2nd Amendment in Action: Juneau Public School Sends 200 Sixth Graders to the Firing Range

/3 Comments/in , , /by

Last week in Juneau Alaska, about 200 sixth graders headed to the firing range to learn about firearms. Floyd Dryden Middle school runs a program that teaches the kids how to safely handle and shoot rifles, as well as hunting ethics, conservation and management, navigation and other outdoor skills.

But don’t misunderstand, just as the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting, neither is this program. Program Director Ken Coate stresses:

“We aren’t here to create little hunters. We’re here to teach firearm safety, firearm handling, how to treat a firearm with respect, how to keep a kid from getting in trouble with a firearm — and everything else is a side benefit.”

A side benefit. Meaning that the most important thing and the primary purpose of this program is to instill respect for and knowledge of firearms. I have always been a proponent of educational programs such as this so that children realize that guns in real life hold very little in common with the dramatized fiction of the movies.

With this knowledge a couple of things happen. First, the seriousness of the matter sinks in so children understand that guns are not toys. Secondly, the mystery around guns is removed so kids won’t be as tempted to seek them out in a home that has one. Thirdly, if you acclimate a child in their youth with guns there is less of a likelihood that they will grow up with that irrational fear and hatred that spawns gun control zealots.

To the earlier points, the Principal of Floyd Dryden, Tom Milliron, wrote a letter to the parents of the children before the program saying:

“Students who live in homes without firearms are often exposed to firearms in their friends’ homes. They need to understand safe and appropriate behavior in these situations.”

Now, for any parent who vehemently objects, their child does not have to participate, but my question is, why would you want to hurt your child? This is a fantastic program which teaches your child invaluable knowledge and may actually save their life. Are anti gun zealots so conceited that they would sacrifice their children in order to maintain their own misguided self righteousness?

I don’t think any of the Alaskan parents actually objected to the program. The previous paragraph was directed more to the other places in this country where they not only lack this program but hell would literally have to freeze over before it was allowed in their schools. I’m thinking firstly of New York City and other North Eastern dens of gun bias. His Mayor-ness Bloomberg’s brain would most likely explode if someone would suggest such a program in his fiefdom. When you have as much hate in your heart as Mayor Bloomberg does then little things like sacrificing children to promote your own agenda is of little consequence.

This is the kind of program that should be everywhere in America. Instead of having a tragedy befall a family because a kid thinks a gun is a toy or doesn’t have the proper respect for a firearm, why don’t we educate them so we avoid a tragedy in the first place?

____________________________________________

Tony Oliva is the Director of Media Relations for Gun Owners of America. You can read more from his blog HERE.

Alaska Family Action’s Response to ADN Column that Compared AFA to Communism, Sharia Law

/4 Comments/in /by

Shannyn Moore recently wrote an inflammatory piece [in the Anchorage Daily News], comparing Communism and Sharia Law advocates with Alaska Family Action. We are deeply offended, and hope that anyone who does not advocate for the mass killing of millions of innocent victims (as occurred last century in Communist countries), or the televised beheading of “infidels” this century, is equally offended by her claim. The difference between such groups and Christians who wish to speak about public policy is not simply a subtle nuance, and should be detectable by Shannyn.

Alaska Family Action does indeed endeavor to promote Judeo-Christian values, which historically involves reaching out to those who are most vulnerable and in need (whether yet unborn /newborn, or struggling to raise a family.) We are thankful that we are still able to do so, including fundraising to get our message out in the public square, despite the best efforts of some to oppress and silence that perspective.

A word about our motivations is appropriate. Since ancient Rome, Christians demonstrated respect for life by pulling discarded babies from the Tiber River and trash heaps outside the city gates; in the 1600s Christians established the first hospitals. Helping the vulnerable is an essential part of who we are, and for Christians, these actions are rooted in our Scriptures.

Let us take just one example: Abortion. AFA advocates against elective abortion because we believe the unborn child is a person. If we are right, then killing the child is dreadfully wrong, with at least two differences from killing an adult. First, we know that at certain stages of development, the unborn child can not only feel pain, but does not yet possess the capability known as “going into shock” to partially block excruciating pain before death. Second, when the child is dismembered in-utero without benefit of anesthesia, no one hears her as she screams.

Our revulsion at this practice leads us to ask voters to oppose Senator Hollis French and the bipartisan coalition. We obviously disagree with Senator French on partial birth abortion, the need to protect minor children from predators, the right of parents to be involved in their daughter’s abortion decision, and forcing the public to fund abortions. However, we’re deeply troubled that he would use his position as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee to prevent a hearing or vote on bills passed by the House on these issues. We believe that is an abuse of power, and an affront to democracy.

Indeed, AFA does seek a voice in the public arena. Issues of life and proper respect for traditional marriage have moved there and we will move with them. We are grateful that Governor Parnell spoke at our fundraiser. There is plenty of precedent in American history for political leaders to speak out on moral issues, going all the way back to George Washington. There is also plenty of precedent for churches and the religious to be deeply involved in issues of public concern – from the cause of Independence through the call to Abolition; from calls to arms to calls for peace; from civil rights for blacks to civil rights the unborn.

Does she find laws against murder objectionable because they are rooted in a Biblical commandment “Thou Shalt Not Kill”? Do followers of Christ lose their right to speak in the public square, or lose the right to raise funds to communicate their point of view, because their view is informed by their faith? Alaska Family Action uses funds to advocate for candidates, as permitted under the law. Instead of demonizing Jim Minnery and AFA, rather than seriously engage on issues that confront our families, we suggest an authentic dialogue.

Perhaps people of faith will eventually lose their right to raise funds and speak out on issues of public policy. However, given what is at stake, many of us who are followers of Christ will follow the example of generations of believers and continue to speak out for the vulnerable. We will do so to our last breath. We can do nothing less.

Exxon Gets Key Permit for Alaska’s Point Thomson Field

/1 Comment/in /by

Exxon Mobil Corp on Friday received a major federal permit it needed to start construction on the Point Thomson oil and gas field on the eastern North Slope of Alaska, officials said, after an extended delay that threatened some leases there.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granted Exxon a wetlands-fill permit for construction of drill pads, roads, an airstrip, pipeline, and docking and other facilities needed for production at the long-languishing field – production the state of Alaska has accused the company of dragging its heels on.

The Army Corps permit followed a detailed environmental impact study that began in 2009. While there remain a few outstanding state permits, the wetlands-fill authorization was the major approval needed for construction, said Mike Holley, northern branch team leader for the state’s Army Corps district.

Holley said Exxon, backed by partners BP Plc and ConocoPhillips, hopes to begin construction soon.

“They are planning on doing as much of the construction this winter as possible,” he said, adding that ice roads, which are built by spraying water on the tundra, would accommodate that.

Read more from this story HERE.

USGS: Massive 7.7 Earthquake Just 164 Miles South of Metlakatla, AK, Tsunami Warnings Issued

/0 Comments/in /by

An hour ago, a massive 7.7 quake hit near the southern tip of Southeast Alaska, just 164 miles south of Metlakatla.

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) announced that the depth of the quake was approximately 17 kilometers (almost 12 miles).

This is the largest earthquake in the region in 63 years. In 1949, a magnitude 8.1 earthquake struck the area.

The West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center has issued a regional tsunami warning for areas near the quake, including southeast Alaska. Hawaii is expected to experience some “non-destructive” sea level changes later tonight as a result of the quake.

UPDATE: Tsunami warnings were downgraded to advisories. In Craig, Alaska, the earthquake apparently caused a four inch wave. Despite the significant size of the earthquake, relatively minor damage has been reported from Canada and southeast Alaska.

Alaska Natives Lobby Obama Admin. Against Oil Development in NPR-A

/1 Comment/in /by

Native Alaskans have teamed up with environmental forces to urge the Obama administration to stick with a conservative management plan for the National Petroleum Reserve, despite oil industry protests that the proposal would block energy development in lands specifically reserved for extracting fossil fuels.

Joseph Sagviyuaq Sage, a whaling captain from Barrow, Alaska, and Lillian Stone, a teacher from Anaktuvuk Pass, are set to meet with Senate staffers and Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes while in Washington, D.C. this week. The pair are collaborating with the Alaska Wilderness League to make the case that some areas in the 23-million acre reserve should be off limits to oil development.

The push comes as the administration nears a final decision on how to balance energy production and conservation in the 89-year-old reserve in northwest Alaska. In August, the Interior Department unveiled its “preferred” management plan, which would allow oil and gas development in 11.8 million acres of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska while blocking the activity in other areas that are home to caribou herds and polar bears.

The Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management appears likely to make a final decision on whether to adopt its preferred approach sometime after the Nov. 6 presidential election.

Stone said she wanted policymakers in the nation’s capital to know “we are real people and we are directly impacted by any activity that goes on within NPR-A.” Oil drilling in the reserve threaten the caribou that roam the land, Stone said, as well as the Alaska Natives who hunt the animal for food and clothing.

Read more from this story HERE.

Alaska’s ‘Bi-Partisan’ Working Group: The Cover for the Progressive Agenda of Obama’s Minions (+video)

/2 Comments/in /by

There has been no small shortage of advertising state-wide to support the “Bi-Partisan Working Group,” or sometimes called the Senate Majority. Despite their claim that they are “bi-partisan” or work “in a bi-partisan” way, it is really a cover for a State Senate controlled by Progressive Democrats. While it is true that the Senate President Gary Stevens is a Republican, he can hardly be viewed as a conservative. Proclaiming resource development to conflict with the state constitution, his views would be laughable if they were not hurting the state and blocking legislation that would allow resource development. In exchange for facilitating their agenda, Gary Stevens gets an easy glide from the Democrats to get back into office.

An examination of the rest of the Bi-Partisan Working Group shows they are, in fact, quite partisan. Some of the most radical state democrats are in control of important committees. It is through the committee chairmanships that they control state business, fostering the agenda of the progressive left. All of them worked on Barack Obama’s campaign, and they share his views on resource development. Anna Fairclough, long time state representative, correctly identified the key roles these Democrats play in the state’s legislative process. The term “bi-partisan” is simply a cover for Democrats trying to hide their association with Barack Obama and his policies.

An examination of the individual members of this group of “gate-keepers” is very revealing. They are all pro-abortion; Bettye Davis is actually playing the role of Planned Parenthood attack dog on her web page against conservative legislators like Alan Dick, claiming they are leading a war on woman. (Apparently, Senator Davis isn’t familiar with the strong role females have in Rep. Dick’s family and rural Alaska). They favor policies that allow government to intrude into your life; some like Joe Thomas advocate policies so radical that many building school teachers would be horrified (newborn public education, support of student insurrections, belief that brains quit developing after the age of 7). Even Joe Paskvan advocates their radical policies (although Paskvan does not agree with Thomas on brain development and believes brains don’t develop until a person is in their 20s). They worked against Parental Consent legislation, they supported legislation that criminalized parents if their child dropped out of school, and they are firm in their belief that the state can run your life better than you can. They may “claim” they are only about fiscal issues, but they clearly have a social agenda they are hiding, and it is an agenda that is reflective of the over-reaching power of the state into family matters that were the hallmark of the Knowles era.

Others like Hollis French are simply anti-gun at their core, and have led Senators like Paskvan and Woelekowski, who once had stellar gun records, down the gun control path. All of them share Barack Obama’s views on resource development and will do whatever they can to block resource development while making them think it is to YOUR advantage. Even worse, they will lie about the records of the Republican Majority to remain in power. They seem to think that no one remembers that the VECO scandal started with the Democrats and Tony Knowles’s Governor’s fund while Dave Guttenberg was Chairman of the Democratic Party, no one remembers the Knowle’s witch hunts for home school mothers who might drown their children, or the various and sundry big government positions of this group of old school progressives.

The cover for the Progressives as “Bi-Partisan” can be clearly seen with a closer examination of the “gatekeeper” Democrats. Fortunately, there are solid people running against each one of these Democratic “gate-keepers.” Let’s get out there and vote, and get both Barack Obama, and his minions in our state senate, out of office. Take note of their names and vote them out.

US Department of Agriculture Funding Broadband to St. Paul Island via Native Corporation

/0 Comments/in /by

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is spending more than half-a-million taxpayer dollars to bring broadband Internet service to the 481 mostly indigenous people of St. Paul, Alaska – a community located 300 miles off the mainland.

“Without broadband, rural communities and business owners face a substantial challenge,” said Dallas Tonsager, Agricultural Undersecretary for Rural Development, in announcing the $554,140 grant. “In Alaska, this grant will bring the benefits of broadband, including new educational, business and public health and safety opportunities to rural residents living in a remote area.”

The taxpayer funds will go directly to Tanadgusix Corporation, the company that will build the broadband network.

The grant is administered through the “Community Connect” program, which is run by USDA’s Rural Development agency.

Community Connect provides grants to poor, rural communities with populations under 20,000 “where broadband service is least likely to be available, but where it can make a tremendous difference in the quality of life for citizens,” according to the program’s description.

Read more from this story HERE.

Alaska’s Governor & Delegation, Party to Empowering Tyrants & Terrorists

/4 Comments/in , /by

Do we want to redistribute America’s wealth to State sponsors of terrorism while hamstringing our defenses? Passing the Law of the Sea Treaty would do just that, enabling the United Nations to further raid America’s treasury, rob her sovereignty, and further empower the despots of the UN.

Here’s a question for the two Senators from Alaska: why would you be a party to empowering the tyrants and terrorists of the United Nations? Why would Alaska’s Governor Sean Parnell and Lt Governor Mead Treadwell also favor passing this treaty?

Our state’s leadership supports a treaty that would be catastrophic for America.

There have been three UN conventions on the Law of the Sea (LOST), the first in 1956, the second in 1960 (both held in Geneva, Switzerland), and the third in New York, 1973. The third convention finally concluded in 1982. The international treaty became enforceable in November, 1994, one year after the sixtieth state, Guyana, ratified the treaty. 162 countries have ratified LOST.

In its current form, the Law of the Sea consists of 17 parts, containing 320 articles and 9 annexes, governing ocean space, boundaries, environmental control, marine research, economic and commercial activities, transfer of technology and royalties, and the settlement of disputes relating to ocean matters.

In past administrations, the main obstacles to US Senate ratification have been the provisions in Part XI, articles 133 through 191 of LOST defining the area subject to international jurisdiction, and part VI, article 82, describing royalty distribution. All disputes would be resolved at an international tribunal headquartered in Hamburg, Germany.

The US Senate has never ratified the treaty. The Obama administration recently revived it and, although the Senate didn’t actually vote on it, LOST supporters were only one vote short of the 67 needed to ratify it (in the US, treaty ratification requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate and the President’s signature). LOST is sometimes called the ‘Zombie treaty’ because it keeps resurfacing after being rejected by the US Senate.

From my perspective, one of the biggest problems with the treaty is its re-distributive policies. America’s generosity has always been superior to that of any other country. Americans have freely given untold sums of aid to those in need. But now the US is supposed to sign a treaty mandating that Americans must give more, potentially sending trillions of dollars to ‘less developed’ countries, some of whom are known state sponsors of terrorism!

Resource exploration and development in effect becomes distribution of wealth to an ‘international authority.’ Of course, the resource extraction itself can only be done after receiving permission from that ‘authority’ to do so. Beyond our Continental shelf or ‘exclusive economic zone’, a percentage of revenue from resource production such as oil, would be distributed to the UN.

Resource development thus becomes the fuel for global power, a power that will further raid America’s wealth, redistributing it as well as the LOST resource revenues, to our enemies across the world.

I am also very concerned that ratifying LOST would greatly degrade America’s defense capability. The security of our allies throughout the world would be compromised. Access to ocean or maritime areas presently used and protected by the US Navy could be lost as sovereignty is lost to the UN. At risk is peace and liberty for many countries. America must not submit to the power of despots within the United Nations.

As noted above, not only does Governor Parnell and Lieutenant Governor Mead Treadwell strongly favor LOST, both of our US Senators do as well. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., is pushing for ratification of the treaty, with a vote planned for the lame-duck session after the November elections. Alaska’s two Senators have said they’ll vote for it.

When you analyze treaties such as the ‘Law of the Sea’, the ‘UN arms treaty’, or proposals and policies found in things like the UN’s ‘Agenda 21’, or Coastal zone management, you find a common thread binding them together: internationalism. Either our elected representatives are ignorant, corrupted by special interests that gain from the new regimes, or they are globalists. More likely, they’re a bit of each.

Obama’s Great Alaska Shutout

/3 Comments/in , /by

President Obama is campaigning as a champion of the oil and gas boom he’s had nothing to do with, and even as his regulators try to stifle it. The latest example is the Interior Department’s little-noticed August decision to close off from drilling nearly half of the 23.5 million acre National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.

The area is called the National Petroleum Reserve because in 1976 Congress designated it as a strategic oil and natural gas stockpile to meet the “energy needs of the nation.” Alaska favors exploration in nearly the entire reserve. The feds had been reviewing four potential development plans, and the state of Alaska had strongly objected to the most restrictive of the four. Sure enough, that was the plan Interior chose.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says his plan “will help the industry bring energy safely to market from this remote location, while also protecting wildlife and subsistence rights of Alaska Natives.” He added that the proposal will expand “safe and responsible oil and gas development, and builds on our efforts to help companies develop the infrastructure that’s needed to bring supplies online.”

The problem is almost no one in the energy industry and few in Alaska agree with him. In an August 22 letter to Mr. Salazar, the entire Alaska delegation in Congress—Senators Mark Begich and Lisa Murkowski and Representative Don Young—call it “the largest wholesale land withdrawal and blocking of access to an energy resource by the federal government in decades.” This decision, they add, “will cause serious harm to the economy and energy security of the United States, as well as to the state of Alaska.” Mr. Begich is a Democrat.

The letter also says the ruling “will significantly limit options for a pipeline” through the reserve. This pipeline has long been sought to transport oil and gas from the Chukchi Sea, the North Slope and future Arctic drilling. Mr. Salazar insists that a pipeline could still be built, but given the Obama Administration’s decision to block the Keystone XL pipeline, Alaskans are right to be skeptical.

Read more from this article HERE.

Alaska’s Judges: Public Servants, or Robed Masters?

/3 Comments/in /by

Judicial retention elections rarely attract much interest from the news media, or from voters. But this year we have reason to pay attention – and take action.

If you live in the 3rd Judicial District – which includes Anchorage, the Mat-Su Valley, the Kenai Peninsula, Kodiak, Prince William Sound and Bristol Bay Communities – you have an opportunity to vote NO on one of the state’s most liberal judges: Superior Court Judge Sen Tan.

Judge San Tan has left his mark on Alaska – and it’s not a pretty one.

Subverted the rights of parents

Judge Tan struck down a common-sense measure that would require a parent to consent before an abortion can be performed on their minor daughter. Thanks to Judge Tan, a girl of any age – even 12 or 13 – can have an abortion in this state without a parent’s consent. The damage caused by Sen Tan’s decision was only partially reversed in 2010 when Alaska voters approved a ballot measure that at least gave parents the right to be informed (not consent) before an abortion is performed on their daughter.

Of course, Judge Tan’s ruling was absurd. A parent’s consent is already required before a minor can get a tattoo, a body piercing, or even an aspirin at school. There are 37 states with laws that require parental involvement before a minor’s abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld these laws as fully constitutional in nine separate decisions. Yet Judge Sen Tan arrogantly argued that Alaska’s constitution somehow prevents us from having a policy that the federal constitution and numerous other states allow. Sen Tan’s decision was nothing more than an imposition of his own extremist views, masquerading as constitutional law.

Forced taxpayers to pay for abortions

Judge Sen Tan ruled that taxpayers have to be on the hook to pay for abortions. He overturned the Alaska Legislature’s decision in 1998 to generally stop using state funds for abortions, except in cases of a threat to the mother’s life, or in cases of rape and incest.

Judge Tan ruled that if the state chose to pay for prenatal care for poor women and their unborn babies, then it must also pay for poor women to have abortions. In the lethal logic of Judge Sen Tan, if you’re using public funds to help ensure that healthy babies are born, then you must also use public funds to ensure that some children are never born. Judge Tan’s ruling completely contradicts the long-established reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court, which had previously held that since the government does not make a woman indigent in the first place, the government does not undermine that indigent woman’s “right to abortion” by simply declining to give her money to pay for it.

Judge Sen Tan is the “poster child” of left-wing judicial activism in Alaska. He is the kind of judge who seems incapable of separating his liberal views from the serious art of constitutional interpretation. If you run for elected office, you’re free to vote your personal viewpoints. That’s what we expect politicians to do. But judges are supposed to be impartially interpreting the law, not making the law.

When judges start acting like politicians, there’s only one appropriate response: treat them like politicians. And that means voting them out of office when they abuse their judicial authority and impose their personal beliefs on you.