Concealed Carry Of Weapons Superior To Taking Weapons: S. 388, Part IV
By John Longenecker (02/06/07)
Grab a cup: this one’s a long one. The last in a four part series. - It's time to define law-abiding for the non-gun owners in America.
A lot of Americans may not want to admit this, but being law-abiding is a very private matter. For many of us, including myself, and including a lot of non-gunowners I might add, it is a matter of self respect, a community contribution, a solemnity that is not based on fear of punishment, but of personal values.
In this value, the law-abiding pay the price in tolerating a great deal of abuse and mistake, a great deal of intentional mischaracterization and of being ignored in not only gun ownership, but in family law and so much more. Many officials fail to understand how the law-abiding keep the populace at peace more than the officials who write the laws.
Many officials go along with unreasonable laws in their inception because they fall for straw arguments of leftists who participate aggressively in the process. Consequently, family court judges fall for the argument that people shouldn’t be at the mercy of their vows, a concept marketed as compassion but certainly not fulfilled as advertised, or that allegations of violence and ‘controlling husbands’ must be true because of androgen versus estrogen – true enough to punish the husband and children, anyway – with below-standard criteria for evidence that would never meet the test in another legal matter.
Yet, we respect the law because, for most of us, it is a solemn value.
Law abiding is to be patient, tolerant and to go along with the law whether we like it or not. It is to believe in it as a solemn way of life – that word again – not a tool for gain. It is to share values of justice, due process, conformity and security in the knowledge that the law will be enforced evenly, fairly and consistently without abuses. And for the survival of the nation.
Understanding the law’s consistency and reasonableness enables the average reasonable person to conduct himself accordingly. Unreasonableness of laws keeps citizens off balance, uncertain and intimidated, certainly destroying their resolve, and serves only the subjectivity of abusers of the law. Often, these are officials much, much more than the constituents.
This is not American. This is abuse of due process, the very reason for the break from the Crown.
The law-abiding are the decent in America. And make no mistake: it’s not to the credit of the state that laws are obeyed by the law-abiding, it is the values system, personal dignity, sense of decency and sense of right of the law-abiding that makes it work.
It is this values system and sense of dignity that is abused.
But Congress has to be law-abiding too. This means that Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer and others by their oath of office have positively no latitude in how they see the second amendment and other amendments which support it. This is not merely one man’s opinion, it is unmistakably clear: they absolutely must defend it – whether they, like the law-abiding citizen, like it or not – and may not interpret it their own way, make exceptions or in any way oppose it, irrespective of any good intentions. Yet they do.
Note that some leftists have cited the papers of the individual Founding Fathers and ignored others: in some papers, there is mention of separation of church and state, but there is also among those papers of other founders the more powerful writings that the citizen is the ultimate legislator.
We are.
Officials cannot pick and choose what they will protect. Officials are subject to, as some had written, a higher calling. We call it integrity.
Congress needs to understand that the second amendment is impervious to any ordinary due process short of another amendment, and until such an amendment is in fact ratified, until that very hour, there can be no such thing as a gun law.
Congress needs to understand that many ineffectual polices have been based on recalcitrant violence, but have only worsened violence as in gun-free zones where law-abiding’s carrying of weapons are banned, such as your back yard, Washington, D.C.
Note the absence of school shootings and a lot of workplace shootings, until labeled as disarmed victim zones. Even postal shootings occurred in workplaces where personal weapons – individuals who might have intervened or even prevented shootings – were banned.
Adhering to the Constitution is what law-abiding means to constituents. We cannot have one interpretation of law-abiding as viewed by Congress and another as viewed by the ultimate legislators of the nation, the people. It means that the executives hired are disobeying their oath of office. Officials may not legally disagree and oppose citizens.
I don’t care of you’re Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, Communist or Socialist party, your instruction is to repeal all gun laws, because they never should have been written. Had they not been written, perhaps we may not have the basis for many useless social programs which beg for more attention, more money, more sacrifice, because, somehow, it is not ever enough.
It is instead, a transfer of wealth - brokering something Congress cannot deliver, brokering something we already have and do not need to purchase twice. [We already purchased it in 1776.]
Put another way, those social programs aren’t working, because the solution is not in Congress, but in the individual citizen in his and her sovereignty.
No one in Congress at this hour can say that we are a nation of laws as long as the people are disrespected so.
Listening, 2008 Candidates?
Repealing all gun laws will restore respect for the authority of the individual constituent and as lawful independence shines through, the need for such silly, imposing social programs will be discredited.
The formula is straightforward: educate congress. Not all officials want compelled citizen dependency on agencies. Many members hold values which resonate with the people who elected them. The smarter candidates in 2008 will enunciate this boldy, get together, get elected.
Instruct Congress. They don’t tell us -- we tell them. It’s amazing how Conservatives understand this clearly and the Democrat members just don’t get it.
Understand that because the right to carry personal weapons is the law of the land, it cannot be subject to the opinion of anti-gun groups any more than it is subject to the nutty views of officials. You can’t have a legitimate opinion, a majority or an official agenda against a civil right put there to protect all the rest of the rights of the people – and still claim you’re honoring your oath of office. The intrusion at present is the use of crime as an excuse to usher in various hi-tech surveillance programs -- the very reason 2A was written to be impervious to due process.
Congress takes testimony from constituents, and all America has lost largely for lack of involvement in that venue. The left has eaten our lunch in giving testimony before Congress. Just as truly as liberals interfere with liberty for all Americans - and they do - the liberty interests strive to enforce liberty for all Americans. Who is against liberty?
Believe me, gun control is against liberty. Except for members who employ armed guards.
One of the best ways is to do what the leftists do: speak before Congress.
Give testimony – succinct, germane, moving testimony – under oath on what weapons are really all about, how it serves the nation on how it bars the very situation we’re facing right now: fears of the people coming true by way of abuse of due process.
Get their ear.
Not only does appearing before Congress help, but so does getting involved with state and local hearings. Put the topic on the agenda and speak.
Summon them to their duty: Educate and instruct Congress and local officials on the idea that officials do not go to office to do their duty their way, but go to office to do their duty our way. We have no Royalty in this country. Don’t ask them: tell them. Tell them nicely, but tell them.
Educate and instruct Congress and local officials on the idea that officials do not go to office to do their duty their way, but go to office to do their duty our way. We have no Royalty in this country. Don’t ask them: tell them. Tell them nicely, but tell them.
Inform nominees that you will support candidates who endorse right to carry and who understand fully what private ownership and carry of weapons is really all about. The authority of the individual and the immediacy of armed resistance in time of facing grave danger. (This theory is proven every hour of every day by the fraidie-cat officials sitting next to them in Congress who go to work with armed guards.)
These pro-family candidates will understand that repealing all gun laws will pave the way for other matters to reconcile themselves. There will be a different kind of official in that way in 2008. (I hope.)
Today, as one prime example, crime is an excuse to enact more and more drastic policies, such as the compulsory RFID Chip tracking – the Flea is not something you want on you – and the Real ID Card.
Why suspicion citizens?
Indeed, states are fighting to refuse the Real ID Card, but it’s a real battle, I understand. What if No isn’t enough?
The imposition of the Real ID Card is a real test of our sovereignty. Will our No be respected? These individuals officials who fight against the National ID Card would be good candidates for the White House.
"The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting - and I know I’m not going to make very many friends saying this - but it’s about our right, all of our right, to be able to protect ourselves from all of you guys up there."
- Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, appearing before Representative Charles Schumer’s committee hearings on the assault weapons ban. Dr. Hupp later became U.S. Representative of Texas.
Show Committees how their values have to be backed by follow-through of our wishes. Prove how having to show cause – for carrying a personal weapon or in refusing an RFID Chip or a National ID Card – are all the same: an infringement on civil rights for the purpose of breeding dependency on officials.
Prove that conservatives in 2008 can not only be no part of it, but must actively oppose it; Indeed, they must act to reverse it all - and must enunciate it boldly.
Why weapons?
Because our liberty is backed by force as foreseen by the founders - foreseen not for just any age, but foreseen for any government - and we are facing today such a scam when crime is used as an excuse to track people, intrude on people, monitor and supervise people, compel people to show cause or otherwise used in any way to deny rights, to interfere with innocent movements, soon to demand explanations for such movements, and basically suspicion all citizens – all under color of necessity. I.e. Crime.
But if crime were lower statistically and individual acts de-escalated – if crime were answered by lawful lethal force by the constitutional authority and force of the victim-citizen – it could impeach the need for such widespread and sweeping programs and policies which profoundly affect only . . . you guessed it: the law-abiding.
Crime is used as an excuse to create dependency on officials. With severe punishments for refusing – exclusion and ostracism with no fuel or food. I repeat: For refusing dependency. Imagine catching Hell for refusing dependency in a nation of independence.
Winning Congress and restoring the nation begins with repealing all gun laws because so many bogus programs are based on the lie of intractable violence.
Violence is intractable only when you snuff personal independence and civilian authority, and gun control cheats the reasonable person from being independent under our system.
But when independence shines through – lawful, legal and authoritative personal independence – it proves that we, in fact, do not need a nanny.
On so many levels. On so many levels.
It’s time for conservatives to get off the band wagon of even-handedness and non-partisan compromise and become partisan and loyal to their oath and family values.
Freedom can take care of itself.
It doesn’t have to show cause. Or wear a chip or carry a national database card.
Gun Control paves the way for dependency on agencies. See www.TransferOfWealth.net
(Printer friendly version) Email: John Longenecker
