Additional Pages

Monday, April 22, 2013

A System Adrift

The one thing more humiliating than being caught by the authorities in an attempt to fight back against a corrupt and illegal system of government is to be caught not making the attempt.

There is no doubt in my mind that every single law restricting ownership of firearms is an illegal law. I can argue that case by case if needed, with a few moments to check my notes. A great resource, however, can be found here. It is an exhaustive look at the Second Amendment as related to U.S. v Miller. Most notable are the arguments made in favor of the United States. The logic and references made there are convoluted and entirely void of references to the founders who made their sentiments known time and time again on where the right rested. It rests with the individual.

Oddly, an argument made during the whole process of Miller making its way up to the Supreme Court was the argument no liberal would want to be made in defense of their attacks on the Second Amendment. The government argued that the only legitimate use of weapons in the hands of the people is to throw off oppression and tyranny of authorities. Referenced as substantiating the government's point was Aymette v. State, supra, it was said (p. 158):

As the object for which the right to keep and bear arms is secured, is of general and public nature, to be exercised by the people in a body, for their common defense, so the arms, the right to keep which is secured, are such as are usually employed in civilized warfare, and that constitute the ordinary military equipment. If the citizens have these arms in their hands, they are prepared in the best possible manner to repel any encroachments upon their rights by those in authority. They need not, for such a purpose, the use of those weapons which are usually employed in private broils, and which are efficient only in the hands of the robber and assassin. These weapons would be useless in war.
This was the government's argument not the argument of the defendants. By then Miller was dead and Layton chose a deal for probation. They did not even have counsel to argue for them before the Supreme Court.

It is simple, the Supreme Court wanted to find a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and used every means possible to interpret the Constitution in a way that would allow them to do so, even calling back on the very British government's laws that led to the Revolutionary War.

This is why one cannot look to the Supreme Court, or any court to determine what rights a person has. No matter how clearly it is said, how eloquently it is put, they will find what they want to find and discard what does not serve their purpose of the day.

The only true arbiter of one's rights is oneself. Though many feel the sting of oppression, they will not act. Only those who understand that rights are inherent to freedom and paid for in blood will ever be willing to shed blood for them. It is not a group or an organization that is capable of fighting for your rights, it is yourself, or no one.

If one needs proof from a court that one has a right, they have already forfeited it. For too long the people of this nation have allowed the courts to determine for them what they are allowed to do, when the opposite should be true. If the Constitution were functioning properly, with honorable and obedient servants of the people behind it, the Supreme Court would rule over and over on behalf of the individual rights of the people. As it is always the nature of government to abuse these rights, the cases should only arise from the abuse and the government should be more specifically restricted from abusing them. Since this is not the case, we can assume that the Constitution is not functioning properly to secure the rights of the people and that the servants of the people are neither honorable, nor obedient.

Over the weekend the III% held a Congress. Hardly any of the III blog sites I go to, or Second Amendment forums mentioned it at all. The III Congress met and discussed action. I support them. They are in need of delegates from as many states as they can get. I hope that it will grow and become a powerful voice in restoring the Constitution. But, I did not attend.

I have come to the understanding, finally, that this is personal. I have rights that are not being honored by the governments created to secure them. It is my obligation to demand a redress of my grievances and since the government will not respond, except to punish my temerity, I am forced to act in a way that shall be most likely to effect my liberty and my security.

I can cite case after case if I choose, point out flaw after flaw in the logic used to arrive at whatever social engineering ruling might best please five out of nine justices, but it would not make a difference. I no longer look to anyone to prove to the "authorities" that I have rights. No one is listening. The warnings have all been made time and time again by citizens wronged by the injustice of a system adrift on shifting sands.

It is what it is and one person can make a difference.

11 comments:

  1. III Congress is yet another money-making venture by Kerodin, that's why no one cares about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like another Firestone blow-out anonymous comment above

      Delete
  2. Well TL,
    We have one thing going for us. For all the trespasses and transgressions upon our persons and Liberty, that would not be so, if people of Liberty where not the existential threat to the powers that be that we are.
    And, Not a shot has been fired in anger against the terrible acts of tyranny and treason perpetrated against us.
    As an entity, the Liberty movement to it's unheralded credit has retained it's principles, it's moral character, it's quiet resolve. As people within it, they, we have held to the respect of the rule of law while all around us have violated it with reckless abandon.
    There is something inherent in this restraint of millions of American's that speaks volumes about the good character and nature of such people. It says everything about who we are.

    I think the powers that be are very worried about an uprising and revolt.
    They should be.
    I think they know perfectly well the growing discontent and contempt that is held for them by a large number of American's.
    I think they know they have created a disaster socially, culturally, politically, economically, that only they are accountable.
    I think they know what they have wrought.
    And I think they are afraid of the bitter harvest come to fruition they have sowed.
    I think they have created a Gordian knot of epic proportions.
    I think their hubris and unchecked power has corrupted them in such a way there is no turning back. It is entrenched to such a degree it is a political pandemic of avarice for power running rampant.
    I think they will do anything to retain this power.
    I think soon there will be no limits whatsoever on the crimes and treason committed openly with abandon for any idea of the rule of law in retention of that power.

    I hold the powers that be are afraid of something. Deep down in their guts.
    These tyrants crooks liars, thieves, and traitors, lording their ways of corruption and moral turpitude against us.

    This is a fear that haunts their dreams, a fear that permeates their waking hours, fear that influences every move, it is a fear that compels them, "Forward!" The key thing is they are beginning to panic. It is manifesting itself in the lawless disregard of The Rule of Law that is expanding exponentially by the day through the nature of corruption of these elites lust to retain absolute power. For how can these self appointed lords ever understand how us such lowly serfs see our Liberty and Prosperity as more important than what these elites think we deserve? Would they not be tyrants if it different?
    But one thing all tyrants understand is threats to their power. And what other threat, (except for their own kinds insatiable lust), exist within the borders of this Republic?

    I think they are afraid of us.
    Afraid of us having arms because, they are afraid of what we could do to them, because of what they are doing to us.

    They should be afraid.
    I hope they are afraid.
    Very afraid.
    They should have to be in dire straights for their lives and liberty, out of fear they should have to seek the same protections the Constitution and bill of rights affords us.

    As you wrote, and it only becomes more the truth every day:

    “It is not ours to restore the power of the Constitution. It is ours to show them the wrath of America without the protections the Constitution offers them.”

    “Let them restore it to find refuge from us.”

    And I think too, everything is boiling down to two essential truths, naked tyranny in our time, and the birth of restoration of Liberty in the hearts of men, everything else is becoming a side show to this reality.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sic Semper Tyrannis.

    Quoted from several sources, Virginia's motto, for one.

    Good post, Mt. Top.

    Semper Fi

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ultimately the meaning of the Second Amendment will be decided, not by the Supreme Court, but by determined people with guns. Better they should fear us enough not to want to put matters to a test

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great Post and Great comments.

    ReplyDelete
  6. There is a very good reason why one of my passwords is shoot first.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Took your advice TL, and read US v. Miller.
    As you said, it matters not what mantle of power, or false legitimacy, the state assumes. It never did matter. That it does not, is everything. Enlightening others to this simple but profound truth, does.
    What I came away with after reading it is, that it is a pivotal act of tyranny by the state to protect it's mantle of usurpation of powers it had no right to assume in any instance in the first place. The hubris of this act of tyranny is stunning, the collusion and treason of those involved is tyrannical by orders of magnitude.
    It is this act of assumption outside the scope of the rule of law that is the question, and the threat that that is to our Liberty as perceived by the usurpers, that matters. The state essentially turned a right that already belonged to the people, into a privilege that only the state had the power to dole out. It doesn't get any more crazy than that. The state has never looked back. And the state always takes, it has become the nature of the beast. It never gives back what it has assumed it has the power to be taken. It never creates anything, it only consumes, it is an entity that becomes ever more insatiable with each act of theft.
    The state has never possessed a single right to grant a right to any American. There is not a single legitimate legal device that gives the state any power of any kind to grant any right within the context and intent of the founding documentation of this Republic. That only comes from the sovereign power of the people. It has however been granted privileges, privileges that contain the caveat that the arms we posses are retained to use in extremis to enforce the very sovereign nature of those grants.
    Or dissolve them and the state that has broken that sovereign trust.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Linked here: http://bobagard.blogspot.com/2013/04/rights-are-inherent-to-freedom.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. I went to look at the website called III Congress. I've read through quite abit tonight. I also really wanted to donate some of that $10 to become a delegate. However, I did some research into the Kerodin guy and I was shocked to learn he's a convicted felon who can't even own a weapon under the current system. Not to mention he was caught trying to coerce folks at a mall in DC which shows bad character massively. You know, I'm not against being friends with someone if they're a "felon" according to the corrupt govt of today but that doesn't mean I'm a idiot either. It depends on what kind of felony it's for. I would say considering the Congress website has hardly any updates since April with one in September which was 2 months ago almost, I wouldn't feel comfortable giving my hard earned money to someone who is not honest. Unfortunately, when you serve hard time like he did for dishonesty essentially, I'm not going to be linked with someone like that, patriotic or not.

    ReplyDelete