Watch and Learn

If you are one who does not understand the need to uphold the principles of the 2nd amendment, please watch this short video. It will provide a much clearer understanding of what the fathers of the constitution had in mind. This is an absolute true story.

This has been around before, but some may not have seen it. And it is true.

Battle of Athens (TN) - 1946
This is an interesting bit of history and gives another view for the right to bear arms and government gone wrong. Be sure to watch it to the end and see the actual pictures of that time.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/Battle-of-Athens.html

 

 This should be spread around.

Open Letter to WV Delegation

To:        The Honorable Joseph Manchin

The Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV

The Honorable Shelley Moore Capito

The Honorable David McKinley

The Honorable Nick Rahall II

Subject: Gun Control

It would be difficult to think of anything more troubling than the shooting of innocent children. We all are saddened and morn for those lost and their families and friends. Of course the top questions in our minds are: Why? And how do we prevent such events?

We may never fully understand the answer to the first question, but it seems clear that we need to address the culture in which our children are desensitized by violent movies and video games. We must also address the need to identify those with mental disturbances that appear to be present in each case of mass murder.  Clearly we need a system in the mental health industry where violent and mentally unstable people can get help for their issues before a tragedy occurs.

It seems many want to use the most recent tragedy to leverage more power and support for gun control.  First, let’s take a look at the facts and consider whether any of the gun control efforts now underway would have made any difference recent mass murders had they been enacted prior.

Here are the facts as we know them and the current laws that were broken:

The assailant steals guns from his mother.

Kills his own mother.

Transports these guns loaded.

Brings guns onto school property.

Breaks into the school.

Discharges the weapons within city limits.

Murders 26 people.

Commits suicide.

All of which are in violation of current laws and none of which would have been altered in anyway by the current movement to ban, limit or restrict guns and ammo for private law abiding citizens.

As a law abiding citizen and military veteran, I feel I am among the last in this nation who’s second amendment rights should be infringed upon.  Particularly when it seems clear that most of the efforts currently in progress will not prevent tragedies like those in the past. The truth is, there are hundreds of millions of firearms in this country and bad people will always find a way to get them and use them. Knowing that, should support the rest of us having the necessary firepower to counter any potential risk.  

These mass murders are occurring in places where guns are not allowed by law abiding citizens and the criminal element is not going to abide by any new laws any more than they do the ones on the books now. So, please explain to me how it makes any since at all to infringe on my right bear arms. Question: Why do I need a so called assault rifle. Answer: Because the bad guys have them.

Self-defense is a right and a responsibility. Government is constitutionally barred from infringing on that right. The people need to stand up on this one.

As our representative, you must act in a manner that projects our constitutional right to defend.

No Constitutional Authority to Limit Arms

Remember when everyone understood that our government was of and for the people. The constitution provides that the powers of the government come from and is granted unto the various branches of government by the people.  The constitution does not provide rights to the people, it assumes they already have them and attempts to limit what powers the government will have in regulating society. The opening remarks in the constitution clearly state the reasons the document was constructed.  The government was created to be the common entity of the people to “establish justice, domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense and secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our posterity. 
 

Liberty or freedom of the sovereign individual was a fundamental proclamation made clear by the authors of the constitution. Although the constitution clearly accepts the rights of the people to remain free, congress and the legislatures of the states voted for and ratified the Bill of Rights to more clearly identify the rights held by the people that the government had no right to infringe upon. 
 

For example: The second amendment clearly states that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.   “Infringe” means among other things: encroach on, intrude on, interfere with, impinge on, trespass or invade.  In other words, the people did not give the government the right to regulate arms in any way. No senator, congressman or judge thereof has the authority to infringe on the people’s right to bear arms of any size, nature or quantity.   
 

Therefore, the Bill supported by Senator Feinstein is unconstitutional on its face. It is not completely clear to me as to why the liberal left want to prevent the people from having arms of their choosing. Many of the very same people who want to take away or diminish my rights to own and carry weapons are themselves either owners and carriers or they have armed guards with them most or all of the time.  Is it ok for them to be protected but not the rest of us?
 

The constitution does not mention hunting as the reason for free people to keep and bear arms. The constitution is clear on the reason as, “being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  It can’t be more clear. 
 

I recognized that there are crazy, even evil people out there who at times want to hurt others. That is precisely why my right to defend my family should never be infringed upon. One question often asked is: Why should anyone own an assault rifle? My answer: is because the bad guys already have them and any invading force whether domestic or foreign will have them.  Taking guns away from law bidding citizens is not the answer.

Taxpayers On The Hook Again

Please explain to me why taxpayers from all over the nation are being asked to pay people in the Northeast for the damages they suffered as a result of hurricane Sandy. I ask this because I and most people I know have insurance to protect us from certain losses and would never expect the government to come in and provide relief should something happen to my home.  This is my home and my responsibility to protect it. If I don’t, the consequences are mine to live with. People have losses all time, sometimes total losses as a result of fire, tornado’s and floods and all sorts of other disasters. Nobody comes to their aid. Since when did it become the taxpayers responsibility to absorb the losses of other taxpayers? 

Could it be it is because politicians can use the opportunity to extract even more money than is necessary from taxpayers to fund their pet projects?  Reports I have seen suggest that the highest legitimate estimate of what is needed to help Sandy victims is only $27 billion, yet lawmakers created legislation totally some $60 Billion and tried to get it passed in an 11^th hour vote to save the nation from economic crisis. Less than half of the $60 billion is even earmarked for recovery, but will be used for new spending all over the country as far away as Alaska. And we wonder how we got into this mess. Thank your government. 

It seems government leader’s never saw a spending opportunity it did not like, so any time the prospect arises, they see this as a way to create new funding that likely has nothing to do with the disaster.  Then what about insurance? Are we no longer in need of insurance on our private or government assets because taxpayers will bail us out?

Our government is led by the most incompetent morally bankrupt group imaginable as a whole. Yes there are some good ones, but they are getting harder and harder to discern.