my blog.
  • In Pursuit Of…

    Custom Search
  • Madaline Speaks

    For those of you interested in reading an Earthling Girl's Guide to a better Government, and a Greener world, check out the blog:
  • Contact Your Representatives and Senators Here!

    To send letters to your representatives about any issue of interest, Click here


    To send letters to your Senators about any issue of interest, Click here


    Get involved - Write your letters today!
  • On The Issues

    Don't be uninformed! Click here to see how every political leader on every issue voted.
  • Don’t Believe The Lies – Get The Facts

    FactCheck.org is a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. They monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Their goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

    Click here to get the facts.

    Pulitzer Prize Winner Politifact.com is another trusted site to get the facts. Click here to get the facts.

  • Who’s Paying Who?

    On The Issues is a nonpartisan guide to money's influence on U.S. elections and public policy.
  • Blog Rules of Conduct

    Rule #1: "The aliens can not reveal anything about anyone’s life that would not be known without the use of our technology. The exception being that if a reader has a question about his or her health and the assistance of alien technology would be necessary to answer that question.”

    Rule #2: "Aliens will not threaten humans and Humans will not threaten aliens."

    Rule #3:

    Posting Comments:

    When posting a comment in regards to any past or archived article, please reference the title and date of the article and post your comment on the present day to keep the conversation contemporary.

    NOTE: You do not need to add your e-mail address when posting a comment. Your real name, an alias, a moniker, initials...whatever ...even simply "anonymous" is all you need to add in the fields in order to post a comment.

    Thank you.

  • *********

    Yellow Pages for San Francisco, CA
  • Meta

  • Looking For A Personal Stylist?

    Michelle has designed and styled for the stars! She can be your "Specialist in Styles" Personal Stylist too. Check out Michelle's style website
  • Recent Posts

  • Michelle’s E-mail:

    E-mail me! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • Care To Twitter? Come Tweet Me!

  • Disclaimer: Adult Blog

    I DO NOT CENSOR COMMENTS POSTED TO THIS BLOG: Therefore this blog is not for the faint hearted, thin skinned, easily offended or the appointed people's moralist. If you feel that you may fit in any of those categories, please DO NOT read my blog or its comments. There are plenty of blogs that will fit your needs, find one. This warning also applies to those who post comments who would find it unpleasant or mentally injurious to receive an opposing opinion via a raw to vulgar delivery. I DO NOT censor comments posted here. If you post a comment, you are on notice that you may receive a comment in language or opinion that you will not approve of or that you feel is offensive. If that would bother you, DO NOT post on my blog.

    27Mar2011
  • Medical Disclaimer:

    I am not a doctor nor am I medically trained in any field. No one on this website is claiming to be a medical physician or claiming to be medically trained in any field. However, anyone can blog information about health articles, folk remedies, possible cures, possible treatments, etc that they have heard of on my blog. Please see your physician or a health care professional before heeding or using any medical information given on this blog. It is not intended to replace any medical advice given to you by your licensed medical professional. This blog is simply providing a medium for discussion on all matters concerning life. All opinions given are the sole responsibility of the person giving them. This blog does not make any claim to their truthfulness, honesty, or factuality because of their presence on my blog. Again, Please consult a health care professional before heeding any health information given here.

    27Mar2011
  • Legal Disclaimer:

    Michelle Moquin's "A Day In The Life Of..." publishes the opinions of expert authorities in many fields. But the use of these opinions is no substitute for legal, accounting, investment, medical and other professional services to suit your specific personal needs. Always consult a competent professional for answers to your specific questions.

    27Mar2011
  • Fair Use Notice Disclaimer

    This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity's problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from me. You can read more about "fair use' and US Copyright Law"at the"Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School." This notice was modified from a similar notice at "Common Dreams."

Supreme Court May Take Action On State Assault Weapon Bans

Posted by Michelle Moquin on June 20th, 2016

Bookmark and Share

Good morning.

For all of you who are tired of the “moments of silence” (me too, and I mean that with all due respect) that we give to the deceased of these horrific killing rampages, wanting something more to happen than just a moment of silence and pop-up shrines for the dead…how many more moments do we need to have before another AR atrocity occurs ?  And now this.

From the Huff Po:

Supreme Court May Take Action On State Assault Weapon Bans

The court has not decided a major gun case since 2010.

WASHINGTON, June 19 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court may weigh in this week on gun control, an issue smoldering again following the June 12 Orlando massacre, with the justices due to decide whether to hear a challenge by gun rights advocates to assault weapon bans in two states.

The Connecticut and New York laws prohibit semiautomatic weapons like the one used by the gunman who fatally shot 49 people at a gay night club in Orlando in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

The Supreme Court will announce as soon as Monday whether it will hear the challenge brought by gun rights groups and individual firearms owners asserting that the laws violate the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms.

The court has not decided a major gun case since 2010.

If they take up the matter, the justices would hear arguments in their next term, which begins in October. A decision not to hear the challenge would leave in place lower-court rulings upholding the laws.

The court’s action in another recent appeal indicated it may be disinclined to take up the matter. The justices in December opted not to hear a challenge to a Highland Park, Illinois ordinance banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.

A national assault weapons ban expired in 2004. Congressional Republicans, backed by the influential National Rifle Association gun rights lobby, beat back efforts to restore it. Some states and municipalities have enacted their own bans.

In their petition asking the Supreme Court to hear the case, those challenging the Connecticut law said the type of weapons banned by the state are used in self-defense, hunting and recreational shooting.

Connecticut said its law targets firearms disproportionately used in gun crime, “particularly the most heinous forms of gun violence.” It said people in Connecticut still can legally own more than 1,000 types of handguns, rifles and shotguns.

There is a longstanding legal debate over the scope of Second Amendment rights.

In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the Supreme Court held for the first time that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual’s right to bear arms, but the ruling applied only to firearms kept in the home for self-defense. That ruling did not involve a state law, applying only to federal regulations.

Two years later, in the case McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court held that the Heller ruling covered individual gun rights in states.

!!!!!

Readers: You’ve got your finger on the pulse as much as I do. If you hear any updates on this, please blog me.

Happy Monday.

✌🏽&💜

Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.

Gratefully your blog host,

michelle

Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)

If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)

Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:

Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129

Thank you for your loyal support!

All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008-2016

me

“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream 

" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"

22 Responses to “Supreme Court May Take Action On State Assault Weapon Bans”

  1. Maury Says:

    Let’s hope those bastards leave it alone until Trump gets in.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    The Supreme Court Just Ruled In Favor Of The Police State, And Sonia Sotomayor Is Not Having It

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sonia-sotomayor-police_us_57680301e4b0fbbc8beaf4ae

  3. Kelly Says:

    Sorry Michelle, the republican controlled Senate just ruled that the largest murder by an Assault weapon isn’t enough to pass any law limiting the access to them by terrorist.

    Very white of them, wouldn’t you say.

  4. Ruth/AF Says:

    Most of the shit the republicans get away with is the fault of the mealy mouth dems. Why doesn’t someone say the the republicans are more beholden to the NRA who fills their pockets than they are with the pain of their constituents whose plight should fill their hearts.

  5. Yani Says:

    Way to go Sotomayor#2. The white boy will destroy the 4th Amendment to give the police the power to terrorize the OTW.

  6. Dolores Says:

    Another little something about the donald duck.

    All that glitters is not gold, especially when it comes to Donald Trump.

    Charlie Sheen says the presumptive GOP nominee once gave him an impromptu wedding gift of what he said were platinum and diamond cufflinks.

    But there was one problem. They weren’t actually the real deal. And when the Hollywood actor had them valued, he claims they turned out to be fake.

    Sheen recounted the incident on “The Graham Norton Show,” which aired in the United Kingdom on Friday night.

  7. Peter/Guam Says:

    Hafi adai.

    I miss Howie, He could have enlightened us on why so many submarines are now stationed on Guam. We now have 4, and two submarine repair ships.

  8. Gabby Giffords Says:

    Fear is what my constituents felt as a man fired his gun at my congressional event in a Safeway parking lot, shooting me point-blank in the head and killing six others, including a 9-year-old-girl.

    Fear is what the children at Sandy Hook Elementary felt as a gunman went shooting from room to room, killing 26 first graders and educators.

    Fear is what the clubgoers at Pulse nightclub in Orlando felt as a murderer committed the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history, killing 49 people just last week.

    Last night, the U.S. Senate voted down two pieces of commonsense gun violence prevention legislation. The senators who voted no will say a lot of things about the votes they cast, and perhaps they might even say they were afraid. But make no mistake, their fear was nothing compared to what far too many victims of gun violence have faced. Theirs was a decision based on political calculations.

    I know that if we elect Hillary Clinton our next president, she will not fear the gun lobby. She will do everything in her power to make our communities safer from gun violence. No. Matter. What.

    Speaking is still physically difficult for me, but my feelings are clear: I am furious.

  9. Nancy Says:

    SCOTUS declined to take up gun issue. Perhaps we are better off that they did considering how 4 white boys and their house nigger voted on police power to stop and harass OTWs.

  10. Barbara Mikulski Says:

    I’ve fought too hard and too long to surrender to the Party of Trump.

    We Democrats need to show some backbone against the bigotry and extremism that’s infected both chambers of Congress and threatens to take over the White House. Everything we hold dear is on the chopping block — and it’ll take a fully united grassroots to turn the tide.

    We can’t give a single inch on the values we champion as Democrats, whether that’s affordable healthcare, equal pay, Social Security, or an economy that works for all.

    The alternative is crystal clear: The Party of Trump’s draconian agenda to sacrifice the middle class, help the rich get richer, and keep up unprecedented gridlock.

    William, it’s not enough to just be against what they’re for. The grassroots must stand up, unite, and protect our progress. And we have to do it now.

  11. Peter/Guam Says:

    If the white boy doesn’t think we on Guam should be allowed to vote for the President or become a state, the perhaps we should seek to become a independent Nation.

    After all we existed as an independent Nation before America became one.

    A pro-independence leader on Guam says he’s happy the island may finally be deciding the future of its political status, but that alone will not be enough.

    Michael Lujan Bevacqua is the co-chair of the Guam Taskforce for Independence, which sits on a decolonisation committee established by the governor Eddie Calvo.

    That committee is expected to submit a report within the next few weeks about whether to proceed with a plebiscite in November’s election.

  12. Mike,TM Says:

    Trump is not actually running for POTUS. He is using the act of running for POTUS to pay himself all that money a candidate gets to run.

    He actually is following what Newt Gingrich did in 2012 creating a racket to run for office as a job. What he is afraid of is the idiots that want so desperately to win the White House will actually get him the job.

  13. Nan Says:

    I like this:

    {Sounds like you are assuming there was something illegal going on in the house and that everyone visiting the housewas part of the illegal activity. Being under surveillance means they most likely did not have enough information to arrest anyone, or were looking for someone in particular to visit the house. If they were looking form someone in particular, they would not have needed to ask for an ID. They would have known who it was and could have put that in their report. They had no reason to stop and question this man other than he went into a house they were watching. . Where would it stop? Someone walking by the house? They may have been suspicious and not gone in. How about someone driving by and slowing down in front of the house, then speeding up and leaving? Pull them over and check for warrants? Sooner or later, there has to be a stop in simply stopping someone because they might look suspicious or be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Part of the decision seems to revert to legal mumbo jumbo ignoring the basis of the original stop. that since they did find a warrant, the drugs could be used as evidence in court.

    ” We hold that the evidence the officer seized as part of the search incident to arrest is admissible because the officer’s discovery of the arrest warrant attenuated the connection
    between the unlawful stop and the evidence seized incident to arrest.”

    Then they state
    ” And, because we ultimately conclude that the warrant breaks the causal chain,
    we also have no need to decide whether the warrant’s existence alone would make the initial stop constitutional even if Officer Fackrell was unaware of its existence. ”

    In other words, they are not even deciding on whether the stop was constitutional.

    So they are not even addressing whether the initial stop was lawful. They go on to state the officer did make mistakes in what he did, even stating “While Officer Fackrell’s decision to initiate the stop was mistaken, his conduct thereafter was lawful”, sort of turning the tainted fruit theory on it’s head. Not to mention the unreasonable search and seizure rights. I’m not an attorney, but looking at some of the Court’s decicisions over the last decade, they can pretty much twist the law to say whatever they want it to say. Not what it means.

    You need to read Sotomayor’s dissent to see their conclusions ripped to shreds. The link to the decision is in the article.}

  14. Eunice Says:

    The police don’t just randomly target people (even blacks, as we are all getting tired of hearing). There is plenty of work for them to do. So, don’t be a “random visitor” at a drug house, for pete’s sake.

  15. Morris Says:

    If we’re going to let cops assume we’re guilty and then stop us so they can search us for criminal evidence, there’s no point in requiring warrants under the 4th Amendment.

  16. Kenneth Says:

    All I see is Sotomayor waving her race card.

  17. Craig Says:

    Those of you who don’t like this white boy will find out what it means to be on the wrong end of a club wielded by an angry white boy when Donald Trump gets in.

  18. Mary Says:

    I can’t believe serious people will actually vote for trump.

  19. Michelle Moquin's "A day in the life of…" » Blog Archive » 4Th Amendment Case will have Dramatic Ramifications for OTWs Says:

    […] Anonymous: Thanks for posting. I’m not sure if everyone clicked on your link but I thought another write was due to the importance of what is happening here. Here is an updated write from CNN: […]

  20. Michelle Moquin's "A day in the life of…" » Blog Archive » #RememberInNovember Says:

    […] Gabby Giffords: Welcome. This one is for you. I HOPE you’re doing well. […]

  21. Dems Says:

    Yesterday, after Speaker Paul Ryan and Republicans in Washington refused to address the epidemic of gun violence that’s happening in communities all across the country, House Democrats staged a sit-in on the House floor to demand that Congress take action to provide universal background checks and close the loopholes that make it far too easy for terrorists and other dangerous individuals to buy guns.

    They stayed on the floor through the late hours of the night because they understand that this is a pivotal time in our country’s history. Ninety percent of Americans agree that something needs to be done, so this is no longer about politics. It’s about consensus. And it’s time for the GOP to get with the program.

  22. Wayne Says:

    Around 10,000 dogs will be killed and eaten during the infamous Yulin Dog Meat Festival, which begins on June 21st.

    Over the course of the year, the Chinese cat and dog meat trade will be responsible for the death of up to 20 million cats and dogs.

    Activists have uncovered horrific abuse in the industry, including dogs being urinated on, beaten, stabbed, and boiled alive.

    Many dogs are stolen from families, stacked on top of each other in crates, and transported for days without food or water. The most recent investigation of the Yulin slaughterhouses adds to the mountain of evidence showing that using animals for food is inherently violent and unethical.

    The US government is currently in strategic dialogue with China on a variety of global affairs. Additionally, China is feeling the pressure to stop the cat and dog meat trade and sales are falling.

    The time is now for President Obama to raise the issue of the cat and dog meat trade with Chinese officials and publicly condemn the industry. Like so many of us, President Obama is a dog lover.

    This is his opportunity to leave a legacy for the cats and dogs and cat and dog lovers of the world and show that animal abuse — no matter the species or country — is always wrong.