Tag Archives: Right to Keep and Bear Arms

“No Amendment is Absolute.”

It’s nice to know our president believes that. Of course we already knew that he and his “progressive” ilk do not believe that the Constitution itself is absolute. After all, it’s a “living, breathing document” that changes with the times. In other words, it doesn’t mean anything if it keeps them from doing what they want to do.

We’ve also known for a long time that the Second Amendment means nothing to them. Biden repeatedly claimed to be a “strong supporter” of the Second Amendment, often adding “I own a shotgun!” But he never hid his disdain for the right to keep and bear arms. In his eyes it means that the American people are entitled to own the firearms and ammunition that (for the moment) the government allows them to own. That’s like saying you have freedom of speech, provided you don’t say anything the government doesn’t like.

But now we know that he believes all the amendments are subject to interpretation, adjustment, change, disregard and whatever wind of government authority happens to blow. Drawing on Biden’s plans for the Second Amendment, some examples:

  • Freedom of religions is absolutely guaranteed — provided that your religion doesn’t offend anyone’s sexual preference or gender choices.
  • Freedom of the press will be respected — as long as the press does not report anything that the government considers “misinformation” (facts or opinions that are embarrassing or inconvenient to the regime).
  • Freedom to assemble is a fundamental right — provided that you are rioting, burning and looting in support of BLM, ANTIFA or against the police, law and order or White Supremacy (by which they mean anything or anyone they don’t like). Simply attending a Trump rally could be grounds for loss of employment, fines and imprisonment even if the crime does not include “meandering” through the Capitol Building.
  • The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effect against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated — except when raiding the homes of citizens suspected of harboring forbidden “weapons of war” (any firearm someone might use to resist oppression by a despotic government) or those suspected of other types of resistance against the exercise of tyrannical governmental authority.
  • No person shall be put in jeopardy of life or limb twice for the same offense — except when a “not guilty” verdict contradicts the expressed demands of a favored identity group.
  • No person may be compelled to testify or give evidence against themselves — unless the regime must use exceptional methods to discover the location of hidden arms caches that might be used to resist oppression by a tyrannical government.
  • Cruel and unusual punishment shall not be inflictedexcept that exceptions may be made for White Supremacists (conservatives, Trump supporters, etc.).
  • The enumeration of certain rights in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people — but since no amendment is absolute, there actually are no rights retained by the people except those recognized and permitted by the government. (In other words, there are no rights.)
  • The federal government shall have only the powers granted to it by the Constitution and all other powers are reserved to the states or to the people — except that in cases of emergency (that is, whenever it wants to) the federal government may impose restrictions on individual freedoms that it feels are necessary. (For example, closing schools and businesses, forbidding gatherings for church services, Trump rallies or Thanksgiving Dinners at private homes, requiring the wearing of masks to appear in public or a “Vaccination Passport” in order to travel.)
  • No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law — unless the government suspects them of especially heinous crimes, such as harboring forbidden weapons or war, being White Supremacists or resisting government power.
  • The right to vote may not be denied on the basis of race, color or previous condition of servitude. However, White Supremacists (whatever their race or color) may be disenfranchised to rectify past White Privilege and enforce “equity.”
  • No person shall be eligible to be elected President of the United States more than twice — unless, of course, there is an emergency.

Everybody (even Democrats) like to say, “we are a nation of laws!” but we all know that this is no longer true. We are a nation that is governed by the (almost) unrestrained use of force by our government. “Stroke of the pen–law of the land!” But the “Law of the Land” is the United States Constitution, and those amendments are all a part of that document. Anyone who can read and think can understand what it says and means. Anyone with any sense at all knows what shall not be infringed means. When the right of the American people to arm themselves to counter government tyranny is finally infringed to death, then you can erase that “(almost)” from the paragraph above. And then say goodbye to the 13th Amendment too.

After all, even the amendment abolishing slavery isn’t “absolute.”

Reichstag Burning

[All Quotes from –Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire]

The Reichstag fire (German: Reichstagsbrand, was an arson attack on the Reichstag building, home of the German parliament in Berlin, on Monday 27 February 1933, precisely four weeks after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany. Hitler’s government stated that Marinus van der Lubbe, a Dutch council communist, was the culprit, and it attributed the fire to communist agitators. A German court decided later that year that Van der Lubbe had acted alone, as he had claimed. The day after the fire, the Reichstag Fire Decree was passed. The Nazi Party used the fire as a pretext to claim that communists were plotting against the German government, which made the fire pivotal in the establishment of Nazi Germany

Gina Carano got fired from her gig at Disney for reminding people that the Jews couldn’t be rounded up and murdered until the German government managed to get their neighbors to hate them, a reference to the demonizing of conservatives by Democrats, the left, the mainstream media, pop culture, and so on. It seems that comparing someone to Hitler or the Nazis is just about the worst thing you can do these days–unless you are on the left comparing Donald Trump, Republicans and conservatives to Hitler or calling them Nazis. I just searched “Trump compared to Hitler” and in addition to a few articles detailing how many times Donald Trump was compared to Hitler (at least 9 or so specific instances) there were also plenty of articles actually comparing Trump to Hitler. I bring that up because I am about to compare what happened on February 27, 1933 and afterwards in Germany and what happened on January 6, 2021 and the days following in the United States of America.

People often forget that Adolf Hitler was democratically elected. I don’t know if his election was as fraudulent as our 2020 presidential election, but Hitler was elected Chancellor of Germany. The power that office provided him, though, was not sufficient to accomplish his objectives. An emergency was needed.

The responsibility for the Reichstag fire remains a topic of debate and research.[3][4] The Nazis accused the Comintern of the act. However, some historians believe, based on archive evidence, that the arson had been planned and ordered by the Nazis as a false flag operation.

Hitler urged President Paul von Hindenburg to issue an emergency decree to suspend civil liberties and pursue a “ruthless confrontation” with the Communist Party of Germany.[2] After the decree was issued, the government instituted mass arrests of communists, including all of the Communist Party’s parliamentary delegates. With their bitter rival communists gone and their seats empty, the Nazi Party went from having a plurality to a majority, thus enabling Hitler to consolidate his power.

Right now the Democrats hold the White House, a razor-thin majority in the House and a tie-breaker majority in the Senate. But they are concerned that this is not going to be enough to effect the complete transformation of the United States that they have promised their radical socialist base.

Whoever planned the riot of January 6, 2021 and whoever executed it, it is clear that the Democrats fully intend to capitalize on the event. They are calling for a “war on domestic terror” by which they mean anyone who resists their radical reshaping of American society. They are calling for the establishment of a “Truth Commission” (Ministry of Propaganda) to ferret out “lies and disinformation” (opinions contrary to theirs and facts that are inconvenient or embarrassing) and to mobilize and direct America’s intelligence agencies toward its citizens (their own Secret Police). And under Nancy Pelosi’s control, with no explanation or description of any specific credible threat, they have festooned our nation’s capitol with razor wire, walls and fences and armed National Guard troops. [Walls and National Guard troops at our border with Mexico: immoral. Walls and National Guard troops surrounding Nancy Pelosi and their nascent authoritarian regime: just fine!]

If all of that is not enough to scare the hell out of you, consider that one of the first priorities of the Democrat Congress and President Joe Biden is going to be licensing, registering, banning and confiscating the firearms of America’s militia–the one that is “necessary to the security of a free state.”

Our God-given right to keep and bear arms for the defense of our liberty is needed now more than ever before in our nation’s history.

Guns and Ballots

I was in a gun store recently. I won’t say where or when, or who I was with. I probably shouldn’t even mention that I was in a gun store, but I was in a gun store, and I noticed something that struck me. Before anyone could buy a gun, they had to fill out a form. A long, long form. The Form 4473 (5300.9) Revised May 2020. It is six pages long–but to be fair, only one and a half of the pages are completed by the purchaser and three and a half of the pages are instructions. I used to be a licensed federal firearms dealer, and I know a few things about the 4473. You have to complete the form exactly right. You must put your check mark in the correct Yes or No blocks or the dealer can’t sell to you. (The check boxes are an improvement. Before, you had to write out Yes or No. Y or N was not acceptable.) You have to spell out the name of your address state and state of birth–no abbreviations. You can make a mistake and correct it, but I heard someone behind the counter say that you couldn’t have more than three corrections on the form. After filling out the form, you must present valid identification that provides your name, address and state of residence, and it must include a photograph, expiration date and be of a document type that is accepted. Once you have proven who you are, you must then prove that you are worthy to purchase a firearm in one of two ways. You can undergo a government background check wherein the dealer calls, gives the FBI operator your identification information and then waits for approval. It might be provided right away, or the dealer might have to hold for a bit, or wait for a call back in a few minutes, an hour or two, or maybe a few days. Or the prospective gun buyer can present a concealed carry, firearms owner card or other state license or permit that certifies that the purchaser has already been deemed worthy to purchase and own a firearm by being fingerprinted, undergoing an even longer and more exhaustive background check, and paying some money. Once the government has granted permission for the purchaser to take possession of a gun, the sale continues and (depending on the size and type of gun store) five minutes to an hour later the purchaser may leave the store with his new firearm.

As I stood there watching a surprising number of people going through this process in order to be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights, I also reflected on the deeply disturbing and quite perilous situation in which our nation currently finds itself. Of course, Joe Biden has been projected, or called or declared the winner by the Mainstream Media (a member of which I must now sadly consider the Fox News Network) but we all know a few things about this:

  • Neither Joe Biden nor anyone else will be the “winner” of this election until the electors authorized by the state legislatures (in whatever fashion) cast their votes and transmit a record to the President of the Senate.
  • Recounts are underway in several states and the margins could easily be changed.
  • There are serious and credible allegations about ballot fraud and computerized vote switching that must be investigated and adjudicated.
  • Every election ever held probably had “irregularities” but we are looking at nationwide, systemic and blatant cheating on a massive scale–an unprecedented scale. That’s what you get when you build, as Joe Biden claimed, “the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.”

How did we get here? Election security has been a joke in this nation for decades, and for justification of the electoral college you need look no further than the fact that certain cities and states have a long and colored history of voter fraud. The electoral college helps prevent one corrupt state from swaying the entire election. But now the corruption has spread throughout the nation, and it was accomplished under the guise of dealing with the threat of Covid-19. The last I heard, about one half of all the votes cast in the 2020 election were “mail-in” ballots, and in most states Democratic lawsuits, Democratic legislatures and Democratic judges made drastic, last-minute changes to voting procedures in order to make fraud easier–not harder. The Biden “victory” is the fruit of their labors.

So what’s my point about the guns? We have allowed our government to make it so hard to exercise our constitutional right to keep and bear arms that it takes hours or days to gain “permission” to buy a gun. While at exactly the same time our government has made it so easy to register and vote that in some places a person can literally walk in off the street, present no identification, cast a ballot and then head off to the next precinct. But that’s nothing! Fraudulent “mail-in” ballots have been injected into this election by the thousands and perhaps millions. In some states signature witnesses were not needed and no comparison with signatures on file was done. In some cases it was supposedly done, but Republican poll watchers were forcibly excluded from the areas where signature comparisons were supposedly being done. All of this is the result of sending out millions of ballots to millions of people who did not request one. Some of them are dead, some have moved out of the district, and some were happy to exchange their blank ballot for money or other valuable considerations.

It is grotesque, obscene, and inexcusable that voting for president, which is not a constitutional right, has been made so trivial that stealing an election is easy for those willing to do it; while buying a gun, which is a constitutional right, has been made such a complicated, confusing and troublesome task that the law-abiding dread it.

But guns are dangerous and we have to keep them out of the hands of criminals! Votes are dangerous too. They can be used to change the course of a nation, alter history and enslave millions of free people, but right now our election laws are designed to make it easy for ballots to fall into the hands of criminals. Therefore, I am calling for laws to be enacted that tie the right to vote to the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms. It should never be harder to buy a gun than it is to vote, and it should never be easier to vote than it is to buy a gun.

As I often say, I’m not holding my breath.

The Nature of Compromise

In grammar school I was taught that our system of government is based on compromise. That’s not true, but that’s what I was taught. Compromise is fine, but there is something you have to understand about it. You cannot compromise with someone whose ultimate goal is diametrically opposed to yours.

For instance, let’s say you and your friend are going on vacation together. You both want to go to the beach, but you want to get there as fast as possible and he/she wants to take the cross-country scenic route. Perhaps you can travel part of the way on the Interstate and part of the way on the secondary roads, and you both wind up where you ultimately wanted to be. But suppose you want to go to the beach and he/she wants to go to the mountains. You compromise and travel part-way toward the beach, and then turn off and go to the mountains. When you get there, you suddenly realize that your friend got what he/she wanted and you got nothing.

That’s where we are with the “gun control” debate. Thanks to Beto, everyone can now see where the democrats have been wanting to take us for fifty years, but everyone is still crying out for compromise on this issue. Democrats, when asked straight up if they agree with Beto on confiscation, hedge, dip and dodge. They use phrases like, “we’ve got to do something now,” and “starting place” and “first steps” and “what is achievable.” What they are saying is that they know they can’t get confiscation right now, but if they can get us to compromise and move in that direction a little, they will be patient and come back for more after the next mass shooting.

Make no mistake: no matter how much they may deny it and claim to be “firm supporters of the Second Amendment,” confiscation of all privately held firearms is their ultimate goal. Why is disarming the population so important to them? Because you can’t make a tyranny without it. Compromise is just another word for slow defeat. In the end, we will either defeat the enemies of freedom or be defeated by them.

My Response To Beto

My sincere thanks to Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke, who finally admitted what most of us have known all along. Hell yes, they want to take our AR-15s and AK-47s!

And when that doesn’t work and the violence continues, they will be back for our other semi-automatics, pump-actions, bolt-actions, revolvers and anything else that goes bang and could put a hole in a would-be tyrant.

You cannot compromise with someone whose end goal is diametrically opposed to yours. You can only defeat them, or be defeated by them. So here is my response to Mr. O’Rourke:

The Third Thing About the 2nd Amendment and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms that TOO MANY Americans Simply Do Not Understand

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Purpose of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Even many who admit to the original meaning and intent of the Second Amendment declare that it is an anachronism, a throw-back to an earlier time and no longer relevant today. We live in an enlightened civilization and the notion of tyranny in America is silly! And besides, the idea of the people standing up to a despot is ludicrous. One democratic lawmaker (Eric Swalwell) even suggested that the people would be hopelessly outgunned since the government has nuclear weapons.

Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. Recent events should convince us that now more than ever before in our nation’s history, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is indispensable to maintaining our free state. It is only the millions of arms in private ownership in America that have kept the forces of tyranny at bay to this point. An armed population is the last line of defense for liberty, and when our government succeeds in disarming us our days of freedom will be numbered.

Imagine a government-required license before starting a church or holding a prayer-meeting. Imagine a government-required background check before being allowed to speak at a public rally. Imagine certain types of unpopular political speech being banned by government and we’re just about there. Why have we tolerated so many restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms when we would never (and should not) tolerate the like when it comes to freedom of speech, assembly, religion or any of our other fundamental rights granted by God? Because “…all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” But to continue quoting the Declaration of Independence, “when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

We’re not quite there yet, but when our government determines to finally destroy that last line of defense, “a design to reduce [us] under absolute Despotism” will be evident. Freedom-loving Americans will never surrender their arms. Doing so will be surrendering our children and grandchildren to slavery.

The Second Thing About the 2nd Amendment and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms that TOO MANY Americans Simply Do Not Understand

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not about hunting, target shooting or even defending your life or your home. Although these pursuits are certainly protected by that same right, they are not what the founding fathers had in mind when they talked about the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Now we are constantly hearing about “military assault-type weapons” and “weapons of war,” and too often I hear gun owners and self-proclaimed supporters of the Second Amendment declare that “no one needs an AR-15 or AK-47!” And one democratic candidate for president finally just admitted it: “hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47!”

The intent of the Second Amendment’s writers is clearly demonstrated in the use of the phrase: A well-regulated militia. The word “militia” comes from the same roots as military and militant and that means fighting wars. Of course, many have tried to define the term “well regulated militia” as the equivalent of today’s National Guard, but both history and just a little thought will inform even the most casual reader that this argument is spurious. The founders clearly wrote “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” and nowhere in the constitution or any founders’ writings was the phrase the people used to describe anything other than the people. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is nothing less than the right of American citizens to retain the means of overthrowing their government should it become necessary. Therefore, “military assault-type weapons” and “weapons of war” are exactly the kind of “arms” that the Second Amendment is talking about.

The First Thing About the 2nd Amendment and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms that TOO MANY Americans Simply Do Not Understand

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment does not create a right to keep and bear arms. I thought that would get your attention. The fact is, none of the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution (the “Bill of Rights”) create any rights. All of our rights are bestowed upon us by our Creator. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This is the foundation of government in the United States of America, and what sets it apart from virtually every other nation in the history of the world. The powers that our government holds are granted to it by the people, and the people retain all of their God-given rights that are not specifically yielded to the government in our founding documents.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms was not established by the Second Amendment, and it does not rely on those words for its survival. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms was not created by the political process, and it cannot be withdrawn by the political process. It cannot be abrogated by executive order, by act of congress or decree of the United States Supreme Court. It cannot even be withdrawn by repealing the Second Amendment, any more than the rights to freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion can be withdrawn by repealing the First Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms is not up for a vote. Government cannot withdraw any of our rights through the legal process. It can only take them from us by force—if we allow it to do so.