NDAA Nullification Passes Virginia Senate by a Veto-Proof 39-1 Vote - DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate

**QXCharles** · 03-03-2012, 03:49 AM

Today, the Virginia Senate took a firm stand in support of liberty, the Constitution for the United States, and the Constitution of Virginia by voting in favor of House Bill 1160 (HB1160), the “NDAA Nullification Act.”

The final vote was 39-1.

After a motion to recommit (delay until next year) went down to the wire before being rejected yesterday (report here), groups across the political spectrum activated in support of the legislation, which codifies in law that no agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia – including defense forces and national guard troops, will comply with or assist the federal government in any way under it’s newly claimed powers to arrest and detain without due process.

INTERNMENT: NEVER AGAIN

The bill’s primary sponsor, Delegate Bob Marshall, had this to say in support:

“During World War II, the federal government incarcerated tens of thousands of loyal Japanese Americans in the name of national security. By this bill, Virginia declares that it will not participate in similar modern-day efforts.

Even President Obama had questions about the bill, when he promised the American people that he would not use the unrestrained powers it granted him — but why should we trust any President with such powers?

There are moments in our history when our liberties hang in the balance. This is one of those moments. I urge the Senate…to lead the way in the nation to ensure that Virginia will not cooperate when the Federal Government strays off the reservation with laws that take away the civil liberties of our citizens.”

BRIDGING THE POLITICAL DIVIDE

Last Thursday, the Tenth Amendment Center, in partnership with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee and Demand Progress held a media conference with experts and legislators from across the political spectrum. On hand were a former Al Gore advisor and a former Reagan administration member. (full report here)

The message was resounding, and echoed by the Jr. Senator from Loudoun Virginia on the floor today, “Wherever you fall on the political spectrum, any law that passes congress that has those provisions should be a deep concern, and I hope that we can all agree on this one issue.”

While the bill doesn’t directly block federal agents from carrying out their new NDAA powers, this is part and parcel of a larger NDAA nullification campaign around the country. Currently 7 local governments have passed resolutions ranging from a denouncement of the federal act in three Colorado counties to requiring noncompliance with it in places like Fairfax, CA and Northampton, MA. And, 7 states are currently considering legislation like Virginia’s – all based off the model legislation provided by the Tenth Amendment Center, the Liberty Preservation Act.

THREE STEPS, MAYBE JUST TWO?

Here at the Tenth Amendment Center, we define nullification as “any act or set of acts which has as its end result a particular law being rendered null, void, or unenforceable in a specific area.” With that definition in mind, we see nullification of the new “kidnapping powers” of the NDAA as a multi-step process.

1. Education - awareness. This is where local and state resolutions come into play. When something is passed, even non-binding, it gets press coverage about the idea that the local and state people have a role to play in this.

2. Non-compliance – as just passed by the Virginia House and Senate, and being considered in various other states and local communities. The message? Your unconstitutional federal act is not welcome here!

Gandhi, Rosa Parks and others didn’t take it beyond there. We recognize that in almost every situation, the federal government relies on states being silent or even fully complicit. Information sharing, logistics, and even national guard troops carrying out orders are activities that could be asked of state and local governments. Could the feds still kidnap at that point if the state refuses compliance? Sure, “legally” nothing has changed. But if 10-15 states and a hundred or so counties and cities are making clear they will not comply and that they consider the act unconstitutional, it’s going to be much tougher for them, if not politically impossible, than if everybody just complied and waited for the courts or another election to “save” them.

3. Resistance and physical interposition – Some, of course, believe that the feds can never be stopped without a physical resistance. But this may not be required if enough states and localities take noncompliance seriously in #2 above. But, we also see the value in running the full spectrum of options from the simplest to the strongest in various parts of the country. In Washington State, the bill there is full non-compliance. Matt Shea and Jason Overstreet, the primary sponsors, feel they can get that moving forward, and hope to follow up with criminal penalties in a future bill. Then, potentially another to require arrest of fed agents for kidnapping could be considered. In Missouri, they’re tracking along the same lines.

In Tennessee, though, the bill being considered right now refers to indefinite detention as a “kidnapping” charge and requires the local sheriffs to stop them. (info here)

MORE STEPS IN VIRGINIA

HB1160 received a minor amendment in the Senate before passage and now goes back to the House for Concurrence. The bill previously passed the house by a vote of 96-4 so it’s expected that the amended version will sail through as well. The Amendment reads as follows:

§ 1. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of law, no agency or political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or employee of same acting in his official capacity, shall aid an agency of the United States in the unlawful detention of any United States citizen pursuant to 50 U.S.C. § 1541 as provided by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81, § 1021).

Delegate Marshall previously reported that Governor Bob McDonnell is opposing this legislation. And, even with such large veto-proof votes in both the House and Senate, Virginia residents are encouraged to take action today. Those living in Virginia are encouraged to contact their Senators with words of thanks for passing HB1160 (at this link) AND the Governor’s office (at this link) in support of this legislation now.

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012...oof-39-1-vote/

**Baromaro** · 03-03-2012, 04:28 AM

Awesome.

At this point, aside from the RP campaign, the 10th amendment should be our main focus, with this it doesn't matter what BS laws Washington dreams up, our respective States could just give DC the finger.

**Baromaro** · 03-03-2012, 04:33 AM

While I agree in theory, in practice if the FED feels the states are getting uppity. They'll just cut off their life blood. Endless federal reserve notes to supply their own unsustainable programs...

That would be the point.......

**QXCharles** · 03-03-2012, 04:33 AM

Awesome.

At this point, aside from the RP campaign, the 10th amendment should be our main focus, with this it doesn't matter what BS laws Washington dreams up, our respective States could just give DC the finger.

While I agree in theory, in practice if the FED feels the states are getting uppity. They'll just cut off their life blood. Endless federal reserve notes to supply their own unsustainable programs...

**QXCharles** · 03-03-2012, 04:39 AM

That would be the point.......

It's been my observation that the states like to play both sides. They want the money, but not play along with some of the strings that are attached to all that "free" money.

I wish a state would stand up and say F*** your money, we don't want it and you're no longer allowed to collect an income tax from our citizens. Show me a state like that and I'll pack up to live and defend that state.

**Appeselve** · 03-03-2012, 04:48 AM

States should outlaw the IRS.

**Baromaro** · 03-03-2012, 04:51 AM

It's been my observation that the states like to play both sides. They want the money, but not play along with some of the strings that are attached to all that "free" money.

That is what I'm saying, they are addicted to the drug, maybe they need to piss of their dealer and it will get two birds stoned at once, first we won't have X unconstitutional law and second we will be forced to live within our means, some States will be able to do this like North Dakota and they will benefit for their responsibility.

**uncoosesoge** · 03-03-2012, 01:08 PM

It's been my observation that the states like to play both sides. They want the money, but not play along with some of the strings that are attached to all that "free" money.

I wish a state would stand up and say F*** your money, we don't want it and you're no longer allowed to collect an income tax from our citizens. Show me a state like that and I'll pack up to live and defend that state.

Would your perspective change if you ever realized that YOU are the state?

What are you waiting for?

**uaodnabnjz** · 03-03-2012, 01:57 PM

if Virginia is so pro-Freedom - why didn't they nominate Ron Paul ?

still, a piece of good news it is.

NDAA + other alphabet soup programs = martial law ... in the US.

**QXCharles** · 03-03-2012, 02:44 PM

Would your perspective change if you ever realized that YOU are the state?

What are you waiting for?

I am not the state, I am not a corporation nor am I represented by a corporation. I get no representation from the state nor do I take part in it's political process. For all intents and purposes I have withdrawn consent.

**uncoosesoge** · 03-03-2012, 03:11 PM

I am not the state, I am not a corporation nor am I represented by a corporation. I get no representation from the state nor do I take part in it's political process. For all intents and purposes I have withdrawn consent.

You do realize that these statements make you the State for if you acted other than you indicate then you will have abdicated your "statehood".

**QXCharles** · 03-03-2012, 03:28 PM

You do realize that these statements make you the State for if you acted other than you indicate then you will have abdicated your "statehood".

Yeah and?? I am one individual who has withdrawn consent. Does the political boundary I reside still suck at the tit of the FED? Yep! Does the political boundary I reside still choke creator endowed freedoms, license rights and regulate privileges? Yep!

I handle myself and my family accordingly and whenever I receive a contract from the STATE OF INDIANA, I refuse for cause and file it at the court of competent jurisdiction. I am my own court recorder as I keep all records.

Like I said, I have withdrawn consent. I'm still working on attempting to get my conveyances MSO so that I am no longer required to plate it. But that is proving to be a bit difficult.

**uncoosesoge** · 03-03-2012, 03:42 PM

Yeah and?? I am one individual who has withdrawn consent. Does the political boundary I reside still suck at the tit of the FED? Yep! Does the political boundary I reside still choke creator endowed freedoms, license rights and regulate privileges? Yep!

Maybe you should consider moving to a different federal zone?

I'm still working on attempting to get my conveyances MSO so that I am no longer required to plate it. But that is proving to be a bit difficult.

You might apply for a DOT number. They have a checkbox "PRIVATE" as an option. That gets you out of the local political jurisdiction (make your own DOT plate).

It is far easier to get along with these political subdivisions when you agree at all times. Stay away from argument. Attorneys are licensed to argue. People are not.

**QXCharles** · 03-03-2012, 04:06 PM

You might apply for a DOT number. They have a checkbox "PRIVATE" as an option. That gets you out of the local political jurisdiction (make your own DOT plate). I didn't see a spot for for Private use. I'll keep looking. Thanks for the tip.

**uncoosesoge** · 03-03-2012, 04:46 PM

I didn't see a spot for for Private use. I'll keep looking. Thanks for the tip.

from another forum several years ago

It has been discovered, investigated, confirmed (by DOT and law enforcement) and utilized that one may go to; Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
and (properly) fill out form MCS-150 in order to be issued a DOT number for declaring that one is driving/operating in private and not "for hire".

Obtaining this number allows one to utilize the roads and highways without a driver's license, registration, insurance, NOR be subject to the various state's motor vehicle codes. AND law enforcement is not authorized to stop those displaying this number for vehicle code violations.

Recorded conference call including how to fill out the form;
TalkShoe - Call - drphil's Call
Choose the call from April 14th, episode #24.
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web...d=34689&cmd=tc

[Update]
For those who decide to pursue this method;
DO NOT change the status to "Inactive" as stated in the recording. Law enforcement who run the number are not to stop those with "Active" status.
DO NOT check the box on the form for vehicles OVER 10,000 lbs. Choose; Under 10,000 lbs.

**antiggill** · 03-03-2012, 04:56 PM

Sadly they will come around.......all war is a war of attrition.

Time and Influcence is on the side of those that control the digital fiat.

**Bigroza** · 03-03-2012, 05:13 PM

the 10th amendment should be our main focus, with this it doesn't matter what BS laws Washington dreams up, our respective States could just give DC the finger.

Agreed. That being said, I tried to explain about the 10th to my Mom and how we should ignore the 535 in DC. I tried to explain how she could go to her Mich State Senator and Rep [for the State Senate and House] and have gold/silver as money [like they did in Utah] and her eyes just kinda glazed over. Hard to make the sheep interested.....

03-03-2012, 03:49 AM	#1
QXCharles Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	NDAA Nullification Passes Virginia Senate by a Veto-Proof 39-1 Vote Today, the Virginia Senate took a firm stand in support of liberty, the Constitution for the United States, and the Constitution of Virginia by voting in favor of House Bill 1160 (HB1160), the “NDAA Nullification Act.” The final vote was 39-1. After a motion to recommit (delay until next year) went down to the wire before being rejected yesterday (report here), groups across the political spectrum activated in support of the legislation, which codifies in law that no agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia – including defense forces and national guard troops, will comply with or assist the federal government in any way under it’s newly claimed powers to arrest and detain without due process. INTERNMENT: NEVER AGAIN The bill’s primary sponsor, Delegate Bob Marshall, had this to say in support: “During World War II, the federal government incarcerated tens of thousands of loyal Japanese Americans in the name of national security. By this bill, Virginia declares that it will not participate in similar modern-day efforts. Even President Obama had questions about the bill, when he promised the American people that he would not use the unrestrained powers it granted him — but why should we trust any President with such powers? There are moments in our history when our liberties hang in the balance. This is one of those moments. I urge the Senate…to lead the way in the nation to ensure that Virginia will not cooperate when the Federal Government strays off the reservation with laws that take away the civil liberties of our citizens.” BRIDGING THE POLITICAL DIVIDE Last Thursday, the Tenth Amendment Center, in partnership with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee and Demand Progress held a media conference with experts and legislators from across the political spectrum. On hand were a former Al Gore advisor and a former Reagan administration member. (full report here) The message was resounding, and echoed by the Jr. Senator from Loudoun Virginia on the floor today, “Wherever you fall on the political spectrum, any law that passes congress that has those provisions should be a deep concern, and I hope that we can all agree on this one issue.” While the bill doesn’t directly block federal agents from carrying out their new NDAA powers, this is part and parcel of a larger NDAA nullification campaign around the country. Currently 7 local governments have passed resolutions ranging from a denouncement of the federal act in three Colorado counties to requiring noncompliance with it in places like Fairfax, CA and Northampton, MA. And, 7 states are currently considering legislation like Virginia’s – all based off the model legislation provided by the Tenth Amendment Center, the Liberty Preservation Act. THREE STEPS, MAYBE JUST TWO? Here at the Tenth Amendment Center, we define nullification as “any act or set of acts which has as its end result a particular law being rendered null, void, or unenforceable in a specific area.” With that definition in mind, we see nullification of the new “kidnapping powers” of the NDAA as a multi-step process. 1. Education - awareness. This is where local and state resolutions come into play. When something is passed, even non-binding, it gets press coverage about the idea that the local and state people have a role to play in this. 2. Non-compliance – as just passed by the Virginia House and Senate, and being considered in various other states and local communities. The message? Your unconstitutional federal act is not welcome here! Gandhi, Rosa Parks and others didn’t take it beyond there. We recognize that in almost every situation, the federal government relies on states being silent or even fully complicit. Information sharing, logistics, and even national guard troops carrying out orders are activities that could be asked of state and local governments. Could the feds still kidnap at that point if the state refuses compliance? Sure, “legally” nothing has changed. But if 10-15 states and a hundred or so counties and cities are making clear they will not comply and that they consider the act unconstitutional, it’s going to be much tougher for them, if not politically impossible, than if everybody just complied and waited for the courts or another election to “save” them. 3. Resistance and physical interposition – Some, of course, believe that the feds can never be stopped without a physical resistance. But this may not be required if enough states and localities take noncompliance seriously in #2 above. But, we also see the value in running the full spectrum of options from the simplest to the strongest in various parts of the country. In Washington State, the bill there is full non-compliance. Matt Shea and Jason Overstreet, the primary sponsors, feel they can get that moving forward, and hope to follow up with criminal penalties in a future bill. Then, potentially another to require arrest of fed agents for kidnapping could be considered. In Missouri, they’re tracking along the same lines. In Tennessee, though, the bill being considered right now refers to indefinite detention as a “kidnapping” charge and requires the local sheriffs to stop them. (info here) MORE STEPS IN VIRGINIA HB1160 received a minor amendment in the Senate before passage and now goes back to the House for Concurrence. The bill previously passed the house by a vote of 96-4 so it’s expected that the amended version will sail through as well. The Amendment reads as follows: § 1. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of law, no agency or political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or employee of same acting in his official capacity, shall aid an agency of the United States in the unlawful detention of any United States citizen pursuant to 50 U.S.C. § 1541 as provided by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81, § 1021). Delegate Marshall previously reported that Governor Bob McDonnell is opposing this legislation. And, even with such large veto-proof votes in both the House and Senate, Virginia residents are encouraged to take action today. Those living in Virginia are encouraged to contact their Senators with words of thanks for passing HB1160 (at this link) AND the Governor’s office (at this link) in support of this legislation now. http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012...oof-39-1-vote/ Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:28 AM	#2
Baromaro Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 537 Senior Member	Awesome. At this point, aside from the RP campaign, the 10th amendment should be our main focus, with this it doesn't matter what BS laws Washington dreams up, our respective States could just give DC the finger. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:33 AM	#3
Baromaro Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 537 Senior Member	While I agree in theory, in practice if the FED feels the states are getting uppity. They'll just cut off their life blood. Endless federal reserve notes to supply their own unsustainable programs... That would be the point....... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:33 AM	#4
QXCharles Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	Awesome. At this point, aside from the RP campaign, the 10th amendment should be our main focus, with this it doesn't matter what BS laws Washington dreams up, our respective States could just give DC the finger. While I agree in theory, in practice if the FED feels the states are getting uppity. They'll just cut off their life blood. Endless federal reserve notes to supply their own unsustainable programs... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:39 AM	#5
QXCharles Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	That would be the point....... It's been my observation that the states like to play both sides. They want the money, but not play along with some of the strings that are attached to all that "free" money. I wish a state would stand up and say F*** your money, we don't want it and you're no longer allowed to collect an income tax from our citizens. Show me a state like that and I'll pack up to live and defend that state. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:48 AM	#6
Appeselve Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 520 Senior Member	States should outlaw the IRS. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:51 AM	#7
Baromaro Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 537 Senior Member	It's been my observation that the states like to play both sides. They want the money, but not play along with some of the strings that are attached to all that "free" money. That is what I'm saying, they are addicted to the drug, maybe they need to piss of their dealer and it will get two birds stoned at once, first we won't have X unconstitutional law and second we will be forced to live within our means, some States will be able to do this like North Dakota and they will benefit for their responsibility. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 01:08 PM	#8
uncoosesoge Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 398 Senior Member	It's been my observation that the states like to play both sides. They want the money, but not play along with some of the strings that are attached to all that "free" money. I wish a state would stand up and say F*** your money, we don't want it and you're no longer allowed to collect an income tax from our citizens. Show me a state like that and I'll pack up to live and defend that state. Would your perspective change if you ever realized that YOU are the state? What are you waiting for? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 01:57 PM	#9
uaodnabnjz Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 464 Senior Member	if Virginia is so pro-Freedom - why didn't they nominate Ron Paul ? still, a piece of good news it is. NDAA + other alphabet soup programs = martial law ... in the US. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 02:44 PM	#10
QXCharles Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	Would your perspective change if you ever realized that YOU are the state? What are you waiting for? I am not the state, I am not a corporation nor am I represented by a corporation. I get no representation from the state nor do I take part in it's political process. For all intents and purposes I have withdrawn consent. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 03:11 PM	#11
uncoosesoge Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 398 Senior Member	I am not the state, I am not a corporation nor am I represented by a corporation. I get no representation from the state nor do I take part in it's political process. For all intents and purposes I have withdrawn consent. You do realize that these statements make you the State for if you acted other than you indicate then you will have abdicated your "statehood". Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 03:28 PM	#12
QXCharles Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	You do realize that these statements make you the State for if you acted other than you indicate then you will have abdicated your "statehood". Yeah and?? I am one individual who has withdrawn consent. Does the political boundary I reside still suck at the tit of the FED? Yep! Does the political boundary I reside still choke creator endowed freedoms, license rights and regulate privileges? Yep! I handle myself and my family accordingly and whenever I receive a contract from the STATE OF INDIANA, I refuse for cause and file it at the court of competent jurisdiction. I am my own court recorder as I keep all records. Like I said, I have withdrawn consent. I'm still working on attempting to get my conveyances MSO so that I am no longer required to plate it. But that is proving to be a bit difficult. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 03:42 PM	#13
uncoosesoge Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 398 Senior Member	Yeah and?? I am one individual who has withdrawn consent. Does the political boundary I reside still suck at the tit of the FED? Yep! Does the political boundary I reside still choke creator endowed freedoms, license rights and regulate privileges? Yep! Maybe you should consider moving to a different federal zone? I'm still working on attempting to get my conveyances MSO so that I am no longer required to plate it. But that is proving to be a bit difficult. You might apply for a DOT number. They have a checkbox "PRIVATE" as an option. That gets you out of the local political jurisdiction (make your own DOT plate). It is far easier to get along with these political subdivisions when you agree at all times. Stay away from argument. Attorneys are licensed to argue. People are not. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:06 PM	#14
QXCharles Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	You might apply for a DOT number. They have a checkbox "PRIVATE" as an option. That gets you out of the local political jurisdiction (make your own DOT plate). I didn't see a spot for for Private use. I'll keep looking. Thanks for the tip. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 04:46 PM	#15
uncoosesoge Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 398 Senior Member	I didn't see a spot for for Private use. I'll keep looking. Thanks for the tip. from another forum several years ago It has been discovered, investigated, confirmed (by DOT and law enforcement) and utilized that one may go to; Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and (properly) fill out form MCS-150 in order to be issued a DOT number for declaring that one is driving/operating in private and not "for hire". Obtaining this number allows one to utilize the roads and highways without a driver's license, registration, insurance, NOR be subject to the various state's motor vehicle codes. AND law enforcement is not authorized to stop those displaying this number for vehicle code violations. Recorded conference call including how to fill out the form; TalkShoe - Call - drphil's Call Choose the call from April 14th, episode #24. http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web...d=34689&cmd=tc [Update] For those who decide to pursue this method; DO NOT change the status to "Inactive" as stated in the recording. Law enforcement who run the number are not to stop those with "Active" status. DO NOT check the box on the form for vehicles OVER 10,000 lbs. Choose; Under 10,000 lbs. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

03-03-2012, 04:56 PM	#16
antiggill Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 425 Senior Member	Sadly they will come around.......all war is a war of attrition. Time and Influcence is on the side of those that control the digital fiat. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

03-03-2012, 05:13 PM	#17
Bigroza Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 426 Senior Member	the 10th amendment should be our main focus, with this it doesn't matter what BS laws Washington dreams up, our respective States could just give DC the finger. Agreed. That being said, I tried to explain about the 10th to my Mom and how we should ignore the 535 in DC. I tried to explain how she could go to her Mich State Senator and Rep [for the State Senate and House] and have gold/silver as money [like they did in Utah] and her eyes just kinda glazed over. Hard to make the sheep interested..... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote