When in the Course of Human Events...

The Declaration of Independence, written by men no longer able to idly allow usurpation of their natural right to freedom from tyranny and excessive and burdensome law, has been forgotten by most and ignored by more. What is worse, the importance and relevance of this document is further il-understood in the context of the sequence of events which have recently elapsed.

Over the weekend, the United States ceased to exist as a free nation, as a nation of free men.

This statement has been closer to reality for some time, but the events of the last week have ensured an end to the free society which was so nobly defended by the blood of our forefathers - the same blood that now boils in my veins.

The United States Government, under the guise of security in the financial markets, has simply cast aside the Constitution - a document which identifies the limited government which was allowed by the free peoples of this nation to be established with the limited roles of providing for the common defense of this nation and it's people - and have instituted in it's place an entity with limitless power over finance, business, banking, and the very core of the market system.

This nation ceases to be a Republic, and has now boldly stated that Republics are unnecessary - instead relying on a socialist democracy where the mob rules and the government remains in power of business, jobs, and the once free market. Free thinking minds need not apply - the United States of Freedom has officially gone bankrupt.

Free thinking men continue to do nothing, insisting instead that it is actually a good thing for an entity of once limited power to have unlimited power over businesses - and now has the ability to cease failing businesses for the cause of financial security.

Benjamin Franklin noted: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

So what about those of us who acknowledge the error in the government - what choice do we have but to dissolve the political bands between ourselves and the Federal Government - to declare that we are the Harbinger of Liberty, the protectors of our inalienable rights! Experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Our Federal Government has violated the contract in which WE ALLOW THEIR EXISTENCE. They have proclaimed themselves rulers of their people, masters of the land, and have shown intent to bring slavery and military force upon her people.

The Federal Government is guilty by their own admission of the following:

*It has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies with the purpose of combat against citizens in protest against them
*It has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power, usurping jurisdiction from rightful local citizens.
*It has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving its Assent to their Acts of unwanted Legislation:
- For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us
- For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent
*It has violated the trust of the people, conducting unreasonable search and seizure of persons and property without just cause or due process under the guise of Homeland Security and the "patriot act"
*It has moved to establish itself as superior in all matters where rights and laws are naturally reserved for the people or the states, including but not limited to marriage, education, and local security
*It has established evidentiary proof against itself to be called into question its intention of treason against the good will of the free people of the nation

All these actions occur in violation of the contract between the people and the government. We are under siege, yet we remain distracted and indifferent to action.

My recent near detention at the SeaTac airport in Seattle Washington emboldened me to action. I refused to cooperate with additional screening three hours after I went through security as the TSA agents conducted "random searches" of citizens at my gate. My refusal was on the grounds of the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable search or seizure without probable cause - unless they could present me with a warrant or some other document authorizing such a search of my secure person. They were unable to provide a warrant, and unwilling to show me an authorizing document to conduct this additional and unreasonable full body search. Their response to my protest was to call in their management, who was equally unable to cite any directive or authority to conduct such a search, and when fully frustrated that they could not beat me in a battle of constitutional wits, they threatened to have me arrested. I answered back that there is no need to show unnecessary force, when all I am requesting is documentation of their right to search my person. Needless to say, after a 25 minute stand-off, I took down their names and their position and informed them that i intend to file a full complaint - and allowed them to perform their search under my protest so that I could board my plane. I am currently investigating legal action against the TSA for failure to provide warrant or authority to conduct unreasonable searches under force.

And I call into question any citizen who is unwilling to question the actions of our government. What has this society become? Am I mourning the death of the Republic while others are celebrating the birth of whatever our nation has become?

We should never forget that a government that ceases to act on behalf of the people becomes an enemy of the people. This is just as true today as it was in 1776 - when our Founding Fathers - those brave souls - proclaimed that enough was enough.

Shall Not Be Infringed...

Thanks to the DC gun ban, and the lawsuit by a local DC police officer, the Supreme Court is hearing a case on Gun Rights for the first time in 70 years. A circuit court ruling 2-1 decided that the gun ban was unconstitutional, and that individuals had the right to own personal guns for self defense.

The issue, which is a staple of the conservative base, revolves around the intent of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Fox News reports the two sides of the argument being brought before the court. The DC government ‘s first argument is that the amendment applies to the militia (i.e. National Guard and Army) to have guns. Secondly, DC claims that the amendment does not apply to the district, as it is a special federally controlled haven of the government (a strange argument for a government looking for equal representation in congress). Finally, the DC government claims that this is a reasonable ban used in protecting the DC citizens from violence (looks like it has worked! I can’t think of one person that equates DC with Crime!)

The opposition claims, of course, that the 2nd amendment is very specific about guaranteeing an individual the right to keep and bear arms, and that the DC ban is a “draconian infringement” of our rights.

Heller’s lawyers also present its Founders-era evidence by quoting from George Mason, Blackstone and Madison. They also quote lawyer John Adams during his successful defense of British soldiers in the aftermath of the Boston Massacre.
In that trial Adams conceded that “here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves at that time for their defense, not for offense."

This is going to come down to the intent of the amendment. What did the founders intend by placing those 27 words into our constitution? What purpose could those words serve for future generations?

Let’s take a look at the words, and identify with the founders… what experiences had they lived that would move them to include such a statement?

Definition of MILITIA: The term militia is commonly used today to refer to a military force composed of ordinary citizens to provide defense, emergency law enforcement, or paramilitary service, in times of emergency; without being paid a regular salary or committed to a fixed term of service

The founders had just fought and won a war against the largest army and Navy in the world, with little more than farmers and family men with a want to be free. Had these men not owned their own hunting rifles, or been trained in how to use them, there would be no USA. The militia is a band of ordinary citizens versed in defense.

“A well-regulated militia” refers to the ability to call on the citizens of a country to stand in defense with little training in order to face foes the likes of the British regular army.

“being necessary to the security of a free state” – it is the people of a society which are it’s very defense. The security lies in the necessity of ability to defend… and without this ability, the freedoms so valiantly fought for will be succumbed.

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms” – the two most important words are in this clause: right, and people. “Right” indicates that the words of this amendment are equal to those rights endowed by our creator, as described in the Declaration of Independence, which states that “among which are Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness”… of course the founders were bright enough to say “among which”, which meant that further rights were yet to be defined that were also Divinely Endowed. And the word “People” is equally important. They did not say that it is the right of the government to issue arms, rather the right of the people to keep their own arms outside of a government armory. These would be their personal arms, well known to the individual, and able to sue in times of necessary defense of their personal property… be it from a tyrannical government or in simple defense of their personal property.

“shall not be infringed” – the meaning of this line is self evident… it was stated very clearly and bluntly… “No Trespassing” on our afore mentioned rights.

So according to my most accurate interpretation of the amendment, it would read (in layman’s terms): For the protection of our God Given and Earned Rights, a trained and knowledgeable citizenry is necessary. There is no better way to ensure that the United States will always have a citizenry ready to defend than to ensure that the people are always armed and well versed in their personal firearms. This is a right that a government of, by, and for the people shall never take away.

The court is expected to have a ruling on this case by June. I expect that a court truly in understanding of the intent of the people who founded this country will vote unanimously against any bans on firearms by the government. Unfortunately we have a court full of very liberal activists, willing and waiting to strip the people of their Endowed rights. Luckily we have a slim conservative majority, so we can expect a 5-4 ruling in favor of freedom. And this is exactly why we must not allow Hillary or Obama to select our next judges… the very interpretation of our Liberty is at stake.

When widom is needed...

"[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the
liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. He
therefore is the truest friend of the liberty of his country who tries most to
promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not
suffer a man to be chosen onto any office of power and trust who is not a wise
and virtuous man." - Samuel Adams

"The life of the nation is secure only while the nation is honest, truthful and
virtuous." - Frederick Douglas

"The American Constitution is remarkable for its simplicity; but it can only suffice a people habitually correct in their actions, and would be utterly inadequate to the wants of a different nation. Change the domestic habits of the Americans, their religious devotion, and their high respect for morality, and it will not be necessary to change a single letter in the Constitution in order to vary the whole form of their government." - Francis Grund

231 Years... Happy Birthday America

231 years ago, there was a spark that ignited a fire... a fire that would ultimately forge the steel foundations for a country with resolve... a new nation rising up from the ashes of tyranny, like the majestic phoenix... As such, the government that has since been founded must learn from the mistakes of past failed governments, or as the cycle of the phoenix, suffer the same fate.

Government, as an entity, has but one purpose... however "free" the ideology of a democratic-republic may make us feel, the fact is that a government set apart from the people has the power to rule the people.

And so, 231 years after the great phoenix that was this budding democracy so gracefully sprang forth from the ashes of tyranny, do We the People of this great nation find ourselves at the mercy of yet another overbearing and unrepresentative government?

I pose a simple question... has the dream been lost?

Or is there hope that the people of this country can realize the err in their direction, and cast off the corruption found in their leaders? Is there that glimmer of a chance that as this phoenix burns, we can rise up, a great nation with new potential... with true freedom from fear of our own government... that the nation will stand in defense of our enemies, but allow freedoms within our own borders?

Is there hope that the once great roar found in the words of the founding fathers, that roar which has since been silenced to a whisper by lack of conviction out of our fellow man... is there hope that these words are not lost, and that the idea of this great nation, where man can be free, is still within our grasp?

In a nation where "fairness must be legislated" (Clinton-D-New York) and the day of our Independence has become a day for "4th of July Sales" and fireworks, I have to ask these questions... And I hope that you are all asking the same.