Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/136007
6A Daily News – Tuesday, June 11, 2013 Opinion Amendments that complicate prosecutions and protect citizens DAILY NEWS RED BLUFF TEHAMA COUNTY T H E V O I C E O F T E H A M A C O U NTY S I N C E 1 8 8 5 Greg Stevens, Publisher gstevens@redbluffdailynews.com Chip Thompson, Editor editor@redbluffdailynews.com Editorial policy The Daily News opinion is expressed in the editorial. The opinions expressed in columns, letters and cartoons are those of the authors and artists. Letter policy The Daily News welcomes letters from its readers on timely topics of public interest. All letters must be signed and provide the writer's home street address and home phone number. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and cannot exceed two double-spaced pages or 500 words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section of those submitted will be considered for publication. Letters will be edited. Letters are published at the discretion of the editor. Mission Statement We believe that a strong community newspaper is essential to a strong community, creating citizens who are better informed and more involved. The Daily News will be the indispensible guide to life and living in Tehama County. We will be the premier provider of local news, information and advertising through our daily newspaper, online edition and other print and Internet vehicles. The Daily News will reflect and support the unique identities of Tehama County and its cities; record the history of its communities and their people and make a positive difference in the quality of life for the residents and businesses of Tehama County. How to reach us Main office: 527-2151 Classified: 527-2151 Circulation: 527-2151 News tips: 527-2153 Sports: 527-2153 Obituaries: 527-2151 Photo: 527-2153 On the Web www.redbluffdailynews.com Fax Newsroom: 527-9251 Classified: 527-5774 Retail Adv.: 527-5774 Legal Adv.: 527-5774 Business Office: 527-3719 Address 545 Diamond Ave. Red Bluff, CA 96080, or P.O. Box 220 Red Bluff, CA 96080 This is my fourth column covering our rights as Americans guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Before addressing those next in line, the fifth and sixth, I respond to a concern registered by a reader regarding my opinions on the right to bear arms, particularly my assertion that: "Arguments against (holding gun owners responsible for misuse of their weapons) out of fear that government might use such information to confiscate weapons are far-fetched since the military officers that would be tasked to do this are duty bound to uphold the constitution." The reader asks "What if the officers fail to follow their oath?" My response is that seems very unlikely since a majority of officers that put their lives on the line every day to protect our freedoms would need to suddenly abandon their oaths even if under direct order by their commanders. As sworn officers their first priority is to their country, and should an unconstitutional order be given, they are duty bound to refuse. Knowing the honor of the Officer Corps first hand I feel certain that no one will ever be able to take your guns away unless our constitution is amended, a process requiring a similarly unlikely concurrence of two thirds of state legislatures. The fifth amendment provides important rights for those accused of crimes or subject to public tak- ings, to wit: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." In practice this amendment ensures that grand juries must charge Americans with capital offenses or felonies, albeit with often overbearing prosecutors and police advising them. It also protects the accused from "double jeopardy" by banning retrials when "not-guilty" verdicts are rendered. But this guarantee is not ironclad since certain crimes can be brought separately in federal and state courts, offering the opportunity to overturn a "notguilty" verdict for the same offense. Of course this amendment allows defendants to "take the fifth" to keep from incriminating themselves. This amendment also bans the deprivation of life, liberty, or property without just compensation. Due process must precede any public takings to ensure com- overload of cases facing our finanpelling evidence of overriding cially strapped judiciary, leading to strong incentives for public interest exists prosecutors to offer genand suitable compensaerous plea bargains tion provisions are prorather than take cases to vided. trial. Defendants in The sixth amendcases involving national ment provides additionsecurity issues may be al rights to the accused, denied a public trial or at to wit: "In all criminal least one where the pubprosecutions, the lic and press may be in accused shall enjoy the attendance. right to a speedy and So you should apprepublic trial, by an ciate many rights carry impartial jury of the Richard with them significant state and district wherecosts and responsibiliin the crime shall have ties to ensure their effecbeen committed, which tive application. I district shall have been believe Americans previously ascertained should provide more by law, and to be support for the judicial informed of the nature branch to minimize the and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the wit- length of pre-trial detentions and nesses against him; to have com- ensure better representation of the pulsory process for obtaining wit- poor. I also argue we should bring nesses in his favor, and to have the and end to double jeopardy by assistance of counsel for his allowing federal and state authorities to retry those found to be notdefense." In practice this amendment guilty by a jury of their peers. In provides the accused with an attor- these matters one's perspective ney if he cannot afford one, and will reign supreme when deterthe right to subpoena witnesses for mining if you are well served by his defense. The fifth and six amendments that complicate prosamendments provide the constitu- ecutions and protect citizens. tional basis for the Miranda warnRichard Mazzucchi is a retired ing, than ensures suspects are informed of their rights upon research engineer specializing arrest. The concept of "speedy in energy. He can be reached at trial" is tenuous at best with the living-green@att.net. Mazzucchi Positive Point Your officials STATE ASSEMBLYMAN — Dan Logue, 1550 Humboldt Road, Ste. 4, Chico, CA 95928, 530-895-4217 STATE SENATOR — Jim Nielsen, 2635 Forest Ave., Ste. 110, Chico, CA 95928, (530) 879-7424, senator.nielsen@senate.ca.gov GOVERNOR — Jerry Brown, State Capitol Bldg., Sacramento, CA 95814; (916) 445-2841; Fax (916) 558-3160; E-mail: governor@governor.ca.gov. U.S. REPRESENTATIVE — Doug LaMalfa 506 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515, 202-225-3076. U.S. SENATORS — Dianne Feinstein (D), One Post Street, Suite 2450, San Francisco, CA 94104; (415) 393-0707. Fax (415) 393-0710. Barbara Boxer (D), 1700 Montgomery St., Suite 240, San Francisco, CA 94111; (510) 2868537. Fax (202) 224-0454. Commentary Buffoonery from the lap dogs of the left Describing as buffoonery the left's hypocritical reaction to IRS targeting, or "profiling" (their favorite buzzword), of political opponents of the current regime's expansion of the power and reach of the central government, has a point. "Buffoon, a clown" (Webster's) goes with the phrase "soand-so beclowned themselves" as when partisans make obviously ridiculous one-sided assertions. Such is the case with the arguments presented from arrogant, snide Democrats in Congress, to liberal loons on MSNBC, to writers on this and other newspaper opinion pages. One Democrat in a committee hearing actually suggested that a Tea Party applicant for tax-exempt status brought intrusive, improper, illegal and unconstitutional questions on themselves (ranks up/down there with "the way the lady was dressed, she was just asking for it"). Constitutional and tax law genius Nancy Pelosi uttered some nonsense about the Tea Party abusing the tax statutes for crass purposes of political skullduggery. Perhaps taking a cue from such leaders (including numerous antiTea Party remarks from "Dear Leader" Obama), liberal lap dogs have pounced. A writer on May 23 posited just that line of attack: the Tea Party was misusing a provision of the tax code, 501 c (4), to establish "a pass through for hiding political funding," rather than "a social purposed nonprofit." I also suspect the writer's condemnation of churches becoming "more political than religious" meant conservative Christians, rather than liberal, urban churches openly embracing liberal causes with liberal Democrat politicians in pulpits. A promotional Chico Enterprise-Record at my curb on June 2 had a letter of similar sentiment. In "What's the tea party worried about?" the writer simply ascribed "a lot of shady tactics" and "improper financial usage" to the groups, as apparent justification for the "IRS [to] watch them closely." Indeed, our local writer simple presumed to know unequivocally that the "intent on the Tea Party's part had little to do with establishing a legitimate non profit." That statement presumes knowing a group's "intent" as well as near-certainty about the meaning, purpose or intent of the tax provisions governing 501 c (3) and (4) organizations. First, the irrefutable facts are that not one, single conservative, Christian, Tea Party or constitution-themed group has been denied their long-delayed tax status, nor have any had such nonprofit status revoked. Read that again. All the caterwauling from the "lap dogs" on the left is utterly without basis in fact, according to the same IRS that peppered groups with improper, illegal queries. However, when did not having all the facts straight ever stop liberals from besmirching their political opponents? With the left, it's just accuse, charge, denigrate, insult, name-call and assassinate character first; explain, prevaricate and do-everything-but-apologize later when caught lying. Without getting into legalese and tax law tall weeds, I'll frame the subject in plain English. In 2009, when the Tea Party move- ment began in protest over out-of- improve the "health, happiness and comfort" "of society" as control spending, bank we see fit politically. bailouts and a trillionFolks, the difference dollar stimulus boonbetween a non-profit doggle, the Tea Party charitable group under Patriots formed locally 501 c (3) and the more first in Redding, then political and issue orientRed Bluff, Corning and ed c (4) has to do with regionally in other comtax deductibility of conmunities. Our one guidtributions: The tax sysing principle was that all tem encourages purely issues, topics, projects charitable groups [c (3)] and causes were fair to benefit by contributors game under the 501 c deducting their gifts on (4) rules. Don their tax return from their What was not allowed was partisan Polson gross income. No one questions the benefit to promotion of candiThe way society. Donors deduct dates; all candidates their gifts; their names could address the public I see it are on the record. at our meetings together The political and with their campaign social welfare category, c materials. Some members had to be reminded during (4), however, has no tax deducibilelection times that we did not dis- ity for contributors. That is not a play candidate promotional mater- loophole to avoid taxes; people still ial under the rules. Indeed, under pay taxes before making a gift. For the local Tea Party Patriots organi- anyone in the group paid a salary zational umbrella, our lawsuit (hasn't happened but it could), against the IRS proceeds, with Jay taxes would be paid on their Sekulow of the American Center income. There's nothing deceptive for Law and Justice providing for or dishonest about keeping peoour legal action over their discrim- ple's names out of it; people are allowed to anonymously do things inatory delay. When the phrase "social wel- because they believe in a cause, fare" is used for the c (4) non-prof- whether it's building a playground it, you, dear liberals, don't get to or funding efforts to educate peodecide what qualifies. Indeed, ple on the U.S. Constitution. Come to the Westside Grange (from Webster's) "social, 1. of society" and "welfare, 1. health, tonight at 6; watch "The Path to happiness and comfort" combine Restoring America" by Krisanne to the deference of the non-profit Hall (krisannehall.com). group's interpretation. We don't Don Polson has called Red Bluff have to come cap-in-hand to our state masters or their liberal syco- home since 1988. He can be by e-mail at phants around us to get permission reached and approval to engage and act to donplsn@yahoo.com.