This is a blog of current events and issues that affect most of our lives. There are fundamental flaws in how American government operates today,contrary to the Constitution and the vision of a representative republican form of governance. I intend doing something about it: by educating and informing others who are not even aware of the dangers.
The Second Article of Amendment was not meant for self defense alone nor primarily the reason of its place in the list of explicit rights reserved to the People and to the People alone. This meant that neither State nor federal government could legislate any abrogation of those rights whatsoever. The People failed to remain ever vigilant in protecting those rights to which are their first line of defense of freedom.
“Shall not” are two very powerful words when used lawfully and in biblical context. But the best source for the arguments regarding the right to keep and bear arms, come from those who were in Philadelphia making the points of why that was was fundamental to the sovereignty of the People and the Independent (nation) States in which they reside. The People were not mere “citizens” of the State, they were the States.
In the link below you will find an article that just may change your views on gun rights and militias. Many thanks to KrisAnne Hall
A short excerpt:
““[W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.” (Letter from the Federal Farmer #18, January 25, 1788)”
The new argument is that a ‘bump stock’ is an accessory like a high capacity magazine or a noise suppressor, and therefore it is not protected by the Second Amendment. Well yes it is. But first let’s examine the reasons given that allowed the federal and States governments to enforce legislation that started to infringe on those very rights that the Constitution was supposed to protect.
The real problem stems from Hamiltonian federalism, and using the Supreme Court was a method by which that was to be accomplished. Using terms such as “implied powers” by Chief Justice John Marshall, echoing the very words of Alexander Hamilton himself, The Federal Courts took complete control of all judiciary functions that the federal government chose to take jurisdiction over by force.
Now I know that the federal government did not send troops to any state legislative houses to demand compliance, Although they did use federal money to force them to comply. One of the amazing revelations in Brion McClanahan’s book, is that as far back as the 1780’s, the reduction of the states as mere corporate franchisees of the federal government (also a franchisee corporation of another foreign corporation) and that federal government would be supreme.
There were too many in Congress and in State governments, that would never consent to such a powerful central government. They just fought to be independent nation states and certainly as was made evident in the Constitution Convention in Philadelphia, and in the many ratifying conventions in the States, an overwhelming number wanted a very limited federal government and it took some convincing that the new constitution would surely limit that body politic. There were however, a number who saw vast financial opportunity if they can influence that central body and have that body reign supreme over the state corporations and profit greatly off the toils of others.
So now let’s talk about guns. More specifically, let’s talk about weapons of war, and why that term was something that was well understood by all delegates in Philadelphia and in the ratifying conventions of the States. The federal courts are to deal with federal matters, and the Congress is to legislate on federal matters. The President is to execute the laws (within the limits of the Constitution) as passed by Congress and enacted into law when the President signed it.
The British troops were ordered to confiscate all of the arms possessed by the Colonists. They resisted. When the British ships began to arrive with more troops, the Colonists fired upon those ships, not with flintlock pistols and muskets, but with cannon. The militias of the colonies possessed the weapons of war of the day.
The Second Amendment is not about hunting, sport shooting, or merely self defense. It’s about defending against tyranny by government. If there were no unconstitutional gun laws, we would be a safer nation not a more dangerous one. If shooters knew that there would have been more arms pointed at them than they could possibly carry, that may deter them much more than any laws that they currently disobey anyway. They very idea that government can have a registry of arms is a violation of the Fourth Article of Amendment to the Constitution. The words “… shall not be infringed.” contains no caveats, exclusions, exceptions or even special circumstances be which government (yes, even States, can lawfully violate those eights of he People.
History demonstrates that nothing good has ever befallen a citizenry that was disarmed. Never. So while there are many people who have great intentions and good hearts, they lack the knowledge of the past that demonstrates the serious fallacy of the whole gun control issue. Americans need to understand their own history and the roots of what made this group of nation states in union exceptional. There were no gun laws at all when there were far less per-capita crimes in the States, excluding of course the killings of government, when they disarmed Native Americans and then proceeding to slaughter men, women, and children. Or Ruby Ridge, or Waco. Or Kent State that everyone would like to forget because the protesters were all unarmed. American troops killing Americans protesting for a redress of grievances against the Vietnam War.
The governments have grown too powerful for the People to feel safe. It’s a sad testament to a nation who trusts in a few in government instead of their own knowledge and self determination. Our governments have control and profit as their objectives and the protection of the rights of the People and the nation States. And they want to use fear and paranoia to limit arms capabilities and limit the ability to resist tyranny.
In the words of the late American Hero Robert LaVoy Finicum, “It doesn’t matter how it ends, #ItMattersHowYouStand.”
This website is about America and politics. It’s not about sports. As a Jeffersonian constitutional Patriot, freedom of speech is something that I wholeheartedly support. I also feel that there is a time and place for each of us to express ourselves when we feel an injustice needs to be addressed.
If you want to protest against what you feel is unjust treatment by law enforcement, you certainly have the right to do so. I don’t think that taking a knee during the playing of the national anthem is the proper venue to express that protest. The men and women who fought for freedom and defended those rights that we all hold dear as free People in this union of States, deserve your respect. If you want to protest against the police, you should gather around the local police station or city hall and not at a sports arena or stadium.
The NFL and Commissioner Goodell are wrong to allow players to make political statements or protests at an event that fans have payed to watch you perform for those multi-million dollar salaries that you are paid. Your choice of expression demonstrates a level of disrespect and conceit beyond the pale.
I call upon the NFL Commissioner and every team owner to put a stop to this divisive behavior. It is unbecoming of players to disrespect the entire country. There is no justification for this behavior by the athletes and allowing it to be by the league and the teams demonstrate a lack of respect to the fans who pay to see you play. There are many ways in which you can express your opposition to what you see as injustice. Taking a knee or raising your fist before you ‘go to work’ in front of thousands at the stadium and millions watching on television is not the place to express your views.
Make enough of us good people angry and you will find yourselves performing before empty seats. Viewership has declined since this all started, should sent a strong message to all those who feel they have a ‘right’ to protest. You do have that right. And we all have the right to disagree with your method and express ourselves with our wallets and televisions.