Rss

Press release – March 19, 2014 speaking event at Sons of Italy about NY Safe Act

As provided to news media on 3/10/14

For immediate release
Please contact 6072429247 – campaign of Michael Vasquez for Congress – for further comment or questions
*************************************************************************

3/10/14 (Binghamton, NY)
We have confirmed that NY 22nd congressional candidate Michael Vasquez will be one of the speakers at the Register Voters Not Firearms – NY Safe Act protest event. This event is to be held at the Sons of Italy Hall, 126 O’Dell Ave., Endicott NY 13760. The event is sponsored by SCOPE, Inc.

The event is open to the public and the press, and will start at 7pm.

Vasquez political position cards

Political position cards for the Michael Vasquez for Congress campaign

Michael Vasquez will be one of 6 confirmed speakers at the event. Mr. Vasquez will be speaking on the importance of public opposition and voting to enact a repeal of this infringement on the 2nd Amendment, as well as his December 2012 prediction [http://www.mvass.com/2012/12/18/gun-restriction-legislation-does-it-really-help/].

Candidate Vasquez stated,

“It is vital for voters in New York to step up and let their voices be heard, in the Primaries and the General Election this year. The only way to combat the growing presence of Government interference in the lives and choices of the public is to remind the elected politicians that they are not nobles dictating to the public, but servants of the public as defined by our Constitution.”

Candidate Vasquez went on to state,

“I have firmly and consistently supported the 2nd Amendment over my years of political commentary, which I believe that NY Safe Act thoroughly violates. I thank SCOPE for the opportunity to join with what I believe are a majority of members of the NY-22, New Yorkers across the State, and Americans across the nation in opposing this violation of our Rights.”

Michael Vasquez has been a vocal opponent of gun restriction and ban legislation throughout his time as a political commentator, with articles and videos reaching back before 2008. Mr. Vasquez is the owner of M V Consulting, Inc with articles written under his legal alias “Michael Vass.”

SCOPE Inc, created in 1965, is a civil rights organization focused on the protection and preservation of the right of firearms ownership as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. They have rated Michael Vasquez A+ on 2nd Amendment issues.

NY Revolution, also speaking at the event, is a grass roots organization whose mission statement is the purpose of waking up Americans to the reality of our civil liberties.

Also speaking is 2nd Amendment Coalition of WNY, a Facebook organization out of Westerm NY, seeking to protect the Constitution.

Oath Keepers will be represented at the event, is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, peace officers and first responders that seek to fulfill the oath mandated by Article VI of the Constitution they have taken.
————————————————————————————–

A flyer of the event can be seen here:
Sons of Italy – anti Safe Act event – Endicott, NY on 3/19/14 @ 7pm

2014 starts with a jolt of legal decisions

Mere hours into the start of 2014 and already there have been legal outcomes that are going to affect millions of Americans. Some will be happy, but assuredly not all. Yet, to varying degrees, all of these decisions will affect the nation. Considering that 2014 is a mid-term election year, these legal actions and their results – as well as other issues – demand that we ask ourselves 3 questions (which I will ask at the end of this article).

Starting in New York, the controversial NY SAFE Act was ruled as constitutional by Chief U.S. District Judge William M. Skretny in Buffalo. At the same time, Judge Skretny also ruled that the limitations on magazines (to contain 7 rounds maximum),

“…fails the relevant test because the purported link between the ban and the state’s interest is tenuous, strained, and unsupported in the record.”

The NY Safe Act has been seen as a model of what President Obama has been pushing to have Congress enact nationally – and part of his Executive Orders issued in 2013, circumventing Congress. The argument being that in restricting certain types of firearms the ability of the criminal and criminally insane to engage in mass shootings will be diminished (though VP Biden admitted in February 2013 that the Executive Orders will have no impact – which was sadly proven correct later that same year). This flies in the face of the fact that the overwhelming majority of shooting deaths occur with handguns (like the Binghamton Civic Center shooting) and the 2003 First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws which determined,

“The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.”

As well as the overall result of a gun restriction ban of “assault” firearms I reviewed in an investigation of the data over 30 years in an article Jan 11, 2013,

“…if the movement for gun restrictions as the primary safeguard to the public are correct, 75% of these kinds of tragedies will continue relatively unabated. Is the battle being waged against the 2nd Amendment, as some claim, and opposition like the NRA worth potentially stopping 1 – 2 events per year? To the families that have lost a loved one, of course. But if we are trying to increase the safety of the nation, shouldn’t the focus be on what is motivating the majority of these hateful crimes? Shouldn’t the resources be poured in to finding the root cause and eliminating it?”

As I have stated before, the delusion of safety by restricting certain arbitrary definitions of “assault weapons” and reducing magazine size is both misleading and unequal to the infringement on 2nd Amendment Rights. I agree with Judge Skretny that the magazine ban is unsupported and tenuous, as I presented in an article published on March 13, 2013

“… actively misleading the public into a false sense of safety based on pipe dreams and wishful thinking is as dangerous as any firearm ever made. We must also clearly state that using a preposterous fallacy meant to target the fear and emotion of the public to enact a politically motivated outcome is a tactic more akin to those wishing to shackle freedom than embracing or protecting it.”

Surely the debate over the NY Safe Act is not over, and will reach higher courts. Other States and the Federal Government will be watching closely, with a slew of laws to follow the ultimate outcome. Whether or not this has any effect on mass shootings is debatable, and historically leans towards being ineffective. But the impact on the 2nd Amendment may be irreversible.

On a larger scale, also on January 1, 2014, there is the news that the Government has been blocked in forcing the birth control requirement of the Obamacare law. US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor enacted an injunction in the late hours of Dec 31 2013, that prevents enforcement of this provision of the law. The reason is the infringement of religious freedom that is being argued Obamacare restricts.

This is yet another factor that is adding to the obtuse and ever more convoluted impact of the Affordable Care Act. With each passing month more groups and classes of those required to be affected by Obamacare are being delayed or excluded from inclusion. This of course alters the projected mix of population that healthcare insurers have calculated into premiums, and projections of an increase in costs continue to become more reliable.

This is yet another example of the rushed and poorly thought out ramifications of the Affordable Care Act long-term. It may well be just another factor that helps to establish that Obamacare will fail in its purported primary mission of reducing health care costs. The full impact of cancellations, the massive and still existing problems with the Healthcare.gov website, the yet to be determined inclusion of businesses (or their decisions to opt-out of providing healthcare), and the less than projected sign up of millions of Americans as well as other provisions of the law have yet to be felt in earnest.

It is fair to say that as courts address the underlying components of Obamacare, and those excluded are mandated to be included in the wide berth of the law, the reality of what this law will mean to freedoms and costs will be seen later in the year. I hold little hope of clarity or price reductions.

Lastly there was the decision in Florida, by Judge Mary S. Scriven of the United States District Court in Orlando, to strike down the requirement of drug screening for those seeking welfare.

Judge Scriven stated,

“The court finds there is no set of circumstances under which the warrantless, suspicionless drug testing at issue in this case could be constitutionally applied.”

This of course will impact many States (29 States have considered such laws and 9 have enacted similar laws) as there is a growing view in the populace (who themselves are faced with drug tests to be employed) that such a requirement is valid and worthwhile. Many feel that those seeking public assistance should be held to the same standards as those paying for the assistance via their taxes (which I agree with). In addition, supporters point to the safety and welfare of the households where drug use does exist, that can potentially be aided by the enforcement of these drug tests as a condition of public aide.

At the core of this argument is National Treasury Employees Union v. von Raab., US Supreme Court, 1989. This was the case that the Supreme Court reviewed and upheld that drug testing of Federal employees was constitutional. This lead to the widespread use of drug testing as a requirement in the private sector.

I believe that the Supreme Court decision explains why drug testing of welfare applicants is valid – though the ruling had no private sector applications at the time. [emphasis added]

“Petitioners’ contention that the testing program is unreasonable because it is not based on a belief that testing will reveal any drug use by covered employees evinces an unduly narrow view of the context in which the program was implemented. Although it was not motivated by any perceived drug problem among Service employees, the program is nevertheless justified by the extraordinary safety and national security hazards that would attend the promotion of drug users to the sensitive positions in question. Moreover, the mere circumstance that all but a few of the employees tested are innocent does not impugn the program’s [489 U.S. 656, 658] validity, since it is designed to prevent the substantial harm that could be caused by the promotion of drug users as much as it is designed to detect actual drug use. Pp. 673-675.”

If you substitute “Welfare recipient” for “service employee” and remove “national security hazards” – almost the the same way that the private sector has done in its interpretation of the law to require drug testing – the reasoning remains intact. Thus the law, in my non-attorney opinion, is a valid law and Judge Scriven is wrong.

As 2014 moves forward, and the number of those seeking public assistance increases (as has been the trend) – placing an ever larger burden on States and the taxes of residents of those States – there will be more focus on this ruling by the Supreme Court and how it applies to the private sector as well as those seeking public assistance.

As a result of all 3 of these events, as well as many more issues, the nation will face tough decisions in 2014. Decisions that will affect the economy, freedoms, and pursuit of happiness of all Americans to some degree or another. The questions that I ask you are simple.

  • Where does your elected politicians stand on these important issues?
  • Is the position they hold the one that you (and a majority of constituent) have?
  • If it is not, why did you elect that politician?

    These 3 questions are the core reason of why I am running for the New York 22nd Congressional District seat in 2014. Many other politicians will be up for election in the mid-terms this year. But the key to re-election, in my opinion, should be the answer to these 3 questions – as opposed to the campaign promises and 30 second polispeak ads that are sure to fill airwaves.

  • Is an election a question of looking tough?

    On December 19th, Rep. Richard Hanna traveled to Chenango County and visited the Wesson gun manufacturing facility south of Norwich, NY. The move was more than just routine.

    I don’t question that Rep. Hanna believes in the 2nd Amendment, nor that he has spoken out against the NY Safe Act. These are positions that most Conservatives hold, and in as much as Rep. Hanna can be believed to be firm on any issue given his numerous flip-flops and “symbolic” votes, I accept his stated convictions.

    The thing that troubles me about this is the photo-op. Here is the photo from CNY News

    CNY News photo

    So why does this bug me?

    I get that Rep. Hanna wants to be seen as a everyday man – though he is a millionaire businessman and a member of Congress that regularly votes against Conservative positions (immigration, abortion, as well as NSA and drones). I get that he is trying to secure his position with the gun lobby, NRA, and voters that believe the 2nd Amendment is under attack (which I agree it is). That’s the purpose of the visit and the photo.

    But I find it annoying that a Representative, that didn’t bother to visit Wesson or Remington in the beginning of 2013 when President Obama was issuing 23 Executive Orders to restrict gun ownership, is using the image as if the public didn’t notice his relative silence. I find it annoying that he is taking time to visit a County he rarely has shown any concern about prior to coming under challenge for the 2014 election.

    Call me shallow, but when it comes to gun restrictions I expect a Representative to do more than say that protecting Remington Arms is only about jobs. I expect a Representative that stands for the 2nd Amendment to have a firm opinion why Executive Orders limiting freedoms is wrong and not to say,

    “I want to talk about it. No, I don’t have an opinion about it just yet.” – January 13, 2013

    Most of all, I don’t want a Representative that works at looking tough in a photo with a few firearms in the foreground in an article with no real content – essentially just a fluff piece to tout him as an advocate to a specific group of voters, in my opinion.

    I’d rather a Representative that can actually fight to get a bipartisan politically neutral Bill like HR 2310 (which helps provide gravestones to Reservists that gave the ultimate sacrifice of their life to this nation) get passed – or at the very least supported by the 89 members of Congress that are all former military, which does not include Rep. Hanna who never served in the military in any capacity. Currently it is supported by 5 former members of the military, and I wonder why its so few?

    But maybe winning the primary in 2014 and going to Congress to actually represent the voice of the NY-22 is all about good photo ops, as is the example Rep. Hanna is making apparently. Perhaps, if Rep. Hanna were an example to be followed, all it takes is a photo that makes a candidate look tough. In that case, all I have to offer is this…

    USMC 1987

    Meet and greet with voters and potential supporters Oct 26 2013

    I just wanted to publicly thank attorney James Sacco for putting together a meet and greet of potential supporters at his home in Vestal, NY. I also thank everyone that attended, for their time and questions about the 2014 New York Congressional election.

    It was a great night, speaking to a couple dozen voters, discussing their concerns and questions about how the representation for the New York 22nd Congressional District can be improved. The conversation covered everything from by background, experiences, and motivations; as well as where I stand on issues including immigration, the national debt, taxes, drones, the 2nd and 4th Amendment among others.

    meet and greet in Vestal NY, at home of attorney James Sacco

    coffee and doughnuts meet and greet in Vestal NY

    It was a great opportunity to hear from more of the public on what they really want to see address on the floor of Congress, and understand what they believe is not being done to represent their views currently. I continue to see a consistent theme of issues that neither Congress nor our current Representative are focused on.

    I look forward to speaking at several more meet and greets at the homes of supporters and potential supporters, as well as other events. It’s important to be connected to constituents, and this is a significant way to do so. If anyone would like to host a similar event for me to appear at, please contact me at Michael@ElectMichaelVasquez.com.

    That email can also be used for those that want to volunteer directly in helping spread the word about the 2014 NY Congressional race. Those that would like to donate $20, $50, or whatever amount up to the limit of $2600 for individuals can do so online via paypal at https://electmichaelvasquez.nationbuilder.com/donations
    or mail a check/money order made out to Friends of Michael Vasquez at PO BOX 515, Binghamton NY 13902.

    More news is coming in November!

    Sincerely

    Michael Vasquez

    What did you get for your vote in 2012? Video

    Congress has a 16% approval rating, and political gridlock is running rampant. Scandals fill the airwaves, as Government overreach attacks the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments. Yet incumbent Representatives are re-elected 93% of the time – in 2012 it was a 90% re-election rate. The problems are obvious, and the solution can be as well.

    We expect more than special interest favorites and political party preferences. Congress needs to reconnect with the public. We need Representatives that will work for constituents and fulfill their obligations in office as well as live up to campaign promises.

    Let’s remind voters that there is a choice in 2014. Let’s work together to tell Congress that they can’t just sit back and get re-elected for doing nothing. With your donation and support, we will put this video advertisement on televisions across the New York 22nd Congressional District.

    Share and like the video. Donate* via Paypal at http://exploratory.electmichaelvasquez.com/contribute/, or mail a check/money order (payable to: Friends of Michael Vasquez) to

    Friends of Michael Vasquez
    PO Box 515
    Binghamton, NY 13902

    Every dollar, like every vote, counts!

    *Donations are not tax deductible.

    Michael Vasquez talks about improving Congress with Southern Tier Tea Party in Vestal, NY

    On June 4, 2013, Michael Vasquez spoke before the members of the Southern Tier Tea Party and the general public at the Vestal Public Library. The discussion was part of an event featuring Binghamton Mayoral candidate Douglas Drazen, as well as Mr. Vasquez, to present the options that face voters in the upcoming Binghamton, NY elections and the 2014 NY Congressional election.

    Michael Vasquez took the opportunity to introduce himself to the constituents at the meeting, and to share his views on how Congress can become more accountable and reflective of the issues that are foremost in the minds of residents in the NY-22. Mr. Vasquez also took the time to express his thoughts on the 2nd Amendment and the growing issue of domestic unmanned aerial surveillance (drones). The following video is the uncut conversation of Michael Vasquez at the event:

    Part 1 – Michael Vasquez introduces himself to NY Southern Tier residents

    Part 2 – Michael Vasquez shares views of improving Congress and better representation for the NY-22

    Following the introduction and the ways to improve government, and a similar discussion by Mr. Drazen, the question and answer portion of the event took place. It was during this time Mr. Vasquez expanded on a few ideas to create jobs, balance the budget, cut government debt spending, and reduce the national debt. In addition, Mr. Vasquez took the opportunity to gain greater insight on the concerns that the average American feels are a priority, and need to be discussed on the floor of Congress.

    The following video of the Q&A is edited only to present the questions to, and answers from, Michael Vasquez:

    Q&A in Vestal, NY with Michael Vasquez and Southern Tier residents

    Michael Vasquez is continuing to explore a run for the 2014 New York 22nd Congressional election, and will be traveling throughout the NY-22 over the summer.

    As always we look forward to your comments, questions and support. Please visit exploratory.ElectMichaelVasquez.com to learn more.

    Binghamton University Libertarians and Michael Vasquez discuss New York 22nd Congressional District

    On May 9, 2013 the Binghamton University Libertarians had Michael Vasquez as the guest speaker at their meeting in the Fine Arts building on the BU campus. This was an informal discussion; to introduce Mr. Vasquez and to address the concerns of young voters.

    Initially the expectation was that the meeting would only be a 15 minute speech and Q&A combined as this would be at the end of a 12 hour workday for Mr. Vasquez. But after the casual introduction, when questions were opened to the students, the passion and variety of questions offered led to almost 2 hours of discussion on issues in the minds of BU students. Issues discussed included: the economy; student loans; 2nd Amendment; legalizing drugs; Affirmative Action; Equal Rights Movement; representation by elected officials; and more.

    The following videos are the total introduction, questions and answers. All answers and questions are complete and without edit.

    Introduction

    Q & A pt 1

    Q & A pt 2

    Q & A pt 3

    Q & A pt 4 (final)

    %d bloggers like this: