Reader letters, Feb. 20

Feb 22, 2013

False accusations are mean-spirited

To the editor:

In reference to a recent letter-writer’s comments regarding picking the most qualified candidate for sheriff, I voted for Mr. Wilke in the last election. However, I do think it is fair and lawful that the political party from which the vacancy occurred should make the appointment.

To the best of my knowledge, all political and law enforcement officials are sworn to an oath, regardless of any perceived technicalities.

All law enforcement agencies are considered paramilitary organizations, what is your point?

As one of the hapless citizens in this great state, I find it hard to believe that any unlawful traffic citation process has not been challenged by hundreds of attorneys in all the higher courts.

For anyone to state that a judge or law enforcement colleagues receive a cut or percentage of traffic fines is just misleading and mean spirited.

In reference to limited police powers, all law enforcement officers have limited powers, either by policy or state or federal statutes.

Jim Noland



Support Project Life, promote common good

To the editor:

When the right to life is denied for any, the right to liberty for all will soon be extinguished.

Forty years ago, the Supreme Court, in an exercise of raw judicial power, legalized abortion on demand. Since then, not only have more than 55 million human lives been snuffed out before seeing the light of day, threats to human life — especially in its most vulnerable expressions — have continued to grow.

Now, in the HHS mandates implementing the Affordable Care Act (“ObamaCare”)  these threats have expanded to include attacks on the exercise of religious freedom outside the walls of our houses of worship.

In response, “Project Life and Liberty” is being carried out this coming weekend, Feb. 23 and 24.

At that time, Catholic Christians in Western North Carolina will be given an opportunity to communicate personally, directly and succinctly with their senators and representatives in Washington.

The postcards provided for this purpose will clearly emphasize the insistence of people of faith that any attempt to restrict the right to life and the liberty of people to follow their consciences and their Church’s teachings ought to be met with resolute resistance by their elected representatives.

This is not just a “Catholic thing.” It involves principles which are of critical importance to people across a broad spectrum of religious confessions.

Religious freedom is much more than permission to hold worship services without state interference. If freedom of religion is to be allowed only within the walls of houses of worship, it is no longer freedom.

For Christians, especially, what we receive in our acts of worship must be carried into practice in the mission territory beyond the boundaries of the places where we offer these acts — to places such as hospitals, schools, social service ministries, and our workplaces.

To secure genuine religious freedom in this time, we need to let our elected representatives know that we will support them in all efforts to defend both liberty and life.

All people of good will are cordially invited to join in this effort to promote the common good.

Samuel Edwards



District traffic court is unconstitutional profiteering

To the editor:

This is in response to the individual who submitted a Feb. 18 letter entitled “Highway Patrol officers aren’t profiteers.”

This letter-writer attempted to refute my earlier contention in a letter to the editor that the Highway Patrol and all local law enforcement revenue agents receive a financial emolument/portion of every traffic citation they write, deposited into a deferred retirement fund.

The aforementioned individual accused me of attacking Greg Christopher, a candidate for sheriff. In her response, she cited no facts to refute my documented assertions. It was not my intention to “portray” Christopher as an “unsavory” character.

It was, however, my intention, to portray the entire district traffic court as an unconstitutional, corporate, profiting star chamber of pirates who daily simulate judicial process by financially plundering a  hapless and legally ignorant population of U.S citizen socialists.

These are citizens who don’t know the difference between a common law jurisdiction and a corporate statutory overlay.  Christopher is simply a semi-conscious participant/cog in that lucrative steamroller of injustice, which is really the just a club/bar association.

Perhaps this individual should cross examine a law enforcement/revenue agent on the stand and ask them if they receive a portion of the citation.

If this individual had read Chapter 7A of the Corporate statues of North Carolina, she would have found out judges receive a portion of the citation along with the prosecution.

If she were even more diligent before her knee jerk response to me, she would find out about cuspid bonds and court investment registered securities  created and invested from these bills of attainders known as citations. I cited law, not socially conditioned groupthink.

Much to her credit she did make one legally accurate statement concerning the “law.”

That is NCGS 161-5.1, by which a political party (where are political parties in the constitution) appoints a sheriff, by the circumventing lawful election.

The respondent referred to the law as a “rule.” Rules are not law and have no force and effect of law.

Indeed, after reviewing the legislative intent and history of the aforementioned statute, I have grave questions as to whether it is really a public law, or just mere policy.

Art Patten


Comments (1)
Posted by: Charles Zimmerman | Feb 26, 2013 09:24

Considered as a leter to the editor:


Dear editor;

  As OUR vice principle quite well and rationally pointed out, every person must be aware of scams. Generally speaking, scamers use a person's reaction to a portion of truth to perpetrate something that is wholly false. Such is the case with the issue of the so-called "right to life". While the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence was not incorporated into any declaration of rights nor law, it is important to note that the phrase "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", must be taken in its entirety to fully convey the true meaning. Influenced by John Locke's writings, they fully embraced and expressed a belief in the Deistic notion of inalienable rights inherited at birth from a common "Creator" and as such "all men are created equal". Secondly they listed what they considered to be the most important of those inalienable rights:"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", of which "life" cannot be seperated  without adverse effect on "liberty and happiness". But yet the so-called "right to life" folks would have US believe otherwise. They would have US believe that a fetus "inherits" rights at the moment of conception and worse, directly not from its parents but from a foreign omnipotent source. By this abhorrent nonsense they would subjugate a woman from the moment of conception, substituting their judgement of conscience for hers.

      As the Supreme court pointed out in Roe, not only is abortion covered by common law(7th Amendment), the 14th Amendment quite clearly expresses the original intent of "Citizen by birth"(George Washington):

Sec.1 All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

      How much clearer or otherwise "self-evident" can this be?


       Chuck Zimmerman

       311 Locust Drive Waynesville, N.C. 28786


If you wish to comment, please login.