U.S. Supreme Court

Chicago Restrictions To Gun Ranges Ruled Unconstitutional

The City of Chicago lost yet another court battle versus gun “rights.” From a news release yesterday on the website of the Second Amendment Foundation:

A three-judge panel of the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today handed the Second Amendment Foundation a victory in its challenge of firearms regulations in the City of Chicago, striking down a zoning provision, reversing an earlier ruling that upheld “distancing” restrictions for gun ranges, and reversing an earlier ruling that upheld certain age restrictions.

Writing for the court, Judge Diane S. Sykes noted, “To justify these barriers, the City raised only speculative claims of harm to public health and safety. That’s not nearly enough to survive the heightened scrutiny that applies to burdens on Second Amendment rights.”

“We are delighted with the outcome of this lengthy case,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The extremes to which the city has gone in an attempt to narrow its compliance with the Supreme Court ruling in McDonald v. City of Chicago can only be described as incredible stubbornness. In the 6½ years since the high court ruling in our McDonald case, the city has had ample opportunity to modify its regulations. Instead, Chicago has resisted reasonableness.

“We had already sued Chicago successfully to knock down its outright ban on gun ranges within the city,” he recalled. “Then they adopted new regulations that included the zoning, distancing and age restrictions that we contested in this legal action, known as ‘Ezell II.’

“The city tried to severely limit where shooting ranges could be located, and they failed,” he continued. “The city put up arguments about the potential for gun theft, fire hazards and airborne lead contamination, and they failed. Even the judge’s opinion today noted that the city had ‘produced no evidentiary support for these claims beyond the speculative testimony of three city officials.’ This nonsense has got to stop

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

The “nonsense” Gottlieb speaks of is well-documented on the Chicago Tribune website this morning. From the Associated Press article:

Chicago has suffered a string of defeats in its efforts to restrict guns, which top officials have cited as a major reason for a sharp rise of violence in the city.

The U.S. Supreme Court forced the city to rewrite its firearms ordinance in June 2010, which had banned the ownership of guns in the city. In response, the city came up with an ordinance outlawing the sale of firearms in the city.

A judge ruled in 2014 the city’s ban on gun shops violated the Constitution.

Chicago imposed a blanket ban on shooting ranges in 2010. The Court of Appeals struck down the ban in 2011, prompting the city council to pass ordinances accomplishing the same thing. The Second Amendment Foundation and others took the city to court over the ordinances in 2014.

Sounds like City Hall could really use a refresher course on the U.S. Constitution.

Plus, how much more of the taxpayer dime was blown on this latest anti-Bill of Rights legal activity?

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

Associated Press. “Appeals court rules restrictions to gun-ranges in Chicago are unconstitutional.” Chicago Tribune. 19 Jan. 2017. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-gun-range-restrictions-20170118-story.html). 19 Jan. 2017.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, January 19th, 2017 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Legal, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports, Training Comments Off on Chicago Restrictions To Gun Ranges Ruled Unconstitutional

SP Intel Report- December 8, 2015

How’s this for timing? Bringing up the rear in my last SP Intel Report entry:

I too believe it’s only a matter of time before a major terror attack is launched by jihadists against the U.S.

Okay, so the San Bernardino, California, terrorist attack (pretty pathetic how some tried real hard to paint this as merely workplace-related violence) wasn’t exactly “major,” and anyone with at least half-a-brain should have seen this coming. But the Muslim extremists are here, and they will strike again at the “homeland” on the level of what just happened out on the “Left Coast” (all that gun “control” didn’t work out too well for California in this instance) all the way up to another 9/11-type attack with thousands of Americans dead.

Chicagoland

U.S. Supreme Court Declines To Hear Appeal Of Lower-Court Ruling Upholding City of Highland Park, Illinois, Assault Weapons Ban

From a press release published on the City of Highland Park website Monday:

On Monday, December 7, 2015, the United States Supreme Court announced that it will not entertain a challenge to the City of Highland Park’s ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, thus allowing the 7th Circuit Court opinion supporting the ordinance to remain standing. This Supreme Court’s determination is a resounding victory for the City of Highland Park and the safety of its residents…

Or so their local government leaders think. For a number of years now I’ve thought Highland Park might be a potential target for home-grown and visiting jihadists in the Chicago area due to its significant Jewish population that, in general, doesn’t seem to celebrate the natural right to self-defense and firearm protections provided by the Founding Fathers like their brethren do over at the JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership). One might think world history would cause them to act otherwise. Here’s hoping the Highland Park Police Department is equipped with some major firepower, because if the (aspiring) terrorists weren’t familiar with Highland Park already, they are now, considering the amount of nationwide publicity gun “control” supporters (mainstream media) are giving this inaction by the U.S. Supreme Court. The “North Shore” community might now look even “softer” in the eyes of these bad guys. Good luck with that.

Illinois

Illinois State Rifle Association Declares December 12-13 To Be ‘Illinois Family Security Weekend’

Speaking of that last SP Intel Report entry, in it I talked about a November 14, 2015, Facebook post from the Illinois State Rifle Association in which they issued an “Urgent Alert” regarding terrorism preparedness. Well, the ISRA just issued another alert today. From their website:

SPECIAL ALERT
THIS WEEKEND IS “ILLINOIS FAMILY SECURITY WEEKEND”
PROTECT YOUR FAMILY – PREPARE FOR THE WORST

The closing months of 2015 provide chilling proof of just how successful Obama has been in engineering the decline of the USA. In less than 8 years, the USA has gone from world power to whimpering “also ran.” There is no better illustration of this sad state of affairs than the happenings of the last several weeks.

In October, cultists bombed a Russian airliner killing more than 200 people. In November, cultists bombed and shot more than 100 people in attacks on Paris’ entertainment district. In response to these attacks, Europe banded together under the leadership of President Putin to deliver a staggering military attack on cultist strongholds.

Earlier this month, cultists attacked a Christmas party in San Bernardino – killing 14 and wounding at least a dozen more. In response, Obama got on TV to tell law-abiding citizens to give up their guns and to lecture Americans about how they have to do a better job of making friends.

Get the picture here?

If you think that Obama is capable, or even willing to faithfully discharge his duty to protect this nation and its people from cultist attacks, you are sorely mistaken. That means that the safety and security of you and your family is totally up to you. Are you prepared for that mission?

Your Illinois State Rifle Association has declared the weekend of December 12-13 as “Illinois Family Security Weekend.” The purpose of this declaration is to emphasize the dire situation our nation is in and the necessity for all good citizens to be prepared for swift and devastating changes to our way of life. The Illinois State Rifle Association is asking all Illinois citizens to make a pledge to themselves and their families to spend some time this weekend preparing for the unthinkable, yet inevitable horrors that could be inflicted on our nation at any moment.

Key things that you and your family need to be working on this weekend…

Check out what the ISRA has to say over on their website here.

National

The New York Times Pushes National Gun Confiscation

If there was still any doubt about the ongoing push for nationwide gun confiscation in the United States (did anybody ever really believe that “we’re not coming for your guns” horse crap?), one only needs to read the front page of The New York Times last Saturday. From their Editorial Board:

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

By the way, this was the newspaper’s first front-page editorial since 1920.

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

Editorial Board. “End the Gun Epidemic in America.” The New York Times. 4 Dec. 2015. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/end-the-gun-epidemic-in-america.html?_r=0). 8 Dec. 2015.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, December 8th, 2015 Ammunition, Crime, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Legal, Mainstream Media, Preparedness, Public Safety, Religion, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports, SP Intel Report, Terrorism, War Comments Off on SP Intel Report- December 8, 2015

Chicago-Area Democrats Push To Expand ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Throughout Illinois

After a federal court upheld an “assault weapons” ban by the City of Highland Park, gun “control” supporters in Chicago’s far north suburbs are trying to expand the ban on these military-pattern semi-automatic rifles throughout the state of Illinois- under the guise of “local control.” Deb McCarver reported on the Illinois Senate Democrats website Tuesday:

In response to a recent federal court ruling in support of Highland Park’s assault weapons ban, state Senator Julie Morrison introduced a measure to restore the right to ban assault weapons to every city and village in the state.

“This is about local control,” the Deerfield Democrat said. “Highland Park decided to protect its citizens by banning assault weapons. Every other city and village in Illinois should have that same right.”

The highly controversial 2013 law that allowed Illinois residents to carry concealed weapons also prohibited local governments from banning assault weapons…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

According to the “synopsis” of Illinois Senate Bill 2130:

the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Deletes provision that the regulation of the possession or ownership of assault weapons are exclusive powers and functions of this State. Deletes provision that any ordinance or regulation, or portion of that ordinance or regulation, that purports to regulate the possession or ownership of assault weapons in a manner that is inconsistent with the Act, shall be invalid unless the ordinance or regulation is enacted on, before, or within 10 days after the effective date of Public Act 98-63 (July 9, 2013). Deletes provision that any ordinance or regulation described in the stricken provision enacted more than 10 days after the effective date of Public Act 98-63 is invalid. Effective immediately…

This Tuesday I noted something Robert McCoppin reported on the Chicago Tribune website April 28. From his piece:

A federal court Monday upheld Highland Park’s ban on assault weapons — possibly setting the stage for a showdown over the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court…

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said he was confident the law could be overturned on appeal to the Supreme Court, but the National Rifle Association would have to decide whether to make a costly appeal.

“The Second Amendment is about the right to keep and bear arms,” Pearson said. “The government doesn’t get to pick the list.”

After Senator Morrison’s action- supported by Highland Park Mayor and Democratic candidate for Congress (10th Congressional District) Nancy Rotering (as evidenced later on in that McCarver piece)- don’t be surprised if an appeal is now launched by pro-gun rights forces- costs be damned.

As for Highland Park, which is making a strong bid for wrestling away the title of “Ground Zero for Gun ‘Control’” from Oak Park, Illinois, these days, I suspect they could be on the hook for some astronomical legal fees after all is said and done.

You can track the status of SB2130 on the Illinois General Assembly website here.

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

McCarver, Deb. “Morrison: Illinois should let cities ban assault weapons.” Illinois Senate Democrats. 5 May 2015. (http://www.illinoissenatedemocrats.com/index.php?option=com_tag&task=tag&tag=sb2130). 7 May 2015.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, May 7th, 2015 Essential Reading, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Legal, Main Street, Political Parties, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on Chicago-Area Democrats Push To Expand ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Throughout Illinois

Highland Park, Illinois, ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Latest

Back on December 23, 2013, I blogged about the City of Highland Park on Chicago’s far North Shore passing an ordinance banning “assault weapons” within its city-limits at a June city council meeting.

Subsequently, the Illinois municipality was sued for its “assault weapons” ban.

Last week, a federal court rendered a decision on the lawsuit. From the website of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action on May 1:

The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision on Monday allowing a Chicago-area gun and magazine ban to stand. Such bans are justifiable, according to the court, merely on the basis that they “may increase the public’s sense of safety.”

The case, Friedman v. Highland Park, was filed in 2013, and sought to invalidate a city ordinance that banned “assault weapons or large capacity magazines (those that can accept more than ten rounds).” Highland Park was one of several Chicago suburbs that hastily enacted municipal ordinances regulating or banning the possession of “assault weapons” before the state’s 2013 concealed carry law preempted home-rule authority to do so.

This week, in a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel upheld the ban. According to the majority opinion, “A ban on assault weapons won’t eliminate gun violence in Highland Park, but it may reduce overall dangerousness of crime that does occur ….” Remarkably, the majority went on to suggest that even if the ban’s incursion on Second Amendment rights had no beneficial effect on safety whatsoever, it could still be justified on the basis of the false sense of security it might impart to local residents. “[I]f it has no other effect,” the majority wrote, “Highland Park’s ordinance may increase the public’s sense of safety. Mass shootings are rare, but they are highly salient, and people tend to overestimate the likelihood of salient events.”

The majority acknowledged that “assault weapons” can be beneficial for self-defense because they are lighter and more accurate than alternative options and can be wielded more effectively by householders. Yet they quickly threw their own logic aside to reassert the city’s interest in reducing perceived risk over the tangible benefits that that modern firearms provide to their owners. “If a ban on semiautomatic guns and large-capacity magazines reduces the perceived risk from a mass shooting, and makes the public feel safer as a result, that’s a substantial benefit,” the opinion argued.

Judge Daniel Anthony Manion dissented from the majority opinion. Manion forcefully and persuasively argued that the ruling opinion is “at odds with the central holdings in Heller and McDonald: that the Second Amendment protects a personal right to keep arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense within the home.”

He went on to press the point that only individuals “make the ultimate decision for what constitutes the most effective means of defending one’s home, family, and property.” In stark contrast to the majority, Judge Manion was willing to recognize the constitutional dimensions that individual choice makes in the Second Amendment realm, just as it does with other fundamental rights. “Ultimately, it is up to the lawful gun owner and not the government to decide these matters,” he wrote.

Judge Manion’s reminder that when it comes to our fundamental rights, “The government recognizes these rights; it does not confer them,” cannot be overemphasized. Unfortunately, his colleagues refused to uphold their duty to recognize either the right at stake or Highland Park’s violation of it. Rest assured, however, that your NRA will continue the fight to see that injustice corrected.

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Robert McCoppin reported on the Chicago Tribune website on April 28:

A federal court Monday upheld Highland Park’s ban on assault weapons — possibly setting the stage for a showdown over the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court…

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said he was confident the law could be overturned on appeal to the Supreme Court, but the National Rifle Association would have to decide whether to make a costly appeal.

“The Second Amendment is about the right to keep and bear arms,” Pearson said. “The government doesn’t get to pick the list.”

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Stay tuned…

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

(Editor’s note: Permission to reproduce this piece granted by the NRA-ILA)

Source:

McCoppin, Robert. “Appeals court upholds Highland Park assault weapons ban.” Chicago Tribune. 28 Apr. 2015. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/highland-park/news/chi-assault-weapons-ban-highland-park-20150427-story.html). 5 May 2015.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, May 5th, 2015 Ammunition, Crime, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Legal, Self-Defense Comments Off on Highland Park, Illinois, ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Latest

Congressional Democrats Push ‘High-Capacity’ Magazine Ban

Like I blogged Monday, the gun “control” crowd is off-and-running several weeks into the new year. In addition to a ban on certain AR-15 rifle ammunition, they’re also pushing to ban “high-capacity” firearm ammunition magazines. From the website of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislation Action (NRA-ILA) last Friday:

Anti-gun U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty (D-Conn.), have introduced their Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act (S. 407 and H.R. 752, respectively), in yet another attempt to ban magazines that accept more than 10 rounds. Similar legislation has been introduced in previous Congresses, and has repeatedly failed since the expiration of the Clinton “large” magazine ban in 2004.

Firearms designed to use magazines that hold more than ten rounds have been around for more than a hundred years. Today they constitute a majority of all new firearms manufactured, imported and sold in the United States, for what the Supreme Court, in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), called the central purpose of the Second Amendment: self-defense. While gun control supporters claim that the magazines are unnecessary for self-defense, millions of Americans disagree, and the Supreme Court has ruled in Heller that laws are unconstitutional if they prohibit firearms that are in common use for defensive purposes.

Moreover, studies have shown that magazine bans don’t reduce crime. The congressionally-mandated study of the 1994-2004 federal “large” magazine “ban” concluded that its 10-round limit on new magazines wasn’t a factor in multiple-victim or multiple-wound crimes. A follow-up study concluded that “relatively few attacks involve more than 10 shots fired,” and “the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” And a majority of law enforcement in the United States acknowledges that banning standard-capacity magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds will not increase public safety.

A person attacked in a parking lot, or at home in the middle of the night, will probably have only the magazine within the firearm. No one should be arbitrarily limited in the number of rounds he or she can have for self-defense.

The NRA opposes this legislation and will continue to fight attempts in Congress to limit magazine capacity.

As I type this, each and every co-sponsor of this legislation is a Democrat (16 in the Senate and 107 in the House).

You can track the status of Senate Bill 407 here and House Bill 752 here via Congress.gov.

Permission has been granted by the NRA-ILA to reproduce the above.

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 18th, 2015 Ammunition, Crime, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Legal, Political Parties, Public Safety, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on Congressional Democrats Push ‘High-Capacity’ Magazine Ban

Chicago To Fight Gun Sale, Transfer Ban Ruling?

Supporters of gun rights scored a big victory in Chicago yesterday, continuing to undermine gun “control” efforts pushed by former Mayor Richard M. Daley and current Mayor Rahm Emanuel. The Associated Press reported this morning:

A federal judge on Monday overturned Chicago’s ban on the sale and transfer of firearms, ruling that the city’s ordinances aimed at reducing gun violence are unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang said in his ruling that while the government has a duty to protect its citizens, it’s also obligated to protect constitutional rights, including the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. However, Chang said he would temporarily stay the effects of his ruling, meaning the ordinances can stand while the city decides whether to appeal…

So is Mayor Emanuel and the City of Chicago going to appeal the ruling of Judge Chang, an Obama appointee?

Dahleen Glanton and Jason Meisner reported on the Chicago Tribune website today:

Roderick Drew, a spokesman for the city’s Law Department, said in a written statement Monday that Mayor Rahm Emanuel “strongly disagrees” with the judge’s decision and has instructed city attorneys “to consider all options to better regulate the sale of firearms within the city’s borders.”

So here’s a question Chicagoans might want to ask City Hall before a potential appeal is filed:

Seeing that all this stems from a 2010 lawsuit filed by three Chicago residents and an association of Illinois firearm dealers, how much, if any, is the City already on the hook for when it comes to the victors’ legal bills?

I seem to remember a certain check for $399,950 being coughed up by the City of Chicago to pay the Second Amendment Foundation for their legal costs in fighting the city’s handgun ban in the U.S. Supreme Court case of McDonald v. City of Chicago.

Followed shortly thereafter by a check for $663,294.10 to the National Rifle Association for their attorney fees related to the lawsuit.

Enquiring minds want to know…

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Sources:

“Chicago gun sale ban unconstitutional, judge rules.” FOXNews.com. 7 Jan. 2014. (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/06/chicago-gun-sale-ban-unconstitutional-judge-rules/). 7 Jan. 2014.

Glanton, Dahleen and Meisner, Jason. “Judge scraps Chicago’s ban on retail gun shops.” Chicago Tribune. 7 Jan. 2014. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-citys-gun-ordinance-ruled-unconstitutional-by-federal-judge-20140106,0,7182171.story?page=1). 7 Jan. 2014.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, January 7th, 2014 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Legal, Self-Defense Comments Off on Chicago To Fight Gun Sale, Transfer Ban Ruling?

Quote For The Week

“The Supreme Court has ruled that they cannot have a nativity scene in Washington, D.C. This wasn’t for any religious reasons. They couldn’t find three wise men and a virgin.”

-Jay Leno, American comedian and television show host

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Share

Tags: , , , ,

Sunday, December 22nd, 2013 Government, Humor, Legal, Quote For The Week, Religion Comments Off on Quote For The Week

Illinois Right-To-Carry Deadline Extended Again

July 22. That’s the new deadline set by the U.S. Supreme Court for Illinois to put a concealed-carry law in place. From an Associated Press-authored piece in The State Journal-Register yesterday:

The U.S. Supreme Court granted an extension Tuesday for Illinois’s attorney general to decide whether to appeal a court order permitting the state’s gun owners to carry concealed firearms.

Justice Elena Kagan granted a delay until July 22, essentially a second 30 days of leeway that allows Attorney General Lisa Madigan time to craft a response.

The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Illinois’ ban on concealed-carry back in December 2012 and set a June 9 deadline for the state to have a CCW law on the books. The appellate court subsequently pushed that back to July 9 at the request of the Illinois Attorney General, saying it wouldn’t allow another extension.

Seeing that both chambers of the Illinois General Assembly passed the concealed-carry legislation (Illinois House Bill 183) with more than the three-fifths vote needed to override Illinois Governor Quinn if he offers changes/vetoes the bill, it’s suspected by some that the extensions are no more than stalling tactics to give Illinois municipalities the chance to pass so-called “assault weapon” bans before the CCW legislation awaiting the Governor’s signature prohibits it.

By Christopher E. Hill, Editor
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

O’Connor, John. “Lisa Madigan gets guns delay; Speaker Madigan wants bill OK’d.” Associated Press. 18 June 2013. (http://www.sj-r.com/breaking/x871007557/U-S-Supreme-Court-grants-Madigan-more-time-on-guns#axzz2WfY18WW1). 19 June 2013.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, June 19th, 2013 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Legal, Self-Defense Comments Off on Illinois Right-To-Carry Deadline Extended Again

CBO: ObamaCare’s Gross Costs Over 10 Years May Be Nearly Twice White House’s Original Projections

Universal healthcare. A noble idea- if a nation can afford it.

As for “ObamaCare,” the more time that passes since the Affordable Care Act was enacted on March 23, 2010, the more expensive the projected numbers are getting.

Howard Sheppard reported on the website of Central Pennsylvania FOX affiliate WPMT FOX 43 yesterday:

The gross costs of the national healthcare law rammed through Congress by President Barack Obama will reach an estimated $1.76 trillion over 10 years – nearly twice the amount originally projected. The figure, which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) revealed on Wednesday, is bound to cause embarrassment to the administration as it comes just as debate on “Obamacare” is starting to heat up again, two weeks before the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on whether the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional…

Original White House estimates said the gross cost of the healthcare act would be $940 billion over a decade, but the CBO’s new figures raise that figure to a shade under $1.5 trillion. For the 10 years from 2013-2022 that increases even further to $1.76 trillion.

(Editor’s note: Italics added for emphasis)

Back on March 1, I noted that according to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released February 26, ObamaCare will increase the long-term federal deficit by $6.2 trillion.

$6.2 trillion.

Considering the growing instability of the U.S. financial house of cards, one might wonder if the costs associated with universal health coverage won’t be the straw that eventually breaks the camel’s back.

By Christopher E. Hill, Editor
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

Sheppard, Howard. “CBO: Obamacare estimated cost nearly double to $1.7 trillion.” FOX Central Pennsylvania. 16 May 2013. (http://fox43.com/2013/05/16/cbo-obamacare-estimated-cost-nearly-double-to-1-7-trillion/#axzz2TYdCQnzp). 16 May 2013.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, May 17th, 2013 Debt Crisis, Fiscal Policy, Government, Health, Legal, Spending Comments Off on CBO: ObamaCare’s Gross Costs Over 10 Years May Be Nearly Twice White House’s Original Projections
Survival And Prosperity
Est. 2010, Chicagoland, USA
Christopher E. Hill, Editor

Successor to Boom2Bust.com
"The Most Hated Blog On Wall Street"
(Memorial Day Weekend 2007-2010)

PLEASE RATE this blog HERE,
and PLEASE VOTE for the blog below:



Thank you very, very much!
Advertising Disclosure here. Ad captions last reviewed/updated 4/18/17.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Freeze Dried Food SPRING ADDITIONAL 15% DISCOUNT (promo code- home page); Free Gift w/ Purchase; Free Shipping (domestic orders). Review coming soon.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Family-Owned & Operated in Chicago Suburbs! SAVE 10% OFF ALL ITEMS (promo code- home page); Free Shipping (U.S. orders) & Returns. Review coming soon.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Buy Gold And Silver Coins BACK-DATED SILVER & GOLD EAGLE SALE!; Secondary Market Silver Coin/Bar Sale (1 oz. coins, 10 oz., & 100 oz. bars); 90% Silver U.S. Dimes & Quarters Sale; U.S./World Gold Bullion Coins/Bars also on sale; Free Shipping on U.S. orders $99 and up (only $5.95 below $99!). BGASC reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
BullionVault World's Largest Online Investment Gold Service taking care of $2 billion for over 65,000 users from 175 countries. BullionVault.com reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
SAVE 20% OFF ALL CASE PACKS!; BUY 3-MONTH SUPPLY GET BREAKFAST KIT FREE!; Big Savings on "Deal Of The Day" page; Free Shipping on orders over $79. MyPatriotSupply.com reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
bullet proof vestsWorld's First Bulletproof Baseball Cap only $129; Bulletproof Ceramic Plate (NIJ Level III Stand-Alone) only $169; Bulletproof Backpack/Messenger Bag Panel only $99. BulletSafe reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Survival Titles Save 20% SAVE 35% ON SURVIVAL TITLES! (promo code- home page); Discontinued Title Sale- Savings up to 75% Off Original Price. Paladin Press reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
This project dedicated to St. Jude
Patron Saint of Desperate Situations



happyToSurvive

Categories

 

Archives

RSS Chris Hill’s Other Blog: Offshore Safe Deposit Boxes

  • Degussa Singapore Launches YouTube Channel
    It’s been some time since I last blogged about the first Asian branch of Degussa, a leading international player in the precious metals world. Degussa Singapore opened its doors at 22 Orchard Road in October 2015 and operates a safe deposit box service in addition to selling bullion bars, coins, and precious gifts. Yesterday I […]
  • Nomad Capitalist’s 5 Best Countries For Offshore Gold Storage
    Research related to Monday’s post about precious metals storage in Singapore led me to a piece published last fall by Andrew Henderson over on the Nomad Capitalist website. I’ve mentioned Andrew and his company before on the blog, but for those readers not familiar with them, Henderson is the founder and managing partner of Hong […]
  • Singapore’s ‘Strong’ Precious Metals Storage Infrastructure Anchors Trading Hub Push
    It’s no secret that Singapore has become a global leader in the storage and safekeeping of private wealth. In fact, the last mention of the Southeast Asian city-state on this blog concerned a December 12, 2016, article on the The Business Times (Singapore) website which noted privately-owned precious metals from around the world are finding […]
  • List Of Offshore Private Vaults Updated
    The list of private, non-bank vaults outside the United States (offering safe deposit boxes/lockers at a minimum) located on this blog’s sister site- Offshore Private Vaults- was recently updated. Safe deposit facilities now open for business have been added under the following countries: -Hong Kong (Royal England Safe Deposit Box Ltd.) -Thailand (Magna Carta Law […]
  • Next Degussa Numis Day To Take Place May 4, 5
    Degussa, a leading international player in the precious metals world which also offers safe deposit boxes (for customers) at branches in Germany, Singapore, Spain, and Switzerland, has just posted information about their next Numis Day (first blogged about here) at their Geneva and Zurich showrooms. From their website: The Next Numis Day We appreciate and […]