Constitution & Articles, Right to Bear Arms, and comment:
Rep. Ron Paul, Crimes of Waco and loss of Constitution.
Just a few comments on the "right to bear arms" issue. First,
admittedly, you could take what I know about gun control and the sum total of
the gun control issue and place it in a sewing thimble and hear it hit bottom. I
simply wish to consider some points I haven't heard made yet by either side, pro
I don't think there has been an article of the bill of rights so twisted as the "separation of church and state," and, "the right to bear arms." Now, what exactly does the article say?
Proverbs 22:7 The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender. Keep this firmly in mind.
Clearly stated, once the federal government "buys into our lives," our states, our schools, our businesses, they own us, the money chokes us to death and results in our surrender to the powers that be, few can resist the greed, or the opportunity to advance on up to the next level of power. This (buying power and favors in the states) all started with the scam of "revenue sharing." Now every state is kissing federal butt for it's "share" of the loot," and in doing so, they sell their souls (our souls). Sadly, like every other government scam, revenue sharing has backfired and become a nemesis instead of a friend to the state. The government (money boys) NEVER gives that which it cannot take back!
For reference, here are the ten articles of our Constitution:
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
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.
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
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 all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Fascist and tyrants live according to the "letter of the law."
Free men live according to the "spirit of the law."
The letter kills, but the spirit gives life.
The first thing we must keep in mind is, "the intent of the law." Our US Constitution was designed and written by intelligent men, something sorely missing today in America, the right to bear arms was intended for every citizen, not just the accepted new term today "citizen soldier." It isn't a matter of the government not trusting the citizens, it is a matter of the citizens not trusting the government. This was to insure two things, first, that no external power would ever again be able to attack and dominate our God given, free society, also, to provide the citizens of this newly found republic with the means of protecting its self against the inherent evils and dangers of big government internally. Neither do I believe the intent of a "well regulated state militia" meant situating federal military bases in the states and placing all arms within the confines of the guarded bases and keeping all firearms locked up under the control of the cent ral government, denying the very citizens this article applies to the right to own and bear arms. This is simply the most communistic, socialist interpretation I have ever heard of, or encountered, and we the people are totally stupid to accept it. It is tantamount to saying to the federal government, just hand me the chains, I'll put them on voluntarily. I believe most of us who attended school before the socialist changes and interpretations to our constitution were made by this very type of government today, know as a fact, that "the people" had, through self determination and trust in their own wisdom and abilities elected to self govern and not to be centrally controlled, but to be centrally "represented," which we are not getting today. I haven't seen a law, or an EO (executive order) regardless of how oppressive, overturned by legislative action in my lifetime. A law signed into action in America is a link in any future tyrannical chain, never to be rescinded. Anyone who contends such laws or question s the "system" is humiliated, degraded, character destroyed and virtually eliminated from public and political life, bucking the system in America is not tolerated. As a matter of fact, it appears that to criticize or show dissent against our president or national leaders today can get one imprisoned. The right to dissent is also at serious risk. America seems to be a short step away from total control by FEAR.
It is said that a huge animal like an elephant can be held in place by a small rope less than a half inch in diameter, something very easily broken by the elephant. This is supposedly accomplished by tying a strong wire around the elephant's leg, when the elephant pulls against the wire the wire cuts into the flesh and is very painful. Soon, the elephant, having a very good memory stops pulling against the wire and becomes passive, it refuses to cause further hurt to its leg. At this point, any device around the elephant's leg will hold it in place because it associates the device with the pain. Point is, the more citizens are beaten, shot and harassed at demonstrations or protest, the more they will cease protesting because of the pain, the jail times and the huge fines imposed. They eventually become elephants. Resistance is futile, at least this is government's position.
Now to my point. It is argued that each state is authorized a state militia, and this is very true, as stated in the article, the second amendment, however, the only "state militia" recognized today are the National Guard and the Reserve Organizations. If I'm not missing the proper interpretation of the right of "the people" and not just a select armed organization, such as a military function such as a Guard unit to bear arms, then we were robbed of our rights in this matter long, long ago, again while America slept.
At what point, and by whose authority did we change from the "people's right" to an arm of the "state's right" and ultimately an arm of the federal government? It has always been my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) that this "so called" state militia which is the Army National Guard, the Air national Guard and the Reserves of different branches of the military were all under the direct command of the several state governors. And this is fine, there is not problem with this in its purist form, in and of the several states, this in addition to the "right of the citizens" to bear arms.
Aside from a departure of the "lawful intent" the second amendment within each state, apparently stolen from the people via standard political manipulations over the years, one doesn't have to look too hard to see that these military organizations are actually an extension of the military complex of the federal government. The federal government as it has done almost as a matter of policy to gain control and leverage over states rights and the people at large has dumped millions of dollars (possibly billions) into these state systems. Now all of these Guard and Reserve units look to "big Daddy" for their continued survival, also, they are so controlled by government regulations and procedures that they cannot function without the blessings of the routine readiness inspections of federal specifications. In other words, unless the arm of the regular federal military complex gives it's OK to standardization and performance, the Guard units just don 't fly, literally. We can see in an instant where politics can play a major control roll here.
Consequently, the governors of the fifty states are the heads of the so called state militias in name only, they can do nothing other than state directed internal assignments without the blessing of Big Brother. So, where is our "people's militia?" In reality "we the people" have no militia and we have by our unconcern and inactivity politically, permitted the very thing to occur that the "people's militia" was designed and meant to prevent, and that is the takeover and subjugation of all citizens by a detached and self serving power structured central government.
When was the last time anyone heard of, or witnessed any state governor refusing to commit his "state militia" (the people) to an unpopular war declared by the central government? I suggest that the fifty governors are pawns and extensions of the federal government and the suggestion of representing the people of their individual states is a farce. it is a game they play for the benefit of the masses. This is why you will not see governors defend the "people's right" to bear arms.
If what I have said is not at least fundamentally true, then why do incumbent presidents, senators and congressmen stump so hard for their preselected state party candidates for governor? Birds of a feather STILL flock together. The man or woman most likely to toe the (socialist) party line will receive the nominations. There will NEVER be a governor who will say to a national leader, "My young men and women are not going to fight your unjust and unholy war" in MHO. The governors are out of the same secret societies and cesspools as their counterparts at the national level. Hence the verse of scripture at the beginning of my article. Once UNCLE shoves that bribe money into our state coffers and the local boys get a taste of power, the system has already been neutralized and the feds have gained control down to the local dog catcher. SW and MT.
So I suggest that technically, no state has an actual "state militia," but all states now have a federally funded and controlled agent in each state by virtue of the armed military called the Army National Guard, the Air National Guard, and their sister reserve units. It might also be pointed out that no Guard unit is exclusive to the particular state, most Guard units have members from surrounding states making the said "state militia" very much compromised or diluted by yet another federal check point. If a situation were to arise where any state might take an independent stand on an issue, who would these "transplants" (military members) be loyal to, the state or the federal government? So, there is NO pure militia! This is extremely dangerous to our fundamental freedoms! Military men directed and ordered by a centrally empowered (federal) government imprison and kill civilians! Sooner or later it will happen in America, the mechanics of total federal control are already close to completion, re: Patriots 1 & 11 plus DARPA and FEMA.
This (maintaining a few, select, federally trained military state natives and implants from border states) as a "militia" is by far cheaper than keeping an equal number of trained military operatives on a continued payroll and paying them benefits when ownership is still secured and assured by the federal government. The side advantage to this is the state having a trained contingent of personnel to clean up any damage resulting from man made or natural disasters, or quell any internal civil disturbance (acting as internal police) and not have to pay them a competitive wage and benefits. So, it's a win, win situation for state leaders and the big boys at the top of the power ladder in Washington.
Bottom line, our "right to bear arms," along with a multiplicity of other freedoms was stolen one by one by the shadow culprits long ago and this is yet another illusion under which we live today. Confiscation of all arms brought on by "terrorism" with the proclamation of "martial law" will be the next major step. I can't think off hand of any nation that was ever taken over by tyrannical forces whose people were well armed. I can think of a few who fell to socialist/communist oppression who surrendered their arms and trusted their government.
This is the picture I see, but like I said, gun control is not my forte'. I would like to read other views on this matter. Maybe this might generate some further thought on where America is headed today, and headed quickly. Then again, maybe I'm just another fool who should remain silent and simply let the tyrannical chips fall where they may, time will be my judge.
Question: Do we REALLY believe that our "state militias" are so bound and dedicated to the internal welfare of the several states that any of the state militias would DARE defy our central government regardless of how corrupt it might become, or how constitutionally deficient and repugnant they might become? Ponder this question and then answer truthfully, then ask yourself, do we really have a well regulated state militia in each state to guard against this eventuality? I am hard pressed to answer that in the affirmative.
Jerry L. Gardner