the struggle to pass the Fourteenth Amendment, the defining
moment came when patriotic representative Thaddeus Stevens
eloquently observed, “What are those rights, privileges
and immunities? Without excluding others, three are specifically
enumerated -life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…
It follows that everything necessary for their establishment
and defense is within those rights… Disarm a community and
you rob them of the means of defending life. Take away their
weapons of defense and you take away the inalienable right
of defending liberty… the Fourteenth Amendment, now so happily
adopted, settles the whole question.”
the words of the nation’s first Jewish Supreme Court Justice,
Brandeis, "The makers of our Constitution undertook
to secure conditions favorable the pursuit of happiness...They
sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts,
their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as
against the ‘Government,’ the right to be let alone- the
most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued
by civilized men. Those who won our independence believed
that the final end of the State was to make men free to
develop their faculties. They valued liberty both as an
end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret
of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty. Those
who won our independence by revolution were not cowards.
They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order
at the cost of liberty. Our ‘government’... teaches the
whole People by its example. If the ‘government’ becomes
the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every
man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."
courageous Founders, who willingly gave up lives of privilege
and luxury, purposely framed a country where gangs of armed
strangers were, not permitted, under sufferance, but rather,
possessed the inalienable right to assemble even in the
Founders’ presence, even in the very capitol of the nation.
politicians have unconstitutionally passed mala prohibita
laws barring, not predatory criminals, but instead law-abiding
citizens from the God-given, Constitutionally-guaranteed
inalienable right to justifiably immediately protect their
own lives and those of their precious families.
unconscionable result is that Washington, our nation’s capitol,
named for our greatest leader, a man of impeccable integrity,
the country’s opinion of the best we’re capable of, a shining
beacon that we offer to people the world over as a sterling
example of what they can aspire to, has become merely Washington,
the District of Corruption, with the highest crime rate
in the nation.
the March twenty-second 1996 edition of the Washington Post,
Lieutenant Lowell Duckett, special assistant to the D. C.
mercenary proxy-guardian “police” chief and President of
the Black [mercenary proxy-guardian] “police” Caucus, railed,
"[Extremist victim disarmament] has not worked in D.C.
The only people who have [firearms] are criminals. We have
the strictest "[extremist victim disarmament] laws
in the nation and… the highest murder rates. It's quicker
to pull your [illegal] Smith & Wesson than to dial nine-one-one
if you're being robbed!"
their populations are fairly close, a person is over twenty
times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime in the
District of Columbia than in Vermont.
Arlington Virginia neighbors Washington D. C., but in 2001,
Washington D. C.’s murder rate per hundred thousand was
sixty-nine, while Arlington’s was only one point six!
1976, there were seven hundred two thousand citizens living
in D.C. and one hundred eighty-eight murders.
1996, there were five hundred forty-three thousand citizens
(less) and three hundred ninety-seven murders (more).
city fathers were ecstatic: legal defensive firearms had
disappeared in D.C. -from only the hands of the law-abiding.
course, there’re more illegal firearms than ever in the
hands of predatory criminals, and they’ve an unconstitutionally
disarmed public to prey upon at their whim.
haven't heard Dan Rather talk about this, nor can you expect
to hear it from Peter Jennings or Tom Brokaw, but during
the first three months of the war, more Americans were murdered
in our nation's capitol than were killed in Iraq!
Republican Representative Mark Souder if Indiana remarked,
“The District of Columbia is a failed laboratory experiment
for [extremist victim disarmament]. It has one of the most
comprehensive bans on firearms in the nation, and it also
has one of the highest violent crime rates in the nation.
In fact, in 2002 it had the highest per capita crime rate
of any city in the nation. This is not a coincidence. The
simple fact is, when law-abiding citizens are [unconstitutionally]
forbidden by… “government” from protecting themselves, they
become easy prey for those to whom a [legal defensive firearm]
ban is just one more law to break. The citizens of the District
of Columbia have the same Constitutional rights as the rest
of us, and one of those rights is the right to bear firearms.
We shall not allow their right to protect themselves and
their property be trampled on any longer."
left-leaning pawn Republican In Name Only Senator Orrin
Hatch of Utah, Chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary
Committee railed, "It is time to restore the rights
of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and to defend
their families against murderous predators. It is time to
tell the citizens of the District of Columbia that the Second
Amendment of the Constitution applies to them, and not only
to their fellow Americans in the rest of the country. The
prohibition of [legal defensive] firearms in the District
of Columbia is as ineffective and deplorable as it is unconstitutional;
it is high-time we rectify this wrong."
are your mere employees, the elected politicians, entitled
to expensive offensively-armed personal bodyguards, equipped
with the high-capacity fully-automatic assault weapons they’ve
unconstitutionally denied you, and you, their boss, their
employer, their master, aren’t?
your life, or that of your family’s, any less valuable?
era of terror has spawned a new "status symbol"
in the nation's capital: offensively-armed mercenary bodyguards.
you don't have them, you're not considered important, say
career federal bureaucrats who find the post-September eleventh
2001 trend both amusing and disturbing.
the low-profile director of the relatively small thirty-six
hundred-employee Office of Personnel Management now has
a “protective” detail.
Secretary Gale Norton, moreover, is protected by a phalanx
of guards armed with MP-5
submachine-guns, a weapon favored by the president's
S. S. detail.
Secretary Norman Mineta's “security” detail also is heavily
armed, which is ironic considering Mineta opposed arming
pilots after the September eleventh 2001 hijackings.
and Human Services Inspector General Janet Rehnquist, the
daughter of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, wasn’t legally
entitled to receive a “government” firearm and “law enforcement”
credentials but got them anyway, an internal investigation
conducted by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency
report found as well that Vicki Shepard, deputy inspector
general for investigations who obtained the firearm and
credentials for Rehnquist, also had an unauthorized weapon.
Everson, deputy director of the White House Office of Management
and Budget, suggested that HHS officials consider whether
action should be taken against Shepard.
told investigators she was unaware that she was not authorized
to carry a weapon.
law makes it illegal to knowingly possess a firearm in a
federal facility, although there's a sly exception for “law
paper-pushers say some agency heads, such as Health and
Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, are reassigning
armed criminal agents in their inspector general's offices
to bodyguard duty in violation of the Inspector General
Act of 1978.
I. G. Act only authorized investigation and audit for fraud,
waste and abuse, not dignitary protection," said one
agents have no legal authority to protect anyone."
agency heads, such as Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and
Commerce Secretary Don Evans, tap their bodyguards from
their departments' offices of “security.”
Director Joe Allbaugh has a detail of deputy U.S. Marshals,
who also provide “protection” for the drug czar.
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld uses agents from the Army Criminal
Investigative Division, which raises troubling questions
about enlisted military personnel doing civilian “law-enforcement”
duties in the “protection” of a mere civilian.
“officials” say the recent assignment of heavily-armed bodyguards
in many cases has more to do with “image enhancement” than
“protection.” (I’m more important than you mere peons)
a ‘protective’ detail is the new status symbol in town,"
an Interior Department official who requested anonymity
said. "You don't look important unless you have one."
another “official,” who’s employed by the sinister new GEheime
STAat POlizei (homeland “security”) Department: "It
is a fact that a ‘detail’ is very prestigious now in Washington."
of Personnel Management Director Kay Coles James recently
was assigned a protective detail.
is taken care of twenty-four-seven," said OPM spokesman
Scott Hatch, who declined to elaborate
STAat POlizei (homeland “security”) Secretary Tom Ridge
is expected to get a full Secret Service (SS) detail, like
going overboard on new “security” measures, top politicos
are unwittingly setting up a “police” state.
going to have a huge ‘police-state’ infrastructure, one
we probably won't be able to get rid of even after al-Qaeda,"
admitted the Interior “official.”
cite, for example, a provision in the recently signed GEheime
STAat POlizei (homeland “security”) Act that gives broad
new “policing” powers to inspectors general.
the obscure National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
or NOAA, has started a wide-ranging “security” program.
program included a proposal for so-called "space cops,"
armed with offensive firearms, to monitor private operation
and use of the nation's satellites through NOAA's National
Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service office.
is the one use that our “government” doesn’t view as legitimate
...an attitude that’s quite disturbing in the people who’re
supposedly employed by the taxpaying sheep.
can only wonder what they’re up to, that they prefer law-abiding
unorganized Militia members around them to be unequipped
to resist illegal aggression.
“Gun Control” [Extremist Victim Disarmament] Act of 1968
was the camel's nose under the tent: Hitler's very own immoral
laws blatantly used, right out in the open, against you.
victim disarmament is racist, sexist, and always a precursor
of first, confiscation and next, genocide.
victim disarmament laws are insidious barbed hooks. Once
placed on the books, they never get pulled out!
evil social fascist supporters of the 1996 Sarah Brady’s
Revenge Law claim they’ve “prevented” over one hundred thousand
predatory criminals from obtaining a legal defensive firearm.
very application for a permit is a felony, yet there’ve
been virtually no prosecutions for this, so that evil social
fascists like millionaire playboy Ted “my car has murdered
more innocent unorganized Militia members than your legal
defensive firearm” Kennedy, who after drunkenly drowning
innocent young Mary Jo Kopeckne, arrogantly named his dog
“Splash,” whose highly-paid personal mercenary bodyguard,
Charles Stein, was briefly detained, but not arrested, for
carrying two fully-automatic sub-machineguns, a pistol and
over a hundred rounds of ammunition into the Senate office
building, can demand more coercive unconstitutional laws,
funded with your money, employing more nefarious social
fascist politicians because, obviously, this one won’t work!
wasn’t until unconstitutional mala prohibita laws
like the homicidal “Gun-Free Schools Act,” which insanely
purports to make schools “safer” by officially turning them
into shooting galleries where predatory criminals are guaranteed
by law to enjoy a target-rich environment.
so-called “assault”-style legal defensive weapons ban, another
capricious and arbitrary piece of excrement compiled by
a gang of ignorant political rabble, indiscriminately limited
the number of cartridges in a legal defensive weapon to
ten, but in shootings of mercenary proxy-guardian “police,”
most were killed by less than four bullets. That’s less
than the smallest revolver will hold!
actually nothing more than smoke-and-mirrors; mind games
played against the ignorant voters to illegally usurp even
more control over their lives.
evil social fascist elitists wish the frightened sheep to
believe, by cunningly referring to ordinary hunting arms
as nefarious “assault” weapons, that millions of Elmer Fudds
armed with deadly machineguns will surreptitiously crawl
through their bedroom windows in the dead of night and negligently
murder them in their beds as they sleep, mistaking them
hideously confusing maze of unconstitutional regulation
now exists where it’s very easy to have two precisely identical
firearms - one legal, and the other carrying a felony conviction
to own because it was manufactured one day later than the
embraces the epitome of sheer idiocy, and is the very definition
of arbitrary and capricious legislation
prima fascia evidence of malicious unconstitutional
infringement of the Bill of Rights, and it’s a mockery of
justice to have such irrational mala prohibita
laws on the books.
Kopel of the Independence Institute found in his 1994 paper
Basis Analysis of "Assault Weapon" Prohibition"
that: "Less than four percent of all homicides in the
united States involve any type of rifle. No more than point-eight
percent of homicides are perpetrated with rifles using military
calibers. (And not all rifles using such calibers are usually
considered "assault”-style rifles.)"
passage from a September fifteenth 1994 Washington Post
editorial rhapsodizing on what was accomplished by passage
of this illicit “law” bragged, “No one should have any illusions
about what was accomplished. ‘ Assault’ weapons play a part
in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly
symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out be be, as hoped,
a stepping stone to broader [extremist victim disarmament]."
of Philosophy Arthur Robinson, writing in “Access to Energy,”
July 1994, said, "Most of America's [legal defensive]
‘assault’ [style] rifles are in the attics, basements, and
closets of patriotic Americans who never fire them and to
whom war against their own ‘government’ would be an unthinkable
problem is that millions of such [legal defensive] weapons
are now being stored in the homes of ordinary Americans,
especially in the Western united States.
defensive] ‘assault’ [style] rifles have a military appearance
and contribute in a subtle, psychological way to growing
resistance to [tyrannical] ‘government’ oppression.
farmers, ranchers, and loggers who see their lives and families
entirely [illegally] destroyed by Babbitt and retainers
will never fire a shot.
existence of these [legal defensive] weapons, however, makes
resistance, even legal resistance, more thinkable to these
[innocent] victims [of illegal ‘government’ aggression].
[arrogant social fascist] bureaucrats and politicians do
not fear [illegally offensively-armed] criminals or armed
political zealots so much as they fear peaceful Americans
who will probably never use their [legal defensive] ‘assault’[-style]
rifles -but whose mental toughness may be enhanced by possession
of military[-appearing] weapons.
[extremist victim disarmers] are not deterred by the facts
about [legal defensive firearms] and crime, because their
primary fear is not of criminals.
fear ordinary Americans whose lives and freedom their policies
are [illegally] destroying. In this [reasonable] fear and
in their world, they are on target."
the well-reasoned and practical “Invisible Resistance to
Tyranny,” by Jefferson Mack, available from Paladin Press.
social fascists are exactly like the “Eddie Haskell” character
on the “Leave It To Beaver” show,” who consistently ignorantly
mouthed off to his peers an a feeble attempt to coerce them
into reverence while simultaneously groveling, mealy-mouthed,
kissing up to every adult who crossed his path.
classifying a certain category of firearms as “assault”-style
weapons, “government” simultaneously classified the remainder
as non-assault weapons.
by unconstitutionally usurping the power to ban, that is,
the power to forbid, predatory “government” also usurped
the power to permit.
power to forbid goes hand in hand with the power to permit.
can’t forbid a portion of a whole without permitting the
wresting the power for either without Constitutional prerogative,
predatory “government” has illegally transferred sovereignty
from you and me, the People, to itself and has reversed
that for which the Founding Fathers pledged their sacred
honor, their fortunes, and their lives to secure not only
for themselves, but also for their progeny.
by permission rather than personal volition is the most
horrifying, the most debilitating, the most demeaning form
this also: that the most precious property you can own is
not life, is not freedom, it’s arms when derived from the
unalienable right to keep and bear them.
proscribing arms -the most - predatory “government” can
proscribe the least.
toilet paper, your forks and knives, your candlesticks,
and your matchbooks. All these are now subject to censure.
fax, call, write and visit each of your elected servants
again and again, and demand your inalienable rights as a
citizen: the long overdue demise of the unconstitutional
“assault”-style weapons ban, the infamous Lautenberg amendment,
and the civil war holdover, prohibition of concealed carry.
when honest citizens legally possess the same means of justifiable
immediate self-protection as corrupt politicians now lavish
only on predatory criminals will we ever have the opportunity
to meet Jefferson’s definition of how the Founders wanted
the country: “When the ‘government’ fears the
People, that is Liberty. When the People fear the ‘government,’
that is Tyranny.”