"Owning a gun is a precious, fundamental right"

Found the following article of the Mansfield News Journal:

(Links and highlighting added)

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

If "people" above refers only to the militia, then "We The People" in the preamble of the Constitution, has to refer to the militia only.

.

If you study the history of the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment, there were many reasons our forefathers wanted the people to have firearms. Some called it the keystone amendment, the one that protected all the other freedoms. First, if all the people have firearms common to the time, they can repel any aggressor. With our military stretched thin, and the border and terrorist problems, do you want to take a chance?

.

Second, they wanted the people to have the ultimate power over government. Paraphrasing the Declaration of Independence, government derives its power from the consent of the governed; and when the government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to abolish it and form a new one. Every dictator in modern history has disarmed the citizens first.

Third is the right to protect yourself and your property. Check out what happened in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina. The authorities confiscated all registered guns. The criminals had never registered theirs, so the crime rate skyrocketed.

Fourth, hunting. The animal population would be totally out of control without hunting, and many people count on this food.

Some, including the U.N., are trying to take our gun rights. Listen to our forefathers before you give them up.

"No free man shall be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason.

"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self-defense." John Adams.

And finally, Benjamin Franklin: "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

George Schneider

"THE GANG"

How A Government Agency Uses The Law To Destroy Your Rights And Freedoms

Before the 1968 Nazi-styled 'Gun Control' Act;

- People could mail order firearms.
- People could acquire handguns outside their state of residence.
- People from different states could privately sale handguns.
- Individuals under the age of 21 could purchase a handgun, and individuals under the age of 18 could buy a shotgun or rifle.
- People that had previously violated the law and whom were once again free, included ex-felons. Could purchase firearms and exercise their right to Self-Defense as intended.
- The instances of "mass shootings" were extremely rare. The only memorable one being that of Charles Whitman at the University of Texas.
.
Since the enactment of the un-constitutional 1968 act;
.
- There have been more than 100 mass shootings.
- Crime has risen dramatically, especially violent crime.
[Ref. - Which came first - the gun violence or the gun control?]

Re: "Ban Assault Rifles"

A regular poster on Keep and Bear Arms who goes by the handle "Phat Chantz" sent me a reply to one of the articles posted. The article appeared on 5/07/2007 at CourierPostOnline (New Jersey) and was by JACQUELIN AGOSTINI. Enjoy the commentary that "Phat" usually makes, so asked his permission to share it;

I'm batting just about 1000. Here's another letter that I submitted to the Courier Post Online in response to a letter that KABA.COM listed on its links today. Ban Assault Rifles takes the pedantic and old saw that since today's arms weren't available at the time of the writing of the Second Amendment, that assualt and all other terrible weapons we use today should be prohibited.

So I'll just share it with you. I hope the audience-of-one enjoys it.

Pish.

Don't get me wrong. I can certainly understand why this wasn't printed: it is the truth and the Courier Post Online counts itself as past of my cowardly enemy.

The Founding Fathers wanted to assure that any man could obtain and bear the most lethal and terrible weapons of the time. Only in this way could mere citizens assure that their government always feared the real power in a Representative Republic -- the people.

Many casual readers of the Constitution and its amendments read their own biases into the interpretation. It serves the interested student to read the correspondence of the time as well as the Federalist Papers, written publicly as an ongoing discussion of issues such as the power of the federal and the rights of the individual.

Most importantly, the Second Amendment enumerates the RIGHT (to keep and bear arms) and not the OBJECT of the right (which arms, how many arms, kept where, how). It was just as common at the time that the cannon used in a battle
would be privately owned as held by the Continental Army. Using such logic, by extension I should be able to own my own Bradley or Howitzer; or even an old F-14.

The right to keep and bear arms pre-existed the Country, the Constitution, and the Second Amendment. This is the most important thing that the Second Amendment codifies: that government is not the author of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It, therefore, cannot be the gatekeeper to decide who is granted that right and who is denied. Neither is the federal or state government the author of the right to self-expression, faith, or private property.

But only one right guarantees that the federal government should reconsider any violation of the others, and that is the right to keep and bear arms that are so deadly, so terrible, that even a standing army would be loathe to fight the mere citizen.

The current battle over the right to keep and bear arms seems mired in the trivial disagreement of whether a citizen should be able to keep and bear arms in defense of his personal property, his life, or the lives of his loved ones should a petty criminal or felon descend and attack. If interpreted correctly according to the original intent of the Founding Fathers, this question pales into insignificance if it can be understood that I already have the right to keep and bear a Howitzer in defense against my government. If I can bear a cannon, I can certainly conceal and bear a lowly .40 caliber semi-automatic handgun.

Today's cowardly citizen desperately wants to dismiss the burden and obligation to bear that arm in defense of his life, his property, his family, and his nation. Whether cowardly or not, the burden exists and will be tried. If the coward chooses to be disarmed for the coming fight, he shall lose his possessions, his family, his nation, and most certainly his life.

Should the citizen patriot choose to bear that burden, as well as the obligation to keep and bear arms in defense of himself, his possessions, his family, and his nation, he may yet lose his life. But where enough patriots rise in their own defense and in defense of their neighbors, the family and the nation will stand.

The Right To Keep And Bear Arms is a litmus test of honor, courage, and patriotism. Those who cower behind the vain hope of peace shall see chains, at the very least. Those who are prepared to stand against the petty criminal, the petty tyrant, or any such world-wide threat to peace and independence (anyone know of one, off-hand?) will be the only hope of peace and the only authors of tomorrow's independent nation.

Shall we legislate against the right to keep and bear arms or even the "common sense" ownership of assault weapons and such ugly things? If so, we shall telegraph our cowardice and fear to the whole world.

And the whole world is watching -- and waiting for the next chance to turn us to their slaves.

Don't think that I can add anything to that one. Good job, "Phat"! If you want to contact "Phat Chantz" you can do so here.

Re: "Parliaments around the world urged to act on gun control"...

Found this article while looking for news on Guns on an internet search;

Parliaments around the world urged to act on gun control

JAKARTA: Parliamentarians around the world should press for urgent action on gun control, particularly in view of recent tragedies, the head of a global body representing lawmakers said yesterday.

Anders Johnsson, secretary general of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, was speaking after the launch of a handbook aimed at guiding legislators in the area of gun control.

“We are pushing parliamentarians to act on this,” he said by telephone from the resort island of Bali where the IPU, which claims 148 affiliated national parliaments, is meeting.

The handbook has been jointly launched by the IPU and the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, a Geneva-based think tank....

...The statement said small arms and light weapons took between 200,000 and 270,000 lives a year in countries that were at peace, through homicide and suicide.

The gun control issue was thrown into the spotlight again in April by the massacre of 32 people at Virginia Tech in the US by lone gunman Cho Seung-Hui.

The Democrat-led US Congress has ignited fresh talk about tightening gun laws, but many politicians are reluctant to take on the nation’s numerous gun owners or the powerful gun lobby....

Based upon the number of foreign posters I've seen on various Gun related forums. There seems to be a coordinated effort at undermining We The People's "inalienable right". These attacks are becoming more frequent, and come across as "common sense" and "feel good" remedies. The foreigners are then backed by a group of domestic posters that seemingly nod their heads in agreement to the 'speil' spewed forth.

Given the fact that there is an apparent worldwide effort at diminishing our God-given, Natural right. It would seem wise for all those concerned to confront those attacking our right with the FACTS. We must not take it for granted that there are 'others' that will protect our right for us....

Re: Our God-given right of self-defense

Ran across the article titled in the headline while doing quotation research on another article. The author turned out to be the same as the one that I was doing historical study on. Which would be the venerable former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court; Judge Roy Moore. The article is found on WorldNetDaily, and it is a good one!

Following are a few pertinent quotations from the latter article, (emphasis and links added);

Within hours of the tragic murder of 32 students and faculty last week on the campus of Virginia Tech, liberals both at home and abroad began to cry out for "gun control," as if the two handguns that were used in the killings were more to blame than the disturbed student who pulled the trigger. While Cho Seung-Hui blamed everybody else in his chilling videotaped rant, the liberals and many in the media also wanted to place the blame on something else for Cho's cruel and immoral actions, once again exploiting this tragedy to push their agenda of taking away guns from law-abiding citizens....

...Our Founding Fathers believed that the right to keep and bear arms was a natural right given by God and essential to the preservation of life and liberty. Alexander Hamilton acknowledged that "the Supreme Being ... invested [man] with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety." James Wilson – one of the first Supreme Court justices and a signer of both the Declaration and the Constitution – wrote that taking the life of an attacker is allowed "when it is necessary for the defense of one's person or house." This "great natural law of self-preservation," Wilson continued, "cannot be repealed, or superseded, or suspended by any human institution." ...

...In 1997 in Pearl, Miss., a 16-year-old boy shot and killed two and wounded several others at his high school before he was finally subdued when an assistant principal,
like the Appalachian law students, grabbed his handgun from his vehicle and bravely put a halt to the violence.

The right to keep and bear arms is not just a means of protecting life, but an indispensable safeguard of our liberties against oppressive government. Our Founding Fathers enshrined in the Second Amendment that this right of the people "shall not be infringed" because "the security of a free state" requires a "well-regulated militia." Liberals choosing to ignore the historical evidence claim that this is an outdated "collective" right of the state, not the individual. But in Parker v. District of Columbia on March 9, 2007, the D.C. Court of Appeals found that the right to keep and bear arms was an "individual right" held by "the people," and that it "existed prior to the formation of" the Second Amendment.

Tyrannical governments like those of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, China and Cuba all disarmed their citizens before the unprecedented oppression and murder of millions began. Back in 1833, Justice Joseph Story wrote in his "Commentaries on the Constitution" about the "importance" of the Second Amendment "as the palladium of the liberties of a republic since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers." History has indeed proven the truth of Story's comment and what every oppressive government knows: You must take away the people's guns before you can take away their rights and liberties....

My hat is off to Judge Moore once more, for his support of our God-given, Natural and inalienable right. And, for him telling it like it is, as it what so clearly intended to be. The full article is well worth reading....

Hmmmmmmmmm.......

The following article was forwarded to me by a man whom is a church Pastor and a regular commentator on Keep and Bear Arms. Glenn and I communicate regularly, and we have become good friends. This article will possibly cause some anger and disgust. For, had the idea expressed in it been implemented. We more than likely wouldn't have had near the tragedy as that which occured Monday in Virginia;

Student Group Wants Campus Gun Ban Lifted

By Christine Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
September 17, 2002

After two armed southwest Virginia law students stopped a campus shooting rampage in January, a Second Amendment group at a northern Virginia law school decided it was time to change their own school's ban on guns....

...I think the middle ground is to allow concealed handgun permit holders to carry just like they can anywhere else in Virginia," he said. "You provide extra safety to the student body that way."

Jowyk began researching his law school's gun policy following the January incident in which a disgruntled student at Appalachian Law School, Peter Odighizuwa, allegedly shot and killed the school's dean, a professor and a student on campus before being subdued by two armed students, Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges.

Gross and Bridges reportedly ran to their cars to fetch their own guns and returned to confront Odighizuwa, who surrendered after allegedly initiating a fistfight.

Jowyk was heartened by the students' intervention. But looking into GMU's gun policy, Jowyk found to his dismay that the school's board of visitors had in 1995 passed a ban on all weapons, concealed or otherwise, except by law enforcement officials.

Anyone who violates the school's gun ban would face administrative repercussions but not criminal charges, according to Jowyk.

Then in April, Virginia's Democratic governor, Mark Warner, signed a law prohibiting local governments from using administrative rules to pass gun restrictions that go beyond existing state law....

(Emphasis added).

Don't know if RAGE quite describes the emotion that I'm feeling in the pit of my stomach. For, there is quite a bit of sickened disgust mixed in as well. Not only are businesses, and public as well as private learning institutions permitted to circumvent We The People's U.S. Constitution. But, to violate the First Law of Nature - Self-Preservation, as well. The very Laws which ALL American governments are supposedly BASED upon.

And, to make matters worse. Recently, the Virginia Legislature again had the opportunity to correct this travesty of justice. Yet, refused to do so. In my minds eye, that makes them complicit in the deaths of the students at Virginia Tech.

Those whom SERVE us in our government are our SERVANTS - NOT our masters. Not only have they been steadily and increasingly subverting the very purposes for which we established our government to begin with. Which, as spelled out in part of the preamble to our Constitution, was to;

"...and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."

AND

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty....The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Whenever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction...."

"...In America we may reasonably hope that the people will never cease to regard the right of keeping and bearing arms as the surest pledge of their liberty..."

- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries, (1803).

(Mr. Tucker knows that of which he wrote, as he was THERE when it was debated and enacted).

So then, not only do our governments infringe, but they allow the wholesale infringement by our fellow citizens as well. Thereby, effectually eliminating one of the very "blessings" for which we instituted our governments to "secure".

Businesses, learning institutions, etc. all make their livings off of We The People. As it appears, they not only want our money, but our lives as well. For, many show a gross and reckless disregard concerning not only the lives of those whom elevated them to their positions. But, for the Supreme Law of the Land, and the "TRANSCENDENT laws of Nature and of Natures God". (See Federalist #43). Their own safety, and the the ability to continue making money off of us, is paramount to them. Believe that just by its very definition, that is what could very well be called the most selfish and depraved kind of evil.

RELEASE: Rick's Bond Revoked!

Received the following from Pam Stanley, wife of Rick Stanley. Many of you may remember Rick in his run for the Colorado U.S. Senate race in 2002;

At about 11:30am Denver time, as Rick and I were exiting our bank, a dozen or so swat team decended upon us. They fired stun grenades in order to disorient us and screamed at us to get down on the ground. They proceeded to tie our arms behind our backs, then handcuff us. As they were doing this we were asking "what is going on?" They merely told us that Rick's bond had been revoked by a judge.

They took him away, impounded our vehicle then they released me, having a female detective give me a ride home since I had no vehicle. I just got off the phone with the booking department of Denver County Jail. I was told Rick is there on a "fugitive hold" from Adams County for bribery, 2 counts. Neither I, nor our attorney have any clue what this is all about! I assume this is all steming from the original "Influencing Public Officials" charges that he was convicted of and the Colorado Court of Appeals just upheld the week before last.

When I called Denver County Jail they also told me that I can go down there at 7:00pm this evening to see Rick. I plan to do so. I have been in contact with our attorney, Jim Bull, but unfortunately he is up in the mountains and unable to get down here until Monday morning.

He is going to request a hearing in front of a judge as soon as possible on Monday to determine what is going on and to see if we can get Rick out on a new bond. I will keep everyone informed as to what is going on as I get more information.

Pam Stanley

There are those that probably remember how Rick, a staunch advocate for our (supposedly) Constitutionally protected Rights. First came to have problems with the 'law' in Colorado;

Protesting a Denver ordinance against bearing arms, business owner and Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Rick Stanley late last year strapped on a hip holster bearing a .380 Beretta (fellow protester Duncan Philp chose a shoulder rig) during a Dec. 15 rally celebrating the 210th anniversary of the Bill of Rights.

He'd advertised what he was going to do and invited Denver police to come get him. They did. He was peacefully arrested by 18 officers, and brought to trial on May 15 in the municipal court of Judge Robert L. Patterson.

To give everyone an idea of just where Rick stands concerning our Rights. The following is a quote from a website;

This website started out as my personal campaign website for the 2002 Colorado U.S. Senate race. It has evolved into a website that promotes the restoration of our country back to a Republic, based on the Constitutional Rule of Law. I, and many others, believe in defending our God-given, natural, unalienable, Constitutionally guaranteed and protected rights here in the POLICE STATE of America. This is NOT an option, it is a sacred duty. There are some things here which constitute ideas of mine and others, meant to accomplish this mission.

There is a government conspiracy to destroy individual rights, with the government's perversions of Constitutional rule of law, at all levels of government, that has overthrown this country from within. This will not stand. We the people demand all unconstitutional ordinances, statutes, and laws be overturned immediately. The average American cannot afford a five year court fight, hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, to then reach a point at the Supreme Court, where the black robes can ignore the issues, and refuse to hear the case, effectively destroying the unalienable rights of Americans.

LIVE FREE or Die! Liberty in our Lifetime

Rick Stanley

Hopefully Rick's attorney will be able to secure his release this next week. All those concerned with Freedom, Liberty and the Preservation of our Inalienable Rights. Should be concerned with this type of activity from those in our government. As it can very well be that it could be you or I that are next on the list.

There is contact information on Rick's website for those interested in offering encouragement and support. Hope the best for Rick and Pam, and that this present trouble is soon overcome. Will try provide additional information as it is made available. When available, it will be posted here, or on GunShowOnTheNet.blogspot.

Online Petition to the B.A.T.F. and Congress...

David Codrea at the War on Guns points to an article concerning Red's Trading Post. Red's is having some problems with the B.A.T.F. and they have pulled his license. And, this is not an isolated instance. Another shop, that was a competitor of Red's was closed down in the area.

On Red's website there is an Online Petition that allows commentary and anonymity. Please take a little time and add your signature. We The People must stop this ongoing perversion and subversion of our inalienable Right! The Right to something entails the means of procuring all things that are incidental to enable one to enjoy the use of it.

The ongoing governmental assaults against our Right must cease. Let's make sure that they understand that those in our government are still OUR SERVANTS! And, NOT our masters.