Additional Pages

Monday, December 31, 2012

The Good Cops Need To Declare Themselves Now

For the Oathkeepers, it is time to stand up. Whether they like being told what to do, or not, that is what needs to happen and pretty fast. We are at a point where we need to know who the good cops are, who the good people are.

The scenario is this: I just got busted for some nonsense illegal possession of a firearm charge, now maybe they just made my firearm illegal, or maybe they just made me illegal, i.e. I've been to the doctor for depression (don't worry not in real life) and now I cannot own a gun. So I am there, in the Oathkeepers squad car.

I ask are you OK? (meaning Oathkeepers of course).

You, as the law enforcement officer, ex-military say, after a pause to see if what I am asking is what you are about to answer, you say yes.

Now, we have a problem. Why in the hell am I in your squad car to begin with? You have violated your oath already, the first one to defend the Constitution, so help you God and the other when you swore to all of us you would stand up for us when the time came.

If you are OK, you should have let me alone, so I don't have to escape and rack up further charges.

Look, I know how the legal system works inside and out. By the time you have me in your car it is too late to make up an "escapee" situation, because that will only hurt me when some other zealous cop busts me for speeding and runs my name for warrants. Not good enough, folks.

Here's the other thing. If you are a cop and you arrest me for some nonsense gun charge and let me tell you that I consider no gun law valid, or lawful under the Constitution. It has been recently ruled in the Supreme Court that "militia" means individuals, it does not mean organizations. When the Second Amendment mentions "people" it means exactly that, not organizations, not militias, not governments, not military units, "people" meant men of proper age able and willing to defend the nation.

You know what? The nation still needs defending from bad cops and bad politicians and we, the people, will do it. The game has started.

Threats of legislation to confiscate weapons is the same as confiscating weapons, because if we wait until numerous individual American citizens have been made an example of, it is too late to claim your oath has been kept. Sorry, you don't get to decide when or how your oath should be applicable to the situation, that is the decision of a free people and we are watching you to see if you want to do the work or if we are going to have to do it all.

A threat to confiscate a weapon through legislation is the act of confiscation, here's why: because it already demonstrates to the people at large, the hunters, the sportsmen, the preppers and self-defense proponents that the government neither respects nor recognizes the Second Amendment. They are telegraphing their willingness to disregard the Constitution. If anyone should be arrested over gun laws, it should be the politicians which have violated their oaths and have become domestic enemies themselves.

Make no mistake, if I am looking at being arrested for owning a weapon that the government has now deemed inappropriate for my use, I will use it against the Oathbreaker who comes to get it. If you will enforce such a law, you are nothing but a thug coming to collect protection money and should be treated as a criminal and a traitor and likely will be.

It's a fine line that needs to be walked here, friends. We don't know who you are. The Oathkeepers say they won't arrest someone for possessing a weapon recently banned, fine, if that's the limitation of your understanding of the Constitution, but my bigger point is that no Oathkeeper should respond to an illegal weapons call.

Here's another thing to consider: a gun in the hands of a felon is not a threat to you unless it has been used to commit a crime. The Second Amendment does not provide for keeping guns out of the hands of felons, or the mentally disturbed, though both are excellent ideas. But, here is where the rubber meets the road: a felon might be rehabilitated and lead a normal life and require the defense of his home and family as much as anyone else and if that person is prevented from using a weapon to defend himself, he is a lamb led to the slaughter. Likewise, a mentally disturbed person still has the right to legally defend himself and fight back against an oppressive government as much as a sane person. I know you don't like it, but restrictions against gun ownership are not addressed in the Second Amendment and therefore unconstitutional.

But, here is the kicker: gang-bangers are generally under 21, they are in possession of illegal weapons at that stage, are they not? Assuming that the weapons being used are pistols. Are you busting down doors in the "hood" to see who owns an illegal weapon? Are you stopping underage gang-marked young men on the streets to see if they are packing? Not much you aren't or there wouldn't be the gun violence in inner cities and among gang members that there is. Which is the point: anyone willing to break drug and protection laws don't give a damn about your gun laws and neither does any other felon willing to break the law. No schizophrenic, or psychotic gives a damn about your gun laws. And, by making guns scary and only available to the "right" people, you have allowed for a society who fears guns, who think they come with some political agenda and they allow themselves to make your job harder.

The result, people, is that more people are disarmed, cowed by gun laws and left unprotected and moreso, because they are unprotected by obeying the law, they become victims and are unable to stop the rapist, murderer, thief or gang banger before they do more damage to society as a whole. Gun laws degenerate society.

Oathkeepers, the people you are arresting could be doing your work for you, if you obey the Constitution in the way it was meant to be enforced. What about enforcing that law? Kind of drank the Kool-Aid on that one, didn't you?

We need officers to recognize the situation and realize that it is time to stand up, to make your voice known and to stop responding to the dictation of government which is clearly and in so many ways violating the very law that you are sworn to uphold and defend.

Now, there are good cops and bad cops. The good ones need to identify themselves through actions and unmask the bad cops who have taken an oath to which they have not intended to abide. It was only a means to getting a job and some bad cops are much worse than the criminals they engage.

Things are getting real. Are you?

Sunday, December 30, 2012

You Have Been Drafted

I have no cards, or orders to offer you, but you cannot avoid the fact that if you are reading this blog, you have been drafted into a war you don't necessarily understand or even agree with. It is not your choice and like all drafts, it is instituted by the government, the government of years past.

Patrick Henry said, at end of a long and wonderful address: Give me liberty, or give me death.

The war is against us, by the usurpers and pretenders in the government. We did not choose this future, they did. We did not force our hands, they did. From the GOP, who do not understand their role in the resistance to the active Marxists in the DHS and TSA, we are under attack.

The single most important fight of our republic is happening now. The enemy has taken control of the government by support of those seeking favor in the new system. Their whole lives are dependent upon the success of the new regime. All benefits flow from the government in one way or another, either through actual gifts or a waiver from the worst the government will enact.

The GOP is useless. They are terrified of the Obama Administration and I honestly believe that many of the GOP representatives are afraid of being targeted by gang members if they stand against this president in any way. It is the same old corruption that has gripped every dead government from Rome on.

The point is the government is dead, it refuses to serve the whole people and has devolved into paybacks for those who have supported them. The NRA did not support Barack Obama: many members of the church did not support Obama. So, who did? Easy, unions, government employees, rich white folks eager to be marked down as sympathizers in the hopes of not being targeted by a government willing and able to bring about their destruction.

In order to support America, one must turn against the government as it is corrupt and dedicated to the eradication of liberty. Their lies and dismissed oaths are not lost. They are recorded in history as their stance against us, the true authority behind the crown.

So, if you believe in America, of the values it represents, you have been drafted into a war you did not want, perhaps don't even understand. You are in good company. How many young men went off to war in WWII without really knowing why or where they were going or what would happen to them. How many of them died, leaving wife and young children at home? Are you better than them because there is not the threat of imprisonment if you decline their offer? No, you are not.

See, when Marxism takes hold, even here in America, any true patriot who would hold their values of nationality above those of the state is an enemy. They may not be pulling you off the street and demanding your papers, yet, but they are willing to do so. They are not afraid. They have the media to spin it any way they want. Imprisonment is how they get what they want. They will intimidate and persecute your family, if that's what it takes, to get information from you about those you communicate with in the liberty movement.

I am not a leader. I do not see myself as vital to anything. But, I cannot look on the graves in Arlington Cemetery and betray their lives by allowing everything they died defending to be obliterated by audacious presidents. I will not sell their lives short by being unwilling to fulfill my role in the war. I will honor them with my actions.

You, the drafted, must come to terms with your fate. You were born in this time and no other. As others before you, it is your turn to offer your lives in exchange for the future of the nation, or would you roll over and deny those who have gone before you the honor they are due? When called, they came.

Square it any way you can in your own mind if you refuse to stand up for liberty, for the nation. There is no judgement here, it is within your heart, or it is not.

Saturday, December 29, 2012

Now, Kentucky Gets It

Now Kentucky gets it. Visit this blog and help Mike in Kentucky.

Mike is a good person I met at the Liberty Summit. He has credibility. Help him if you can and remember, I am a Kentuckian in ancestry and love the state. I wholly support it and will do everything I can to be there.

Friday, December 28, 2012

Take It To The States

I have proposed a March on DC, or New York, I believe now that I was wrong. We need to act on a state-by-state basis. Local, local, local.

In Colorado, they are doing the right thing, at least to start. The idea is to do something to remove yourself from the hidden, quiet, peaceful, law-abiding and embrace your insurrectionist within.

We are at war, damnit.

We need a political arm and a militant arm. I don't care what arm you want to be, but be one of the two.

Hi this is Cindy Lyons.

Please contribute to this and any other gun organization. I just send $50 bucks to the below gun org: National Association for Gun Rights.  Read this email and shudder at the boldness by which the Constitution's enemies are trying to kill the 2nd Amendment and then you know our 1st Amendment will go next. 

Also: PLEASE ATTEND THIS RALLY. Take off from work. Bring your neighbor. Carpool up there. I don't think we've ever had a gun rally up at the Capitol. But this one is important. COME. I will be there. 

Pro-Gun Rally at the Capitol
Public · By Guns For Everyone

Join us as we fight against gun control.

Pro-Gun Rally to Take Place on Session’s First Day:

With increasing talks about gun control in Colorado, Guns for Everyone, 
a local and somewhat of a newcomer to Colorado’s pro-gun scene, will host
a pro-gun rally at the capitol on opening day of the legislative session.

“Evil is a consequence of freedom, the alternative is slavery,”
said Isaac Chase, local freedom crusader and friend of Guns for Everyone.
“It is a nice theory that we can legislate ourselves into a completely safe world,
but we can’t and that is why it is important we fight for the few freedoms we still have.”

The main focus of the rally is gun freedom, but Guns for Everyone is a strong supporter
of anything freedom, so this is more about freedom than simply guns.

Edgar Antillon, co-founder of Guns for Everyone and former state house candidate, said
this was not just about guns but more importantly about freedom.
“We can debate until we’re blue in the face about gun statistics, but gun ownership is more
about freedom. I’m not comfortable with all that freedom has to offer – marijuana, alcohol, abortion,
but I’d rather be uncomfortable than be a slave to the government.”

Both Chase and Antillon disagree with Gov. Hickenlooper that there needs to be a debate about guns.
“There is nothing to debate, my freedom is not up for discussion,” said Antillon.

The rally is scheduled to take place at the capitol on January 9th at 1 p.m.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dudley Brown <>
Date: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Dear Cynthia,

My jaw just hit the floor.

After reading Senator Dianne Feinstein’s new so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban, I can only describe it as the effective END of the Second Amendment in America.

The definition of an "Assault Weapon" in this bill is so broad you can drive a truck through it!

They’re targeting EVERYTHING -- rifles, shotguns and even handguns.

You see, the gun-grabbers are going for broke.

Even owners of supposedly "grandfathered" firearms will be treated like common criminals.

If passed, Feinstein’s so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban would:
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing or 120 specifically named rifles, shotguns and handguns;
*** Ban the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of ALL firearms with a detachable magazine and at least one "military characteristic" -- which could mean just about anything that makes a gun "look scary."
*** Bans the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of magazines holding more than 10 rounds;
*** Force owners of ALL "grandfathered" weapons to undergo an intrusive background check and unnecessary fingerprinting;
*** Force owners of ALL "grandfathered" weapons to federally register their guns after obtaining permission slip from local law enforcement showing their guns are not in violation of state or local law.
That’s right.  If you own a $10 magazine that’s more than 10 rounds, you’ll have to register it with the BATFE in their National Firearms Registry.

And you and I both know registration is only the first step toward outright confiscation.

Cynthia, don’t be fooled.

This isn’t some "pie in the sky" bill listing all the shiny new anti-gun provisions the gun-grabbers were hoping Santa Claus would bring them for Christmas.

Vice President Joe Biden -- who President Obama has put in charge of ramming new gun control schemes through Congress -- has already said he sees no reason why a new so-called "assault weapons ban" can’t pass.

This is what you and I are facing.  This is what you and I are up against.

To defeat this radical scheme, I’m going to have to pull out all the stops to mobilize Second Amendment supporters all over the country.

If you value your gun rights, I’m going to need your help too.

I’ll continue to keep you updated on any new developments.

For now, brace yourself.

The stakes could hardly be any higher.  And this is going to be one heck of a fight.

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

Dudley Brown is a  well respected member of the Second Amendment rights community and especially in Colorado. Support them, join them, or do something like it in your state.

We are on war-footing ladies and gentlement, act like it.

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Hard Lines

I have been getting a lot of feedback from a few of my latest posts, so I thought I would address a few things.

We are at war.

There is no longer a pretense to civility on the part of the government or the Marxists firmly in control of it. It is a societal earthquake that grew out of the Civil War in the beginning, participated in by every administration since. Over the decades new ideas were brought into the fold, but it really doesn't change what happened in 1861, which was the development of a massive federal government.

We look at people like Jefferson and Adams and think we understand them, but they were running a minuscule federal government and were fearful of the people. That has not been true for a very long time now and the current school of thought is that any large concentration of people cannot be governed from a position of deferment to state governments, but must control the masses from a central planning perspective.

The federal government today, with the mountains of slaves it has bought with welfare, government jobs and pensions, is powerful enough to give us whatever we want and take whatever we have. They know it and they have come to the conclusion that it is time to make their play.

So, I have suggested a few things, an armed march to let them know that we exist, are armed and capable of making a calculated march from someplace to someplace.

I have suggested visiting these journalists that revealed the residences of concealed carry permit owners in New York, hopefully armed, to show them that we can show up wherever we need to.

I have had takers in each instance, but not many and not enough.

I have put it to you what you are willing to do. Some people think I am going to organize all of this. I am not, I have organized before, planned and gotten nowhere. Not that Mercer was a failure, it wasn't, but it hasn't changed things the way I thought it had to.

So, I put out the call again to patriots, liberty advocates and Second Amendment advocates to see what will happen.

In the comments on the March, Dan III, a person I have met and like, pointed out that we are not ready to march, we don't have the organizational skills, the personal training, the understanding of what a march like I have suggested would require in support. In a lot of ways he is right. That's why the march was planned for later, but the fact is, I have not seen the support from the communities I have reached out to to do much more planning on my end. I don't think a lot of people do understand the type of stamina it takes to engage in such a march.

My job currently is very physically demanding. I am accustomed to doing it during the summer heat and humidity as well as the cold of North Dakota, sometimes below freezing with no heat available. I have the gear it takes to not only survive it, but be productive. I walk a lot, up and down stairs all day long, bending, lifting, etc. So, I feel like I am in pretty good physical shape and I don't know that I am prepared for a march like I have suggested.

The facts are these, however, we have all been drafted into a war to save the nation. Our government officials have tossed off the cloak of pretense and have started to come at us head-on. Why? Because they think just like Dan III. They think we are not ready, that we will do nothing when the time comes, that we will lay down and take it.

Back in Mercer, I was ready to roll, but I discovered that there was a great hesitance to do anything illegal. I have written on this many times. You are a criminal already, because you own guns they want to take, it is just a matter of time when the formal charges are drawn up for you and your family for sheltering you and not ratting you out.

Study the writings of Alexander Solzhenitsyn to see how easily it is done, how completely rational to your local cop that it has to be done. They are fed by the beast and will do its bidding when the time comes.

My point is this is a different kind of game than we have ever played in America and we need to figure out what to do about engaging the enemy. The suggestions I make are usually to test the resolve of those who visit this blog. I will do everything I suggest, but I need some feedback, some hard answers on who is and who is not going to be there.

Dan III does have a point that some of you should be listening to: We are way behind the learning curve on this one. We need to come together and stop being afraid of backing someone the media has also demonized. I mean preppers have to get along with the militia, the militia has to get along with the pro-life Christian members, etc (not that one precludes the other, but you get the drift of what I am saying).

We need to stop arguing with each other over principles which are lighter shades of gray when we have a real enemy to deal with, because it doesn't get much better as time goes on. We have to deal with this crowd before we turn our attention to the radical Muslim infiltration into our society. The days of trying to remain legal and tolerant must come to an end.

I have offered my presence to anything that will take a positive step forward to combating our common foe, but I am not going to be the organizer, the leader, it is a role I am ill-suited to, but I will be there with you when you decide to move.

They are coming out to disarm you. If you are an Oathkeeper, this is your opportunity to be more than a frat brother and start taking your role as keeper of the Constitution seriously. We need all the help we can get.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

The Day The War Began

You don't know it. If you were a farmer without a radio during Pearl Harbor, you would not have known that the world had just gone to war and it would not end without the deaths of millions and millions. If you don't know that the American Civil War Deux just started, I pity you for you have no radio.

Diane Feinstein declares her intent to ban all weapons capable (a very big word in the bill) of holding a clip of more than 10 rounds of ammunition, it doesn't matter how big your clip is. If the gun is capable of holding a larger clip, it is banned.

President Barack Obama has declared that "we must change."

Governor Cuomo of New York suggests that the government is quite capable of confiscating weapons, or engaging in a mandatory buy-back program. What the heck is a "mandatory buy-back program?" It sounds like they will take your weapon and maybe give you a few bucks for your trouble of bringing them in yourself.

In New York the Journal News of White Plains publishes the home addresses of concealed carry permit holders in New York.

These are not coincidences, you are being prepped for the big fight in another month or two when another shooting pushes the polls past the point of resisting popular legislation.

You have no radio. You do not see what is coming your way. You are going to be drafted into a war you have not even heard of, yet. You have experienced Pearl Harbor without knowing it.

I cannot attest to the veracity of the next link, except that I believe the source to be credible. It comes in line with the previous statements of fact in the past few weeks. H/T Patriot's Corner, where I first saw it and followed the link.

The fact is, it doesn't even matter if it is a hoax, their real intent is spelled out in the previous statements of fact. Feinstein, Obama, Cuomo have all attested to the pathway to the confiscation, if not outright, they have hinted at it. The media is being tasked with coercive propaganda.

Read closely what the DHS informant says. There are only a few ways this is going to be stopped: one is to change the game; to throw a kink into their plans; to have the Oathkeepers keep their damn oath; or two have open resistance.

As long as we do nothing it will all continue. Do you want to answer the questions of your children while you are all interned at a re-education camp? Do you really want to ride that train knowing that you had an opportunity to stop it and did nothing?

The American Civil War Deux has started, what are you doing sitting on your couch?

I pledge that I will meet anyone in New York who would have me there to take part in whatever protest they intend to engage in. I will fly, if I have to, a thing I abhor. I will do it after the first of the year. I have two weeks off. Let me know

This has to come to an end, it has to stop. I will do anything to put a stop to it. We are at war and I am your soldier. Any from New York who wants to protest at the house of those who published the names and addresses of concealed carry permit holders can call on me to be there.

I have been doing everything I could to wake some people up, to plead for reason, to recognize the obvious. That's done. It doesn't matter. I will roll with the army we have rather than the army we want. Get off the Internet and start doing something about this insanity.

We need to demand the resignations of Diane Feinstein, Barack Obama and anyone else who would take part in the deception, the outright theft of a nation that has taken place. I don't just mean by Obama, either. This has been building every year since about 1970, so let's stop trying to protect our political poster children. They are all to blame. They violate their oaths and we turn a blind eye. They impose unconstitutional regulation and laws and we abide by them. Do you really think they take us seriously?

That is my pledge, let me know where I am wanted and I will go.

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

So This Is The Game They Want To Play

The fight for guns is on. The disarmament of the American population is in the works. While everyone looks for goon squads to roam the neighborhoods looking for these newly illegal weapons, the Marxists in Washington know the road to supremacy does not work that way. There is a whole process involved that begins in the most endearing terms: sympathy. Find a victim, in this case 26 and publicize that victim and provide the answer to such tragedies by moving in a liberty-sacrificing regulation.

This is how Marxism works. The great leader, in this case Barack Obama, espouses a policy, or even a point of view and the propaganda machine kicks into gear to convince all of the serfs to adopt that point of view as if anything else is ridiculous.

It is not so much that they will come with goon squads, they don't need them. The Marxists in Washington have the media to demonize whatever they want to change. They have thousands of useful idiots to do their bidding.

In the latest round the media has decided to publish the names and addresses of gun owners in New York. Okay, that shows that they intend to demonize gun ownership outright, a stupid move, if you ask me, because what they have just done is announce to every crook and murderer in the state where the unarmed people live.

Be that as it may, this is their tactic, this is what they have done every single time to make us swallow one more regulation, one more liberty-stealing scheme.

I don't know how you gun owners in New York intend to handle this vicious attack on your home and family, but you should take it seriously. You should be completely outraged. They are not just intending to regulate something away, they have made you the enemy. How effective that is is up for question, but that they feel comfortable enough to do it, to come after people who have committed no crime, have not sought the spot light and tried to make their personal business public, is beyond the pale. It is Marxist propaganda techniques.

In response, I would like all of you gun-owners in New York to know who they are, their homes and their phone numbers, in case you would like to visit them with a little derision and inconvenience as their homes are protested.

If you don't want to do something like that, I don't know if I would trust you alongside me in the fight for liberty.

Here is the link, but I am posting the editor's information myself below.

Janet Hasson, 3 Gate House Lane, Mamaroneck, NY 10534.
Phone number:
(914) 694-5204

Here’s a photo showing her Mamaroneck house – interior shots are on Zillow:
Janet Hasson, 3 Gate House Rd, Mamaroneck

UPDATE: From reader RJS: Gannett’s CEO-
Gracia C Martore
728 Springvale Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066
(703) 759-5954

The reporter on the story is
Dwight R Worley
23006 139 Ave
Springfield Gardens, NY 11413        (718) 527-0832

I hope the readers of this blog will do as much as possible to make this information available to any 2A groups and organizations.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

The March To Liberty

It has been proposed that a march take place, where law-abiding citizens march, armed, toward some destination and following the laws of the state therein on open carry or concealed carry. I suggest that the march, lets call it a March To Liberty, be a coordinated march to individual state capitols and a final gathering close to DC on a subsequent weekend highly publicized at each march on each state capitol.

The federal government has no right to restrict gun ownership as gun ownership is a right of the people through which to oppose tryanny and oppression. It is the ultimate in irony that the government officials intend to prove their fidelity to law by violating the most serious and sobering law of them all, the law, the right, that allows a free people to engage their abusive and oppressive government with weapons of war.

Governor Cuomo of New York stated clearly that he considers a confiscation of weapons, or a mandatory buy-back program a just response to the Sandy Hook killings. That is a Marxists and wholly un-American mindset on display and the arrogance of this would-be dictator of New York to suggest such a thing in America shows a disconnect from the ideals of a republic where the people, the citizens, are supreme. Cuomo's declaration is much more worthy of Ceasar than Madison.

The re-election of Barack Obama has given legitimacy to the idea that the many may oppress and bankrupt the few for the delights of the crown. Our once great republic of responsible liberty has turned into a madhouse of organized larceny.

I suggest, therefore that any march either begin, or end in New York or DC and to hell with their laws.

Thursday, December 20, 2012

A Right Is As Inalienable As A Finger

In the suddenly white-hot gun-rights debate it has become clear that most Americans, after decades of socialist indoctrination in our schools have not the remotest idea of what a right is. To them it is a debating point, i.e. "I know you have the right to guns, but that is out-dated and really not practical."

The referenced statement is what I have been fighting against since 1986 when Colorado implemented a seat belt law (and I know I lose a lot of you on this topic, but bear me out). The seat belt law was my first encounter with the concept: "It's a good idea and well, why not pass a law making a good idea a good law?"

Let me tell you what's wrong with that. The seat belt law directly impacts Thomas Jefferson's definition of liberty which is available at many sites online, but it states: Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.

I saw it for what it was, an opportunity to create police interaction. Ask any attorney, once you speak to a law enforcement officer you are likely to incriminate yourself somehow some way. I will not speak to an officer of the law, not to say "yes, Sir" while getting my papers. When they ask "where are you going?" I stare at them. The seat belt law was the first introduction in my life to a heightened police state. Now, you as a reader are free to disagree with me on seat belts, or police state, or whatever, but let me ask you: Are you freer or less free since 1986?

Since the passage of the seat belt laws I have witnessed leaps and bounds of encroachment on liberty and the dilution of the understanding of what a right is, so I will clear that up.

A right, as in the right to possess firearms, is not a privilege; it is not up for debate in the congress; it is not addressable by the congress at all, though they don't want you to understand that. A right is something you own, like your hair or your kidney. Once we start talking about what the government is going to allow, we lose everything, because we have diminished the stature of the right. To ask if I have the right to firearms is to ask if I have a right to my finger. What would be your response if a police officer approached you and asked to cut your finger off? Not the same as you would if he asked to see your permit to carry a weapon and that is the problem.

A right is no less alienable to you than your finger.

In the gun-rights debate it has become clear that the purpose of the Second Amendment is misunderstood, it was not to ensure hunting rights, or in-home self-defense, or a preventative step against car-jacking it was simply and exactly to arm the people so that they would have defense against tyranny and oppression from their government.

Oh, like a gun is going to help you repel an attack by our military? Yeah, right. I have heard this statement time and time again and here is where it falls on its face: Those soldiers are not robots sent out by the government, they are our sons and daughters, our brothers, sisters and parents. How much bloodshed over a stupid and tyrannical law do you think they will participate in before they see the evil in the face of their superior? Not long. But it would take sustained resistance.

We are very close to the point where it is going to be time to shut up and fight. They have beaten the church, the Tea Party and the Republicans. What makes you think they will not take on gun owners?

We think of each individual battle as a battle between the forces of Marxism and whatever minority group they want to demonize and we are glad they are not peeing in our sandbox, but to them each individual victory is a signal that more can be done; that the net can be drawn in tighter; that they are only minutes away from total victory. They have the schools, the media, the FSA, the government workers, the union workers, the soft hearted imbeciles. They don't need to gather many more forces before they launch an all-out attack.

They might deny that they can beat the gun owners, but that is a ruse to keep the forces from the field while they annihilate the issue.

Rights are not up for a vote, except by the individual. How much will you endure? That is the only question a patriot need answer, because it is the only answer they are looking for.

Friday, December 14, 2012

Ban Lunatics First

The awful truths of the tragedy in Connecticut is that every law was broken and every means of security violated that led to this horrible event.

Adam Lanza was disturbed. He was under 21 and therefore could not legally possess a handgun. He obtained the handguns illegally. He brought them to a school, also illegally. He entered the school through its new security protocol. He began these mass killings in the administrative offices.

Think about all of that for a moment.

In a post I wrote only a few days ago, I wrote:

It might be a good idea to keep guns out of the hands of lunatics, but it is not allowed under the Second Amendment. By restricting the right to keep and bear arms they have only disarmed those who would be the victim of a lunatic, allowing much more latitude for mayhem.

We have laws against the mentally disturbed from owning weapons; from people under the age of 21 from owning handguns; from bringing firearms into a school. All of these laws were broken. Any future law will not prevent lunatics from doing damage to society if they take a mind to do so. No law was strong enough to stop this event and no future law will stop any future event.

What the laws did do, was they kept the staff of the school from owning weapons and being proficient in their use and ready to stop the mayhem at the first point of contact, which was the administrative offices where, in my mind, two or three of the individuals there should have been forced by law to be proficient in the use of deadly force to protect their students.

The narrative now, from the President's own speech was to do something about this, regardless of the politics. Which politics? How about regardless of the gun-banning politics and look at this one of two ways: 1) either ban lunatics (a thing not easily or realistically done); 2) force school administrative officers, i.e. principals, vice principals and senior staff members to become proficient in the use of deadly force including the use of firearms.

I ask which would be more intimidating to a would-be mass murderer a sign which read: Firearms Strictly Forbidden on the Premisis, or Administration is Heavily Armed and Will Defend the Students Herein?

One thing in common with every shooting I have heard of in the past few years is that each individual involved in these shootings had mental instabilities. When will the mental health system reach for some answer to these shootings other than to ban guns from the very people who might be able to stop them?

The only intended mass killings that has been stopped before it got started is the one which would have taken place at Focus on the Family, where an armed person shot and killed the would-be attacker before he got past the lobby.

I will not denigrate President Obama for being a little choked up at the press conference. The tears seemed real to me. But I will ask him bluntly: Where are those tears when children shoot children on a daily basis in Chicago? What has been done there, or in any of our major cities where gang violence kills many more children on a monthly basis than has ever taken place in a school shooting?

Cries for gun control fall on deaf ears here.

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

An Oath To Whom?

Every once in a while the problem, otherwise somewhat obscured, becomes clear as a bell. That is what happened when I watched this video.

Wild Bill seems to have some misunderstanding of what an oath is and to whom it is kept. The oath the Oathkeepers seem concerned with is not the one to the Constitution they pledged to on the day they assumed police powers and/or were given the tools of war; the one they swore to all of us, but rather the one on their website listing the 10 orders they will not obey.

Here is the problem (from their website):

1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people.

Disarmament is not just the wholesale confiscation of weapons. A tyrannical force does not act in such a way that would cause a backlash. It doesn't have to. Rather, it is done incrementally, piece by piece. It is in the form of legislation against one type of firearm, then another, then who can own weapons and narrowing that pool to an insignificant few and disarming them. By then, brother, all is lost anyway.

2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers or effects. Such warrantless house-to-house searches for weapons or persons.

Warrantless searches go on day after day under the very noses, with complicity and even championed by the members of the police forces across the nation. It is done at DUI checkpoints, which detain and inconvenience many more law-abiding citizens than it snares drunk drivers. Any detention of a citizen uncharged with a crime is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, no matter how popular the purpose.

The encouragement now of black boxes being put in automobiles, the TSA's proposals to run checkpoints at interstate on-ramps, public transportation and the new use of drones is far beyond reasonable searches and seizures. Where there is no warrant, upon testimony and describing the specific places to be searched and items to be seized, there is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

I have heard no uproar, no civil disobedience from Oathkeepers on any of these issues. If they have made them, they have not laid down the gauntlet. Instead, from these officers of the law, sworn to defend the Constitution of the United States, we have heard only cheers from their leadership and rank and file at the new powers to interdict offenders.

In the video, Wild Bill claims that we should be looking to build bridges to the Oathkeepers, while he denigrates "patriot groups" with a broad brush. None of us are looking to start a shooting war with law enforcement, or the military. Were the Oathkeepers to give us heart by their unwillingness to go along with the massive violations of rights undertaken since the passage of the Patriot Act, that bridge would have been built and well trodden by true patriots.

Ironically, patriot groups have gained a resurgence due to the actions of law enforcement and federal agents. Our eyes are vigilant in seeking the day when we, the citizens, are not the only resistance to the federal government run amok. We have, in every instance, stood with law enforcement where that meant following the Constitution, rather than orders from above.

Where law enforcement has taken a stand locally, as certain sheriffs have done, they have been applauded by the patriot/liberty communities.

We are citizens. We are ill prepared and ill equipped to mount any sort of resistance to a modern police force or military organization. It is not our role to step in front of loaded weapons and demand our rights be respected, that is done by the oath taken by those we have entrusted with the many tools of violence we have provided.

We recognize the futility of violence and have had to face some awful truths about our commitment to our rights. In every case, we die. Our only hope is that our deaths might illuminate the enormity of the issue.

The part I think Oathkeepers miss about the patriot/liberty communities is that our rights are not up to the majority, or modern thinking, or the whim of a judge, or the balance of the Supreme Court. Our rights, ably listed in the Bill of Rights, are individual and everlasting. Our rights do not mean one thing in one age and another in a modern age.

Every law passed by the legislature that has limited or restricted gun ownership is unconstitutional. It might be a good idea to keep guns out of the hands of lunatics, but it is not allowed under the Second Amendment. By restricting the right to keep and bear arms they have only disarmed those who would be the victim of a lunatic, allowing much more latitude for mayhem.

It might be a good idea to search every moving vehicle on every street travelling down a road late at night, but without a warrant, there is no justification under the Fourth Amendment to do so. Now, police departments around the nation salivate at the idea of having drones, traffic cameras and face-recognition software. Why? So that their surveillance can go on unrestrained and unchallenged.

If law enforcement has no reason to challenge me, specifically and with testimony that I have broken the law or am about to break the law, they have no justification for looking at me at all. The fact that most of this changed with the passage of the Patriot Act by a nation under duress in the heat of the moment of 9-11, means nothing, except that it was a point at which Oathkeepers should have stood up and refused to participate in illegal searches and seizures.

The very fact that the average citizen has no ally in the fight to abridge their rights, not the police, not the federal government, not the media and certainly not the military gives rise to those of us who have stopped looking for help and who understand that the obligation to stand for these rights has come to their door.

For us, Wild Bill, it is a no-win situation we would much rather not endure.

Sunday, December 9, 2012

One Week March

I am convinced that our government is a house of cards. It is like every other bully I have encountered in my life, if allowed to bully it will, if it is met by a competent foe, it folds.

The moment we live in is the time when the myth is still intact, when Goliath seems invincible. Right now Obamacare is being challenged on the state level simply by not erecting the exchanges Obamacare requires it to erect. For a better understanding of what this means to you and the law, go here and discover that the federal government, when challenged will fold, if challenged vigorously.

The government cannot withstand a barrage of challenges unless it goes through the court, which it controls. Direct, human intervention against its abuses cannot be countered, it has no values upon which to stand.

We have allowed ourselves to accept the rulings of judges in our law-abiding nature. No matter how outlandish the ruling, we withdraw our complaints and damn ourselves for our illiteracy and foolishness. I have long maintained that a stalwart challenge to the legal system reduces them eventually to outright force, a vision of which the typical American rebels against.

The government's cover is the illusion of respectability and order. Shatter that and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Reveal the beast for what it is and it will rile the animosity of the citizen.

It has been suggested by a commenter to the last post that we form up and march toward the Northeast, with arms, just exercising our rights. We should have no goal to accomplish. It would be a protest against the rights already sacrificed, an illumination of grievances we have against an oppressive government. I suggest that we do so.

We should be armed not only with legal weapons, but with legal counsel. That we should come from different directions, to meet at some place a week's march away to hold our congress. That by showing ourselves to be law-abiding, but resolute, we put the government in the position of having to deny what is legal, to break us up as a testament to their might.

We should offer no explanation for where we are going or what we intend, that is a violation of our rights unless charged with a crime. Let them wonder. Let the media speculate. Let the fear sink deep within the hearts of those who are guilty; fear that we are coming for them.

We should be precise in the laws and have representation that can argue the law while we march, but we should not allow ourselves to be detained without warrant and a description of the sworn testimony as to what crimes they believe we have, or will commit. Since our purpose is a peaceful assembly at a place of our choosing, there can be no violation of law by intent.

There are logistics to work out and substitutions to be made for those who cannot be long from work. If we were to gain the trust and cooperation of certain militia units, that would be all the better. The excuses echo in my head as I write these words, but I tell you nothing cannot be accommodated. We would look to liberty groups and Second Amendment advocates in specific states to ensure our compliance with local laws.

Once again, I offer a peaceful approach to our stagnation. Look to your local chapters, your tribe and cohorts. Plan at the local level and bring it together at the congress. It could be framed as escorting your local delegate to the congress, if you wish.

Of course, there is a risk, but only from a tyrannical and oppressive government bent on the absolute destruction of a free society.

Friday, December 7, 2012

Waiting For Godot

A random search in any state inquiring about liberty groups, patriot groups or militias will fill the page. There are wide interests of these groups from strict Constitutionalism, to paramedic militias. The interest in liberty and a faithful adherence to the Constitution is somewhat remarkable given the lack of energy any of these organizations exert toward the actual goal.

It is as if we are all waiting for something, though I cannot fathom what. We have drones overhead, black boxes to be installed in cars, the police demanding the ability to listen in on cell phone conversations. We can be pulled over for suspicion of distracted driving and have our cell phones confiscated, but what we cannot do, without a long legal battle, is film the police. Hmmmm. They can surveil us until the cows come home, but we should not surveil them. Orwellian, or Marxism?

There was a play completed in 1949 by Samuel Beckett entitled "Waiting for Godot" which depicted the situation of two men, Vladimir and Estragon waiting endlessly for someone named Godot to show up. The longer it took for the person to show, the greater the event would be when he finally arrived.

We are nothing less in the Liberty/Patriot Movement. Idle, waiting for that one person, the one who will put impetus to our preparation, who will give us a cause, a reason to move forward with our plans.

We are stymied by our fear and by our distrust. Who is the provocateur? Who is the spy? How far can I go before everyone in my circle reveals themselves as a government agent?

While looking for a home organization in North Dakota, I found several groups that looked interesting. From liberty groups to militias, I found like-minded organizations. All had one basic theme: we are for liberty and a restoration of the Constitution, though we will do nothing overt to accomplish it. No, we would rather hope and wait. Maybe someday the GOP will recognize its true role in the political sphere and save us.

They won't. The Libertarians won't.

I see no way to save the union. The III Congress recently proposed quickly became irrelevant through disagreements and lack of participation. Again, myself and others were prepared to do the heavy-lifting to bring others along the obvious path only to be met with skepticism and objectionism.

I have seen the end of liberty and it is today. We have already allowed too many incursions into our privacy. The Constitution cannot be saved by the timid. Our rights and liberties were on loan from our forefathers and without our willingness to safeguard them, they have drifted away like sheep in the night; while we waited.

I have written about this way too long. Words cannot produce the desired action. In all, it appears that when the time came to stand up to thuggery and corruption, it just felt better to stay home and wait. I have expressed my desire to join those who are going to move, to throw my hat in the ring with them and charge, but no one has come forward to claim my service.

I have led two attempts to wrangle the masses into action and while the Summit produced some positive outcomes, it did not achieve its purpose. The first attempt was a total disaster. I have reluctantly led, been willing to follow, I don't know what else I might do, but wait for Godot.

Sunday, December 2, 2012

III Congress

There seems to be some misunderstanding about the III Congress. It is not to re-draft a perfectly good Constitution. While some might have some reservations about the Constitution as ratified versus as amended, or a Constitution allowing slaves, or any of that, the Constitution was suited only to a moral people of deeply religious constraint. While no one has to believe in Jesus Christ, or God, to understand that a moral person values an oath: values doing right over what feels good: values sacrifice for the better good; values the wages of sin and the value of righteousness, it does help.

Our purpose in engaging in a III% Congress is to decide, for us, what we will finally do. No more talk, no more encouragement, it is designed to see who of us will step out and proudly and boldly claim to believe in the Constitution and to make violations of the Constitution expensive.

Expensive in what way? Who knows, that is up to us to determine. But, if one believes in this nation, it is their duty to do something to stem and maybe even abate the abuses done to the very document that established everything one sees from the first blink in the morning to the last in the evening.

There are those in our nation, with the title of citizen, who have viewed the Marxists changes over the past few decades with favor and even enthusiasm. They find money behind every government program, some of them even lobby for programs which they intend to defraud and manipulate to their benefit and all with the closed eye of the government. A government complicit in the fraud justifying their ruse as compassion, but compassion is not a function of government. This government has no money that it has not taken from other citizens and so cannot be compassionate. Compassion is a an act of self-sacrifice, not of redistribution.

Our congress is not to re-draft the rules of a free society, it is to decide what must be done to counter the revolution that has taken place over these past centuries. If America means anything at all, it means liberty, freedom and the rule of law to secure them. Without those values, those practices, it is merely another nation run by dictators, fueled by abuse and funded by criminals.

There is no longer a pretense that somehow this will all fix itself. That view is like hurtling toward a cliff in a speeding vehicle and believing that the brakes will heal themselves before the edge. One must either risk jumping from the vehicle, or surviving the crash. If one does not intend to flee the United States they had better figure out a way to survive the crash.

The III Congress is very simple. We are a gathering of delegates from around the nation, tied to groups who understand the issues and recognize their role to interdict, by whatever means necessary, the abuse of our Constitution and the rule of law. That we pledge to do something about it, even if that something is nothing more than helping to pay the legal bills of a patriot run afoul of the judicial system in pursuing their individual rights under the legal Constitution of the United States of America.

Other actions may be necessary as well. We intend to enlist the support of militias across the nation for security. Unlike the Tea Party, we will fight back and we will punch back twice as hard as we endure at the hands of Obama's goons in the unions. We are unafraid, better armed and better trained.

Ultimately, if the Constitution has a chance of surviving the reset, we had better put some Constitutional boots on the ground prior to the meltdown or we will be lost and seeking direction. If we can establish a III Constitution with delegates able to speak for their constituents, make pledges and engage in treaties with other groups, we can exert our power in the time of a power vacuum and we can resist the arduous efforts of the enemies of freedom and liberty.

If that means war, let God choose the victor.

By the way, with all of my moves over the past few years, I have no home group from which to be a delegate, but I would like to be involved in the drafting of our mission statement. If one group would sponser me as a delegate, I would gladly represent you and express your views and not my own.