Tag: Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

Obama’s Actions May Bring About A 2nd American Revolution

"Americans will always fight for liberty&...
“Americans will always fight for liberty” – NARA – 513806 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

What can true Americans do? What is left to them when the current administration ignores the law of the Land and willfully circumvents the U.S. Constitution?  What can be done when Obama ignores Congress and rules by executive order; thus negating the principles of separate, but co-equal branches of government as part of a system of checks and balances? What can American’s do when a left-wing dictator wannabe manages, through the support of some wealthy left-wing agitators and a corrupt Chicago-style political machine, to gain the Presidency and then proceeds to dismantle the very fabric of what makes this country such an exceptional and successful nation?What do you do when your current government administration gets caught red-handed running guns to Mexican drug cartels, an action resulting in the deaths of two American Border Patrol Agents, to carry out a scheme to quash the 2nd Amendment and ban/confiscate legal, law-abiding American gun owner’s property; and when confronted; can simply hide behind “Executive Privilege?

What do you do when your dictator-in-chief politicized a tragic event to further weaken American’s 2nd Amendment Rights; while ignoring the real causes of the problem such as mental illness, the over-prescribing of brain-altering drugs in young Americans, and the unwillingness of too many parents and public schools to teach the much-needed life-lessons of resiliency and personal responsibility?

What do Americans do when their government, either through incompetence or willful neglect, cause the death of its own U.S. Ambassador to Libya along with several other Americans, hides behind a ridiculous “lets blame the video” lie, fires the appropriate “scapegoats,” and then never pursues the killers? What do you do when this same administration ignores Americans being killed by Al Qaeda in Algeria because they have already announced that Al Qaeda is defeated, on-the-run, and no longer a threat?

What do Americans do when the so-called “Free Press” is owned lock, stock, and barrel by that same administration, and serves as its official nation-wide propaganda machine? What do you do when the liberal, drive-by media spoon-feeds the “Obama is our Savior” swill to entitlement-addicted Cool Aid drinkers who cannot think critically, or will do nothing out of the fear of losing their cushy life-style supplied by the ever-dwindling numbers of over-taxed hard-working Americans; and vote only to keep their ever-increasing entitlements?

In the past, the American Spirit was one of Liberty … not entitlement.  We were only entitled the three things … Three God-given Rights … Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness! This great ideal has since been fundamentally transformed!  Currently this is being interpreted to mean the right of some to help themselves to other people’s money and property … simply  because they do not want to work for it themselves … or are much too busy enjoying a hedonistic, drug-fueled, or other-wise irresponsible life-style!

When America was great … the primary ideal was personal liberty!  People came here seeking the liberty to work hard, to change their stars,  and to have a real chance at creating a better life for themselves … not simply the  guarantee of a mediocre life on the public dole!

Obama plays the fear card over and over and over again!  How many times have you heard: conservatives want to push Granny over a cliff … guns are evil … Republicans want you to drink dirty water …  Paul Ryan will steal your social security checks … Romney is a horse-owning job outsourcer!  Parents are now too stupid to fix their own kids school lunches.  Women are too stupid to get their own birth control!  Entrepeneurs are too stupid to build their own businesses?  Americans are too stupid to keep their own incomes!  Why does he do this?  Because fear is the “passion” of slaves!  Wealthy progressives want their stupid peasant class.  Ans the Cool Aid drinks will willingly give it to them …  in exchange for their public housing, food stamps, ObamaCare, welfare checks, free condoms, and un-employment checks!  For the Cool Aid drinkers, these entitlements are worth their price … chains and slavery … they will stay on the progressive plantation!

What is then left to the rest of us?  Are we to go quietly into the night?  Are we to simply sit back and watch American be destroyed by an enemy, one that is not foreign … but domestic?  History shows us all where the path Obama has us on will lead to.  The “lamp of experience” shine a very clear light on where we are headed.  Are we going to allow ourselves as a nation to be relegated to such a level of degradation and abasement that we cannot be allowed to think for ourselves, cannot be trusted with guns for our own defense, and will not be allowed to exercise our own person sovereignty?

Is our legacy to our children and grandchildren destined to be one of debt, mediocrity, and simply another failed socialist, nanny-state?  Or, … can it still yet be that of  a great nation; a shining Beacon of Light, a powerful, respectful nation of hardworking, honest and compassionate people?   Not the much-politicized progressive false-passion of the liberal propaganda machine, but the true passion that comes from the heart of an honest, caring, and strong individual … an American!

The actions of a few ideologically driven radical left-wingers, like Obama and his cronies, that have somehow managed to manipulate the system to gain political power are going to back America into a corner … a corner there may be no peaceful way out of.  Much like the infamous Dredd-Scott Decision, where a Democratically controlled Supreme Court almost guaranteed the U.S. Civil War by rendering a decision that eliminated any possibility for a peaceful resolution to the slavery issue … the Obama administration‘s ideology-driven executive orders, his constant circumventing of the U.S. Constitution, and his war on what makes Americans Americans … may well be the tinder that serves to ignite a 2nd American revolution!

If this is Treason, then make the most of it …

Black Democratic Congressman Joins Republican Party!

English: Official congressional portrait of Co...
English: Official congressional portrait of Congressman Artur Davis. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I salute Congressman Artur Davis, the former Black Democratic Senator, who has left the Democratic Party because in his words,”wearing a Democratic label no longer matches what I know about my country and its possibilities.

On the specifics, I have regularly criticized an agenda that would punish businesses and job creators with more taxes just as they are trying to thrive again. I have taken issue with an administration that has lapsed into a bloc by bloc appeal to group grievances when the country is already too fractured: frankly, the symbolism of Barack Obama winning has not given us the substance of a united country.”

I am sure Artur Davis will be excoriated for this in the liberal press.  He will be labeled an Uncle Tom, etc.  It is unfortunate that any independent, free-thinking Black man or woman who steps off the Democratic Plantation gets treated in this fashion.  But, then again, this is the same administration that labels me a possible terrorist because I am white, former military, and an NRA member; and I support true Freedom of Speech (not just the freedom of politically correct speech), the Second Amendment, states rights, and I love (and have always been proud of) my Country without having to “fundamentally transform” it first.

I am a conservative and I am not a racist.  For a long time it has seemed to me that Liberal Democrats are the ones always wanting to categorize us (black, white, hispanic, gay, etc.) and then pit one group against the other; while conservatives tend to think in terms of “Americans.”  Most of the conservatives I know base their decisions about a person on that person’s character; not their creed, color, or religion.  While there are certainly some racist conservatives out there, the party that uses race as a weapon is, and has been for a long time, the Democratic Party!

Can I get an “Amen!”

The True Source Of the Second Amendment

 

Second Amendment

It amazes me just how many Americans do not understand the concept of Second Amendment Rights and where  this American right originates.  Even American’s who support the Second Amendment, own firearms, join the NRA, and exercise their rights under the Second Amendment daily often misunderstand its origins.  

What is scary to me, however, is that the left-wing liberals certainly seem to, at least on one level, understand the reason that the Founding Fathers  wrote Second Amendment and included it in the Bill of Rights.  That is why they are so intent on eliminating the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens.

Of  course, you have to understand that most liberals in this country are not liberals at all … at least not in the true sense of the liberal ideology.  True liberals, as a general rule, would not support gun control because it is a violation of a personal freedom ….  and all liberals certainly claim to strongly support individual freedom.  This is the root of their support for the gay movement, women’s rights to murder 1.37 million American babies each year, legalizing drugs, PETA, terrorist’s rights, and the drive-by media’s right to commit libel and slander against conservatives with impunity while openly supporting their chosen liberal politicians during elections.  

In this country, the term liberal is most often used to hide the true identity of anti-American movements.  The ACLU, for example, originated as a communist organization dedicated to bringing about a peaceful transition  to a communist American state.  When the ACLU’s founding members discovered that the term communist was working against them because of the stigma attached to it, they simply changed their name.  

Many other “liberals” in this country are simply socialists; but because this term also still has a stigma attached to it, they choose to hide behind the term “liberal.”  

Then we also have the liberal “fascists”  … like Barack Obama quickly seems to be turning out to be.  What kind of government allows private ownership of business, but tells you how to run them …..   look it up!

So, what does this have to do with gun control.  Despite the fact that many cool-aid drinking liberal followers live in a dream world where we all sit around the global campfire singing Kumbaya,  their leaders (the movers and shakers of the liberal elitist movement) are actually very intelligent.  They understand that, with the exception of California and the New England states, the backbone of real America is still made up of bitter common folk who cling to their Bibles and their Guns;  and … that these bitter (or shall we say Freedom Loving Rugged Individualists) simply do not want to live in a socialist (or a fascist) nanny state.  Their solution, then, is to lie, cheat, misinterpret, play on fears, elect any and all rabid anti Second Amendment politicians (or  judges) they can find, use their control of the mass media, and otherwise work to dissolve our Second Amendment rights.

 

America's 1st Freedom

 

Because of this on-going assault on the Second Amendment, we often hear some really odd soundbites such as

its people like you who will hand the White House over to some COMMI DEMOCRAT, who will elect some liberal Supreme Court Justices … and they will destroy the Second Amendment  

or even such nonsense as …  

the jack-booted feds will roll you up like an old carpet.  If you think you can resist them then you will join the ranks of the Branch Davidians and the martyrs of Ruby Ridge.  All the good sheeple will fall in line … or die.  

Rhetoric such as this is silly and misses the point entirely.

Implicit in comments such as these is the idea that our rights, including those validated under the Second Amendment, are somehow granted to us by the 9 old men and women on the Supreme Court; or from our legislature; or from our president.  Implicit in these comments is the idea that the right to Keep And Bear Arms actually comes from the Second Amendment itself.  This is a fallacy.  The Second Amendment, the Supreme Court, the legislature, and the presidency are all thing created by men, and thus, they can be taken away by other men.

 

Liberty

 

The truth is that the Second Amendment (and the other rights listed in the bill of Rights) simply acknowledges and allows us to protect our Inalienable Rights to “Life, Liberty, and  the Pursuit of Happiness.”  Depending on your personal belief system, these rights would be granted to us as either Natural Rights based on our condition of being Human Beings …. or as Divine Rights granted to us by God.  

Such rights are yours from the moment of your birth and cannot be taken away by other men … unless you allow that to happen.

Of course we can write our congressmen, join the NRA or the GOA, write letters to the editor, argue cases in court, and work hard to elect pro-gun legislators … and we should certainly be doing all these things.  However, our Second Amendment rights are not based on the outcome of these mechanisms.  Those “liberals” currently in power like Nancy Pelosi, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Emanuel Rahm, Harry Reid, Janet Napolitano, Sarah Bradey, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and soon to be Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor among others, would certainly want to have you believe that it does; and will certainly work to convince you that it does … but, in truth …. it does not.

Our Right To Bear Arms rests entirely upon our willingness to stop, by whatever means necessary, anyone who attempts to confiscate them. What these other mechanisms do is simply postpone any coming day of reckoning … which is certainly worth doing as long as it is feasibly possible.  

However, any political or governmental entity acting to confiscate or deny an honest, law-abiding American citizen the right to keep and bear arms is acting in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution and is, therefore, no longer a legitimate government agency.

 

God given. Not negotiable.

 

And for those of you who will certainly, without thinking or doing any research, chime in and exclaim … “but that’s not what the Second Amendment means” …  “its about militias, not individuals” … ” it is outdated because it was written 200 years ago” …  you should remember that your precious Freedom of Speech was acknowledged and guaranteed at precisely the same time

… and take the time to look at and actually read some of the historical quotes listed below.  You might gain some “intelligence.”

“On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322) 

“The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals…. It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789) 

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by the General Government; but the best security of that right after all is, the military spirit, that taste for martial exercises, which has always distinguished the free citizens of these States….Such men form the best barrier to the liberties of America” – (Gazette of the United States, October 14, 1789.) 

“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950]) 

“The right of the people to keep and bear…arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country…” (James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 [June 8, 1789]) 

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms.” (Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer (1788) at 169) 

“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty…. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [ I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17, 1789}]) 

“…to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380) 

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244) 

“the ultimate authority … resides in the people alone,” (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.) 

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States” (Noah Webster in `An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution’, 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888)) 

“…if raised, whether they could subdue a Nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?” (Delegate Sedgwick, during the Massachusetts Convention, rhetorically asking if an oppressive standing army could prevail, Johnathan Elliot, ed., Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol.2 at 97 (2d ed., 1888)) 

“…but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights…” (Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29.) 

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . . Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46.) 

“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” (Tench Coxe in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’ under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian’ in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1) 

“Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people” (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788) 

“The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.” [William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829) 

“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials.” (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426) 

“The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms” (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87) 

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975)..) 

“The great object is that every man be armed” and “everyone who is able may have a gun.” (Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution. Debates and other Proceedings of the Convention of Virginia,…taken in shorthand by David Robertson of Petersburg, at 271, 275 2d ed. Richmond, 1805. Also 3 Elliot, Debates at 386) 

“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.” (Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elliot, Debates at 646) 

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836) 

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8) 

“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of The United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms…” (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Peirce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)) 

“And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms….The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants” (Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939) 

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined” (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836) 

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — (Thomas Jefferson) 

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” (George Washington) 

“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks. (Thomas Jefferson, Encyclopedia of T. Jefferson, 318 [Foley, Ed., reissued 1967]) 

“The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside…Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them…” (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 [1894]) 

“…the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms” (from article in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette June 18, 1789 at 2, col.2,) 

“Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people.” (Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]) 

“No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion.” (James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]) 

“Men that are above all Fear, soon grow above all Shame.” (John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, Cato’s Letters: Or, Essays on Liberty, Civil and Religious, and Other Important Subjects [London, 1755]) 

“The difficulty here has been to persuade the citizens to keep arms, not to prevent them from being employed for violent purposes.” (Dwight, Travels in New-England) 

“What country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” (Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Dec. 20, 1787, in Papers of Jefferson, ed. Boyd et al.) 

(The American Colonies were) “all democratic governments, where the power is in the hands of the people and where there is not the least difficulty or jealousy about putting arms into the hands of every man in the country. (European countries should not) be ignorant of the strength and the force of such a form of government and how strenuously and almost wonderfully people living under one have sometimes exerted themselves in defence of their rights and liberties and how fatally it has ended with many a man and many a state who have entered into quarrels, wars and contests with them.” [George Mason, “Remarks on Annual Elections for the Fairfax Independent Company” in The Papers of George Mason, 1725-1792, ed Robert A. Rutland (Chapel Hill, 1970)] 

“To trust arms in the hands of the people at large has, in Europe, been believed…to be an experiment fraught only with danger. Here by a long trial it has been proved to be perfectly harmless…If the government be equitable; if it be reasonable in its exactions; if proper attention be paid to the education of children in knowledge and religion, few men will be disposed to use arms, unless for their amusement, and for the defence of themselves and their country.” (Timothy Dwight, Travels in New England and NewYork [London 1823] 

“It is not certain that with this aid alone [possession of arms], they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to posses the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will, and direct the national force; and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned, in spite of the legions which surround it.” (James Madison, “Federalist No. 46”) 

“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.” (Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States; With a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States before the Adoption of the Constitution [Boston, 1833]) 

“The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police and military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military. The hired servants of our rulers. Only the government-and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws.” (Edward Abbey, “The Right to Arms,” Abbey’s Road [New York, 1979]) 

“You are bound to meet misfortune if you are unarmed because, among other reasons, people despise you….There is simply no comparison between a man who is armed and one who is not. It is unreasonable to expect that an armed man should obey one who is unarmed, or that an unarmed man should remain safe and secure when his servants are armed. In the latter case, there will be suspicion on the one hand and contempt on the other, making cooperation impossible.” (Niccolo Machiavelli in “The Prince”) 

“You must understand, therefore, that there are two ways of fighting: by law or by force. The first way is natural to men, and the second to beasts. But as the first way often proves inadequate one must needs have recourse to the second.” (Niccolo Machiavelli in “The Prince”) 

“As much as I oppose the average person’s having a gun, I recognize that some people have a legitimate need to own one. A wealthy corporate executive who fears his family might get kidnapped is one such person. A Hollywood celebrity who has to protect himself from kooks is another. If Sharon Tate had had access to a gun during the Manson killings, some innocent lives might have been saved.” [Joseph D. McNamara (San Jose, CA Police Chief), in his book, Safe and Sane, (c) 1984, p. 71-72.] 

“To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.” [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)] 

For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution.” [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822)] 

” `The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right.” [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] 

“The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff.” [People vs. Zerillo, 219 Mich. 635, 189 N.W. 927, at 928 (1922)] 

“The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions.” [State vs. Kerner, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224 (1921)] 

“The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the “high powers” delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.’ A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power.” [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)] 

73% Of Americans Support The Right To Keep And Bear Arms

Founding Fathers

Do you need more proof that a majority of Americans support the Right to Keep and Bear Arms? What about the results of a Gallup poll, which were reported in a March 27, Gallup.com article. The poll shows that an overwhelming majority of the United States public … 73% … believes that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of Americans to own firearms.

For most real Americans, these results come as no surprise. In fact, the Gallup poll reflects comparable results from a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation telephone poll carried out from December 6 to December 9 in 2007, which found that 65% of Americans believed the Constitution guarantees the right of Americans to own firearms.

Other recent polls have shown that Americans support gun rights. A Zogby International poll for Associated Television News, conducted between December 13 and December 17 in 2007 found that 27% of voters would be more likely to support a candidate endorsed by NRA (through its PAC, NRA Political Victory Fund). That survey showed that NRA ranks above Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, the AFL-CIO, Oprah Winfrey, and Barbara Streisand in influencing voters! And another Zogby International poll conducted earlier in 2007 found that 66% of the American voting public rejects the idea that new gun control laws are needed.

The results of this latest poll make clear where the majority of Americans stand, and confirm what other polls have consistently shown: Americans overwhelmingly support firearm rights and ownership.

Empty Holsters And Other News

Whose Afraid Of An Empty Holster?

Student With Empty Holster

Should students have less freedom and safety than other citizens simply because they attend college? Many students at America’s universities are asking this same question: Why are they not allowed to defend themselves from campus attacks?

College students are mature and responsible enough to cast a vote, fight a war, own a gun, carry a gun, and exercise every other right of citizenship exercised by other adult citizens … then why should they be forced to go unarmed and be defenseless at institutions of higher learning?

While our law makers debate, delay, argue and defend the status quo, far too many college students are being raped, mugged, and robbed at gun and knife point … or they are caught alone and outnumbered by punk gangster wannabes!

There is no need to change current gun laws … simply give people on college campuses the same rights they have everywhere else.

Of course … anti-gun nuts will argue that guns will start going off randomly and students will break out into gunfights all the time. This argument, of course, ignores the fact that people who get concealed carry permits are law-abiding citizens … and the gangster wannabes already have illegal guns anyway.

Many law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits are already permeating the society … folks just don’t realize it because of the “concealed carry” part … and they do not “break out into gunfights.” However … they can protect themselves.

A group called Students for Concealed Carry on Campus are leading the fight and wearing empty holsters to protest state laws and student codes of conduct that prohibit them from exercising their Second Amendment rights even though they have a concealed carry permit.

So far, Utah is the only state that expressly allows the Right to Carry on public college campuses thanks to a 2004 law allowing the Right to Carry on all state property … and Utah has not disappeared in a blaze of gunfire.

Sadly … a bill that would have required colleges in Virginia to allow Right to Carry permit holders to exercise that right on campuses died in committee not long before the Virginia Tech tragedy where an armed maniac killed 27 students and 5 faculty members. If a few of those students or faculty members had been legally armed … perhaps there would have been a few less funerals to attend.

Though no longer a student, I am a staff member at an American university … I applaud their efforts and am supporting them!

Obama the Unifier!

The independent National Journal ranked John Kerry as the “Most Liberal” the year before he lost the race for the Presidency.

Barack Obama

Senator Barack Obama, now in his 3rd year of serving in the Senate, has taken the title of “More Liberal than Kerry, Kennedy and Hillary.” According to the ratings, Hillary Clinton comes in at #16.

I will never understand Obama’s claim that he is a unifier … and that only he will be able to bridge the gap between conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats. Obama’s policies and priorities come straight from the progressive liberal play book.

Of course Obama talks about bringing together Republicans, Independents, and Democrats … but how exactly is that going to work? Is Obama somehow going to retreat from the positions that Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, or John Edwards held. I think not!

I might buy some of the unifier rhetoric if Obama became willing to discuss vouchers for School Choice … or dismantling the NEA and its disastrous effect on our public school system, … or when he decides that entitlement programs need real reform that include ideas like personal individual retirement accounts.

Homeless American Soldiers

This is an absolute disgrace to this country! A true American tragedy! Let me say that when I first read this … being a veteran myself … I was really angry … and I mean jump up and down, punch a hole in the wall, storm the White House kind of angry!

A Homeless Vet

The Veterans Administration estimates that there are about 193,000 homeless veterans living in the U.S., veterans who have served this country when asked. Col. David Hunt thinks the number is closer to 500,000.

The fact that there are homeless people in this country is certainly tragic … but I have to agree with Col. David Hunt … the fact that there are homeless veterans in this country is criminal.

These veterans, mostly men, put themselves between us and harms way, fought our wars, spent countless days and nights in the worst hell holes to be found around the globe, and stood at a wall and said “not on my watch.” They have been wounded, tortured, lost limbs, and lost many close friends while protecting our way of life … then they return home to live under a bridge? That simply should not be!!

This is not President Bush’s fault … nor President Clinton’s fault … nor President Reagan‘s fault! According to Col. Hunt, this is every administration’s fault since Valley Forge.

I say that a nation that does not take care of its veterans does not deserve to have them and eventually, is doomed to fall!! I am going to take a close look at what I can do to help … won’t you?

Iran Goes Nuclear!

Nuclear Iran

Some French folks do still have guts! Thérèse Delpech is the director of strategic studies at the French Atomic Energy Commission. She recently delivered a blistering critique of all the key players in the Iran nuclear controversy including Great Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany, and … of course … the United States.  She also body slams the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Her review of Iran’s nuclear program demolishes the notion that the program was designed for peaceful purposes . Launched in secret 20 years ago, pursued in violation of Iran’s legally binding safeguards obligations, and with no economic justification for the immense investment required … Iran’s program only makes sense as a nuclear weapons program.

Why isn’t Moscow more concerned with a Muslim fundamentalist state on its borders with nuclear armaments? In private, Russian officials agree that Tehran is pursuing nuclear weapons … but still has provided considerable nuclear assistance to Iran over the last 15 years and continues to block meaningful action against Iran at the UN.

In Moscow, it is sometimes very, very hard to tell the difference between strategic issues, commercial issues, and outright criminal activities!

China has a similar record … but China relies on Iran for 15% of its oil imports and is the world’s second largest consumer of oil. China is also working to establish a diplomatic foothold in the Middle East … and does not want to rock the Iranian boat.

Great Britain, France and Germany lead the international effort to negotiate with Iran, but their efforts have more to do with attempting to prove the superiority of “soft power” to the muscular foreign policy of the Bush administration, than any real attempt to end Iran’s nuclear weapons program. So far, due to Russia and China’s efforts in the UN Security Council, their negotiations have met with no measurable success.

And … the U.S.? Distracted by War in Iraq and burdened by all the tragic developments in U.S. – Iranian relations since the fall of the Shah … is, in fact, secretly unwilling to use military force despite all the saber rattling.

It looks to me like last month’s National Intelligence Estimate is far from the last word on this issue … in fact, it is pointless.