A letter I thought All Should Read

This is being sent to my brother, but I thought it was good enough to share publicly; especially for those who support these new Red Flag Laws being proposed to prevent future mass shootings. It is not meant to embarrass or ridicule my brother, I have found MANY who have similar views as him. So if you’re reading this publicly Matt, don’t take it personal.

First of all, I guess I should apologize for calling you a Democrat, but I was pretty sure I thought I’d heard you say that you were one. As for our life experiences being somewhat different, you’d be surprised at what I’ve seen. Aside from you joining law enforcement and me the military, I’d say they weren’t at all much different. I’ve know people who committed suicide, I’ve seen murder victims and accidental deaths, and I’ve had guns drawn on me…and I wasn’t armed so that I could defend myself. Hell, I even had an M61 Vulcan Belt Fed Gatling Gun locked onto me and track me as I drove down the road in Korea; (some Korean soldier’s idea of a joke I suppose).

Yet I’m still a staunch supporter of the right to keep and bear arms. Maybe it is because I understand why we have that right that causes me to defend it so vocally, but in any case ANY law that restricts it, either by limiting what type guns we can own, requiring a permit or background investigation to purchase one, or what capacity magazine they carry, is an infringement upon that right, and I oppose them.

We have the right to keep and bear arms not so that we can hunt, target shoot, or even defend our homes against criminals, we have it so that we can raise up an armed society and overthrow our government if it should ever become tyrannical…of which I’d say we’re about a century and a half too late in doing.

Richard Henry Lee, the guy who introduced the Lee Resolution in the 2nd Continental Congress, once said, “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.”

Then of course there was Joseph Story, a supreme Court Justice who wrote a book giving his interpretation of what the Constitution meant, who said, “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

Numerous lower courts have also rendered similar decisions. In 1859 the Texas courts held, “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the “high powers” delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.’ A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power.”

In 1846 the Georgia courts held, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right.”

And in 1878 the Arkansas courts held, “To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.”

For the life of me I simply can’t understand how people could believe that an entity created by the people can enact laws that limit and restrict our ability to defend ourselves against it; such as how all gun control laws do. When they can decide which type guns we can own, or deny certain people the right to keep and bear them, yet they are free to stockpile an arsenal big enough to invade a foreign country, there is something seriously wrong with people’s thinking. If the 2nd Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights to protect our right so that we could shake off any tyrannical government, why in God’s name would anyone allow that government to tell them what kind of guns they can own to do it?

Yes, there are a lot of stupid and angry people in this country who abuse their rights, but is the answer to deprive those who don’t abuse their rights of that right? Is that truly how society works today; punish the innocent for the actions of the guilty? If that’s truly the case, then put a bullet in my head RIGHT NOW, because that is a society I want no part of.

Thomas Jefferson, aside from being a leading Founding Father and the author of the Declaration of Independence, was an avid reader and collector of books. He also kept a Commonplace Book where he would write quotes and other notations that came to him throughout his life. One of the quotes found in this Commonplace Book came from Cesare Beccaria and his book On Crimes and Punishment, 1764, Chapter 40, “It is a false idea of utility to sacrifice a thousand real advantages for the sake of one disadvantage which is either imaginary or of little consequence; this would take fire away from men because it burns, and water because it drowns people; this is to have no remedy for evils except destruction.

Laws forbidding people to bear arms of of this nature; they only disarm those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.”

I hate saying this, but the belief that society should be punished because a few sick people abuse their rights is a very liberal belief. But then the Republicans have not been such stalwart guardians of our rights either; having supported many of the existing gun control laws currently on the books. That is why I’ve given up on government, having come to the conclusion that the two parties are just different wings on the same bird, two heads on a two headed snake; both of which are vying for control of a system whose sole purpose is to plunder us of our wealth and our liberty.

Doesn’t the Bible tell us to beware of men who speak honeyed words? Well that’s how I see those campaigning for office, men who make all these wonderful sounding promises, then once they get elected government just keeps on doing business as usual. And the people fall for that bullshit time after time after time. And you criticize me for calling them stupid? Since when has telling the truth about people been wrong?

Oh, and you also said, and I quote, “I did find it interesting though that you quoted from the United States Code which I found odd since you believe the Government has no Constitutional Right to draw up laws.” Have I ever said that? I think not! I do, however, think that most of the laws they have enacted over the last 100 some odd years have been unconstitutional; such as the one establishing the National Park Service.

I believe the Constitution is quite clear as to what areas the government can and cannot enact laws upon; and the establishment of a National Park Service, no matter how good intentioned it may be, is not among those powers. The Constitution is quite clear on what land the government’s jurisdiction was to extend to, “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.” (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17)

You see, Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution outlines the authority which was delegated to the federal government by the people, and those are the only areas the government was to have the authority to enact legislation upon; those and nothing else…like establishing National Parks or a mandatory health care plan, or telling people what substances they can and cannot put into their bodies, and…need I go on?

But, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 does say that Congress shall have the power “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”; which is exactly what Title 10 of the United States Code touches upon; the categories of the militia.

So you see, I AM NOT contradicting myself; my position is firmly based in an understand of what the Constitution says and what it means. Is yours?

Our rights, all of them, predate our government. Those rights existed long before the State voted to ratify the Constitution, and when the Bill of Rights was introduced it was made clear that it imposed restrictions upon the government’s ability to limit or restrict those rights. We do not need to beg government for permission to exercise a right; and the moment we stop believing that principle the battle is already lost. Laws that tell us what type arms we can keep and bear, laws the limit the magazine capacity or whether or not those magazines can be removed and replaced rapidly, and laws requiring we obtain a permit to exercise that right ALL are minute infringements upon the right to keep and bear arm; with the ultimate goal of a total disarmament of the public. They have stated that in numerous speeches and articles and if they are ever successful the people of this country will have absolutely no means to resist ANY law they may deem to impose upon us.

Patrick Henry warned of such a situation way back in 1788, “Sir, we should have fine times indeed, if to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people. Your arms wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone; and you have no longer an aristocratical; no longer democratical spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all?”

You know, it’s funny that nobody wants to discuss why there are so many shootings today compared to when we were kids. Don’t you recall seeing all those trucks in the parking lot at Oroville High that had guns in the rear windows? Why did kids settle their disputes with their fists and not end it once and for all by grabbing a gun?

Listen, I’m not saying that there aren’t too many shootings, but denying us our right to keep and bear arms IS NOT the answer. We need to look at what’s causing these shootings and work to remedy that, not deprive us of the ability to resist tyranny.

If gun control actually worked, why is it that the cities that have the tightest gun control laws also have the highest crime rates? People who are inclined to commit crimes don’t care about the laws, and the only way to prevent crimes, using that belief, is to take every gun off the street…ALL OF THEM. But even then, people will still find a way to kill each other. Cain killed Abel with a stone for crying out loud!

I’m sorry, I refuse to accept that restricting my right to defend myself is the answer, and I refuse to live in a society where the only people who own and carry guns are cops and the military; both of whom care more about following orders than they do defending the rights of the people they are sworn to protect and their oath to support and defend the Constitution.

The American Revolution began when the British tried to take the weapons stored at Lexington and Concord, and we’re perilously close to our government attempting the same thing again with these Red Flag Laws they are pushing for.

The government, and local law enforcement already out gun us, and would you have us left defenseless against them altogether simply because a few bad apples go out and do stupid things with guns? Ben Franklin once said, “Those who would give up rightful liberty for a little temporary safety or security will deserve neither and lose both.”

I’m sorry if I rant too much about this, but it is one subject which I refuse to back down upon; and I will rant until my fingertips bleed and my voice goes hoarse on it; or until they come for my guns; and then it will be a moot point, for they’ll have to kill me to get them.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to A letter I thought All Should Read

  1. Roman says:

    Couldn’t agree with you more, Neal

    You know, it’s funny that nobody wants to discuss why there are so many shootings today compared to when we were kids. Don’t you recall seeing all those trucks in the parking lot at Oroville High that had guns in the rear windows? Why did kids settle their disputes with their fists and not end it once and for all by grabbing a gun?

    It’s because we’re not allowed to settle with fists any more. As bad as this sounds, bring back fist fights. That will not only solve a lot of the school problems, it toughens people up.

    That kid that got bullied in my high school is now a CEO of a company he started and has several hundred employees. And a damn good looking wife.

    Our rights, all of them, predate our government.

    Yup. Our Creator gives us Freedoms. Not the government.

    This is key to pretty much everything

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.