January 21, 2019

Infringe Did and Still Does Mean “INFRINGE”

Everyday is the season to infringe upon the Second Amendment. It never ceases and newly-elected politicians love to jump on the totalitarian gunboats, armed for bear, gunning (no real pun intended) for any chance they might get to further infringe (destroy) the Second Amendment. The current political season is no different than others.

The far Left’s staging of events to instill fear, hatred, and anger in the masses have set the stage they hope will carry them over the threshold (that threshold being private gun ownership) that will win them a victory that will end in defeat for all…just you wait and see. But will we even be able to recognize such defeat?

Back in January of 2016 I wrote an article about how Americans consider the Second Amendment to be essentially the only right, inalienable or constitutional depending on how you choose to view it, that is worthy of complete and unrestricted infringement. They don’t necessarily see all the other “rights” in the same way. Surely destruction of those rights is just as potentially dangerous as keeping and bearing arms – if only honesty could admit that.

Of course the original words of the Second Amendment state that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

It has always been argued, never with much conviction or honesty, that when the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment they didn’t mean that citizens, i.e. the people (small “p”), had a right to arm themselves and/or to keep arms in their possession.

An honest assessment of the intent of the the Second Amendment has been made clear through endless examination of historic documents. To support the historic significance of the right of the people (small “p”) to keep and bear arms, the U.S. Supreme Court, in it’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in 2008, declared that the Second Amendment did guarantee the right to keep and bear arms to the people (small “p”).

Of course the downside to the Heller decision is that the majority opinion, given by the late (probably murdered) Justice Antonin Scalia, said nothing about “reasonable restrictions” or infringements to the Second Amendment. And so, even though the Supreme Court ruled that the people have a right to keep and bear arms, there has never been any ruling to determine if any “infringements” can be levied on this right, even though the Second Amendment clearly is written that the right shall NEVER be infringed. What is it here that we are not getting? Therefore, the infringement battle train continues to roll and, no doubt, will never end.

In part of the honest examination of the historic facts that drove the Second Amendment creation, I am going to look at and share with readers the etymology (origins) of two words found in the Second Amendment – “arms” and “infringed.”

Let’s start with “arms.” According to Etymonline.com, since around 1300 a.d. the root word for “arms” meant weapon. This root definition has never really changed. In examining the etymology of many words, over the span of history, the meanings of words change, and sometimes drastically. In this case arms still mean weapons…period.

Argument might be made in this research that the use of the word “arms” may have referred to “military” weapons. I realize that in some cases those who have chosen to use the history of words in their defense of the claim that the Second Amendment applied to “militias” and not the general public, too much history exists that proves the intent of the Founders was to give the people (small “p”) the right to keep and bear arms.

If one is willing to accept that historic research as a true fact, then further argument could be made that the Second Amendment should not restrict that right by prohibiting “military” weapons from those which can be kept and bared.

Regardless, there is no mistaking that when the Founding Fathers used the word “arms” it clearly meant weapons, arms, military tools. They understood the importance of a means to deter a tyrannical government. I wonder if they envisioned a tyrannical people (small “p”)?

The second word to examine is “infringed.” Like the word “arms”, since its creation, infringe has always meant what we today consider the meaning of infringe to be.

Once again, if we look at Etymonline.com, we see that since the 15th century, use of the root word meaning infringe, i.e. “enfrangen,” to violate, or from Latin, “infringere,” damage, break, has never changed in any real meaningful way

When the Founding Fathers selected the two words, “arms” and “infringe,” wasn’t it exactly clear that they were talking about “weapons” and the popular definition of infringe to mean that this right shall NEVER BE violated, damaged, or broken?

Why then do we brainwashed Americans insist on infringing upon this right? Even those claiming to hold dear the Constitution, often claiming how all others tread on it and ignore it, and yet these same mindless folks work tirelessly day in and day out to destroy the Second Amendment, some thinking they are saving it by infringing upon it?

Regardless of what can be presented as evidence, I hold out no hope that the people (small “p”) will ever understand that they are working toward their own destruction.

Oh, what have we done, and what are we doing?

Share

Insanity Is Illogical

Yesterday I received an email that contained a bunch of stuff intended to show the reader how illogical certain modes of thinking, or lack thereof, make little sense and actually brings to light the insanity on display in this country today. I thought instead of just copying and pasting what I received, I would enhance the discussion a bit in hopes that instead of asking whether certain beliefs are logical or contain any common sense, a reader might realize the insanity of it all. Here goes.

I have no idea if any statistics presented in this email are true or false nor do I intend to waste my time trying to figure it out. This is about insanity not about man’s truths.

The email began by stating that 11 teenagers die everyday as the result of texting while driving, suggesting that gun control freaks who have sought to have the age of gun ownership raised to 21, should consider the same for cellphone ownership. There is a difference, evidently between a willingness to die or cause someone else to die so long as that choice is theirs. Odd that people can’t see that all people want a choice, not to be dictated to. Insane.

The email also suggested that if “gun control” actually worked, then Chicago would resemble the mythological TV show The Andy Griffith Show located in the fake town of Mayberry. We know this comparison is just too far out. Mayberry RFD has but a few thousand people, those raised to be respectful and care about all other people, careful not to impose on others and trample their rights. Chicago has a few million people, the bulk of which couldn’t give two rat’s behinds about you or anything about you. And we haven’t even talked about guns. Ridding Chicago of guns will not change Chicago. It’s the people stupid!

The Third Scenario presented is as follows: The Second Amendment makes more women equal than the entire feminist movement. As it is written, I guess I’m just too stupid to understand what it means. On to the next.

Fourth, there are more than 300 million legal gun owners in the US and a trillion rounds of ammo. Remember, I don’t know if this is true. I would guess it’s not. I’m quite sure there are more guns than this and along with it more ammo. The email suggests that if legal gun ownership was THE problem, we wouldn’t have any trouble knowing about it.

This is quite misleading but I guess we are supposed to overlook that and not miss the point. You see, most legal gun owners are of the character that they mind their own business and seldom turn to violence in order to force their choice of lifestyle onto others. (hanging by a thread)

Five, nobody blamed the gun (rifle) when JFK was assassinated in Texas in 1963. They didn’t? Perhaps the question might want to be asked if it was a rifle that killed him. Again, we shouldn’t miss the point. The real point here is that in 1963 the people of this nation were not yet ready to be mass brainwashed into being fearful of honest people having guns. The mass media, as the echo chamber for the Global Power Structure, have done a masterful job of creating an insane attitude about guns. Had this programed event been in place in 1963 you can bet your bottom dollars insane people would have blamed the gun. Had that worked, I’m sure Ronald Reagan would have been attacked with a wet noodle instead of a “automatic revolver” as the press so intelligently told the people at that time.

Here’s a good one. According to whoever devised this email, the NRA murders nobody each year and receives no federal money to not do that. Planned Parenthood murders 350,000 unborn babies using a half a billion dollars of yours and my tax dollars.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say the NRA kills nobody. I read some of the crap they say and do and it’s killing me. Too bad there weren’t more people who felt the way I do about the NRA and the government-controlled instigators that they are – disguised of course as fighters for your Second Amendment rights. I might add, BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

The email says it has no problem with background checks when it comes to being able to own a firearm. They insist that the same should be required for immigrants and voting. That’s where they are all wrong. The Second Amendment does not state the right to keep and bear arms is contingient upon passing a background check, neither was it stipulated that immigrants needed a background check (provided that went through the legal process of immigration), nor did you need one in order to vote.

We can thank all the moron, fake “right-to-bear-arms” promoters for ushering us further into tyrannical rule and the destruction of inalienable rights who promote those deceitful “reasonable” limitations on rights. Refer to Scenario Number Four above. Where once the country consisted of millions of people of good character who would never dream of pleading for laws to limit the freedoms of all. That character that I wrote of above is dwindling away as fast as cellphones are destroying our very existence.

In number eight, it begins to get a bit contrived. They say for those people who claim we don’t need smoke-detectors in our homes; that’s what fire departments are for, they say that’s how they feel when someone tells them they don’t need a gun. Don’t miss the point…if there really is one. I can still choose (at least where I live) to have a smoke detector or not. I’ve pretty much lost the choice to own and use a firearm the way I want to. Again we need to refer to Scenario Number Four. The disintegration of any moral character paves the way for insanity and the forcing of idealistic beliefs and perverse lifestyles onto all others.

The email ends with the most idiotic comparison imaginable…that is if you are an honest and intelligent person. I’ll copy it here just as it came to me in the email: “Folks keep talking about another Civil War. One side knows how to shoot and has a trillion bullets. The other side has crying closets and is confused about which bathroom to use. How do you think that’s going to end?”

To accept this comparison, one has to believe that only gun owners are sane and will line up on one side of a civil war, and anyone without a gun is insane and will man the other side. I’m not even sure there is a point to be made here other than the author ain’t too bright.

There’s just a whole bunch of confusion displaying itself as insanity. We have become insane because we have taken our eyes off our CREATOR OF ALL THINGS! Man has no answers. Man, and his filthy flesh is the problem. If there need be legitimate talk of civil wars, then try to understand the real reason there would be one. It isn’t about gun rights or abortion rights. It’s about your relationship with your CREATOR.

Share

Maine Legislature To Consider 14 “Gestapoesque” Gun Bills

With the Democrats taking over the Maine Legislature, as near as I can tell they plan to introduce a minimum of 12 gun control, rights destroying bills that will do nothing to stop what it is the progressives believe they can stop. So, what else is new?

Without having the text of each and every bill, at this point all we can do is go by the titles of the bills. For those with a brain, we know that most bill’s titles are deceptive at best and an outright lie in most cases.

If we examine the titles, the Democrats intend to ban large capacity magazines (whatever that is); protect children by requiring safe storage of guns (whatever that is); mandatory background checks for anyone who even thinks about a gun (whatever that is); a prohibition that would stop “extremely dangerous and suicidal individuals” (whatever that is) from owning a gun; allow municipalities to ban guns wherever they choose; establish a “voluntary” (whatever that is) gun collection day (all unwanted guns can be dropped off at my house); waiting periods they believe will reduce suicides and violent crimes (chuckle).

What a waste of time.

I would suppose we can also expect abortions to increase, Welfare to explode, illegal immigration to expand exponentially, unemployment to go up and free CELLPHONES for everyone.

Share

98% of Mass Shootings Happen In “Gun-Free” Zones

By our count, the U.S. makes up 1.49 percent of the murders worldwide, 2.20 percent of the attacks, and less than 1.15 percent of the mass public shooters. All these are much less than America’s 4.6 percent share of the world population.

Most gunmen are smart enough to know that they can kill more people if they attack places where victims can’t defend themselves. That’s one reason why 98 percent of mass public shootings since 1950 have occurred in places where citizens are banned from having guns.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Gun Ownership: A Right? Maybe – Granted Privilege? Limited

I do tire of the so-called “Constitutional Experts” who think they know the Constitution. And yes, here goes another attempt at the same. You can turn me off if you want to.

The NRA posted a rebuttal to an anti-handgun rant by a University of Maine professor (electrical engineer – makes sense to me) attempting to prove the professor is misguided and not up to grade with his knowledge of the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

Most readers have an understanding of where I stand when it comes to one’s RIGHT to self-protection and the choice I should have as to how I wish to do that. So, I’ll spare you any rebuttals to the arguments between the professor and the NRA as to who has a right or what that right might be concerning gun ownership. I will, however, raise some questions, some of which readers will think perhaps I’ve stepped off the deep end and maybe I have.

The NRA claims, as most “experts” and misguided citizen/slaves, that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written for us common folks – “we the people” and not “We the People.” Think again. However, I don’t much care for government’s lies and B.S. when it comes to their mere existence. They can all go to hell as far as I care. I claim my right to protection as granted to me by my Creator and that decision and the actions I choose are between me and Him. I must, therefore, (study to show myself approved unto God) decipher when to “render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar and when Ceasar becomes contrary to God’s Word – again my choice established between me and Yahweh.

The Second Amendment is not a right – certainly not an inalienable right. If having the “right to bear arms” was an inalienable right, as we have wrongfully been taught, such a right would never be questioned or changed. The Second Amendment is constantly questioned and always being changed. When you consider the Constitution, it tells us that in order to amend any part thereof there is a process supposedly made necessary to accomplish that. That process has NEVER been undertaken. Congress, with the prompting by activists (a condition that exists to garner votes and money) merely passes new laws that completely alter the guts of the Second Amendment, or any other right or law.

But then we, the citizen/serf/slave, in our misguided educations (indoctrinations) think that the actions of Congress to rewrite the Bill of Rights or vary from what they consider the contents of that constitution, is “unconstitutional.” There is no such thing! Get over it!

How often these days do we hear people invoking their knowledge of the Constitution by making statements claiming some new law is unconstitutional? Endless! Such claims always appear from anyone who doesn’t like a new law or an amendment to an existing law, i.e. Amendment Ten, Second Amendment, etc. And through all of the cherry picking of what fits the agenda in question (all sides do this), they forget the “Necessary and Proper” clause of the Constitution – Article I Section 8. (written for the rulers, not for you and me)

Missing from this brainwashed existence is the understanding of what becomes law. Most think when Congress passes a new law, that is the law…period. Not so.

Court rulings often amend, obscure, muddle, and outright change what we believed to be law. It’s their “duty” to “interpret” the laws – wink-wink. The “winning” side and the “losing” side each get to write an opinion. Those opinions become part of the long list of precedences set that, unless questioned and challenged in a rigged courtroom, become quasi-law used for whatever purposes anyone so chooses. (Never trust a lawyer, right?)

Policy is also an unknown factor in crafting laws. Why do you think presidents, now and in the past, spend so much time writing and publishing their “policy” statements? Presidential Policy becomes law and is used in crafting all new laws designed to oppress the citizen/serf/slave.

The right to keep and bear arms never has been a clear-cut case of an unquestioned right. While it might do some good to fight for what you perceive as an “unquestioned” right to own a gun for whatever reason you so choose, the government operates as a rigged system. They control what you and I can and can’t do. Our “rights” suddenly become privileges because that rigged system can and does yank those privileges from us.

While the battle over the Second Amendment continues, it is only stalling the inevitable. The day will come, and it WILL come, when our fascist Congress will, once again, exercise their authority through THEIR constitution, to pass all laws necessary and proper to do whatever they want to you and me. We lose, they win!

Participating in this man-created criminal enterprise called government, places us in willing participation as a citizen/slave…and evidently, we like it.

The NRA and the professor and many more who will come after them are doing what they have been taught to do. It’s a shame in many ways. So long as things that exist the way they do is of benefit to the corrupt criminals in Washington, you will think you are protecting your rights. You are not! You are doing the bidding for them greedy, crooked, lying bastards! One day you will wake up (hopefully) and ask, what the hell happened?

 

Share

A Tale of Two Cities

 
         CHICAGO, IL   HOUSTON, TX
Population 2.7 million   2.15 million
       
Median HH Income $38,600   $37,000
       
% African-American 38.9%   24%
       
% Hispanic 29.9%   44%
       
% Asian 5.5%   6%
       
% Non-Hispanic White 28.7%   26%
       

Pretty similar until you compare the following:

  Chicago, IL               Houston, TX  
         
Concealed Carry   Legal? No   Yes  
         
Number of Gun Stores None   184 Dedicated gun stores plus 1500 – legal places to buy guns–Wal-Mart, K-mart, sporting goods, etc.  
         
Homicides, 2012 1,806   207  
         
Homicides per 100K 38.4   9.6  
         
Avg. January high temperature  (F) 31   63  
         

Conclusion :  Cold weather causes murders. This is due to climate change.

Share

In Response To Doctors Who Want To Ban Guns

This deep into the Information Age the government wields unimaginable power. The only thing that guarantees the freedom of future Americans is privately owned firearms. We have systematically deconstructed the family, men have forgotten how to be fathers, and we daily ogle murder, rape, and butchery thinking it entertainment. Is it really so surprising that our children shoot each other?

If saving lives really is the goal then meaningful social reform, not ineffective legislative placebos, is the answer. Do we care enough about children to admit that they need dads? Will easier access to marijuana really make things better? The status quo is insanity. If we are serious about solving society’s problems we should treat the disease rather than the symptoms.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Maryland Police Shoot and Kill Man While “Confiscating” His Guns

Gary J. Willis, 61, opened the door to his home with a gun in his hand when two police officers came knocking at 5:17 a.m. on Nov. 5. Anne Arundel County police say Willis put the gun on a table next to the door, but “became irate” when the officers explained that they had come to confiscate his firearms.

Willis grabbed his gun and a struggle ensued, during which the firearm discharged. No one was injured, but the officer not engaged in the struggle shot Willis, and he died at the scene.

Under Maryland’s new Extreme Risk Protection Order law (aka, “red flag law”), family, police, and mental health professionals can seek an order from a judge to temporarily confiscate firearms from a person believed to be a danger to themselves or others.

Maryland’s law states that anything related to an order is confidential unless the court rules otherwise.

…believes one of Willis’ sisters requested that police temporarily remove his guns…

…Willis’ death is evidence that the new red flag law is needed and working.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Another Reason California Bar Shooting Was “Fake” a Staged Event

Ammoland reports that the bar shooting in Thousand Oaks, California, where 13 people were supposedly killed, had 6 unarmed, off-duty police officers as customers. No explanation was given.
Share

White Male Gun Nuts Are Terrorists

I constantly hear each “side” of the political spectrum accusing the other “side” of speaking inflammatory language that only serves to perpetuate the anger and hatred that so severely divides this country.

In the following case, a democratic political candidate in Tennessee claims to be a “pro-gun” candidate. According to the Guns America website, the candidate and the party that is promoting his election were quoted as saying that the biggest terrorist organization in America is “White Male Gun Nuts.”

Nice! Real nice. And all this time I thought the biggest threat to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was totalitarian fascists.<<<Read More>>>

Share