Our Constitutional Rights Under Attack in Orlando- Again!

Seems that Judge Frederick J. Lauten is no fan of the Constitution and is not a supporter of justice. On 30 December 2016, he issued an “Amended Administrative Order Governing Expressive Conduct Toward Summoned Jurors. Orange and Osceola Counties” which forbids anyone from informing potential jurors about their rights and duties as jurors. This supercedes a previous order by Judge Belvin Perry.

In an effort to “to do everything necessary to promote the prompt and efficient administration of justice” Judge Lauten seeks to “minimize activities which unreasonably disrupt, interrupt, and interfere with the fair and orderly conduct of jury trials, and the orderly and peaceable conduct of court business in a neutral forum free of actual or perceived partiality“. He further characterizes pamphlets which inform the jurors of their responsibilities as jurors as a possible violation of 918.12 of the Florida statutes- jury tampering. His line of reasoning conflates an informed juror with an attempt to tamper with a juror. Why would a judge take such an extreme stance? How can someone who is informed as to their duties and rights of a juror somehow been tampered with? Sounds to me like he prefers ignorant jurors who will perform as he wants them to perform, not as a sovereign entity that truly determines justice.

How can informing jurors of their rights and responsibilities be considered tampering? Juries are the people’s way to combat government tyranny. It is a right guaranteed to ALL Americans that whenever a criminal case or a civil case in excess of $20 is to be tried that the person has a right to trial by jury. This right is protected by the 6th and 7th Amendments to the United States Constitution. He states that “Such occurrences severely impact the court’s ability to conduct the efficient, prompt, and proper administration of justice“. How?

Juries are a huge check and balance to our justice system. The proper role of a jury is to protect people from tyrannical abuses of power by government. This is why we are guaranteed a trial by jury. The jury further is the only body who can rightfully judge a person on their guilt or innocence. Judges were never tasked with determining guilt or innocence. How can a person who works for and is paid by the system be truly impartial? The role of the judge is that of a referee in the court room insuring that justice is served, not being the instrument of said justice. This is an idea that used to be known by most but along with other civic ideas it has been flushed down the memory hole.

One of the truly egregious ideas that makes itself known in this order is the idea that someone on court “property” is somehow not protected by our Bill of Rights. “The term “courthouse complex” and any restrictions on expressive conduct contained herein shall apply to the Orange County Courthouse complex grounds, which includes the adjacent courthouse parking garage, the courthouse courtyard, and all other grounds surrounding the courthouse, from the intersection of Orange Avenue and Livingston Street, to the intersection of Livingston Street and Magnolia Avenue, to the intersection of Magnolia Avenue and Amelia Street, to the intersection of Amelia Street and Orange Avenue, to the intersection of Orange Avenue and Livingston Street. The public sidewalks that comprise the boundaries of this designated perimeter are excluded from this designation of the courthouse complex grounds.” (emphasis mine) So on “public” property it is ok to exercise your 1st Amendment rights but for some reason when one steps onto the “courthouse complex” one loses their 1st Amendment rights? And this guy is a judge?!

I wrote an article a few weeks ago detailing the arrest of Mark Schmidter and Julian Heicklen for passing out literature from the Fully Informed Jury Association. Seems that Judge Lauten is in line with Belvin Perry and is fine with restricting our rights and keeping potential jurors ignorant of why they are there and what their true duties are. He is part of the problem and needs to be opposed. The whole idea of keeping people ignorant and restricting our rights through administrative order is also repugnant. He is a judge who supposedly interested in justice. His actions and reasoning speak to another agenda however.

Advertisements

An Open Letter to Mayor Jacobs

Honorable Mayor Jacobs,

I appreciate the position you are in as Mayor of a county when a natural disaster is about to occur. There are many people who are going to be hurting and in need. Your instinct is to protect as many people as possible and take whatever measures you deem necessary to save lives and protect property. I get it.

With that being said, my constitutionally protected rights are not subject to an executive order from the Mayor. The curfew you imposed is unlawful and never needs to be invoked again. You are the Mayor, not Queen, and do not decree when I can and cannot leave my house. Because of rain and wind you feel the need to circumscribe my constitutionally protected rights? You took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of Florida and the Constitution of the United States of America. Abiding by that oath is the most important thing you do. Making an executive decision which affects the lives of many law abiding citizens and the police who have to enforce this unconstitutional behavior is wrong on many levels:

You violate my inalienable rights because of water and wind.
You put police officers in the position of having to arrest people who are simply outside of their homes.
You make criminals out of usually law abiding people who have things they need to do even if a hurricane is coming.
You violate your oath to office by taking a stand against the Constitution.
You condemn people to suffer with no lawful alternative.

Our rights are inalienable. They come from our creator. Government does not give us our rights., nor can they restrict them. That duty is left to the people thru the jury system and due process. An executive order is not a lawful command for the public. It is a directive to others in government on how they should act. It is a direction given within the confines of the law so our government acts in unity.  To portray an executive order as a lawful entity which is enforceable on the people of this county is wrong. This line of reasoning is un-American.

Curfews have been struck down many times for their violations of the 1st Amendment. Your application of a curfew also has 1st Amendment implications. The right of the people to peaceably assemble is a right protected by the 1st Amendment and one that your decree violates. It is never in the best interest of the people to have their rights violated. Governments are instituted among men to secure our rights, not to circumscribe them.

I am hoping you had the best of intentions when it came to the curfew. Other counties do it. It is not unheard of. What I am asking you is that you never do it again. That you come out publicly and renounce the act and promise never to do it again. You see, I and many others will not stand for this precedent to be set in this county. We will not accept executive orders as law. We will never accept any infringements of our rights no matter the situation. I hope you understand that this is being done to make our county as free and prosperous as we can. You may have good intentions but others after you can use this precedence to further erode our rights. It will not be tolerated.

Other municipalities have been sued for cases similar to this and have lost. Let’s make this easy and say it will never happen again.

A Concerned Orange County Citizen,

Frank Caprio

We Hold These Truths

Contrary to popular belief, the Bill of Rights does NOT give us any rights. Our rights do not come from government. Our rights are not given to us by our fellow man. Our rights come from our Creator. This was a founding principle of our country and seems to have been forgotten by many. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain INALIENABLE rights……” This was one of the revolutionary ideas that have propelled us into a leading role for liberty on this planet.

This is not semantics. This is the basis for many attacks on our rights and must be corrected. Take guns for instance- it is much easier for the gun grabbers to cite our 2nd Amendment rights than to say they want to infringe on our inalienable right to self defense. Instead of saying they want to restrict our God given rights, they take the position that they are merely “interpreting” a 200+ year old statement about guns. Or they say that the founders couldn’t imagine the progress we have made in firearms technology and we need “common sense” gun regulations. Or even more ludicrous that the rights given to us by the Constitution have limitations and are subject to the interpretations of some politically connected lawyers who wear black robes and sit in a fancy courtroom in Washington DC. All poppycock. The right to self defense is linked to the right to life and your unfettered ability to protect that life. Without that any other right you may possess is moot. Doesn’t matter that you have freedom of speech if you are dead. Goes for any other rights also. That is why the right to life is always listed at the top and why protecting that right is the most important.

So what does the Bill of Rights do? What is its purpose? Pretty much nothing other than to be a sentinel for the people indicating when government has exceeded its authority and is becoming tyrannical. It is a snapshot of some of our inalienable rights that government has NO authority to infringe upon. These rights we recognize have been fought for for over 900 years. Look up the 1100 Charter of Liberties. The Magna Carte. The Petition of Right of 1628. The Glorious Revolution and the Bill of Rights of 1689. These were all seminal moments in the pursuit of liberty. Our Bill of Rights and the thought that our rights are inalienable didn’t just occur. It was however boldly trumpeted by the colonists when they declared independence and it was codified into our Constitution.

So next time you see someone saying that our 2nd Amendment right to carry guns is being attacked or that our 1st Amendment right to free speech is under assault, just remind them where our rights come from. We used to understand that our rights are inalienable and are not granted by government but are supposed to be protected by government. It boggles the mind to think that this lesson is too hard to understand or if pointed out will be disputed. Get educated. Get active. Liberty is calling and wants to know if you are for or against her. Freedom is not free and is not a spectator sport. It requires action on your part. A piece of paper will not protect your rights. Only true Americans can do that.

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available and teaches of our founding documents and principles. The book would make a great present for anybody 16 and up.

Ted Cruz Is The Constituional Conservative We Need

I wasn’t planning on writing on this subject but I am going to GeorgeFest tomorrow in Eustis with a good friend and mentor and decided to write this as a reference for those I meet there to consolidate my ideas.

My first passion is the Constitution. The most important aspect of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. If you have ever talked to me then you already know: I believe that the ONLY reason we have had THE most prosperous and free country ever to grace the face of the Earth is because of the Constitution. Our country originated in a unique time in history where a people threw off the chains of despotism and formed a government of the people, by the people and for the people. There have been many revolutions throughout history. Our was truly a miracle.

Now to Ted Cruz.

I first ran across Ted Cruz when he was running for the Senate in Texas. I really liked what I read and heard. He had led the fight in District of Columbia vs. Heller to stipulate that the 2nd Amendment was indeed an individual right. He formed a coalition of many states (over 30 I believe) that fought for our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. This decision led to a reassertion of 2nd Amendment rights around the country. Cruz was also involved in a case Mendellin vs. Texas where he asserted the idea that the US Constitution is superior to UN law. The United Nations wanted to reopen adjudicated murder cases here in the United States as ordered by the UN International Court. Ted Cruz fought the International Court and won. A win for US sovereignty.

While not being a religious person myself, I do understand the importance of Christianity in the formation and success of our country. Ted Cruz has defended locating the 10 Commandments monument on Texas state grounds successfully. When the rest of the nation was separating themselves from the Bible and its teachings, he stood firm in Texas and allowed Texans their freedom of religious expression. The 1st Amendment won with Ted Cruz.

I was very involved in politics when the Schumer Gang of Eight Bill was introduced. It was clear then as it should be today that the bill led to a path of citizenship for illegals here in the country. Ted Cruz led the fight against this bill finally winning over support when he introduced a few amendment one of which stated that this bill cannot be used as a tool for citizenship. When his common sense amendments were not added it became apparent to enough Senators the true reason for the bill. It was squashed.

Digging deeper into Ted Cruz what was what fully won me over. His recognition of state’s rights and the proper role of the federal government. In multiple videos I have heard him castigate the Supreme Court for its overreach into state’s issues. This occurrence is nothing new but his responses were refreshing to listen to. It was as if I was listening to Madison reading a modern day Federalist Paper.

On many occasions Ted Cruz has been “ambushed” by the left who think to embarrass him. LOL, so far it has all backfired. Look for Ted’s video where he calls a code pink protester up to the podium to have an actual conversation about the topic of nukes in Iran. Instead of having someone remove the person, he chooses dialogue and reason. Another memorable video is after Sandy Hook where a reporter tries to paint him in a corner as supporting gun violence for not supporting “common sense” gun restrictions. In 2 1/2 minutes he validated the founder’s views perfectly.

While many have said they want to reduce the size of government Ted Cruz is the only one that has committed on paper to do something about it. When he becomes President, Ted wants to shut down the Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy, HUD, and dearest to my heart the IRS! In my opinion the 16th and 17th Amendments are the 2 worst that were ever passed. The creation of an income tax and the removal of a key check and balance between the states and the federal government has altered the lives of Americans in very detrimental ways. Anybody who wants to take on these issues definitely has my blessings as a candidate. The idea that a candidate would run this as part of their platform cemented the idea that Ted Cruz IS the constitutional conservative that we need in the White House.

I am not saying that Ted Cruz is perfect. But if you are looking for a principled constitutional conservative that will start the move to make states a more relevant component of our republic then Ted Cruz is your guy. If you want a constitutional lawyer that will fight FOR the Constitution instead of looking for ways to circumvent it then Ted Cruz is your man. Finally, if you want someone who will say what he will do, and actually do it then Ted Cruz is your guy. You may not agree with everything he believes in but you can be assured he will indeed do what he says.