Plaintiff's were dismissed on Standing grounds. I expect that an appeal will be forthcoming shortly (using Dearth v. Holder as the framework, I predict).
Lose fast, appeal all the way up. Make a Supreme case out of it.
Works for me.
Newbius
Showing posts with label Firearms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Firearms. Show all posts
Monday, July 18, 2011
Friday, July 15, 2011
Lane v. Holder MPI Orals today
Lane v. Holder (sales of handguns across state lines) is having oral arguments on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. No word yet on the outcome (arguments scheduled for 10:00 AM), but the MPI brief filed by Alan Gura is stunning. Go read it.
Newbius
Newbius
Thursday, February 10, 2011
ATF Project Gunwalker updates
Please go to David Codrea's 'War on Guns' and 'Gun Rights Examiner' pages, and Mike Vanderboegh's 'Sipsey Street Irregulars' page for updates on this breaking scandal.
Newbius
|||
Newbius
|||
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Virginia Legislative update
The Virginia General Assembly is meeting today for the final passage of several pro-gun bills. Today is "Crossover Day" wherein bills are presented in each chamber for final passage before crossing over to the other chamber for final concurrence and passage. The following bills have been passed in the House of Delegates, and will be sent to the Senate for final vote before being sent to the Governor:
HB 52 reduces the penalty for not having your permit on your person and provides an affirmative defense and provision to waive penalty.
HB 26 Amends the documentation requirements for obtaining an permit.
HB 637 Waives the CCW application fee for certain members of the Coast Guard.
HB 854 Castle Doctrine
HB 8 allows renewal of CCW by mail.
HB 49 repeals the "One-Gun-a-Month" law.
HB 69 Virginia Firearms Freedom Act
HB 79 Closes public access to the CCW Permit Database and bars the Clerk of the Court from providing access to the applications.
HB 108 Limits Gun "buy-back" programs, and requires disposition of those firearms through licensed firearms dealers rather than by destruction.
HB 109 Gun dealer privacy and taxation. Repeals local authority to tax gun dealers and mandates destruction of the tax records previously collected.
HB 171 Provides immunity from liability for owners of weapons stolen from locked vehicles.
HB 236 Enforces preemption against localities from enacting anti-hunting regulations, and establishes a uniform penalty for discharging a firearm towards a subdivision that is within range of the firearm.
HB 490 Legislation to develop a plan for lifetime issuance of a concealed weapons permit.
HB 870 removes the option for a locality to require fingerprints on a CCW Permit application.
HB 871 provides for the right to an ore tenus hearing.
HB 885 Creates a new exemption to the general prohibition against carrying concealed weapons by allowing a person who may lawfully possess a firearm to carry a handgun in a private motor vehicle or boat if the handgun is secured in a container or compartment.
HB 1070 Persons with a valid permit may carry into an emergency shelter.
HB 1092 Retired law enforcement may carry anywhere in the state.
HB 1191 allows a Circuit Court judge to authorize issuance by the clerk of the court.
HB 1256 Law enforcement officers who have resigned in good standing may carry, as retired LOE's can.
HB 1379 Provides that certain Northern Virginia localities may adopt local ordinances that regulate the possession and storage of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof at child-care facilities, so long as such regulation is not more extensive in scope than comparable state regulations applicable to family day-care homes.
These bills will now cross over to the state Senate for passage. Although most of these bills have overwhelming support, their prospects in the Senate are less than certain. Please contact your state Senator and express support for these pro-rights bills so that we can continue our common-sense reforms of Virginia's firearms laws.
Pax,
Newbius
HB 52 reduces the penalty for not having your permit on your person and provides an affirmative defense and provision to waive penalty.
HB 26 Amends the documentation requirements for obtaining an permit.
HB 637 Waives the CCW application fee for certain members of the Coast Guard.
HB 854 Castle Doctrine
HB 8 allows renewal of CCW by mail.
HB 49 repeals the "One-Gun-a-Month" law.
HB 69 Virginia Firearms Freedom Act
HB 79 Closes public access to the CCW Permit Database and bars the Clerk of the Court from providing access to the applications.
HB 108 Limits Gun "buy-back" programs, and requires disposition of those firearms through licensed firearms dealers rather than by destruction.
HB 109 Gun dealer privacy and taxation. Repeals local authority to tax gun dealers and mandates destruction of the tax records previously collected.
HB 171 Provides immunity from liability for owners of weapons stolen from locked vehicles.
HB 236 Enforces preemption against localities from enacting anti-hunting regulations, and establishes a uniform penalty for discharging a firearm towards a subdivision that is within range of the firearm.
HB 490 Legislation to develop a plan for lifetime issuance of a concealed weapons permit.
HB 870 removes the option for a locality to require fingerprints on a CCW Permit application.
HB 871 provides for the right to an ore tenus hearing.
HB 885 Creates a new exemption to the general prohibition against carrying concealed weapons by allowing a person who may lawfully possess a firearm to carry a handgun in a private motor vehicle or boat if the handgun is secured in a container or compartment.
HB 1070 Persons with a valid permit may carry into an emergency shelter.
HB 1092 Retired law enforcement may carry anywhere in the state.
HB 1191 allows a Circuit Court judge to authorize issuance by the clerk of the court.
HB 1256 Law enforcement officers who have resigned in good standing may carry, as retired LOE's can.
HB 1379 Provides that certain Northern Virginia localities may adopt local ordinances that regulate the possession and storage of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof at child-care facilities, so long as such regulation is not more extensive in scope than comparable state regulations applicable to family day-care homes.
These bills will now cross over to the state Senate for passage. Although most of these bills have overwhelming support, their prospects in the Senate are less than certain. Please contact your state Senator and express support for these pro-rights bills so that we can continue our common-sense reforms of Virginia's firearms laws.
Pax,
Newbius
Saturday, July 11, 2009
New Friends
The people of the gun community continue to amaze me.
I met an acquaintance today at the range. OldNFO offered to play host at the Fairfax Rod and Gun Club. We had met over lunch last week, and made arrangements to connect at the range to do some shooting and tell some lies. We connected this morning and worked out a plan for the day and then proceeded to have a grand time.
We spent several hours punching holes in paper and giving our firearms a workout. We've determined that Beauty might have an issue with the iron sights, beyond my inability to hold a steady aim. So, I will get the manual out and see if there is something obviously amiss. We were able to get her sighted in fairly tightly with the scope, so it is not an issue with the mechanics, barrel, or upper. I'll get it figured out soon.
Lunch was great. The shooting facilities were impressive. I gained a friend.
Today was a good day.
OldNFO, Thank you again for a great time today. I hope we can do this again soon. Maybe even shoot a little trap next time. ;)
Pax,
Newbius
I met an acquaintance today at the range. OldNFO offered to play host at the Fairfax Rod and Gun Club. We had met over lunch last week, and made arrangements to connect at the range to do some shooting and tell some lies. We connected this morning and worked out a plan for the day and then proceeded to have a grand time.
We spent several hours punching holes in paper and giving our firearms a workout. We've determined that Beauty might have an issue with the iron sights, beyond my inability to hold a steady aim. So, I will get the manual out and see if there is something obviously amiss. We were able to get her sighted in fairly tightly with the scope, so it is not an issue with the mechanics, barrel, or upper. I'll get it figured out soon.
Lunch was great. The shooting facilities were impressive. I gained a friend.
Today was a good day.
OldNFO, Thank you again for a great time today. I hope we can do this again soon. Maybe even shoot a little trap next time. ;)
Pax,
Newbius
Saturday, March 28, 2009
This isn't hard...
On 11/28/2007, Paul Helmke wrote a minor diatribe about the phrasing of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. His contention was that the Parker decision went the wrong way, and that the Second Amendment refers only to Militia prerogative for arms ownership; that self-defense was too narrow a view and misses the thrust of the amendment, as written. These remarks were pre-Heller.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State; the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Bon.
If we were to parse it, it would go as follows:
A
well regulated ("in proper and working order")
militia ("the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service")
or, alternately, under 10 USC 311
("-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.")
being (conjunction, emphasizing the following word)
necessary ("logically unavoidable, absolutely needed")
for the
security (" the quality or state of being secure: as a: freedom from danger")
of a
free ("1 a: having the legal and political rights of a citizen b: enjoying civil and political liberty c: enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination d: enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another")
State; (individually - "mode or condition of being", collectively " a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory ; especially : one that is sovereign")
The
right ("something to which one has a just claim")
of the
people ("the body of enfranchised citizens of a state")
to
keep (" to retain in one's possession or power")
and
bear ("to carry or possess arms")
Arms ("a means (as a weapon) of offense or defense ; especially : firearm")
shall ("used to express a command or exhortation")
not ("used as a function word to make negative a group of words or a word")
be (" intransitive verb: to take place") Together "shall not be" means "an absolute prohibition"
infringed. ("to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another")
So, to play Paul Helmke's game, we should look at every word of the Amendment, not leaving anything aside, and also address the Militia clause. To wit:
A properly functioning and in regular working order Militia (those citizens NOT a member of the Armed Forces or of the National Guard), being necessary, logically unavoidable, and absolutely needed for the security of a free state - as defined "a politically organized, sovereign body of the people having the legal and political rights of citizens, enjoying civil and political liberty, independence, and freedom; and not subject to the control and domination of another"; the Right (just claim) of the People (the body of the enfranchised citizens of the above free state) to keep and bear arms (to possess and carry weapons of offense or defense, especially firearms) shall not be infringed (absolutely no encroachments on this right whatsoever).
Mr. Helmke, the people ARE the Militia. The Constitution recognizes this, and 10 USC 311 codifies it in case there is any confusion. The Militia clause argument is self-defeating if you understand the words. Your failure to speak openly and honestly about this indicates that you are either a fraud or a liar, and your intention is perfectly clear to anybody who can read and understand the words. You are attempting to re-write history for your own purpose, to empower a central government who holds you in contempt but will use you for their own purpose, at the expense of free citizens who only wish to be left alone.
According to the Militia clause, the National Firearms Act of 1934 is unconstitutional. According to the Militia clause, the Miller decision was wrongly adjudged. According to the Militia clause, the Brady Assault Weapons Ban was patently unconstitutional, as were the infringements upon civilian purchases of high-capacity magazines, semi-automatic shotguns, and yes even machine guns.
Mr. Helmke's current position on the Heller case is one that presumes Heller to be an invitation to regulation, restriction, and imposition of onerous "common-sense gun laws" for the protection of the people, as the "Slippery Slope" that previously restrained legislators is "now gone".
If the previous position required one to believe that the Second Amendment was solely for Militia purpose, then, logically, the people should not be prohibited in their pursuit of Arms for defense of home and hearth, town, city, county, state, or country. If the current position is that the people really do have the right to self-defense, but that this right is subject to "reasonable restriction"; said restrictions being as many as he can force through the system to achieve the goal of effectively total civilian disarmament, then his previous argument was a smokescreen and a lie. In either case, the two positions are incompatible with each other as rational pieces of the whole. Unless, as mouthpiece of the Brady Campaign, he has no positions of his own and is merely a puppet or a stooge.
In either case: Mr. Helmke, your stated positions are on the side of those people who would gut the Constitution for their own aims. The Supreme Court in the Heller decision got it only half-right. Unfortunately, they limited their scope and dared not tread upon stare decisis and ALSO reverse Miller and declare NFA34 unconstitutional as well. It would have been the greatest blow for freedom that the United States would ever have experienced. Instead, we get to argue banalities about whether your position is one of moral bankruptcy or mental deficiency.
Good day to you.
Pax,
Newbius
|||
(NOTE: Previous version of this posting was removed and replaced by this version to correct a technical inaccuracy and a reference to the wrong court decision in the opening paragraph.)
The Second Amendment to the Constitution:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State; the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Bon.
If we were to parse it, it would go as follows:
A
well regulated ("in proper and working order")
militia ("the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service")
or, alternately, under 10 USC 311
("-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.")
being (conjunction, emphasizing the following word)
necessary ("logically unavoidable, absolutely needed")
for the
security (" the quality or state of being secure: as a: freedom from danger")
of a
free ("1 a: having the legal and political rights of a citizen b: enjoying civil and political liberty
State; (individually - "mode or condition of being", collectively " a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory ; especially : one that is sovereign")
The
right ("something to which one has a just claim")
of the
people ("the body of enfranchised citizens of a state")
to
keep (" to retain in one's possession or power")
and
bear ("to carry or possess arms")
Arms ("a means (as a weapon) of offense or defense ; especially : firearm")
shall ("used to express a command or exhortation")
not ("used as a function word to make negative a group of words or a word")
be (" intransitive verb: to take place") Together "shall not be" means "an absolute prohibition"
infringed. ("to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another")
So, to play Paul Helmke's game, we should look at every word of the Amendment, not leaving anything aside, and also address the Militia clause. To wit:
A properly functioning and in regular working order Militia (those citizens NOT a member of the Armed Forces or of the National Guard), being necessary, logically unavoidable, and absolutely needed for the security of a free state - as defined "a politically organized, sovereign body of the people having the legal and political rights of citizens, enjoying civil and political liberty, independence, and freedom; and not subject to the control and domination of another"; the Right (just claim) of the People (the body of the enfranchised citizens of the above free state) to keep and bear arms (to possess and carry weapons of offense or defense, especially firearms) shall not be infringed (absolutely no encroachments on this right whatsoever).
Mr. Helmke, the people ARE the Militia. The Constitution recognizes this, and 10 USC 311 codifies it in case there is any confusion. The Militia clause argument is self-defeating if you understand the words. Your failure to speak openly and honestly about this indicates that you are either a fraud or a liar, and your intention is perfectly clear to anybody who can read and understand the words. You are attempting to re-write history for your own purpose, to empower a central government who holds you in contempt but will use you for their own purpose, at the expense of free citizens who only wish to be left alone.
According to the Militia clause, the National Firearms Act of 1934 is unconstitutional. According to the Militia clause, the Miller decision was wrongly adjudged. According to the Militia clause, the Brady Assault Weapons Ban was patently unconstitutional, as were the infringements upon civilian purchases of high-capacity magazines, semi-automatic shotguns, and yes even machine guns.
Mr. Helmke's current position on the Heller case is one that presumes Heller to be an invitation to regulation, restriction, and imposition of onerous "common-sense gun laws" for the protection of the people, as the "Slippery Slope" that previously restrained legislators is "now gone".
If the previous position required one to believe that the Second Amendment was solely for Militia purpose, then, logically, the people should not be prohibited in their pursuit of Arms for defense of home and hearth, town, city, county, state, or country. If the current position is that the people really do have the right to self-defense, but that this right is subject to "reasonable restriction"; said restrictions being as many as he can force through the system to achieve the goal of effectively total civilian disarmament, then his previous argument was a smokescreen and a lie. In either case, the two positions are incompatible with each other as rational pieces of the whole. Unless, as mouthpiece of the Brady Campaign, he has no positions of his own and is merely a puppet or a stooge.
In either case: Mr. Helmke, your stated positions are on the side of those people who would gut the Constitution for their own aims. The Supreme Court in the Heller decision got it only half-right. Unfortunately, they limited their scope and dared not tread upon stare decisis and ALSO reverse Miller and declare NFA34 unconstitutional as well. It would have been the greatest blow for freedom that the United States would ever have experienced. Instead, we get to argue banalities about whether your position is one of moral bankruptcy or mental deficiency.
Good day to you.
Pax,
Newbius
|||
(NOTE: Previous version of this posting was removed and replaced by this version to correct a technical inaccuracy and a reference to the wrong court decision in the opening paragraph.)
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Part Two...
It didn't take long for the ghouls to pounce on this, sadly..
As I stated in my Blog on Monday, the Gun Control Advocates use any tragedy as an excuse to attempt to advance their agenda. Unfortunately, another opportunity to do so made the headlines in Alabama.
The Brady Campaign issued a press release today, as did the Violence Policy Center about the Alabama shooting, calling for re-instatement of the "Assault Weapons" ban. The same VPC press release is duplicated at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and duplicated as well at the Freedom States Alliance, and the Legal Community Against Violence.
Had the shooter used a handgun instead, there would be similar calls from these same groups clamoring for the banning of handguns instead.
The only statement that I agree with in these organization's press releases is this one: "Our sympathies go to all those affected by this terrible tragedy."
Except that I actually mean it.
God bless the families in Alabama who are affected by this tragedy. My prayers go out to you. May you find comfort and peace in the knowledge that your loved ones will always be with you in your heart, even though they are no longer with us on Earth. I pray that your friends and family hold you close in this hour of your need, and that the community pulls together to support you and help you through this terrible time.
Pax,
Newbius
As I stated in my Blog on Monday, the Gun Control Advocates use any tragedy as an excuse to attempt to advance their agenda. Unfortunately, another opportunity to do so made the headlines in Alabama.
The Brady Campaign issued a press release today, as did the Violence Policy Center about the Alabama shooting, calling for re-instatement of the "Assault Weapons" ban. The same VPC press release is duplicated at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and duplicated as well at the Freedom States Alliance, and the Legal Community Against Violence.
Had the shooter used a handgun instead, there would be similar calls from these same groups clamoring for the banning of handguns instead.
The only statement that I agree with in these organization's press releases is this one: "Our sympathies go to all those affected by this terrible tragedy."
Except that I actually mean it.
God bless the families in Alabama who are affected by this tragedy. My prayers go out to you. May you find comfort and peace in the knowledge that your loved ones will always be with you in your heart, even though they are no longer with us on Earth. I pray that your friends and family hold you close in this hour of your need, and that the community pulls together to support you and help you through this terrible time.
Pax,
Newbius
Friday, November 21, 2008
Personal and Civic Responsibility, and Arms
Some things to think about regarding Arms in society:
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
-George Washington
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
-Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
“The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right...”
-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, District of Columbia v. Heller
Point One: Arms in a polite society, with knowledge by all that they may be present, reduces criminal activity. With thanks to John Lott and Gary Kleck for their seminal research on the subject; and with thanks to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson for stating something that was obvious even in the 18th century.
An arm of personal defense - a concealable arm if you will - ensures your ability to exercise your right to self defense. This right of self defense was acknowledged long before we had a Constitution, was stated openly in the beginning of the Declaration of Independence ("Right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"), and was recently reaffirmed in the Heller decision.
A free citizen should therefore own a handgun, be proficient in its use, and have it available at all times.
NEXT,
"But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
-1 Timothy 5:8 (NKJV)
Point Two: Every citizen should have the means of providing for his own needs and the needs of his family, and to defend the same. To do any less is to abdicate that responsibility to others, whose own interests are not the same, and who will subjugate that person or allow them to perish. In times of economic calamity, civil unrest, or severe disruption of services, a person should be able to put meat on their table and secure their home.
A free citizen should therefore own BOTH a hunting rifle and a shotgun, be proficient in their use, and have them available at all times.
FINALLY,
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. In acknowledgement whereof I have hereunto affixed my signature."
-The Oath of United States Citizenship
Point Three: New citizens of the United States (those being newly Naturalized) state the above oath to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies Foreign and Domestic. I am of the opinion that all natural-born citizens of the United States should affirm the same oath upon reaching the Age of Majority. All civil servants, military enlistees and officers, and elected and appointed members of Government swear by this same oath. The oath requires the citizenry (all who are not Pacifist Objectors) to be willing and able to take up arms if required to do so.
It is ultimately incumbent upon the citizenry as a whole to defend this country.
A free citizen should therefore own a weapon of the style and type generally considered for use in war (a weapon type usually mislabeled as an "Assault Rifle"), be proficient in its use, and have it available at all times.
Summary: Taken together these three points advocate for the ownership, ready availability, and proficiency in usage of four different weapons. These points advocate for handguns (and shotguns) for defense of person and family, shotguns and rifles for provision of food for person and family, and war rifles for defense of town, city, state, and country.
I believe that these arms are foundational for the success and continued existence of our way of life in the United States. I believe that every able citizen has a duty to self and to others to be sufficient and proficient in their own support. I believe that every able citizen has a duty to defend themselves and to defend their country. I believe that, for an able citizen, anything less than having these abilities and the willingness to use them makes that able citizen a parasite and a drain on society, and one who undermines the very fabric that this society was crafted from.
Please note this very important exception: Persons who are no longer "able" due to injuries or incapacitation incurred in the execution of service to Country should be accorded every benefit that a free society can afford to them. They have paid their price, and they deserve every honor that their service has earned.
This is my stand. What's yours?
Pax,
Newbius
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
-George Washington
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
-Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
“The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right...”
-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, District of Columbia v. Heller
Point One: Arms in a polite society, with knowledge by all that they may be present, reduces criminal activity. With thanks to John Lott and Gary Kleck for their seminal research on the subject; and with thanks to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson for stating something that was obvious even in the 18th century.
An arm of personal defense - a concealable arm if you will - ensures your ability to exercise your right to self defense. This right of self defense was acknowledged long before we had a Constitution, was stated openly in the beginning of the Declaration of Independence ("Right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"), and was recently reaffirmed in the Heller decision.
A free citizen should therefore own a handgun, be proficient in its use, and have it available at all times.
NEXT,
"But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
-1 Timothy 5:8 (NKJV)
Point Two: Every citizen should have the means of providing for his own needs and the needs of his family, and to defend the same. To do any less is to abdicate that responsibility to others, whose own interests are not the same, and who will subjugate that person or allow them to perish. In times of economic calamity, civil unrest, or severe disruption of services, a person should be able to put meat on their table and secure their home.
A free citizen should therefore own BOTH a hunting rifle and a shotgun, be proficient in their use, and have them available at all times.
FINALLY,
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. In acknowledgement whereof I have hereunto affixed my signature."
-The Oath of United States Citizenship
Point Three: New citizens of the United States (those being newly Naturalized) state the above oath to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies Foreign and Domestic. I am of the opinion that all natural-born citizens of the United States should affirm the same oath upon reaching the Age of Majority. All civil servants, military enlistees and officers, and elected and appointed members of Government swear by this same oath. The oath requires the citizenry (all who are not Pacifist Objectors) to be willing and able to take up arms if required to do so.
It is ultimately incumbent upon the citizenry as a whole to defend this country.
A free citizen should therefore own a weapon of the style and type generally considered for use in war (a weapon type usually mislabeled as an "Assault Rifle"), be proficient in its use, and have it available at all times.
Summary: Taken together these three points advocate for the ownership, ready availability, and proficiency in usage of four different weapons. These points advocate for handguns (and shotguns) for defense of person and family, shotguns and rifles for provision of food for person and family, and war rifles for defense of town, city, state, and country.
I believe that these arms are foundational for the success and continued existence of our way of life in the United States. I believe that every able citizen has a duty to self and to others to be sufficient and proficient in their own support. I believe that every able citizen has a duty to defend themselves and to defend their country. I believe that, for an able citizen, anything less than having these abilities and the willingness to use them makes that able citizen a parasite and a drain on society, and one who undermines the very fabric that this society was crafted from.
Please note this very important exception: Persons who are no longer "able" due to injuries or incapacitation incurred in the execution of service to Country should be accorded every benefit that a free society can afford to them. They have paid their price, and they deserve every honor that their service has earned.
This is my stand. What's yours?
Pax,
Newbius
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)