UN Arms Trade Treaty

A lot of fear-mongers are claiming the UN Arms Trade Treaty “takes effect” today (Christmas Eve).  In fact, this “treaty” has UN Arms Trade Treatyabsolutely zero effect on our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Here’s why:

1.  Our Constitution mandates treaties adhere to a simple yet rigorous legislative and governmental process.  No matter who in our government signs a treaty, if the treaty didn’t go through the appropriate review and approval process, it is NOT binding in any way shape, fashion, or form.

2.  Our nation remains sovereign.  No treaty may usurp any portion of our Constitution without a Constitutional amendment to that effect.  Thus, even if a treaty were to go through the appropriate review and approval process, if that treaty violates the Constitution, the treaty remains null and void.

Finding evidence which supports these claims is both simple and straightforward.  In fact, we need look no further than the Constitution itself.

The Treaty Review and Ratification Process

Article. II. Section 2. of the U.S. Constitution governs the process by which the President can make a treaty:

“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”

Did the President seek and obtain both the advice and the consent of the Senate?  Did two-thirds of the Senate concur?  Both of UN Arms Trade Treatythese requirements must be present before the President or his designee can legally sign a treaty.  On the day John Kerry signed this treaty, the Senate had been consulted, and their advice was a big fat “NO,” with a majority voting in opposition to the treaty.  Thus, neither Kerry nor Obama had obtained the consent of the Senate.  Furthermore, not only did two-thirds of the Senators present not concur, the majority of the Senators vehemently opposed the treaty.

In addition, there is serious doubt among Constitutional scholars that the President can appoint anyone to sign a treaty on his UN Arms Trade Treatybehalf without express, written authorization to do so.  General Douglas MacArthur had such authorization.  On September 2, 1945, MacArthur accepted the formal Japanese surrender aboard the battleship USS Missouri, thus ending hostilities in World War II.  John Kerry most certainly did not have any such authorization.

Regardless, neither Obama nor Kerry had either the consent or the a two-thirds concurrence of the Senate.  Therefore, Kerry’s signature on the treaty is invalid, null and void, and without any lawful authority or substance.

The Amendment Proposal and Ratification Process

Article. V. of the U.S. Constitution governs the process by which Amendments are proposed and ratified:

“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”

Put simply, this clause requires the following for all Amendments to the Constitution:

1.  Two-thirds vote from both houses of Congress (or two-thirds of the state legislatures)

2.  Ratification by three-quarters of the state legislatures (or three-quarters of a Constitutional Convention).

3.  All Amendments are valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution.

Thus, even if Obama and Kerry had the advice and consent, along with a two-thirds concurrence of the Senate, the treaty would still be invalid simply because it violates our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.  As the Second Amendment clearly states, “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  The UN Arms Trade Treaty infringes on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.  It is therefore Constitutionally null and void.

The key thing to remember here is to never allow anyone to tell you otherwise.  When the entire populace of the United States of America knows its Constitution and the rights and freedoms respected and protected therein, no amount of government chicanery can take that away from them.

Know your rights!  Stand up for them, not merely often, but always!

It’s called FREEDOM, people, and it is very, very good.

Kill The Congressional Pork Before The Pork Kills U.S.

By far, the greatest Congressional threat to our freedoms is the pork they’re allowed to shove into each and every bill, even if it has absolutely nothing to do with the bill.  They do so to curry political favor, but it’s at our expense, to the tune of millions, if not billions of dollars for each and every member of Congress.

It’s why I fully support a line-item veto.  It wouldn’t matter if the President is rampantly conservative or rampantly liberal – he’d take heat for allowing pork to pass, and the publicity would help curb pork from Congress.  Ultimately, it would lead to a 28th Amendment along the lines of “One issue per bill, no exceptions.”

Our nation was founded by disciplined men, many of whom were lawyers.  The idea of stuffing a bill with pork was as foreign to them then as trying to argue a client out of a parking ticket in divorce court would be today.  The judge would laugh, if not throw them out of court.  Then, as now, the presiding judge would toss the motion as inappropriate, without question.  We need a similar restriction against Congress tossing our hard-earned dollars out the window on JUNK.

Somewhere along the line, stuffing good, decent bills with pork became a favorite pastime of Congress.  The vast majority of bills signed by Presidents over the last thirty years are stuffed with costly measures having absolutely nothing to do with the bill, that benefit very few people, but are paid for by all of us, either directly or indirectly.  To that end, I am stirring up a grass-roots movement to put the money-spending power of Congress back in the hands of the people.  Out nation is in MASSIVE debt, and it will not recover until the massive leaks through which Congress is shoving our money are plugged.  This isn’t a trickle.  We’re talking about Titanic-sized gushes and America will suffer the same fate as the Titanic if these gaping holes aren’t plugged.  Our country went from $9 Trillion to $17 Trillion in debt in just four years.  There’s only 310 Million people in the U.S.,  only half of which have jobs.  Do the math, and one way or another, that’s more than $100 THOUSAND dollars out of everyone’s pockets.

That’s far more than a down-payment on a mortgage.  It’s one third to one half of a very nice home.  It’s the difference between being stuck with rent the rest of your life and living out the American dream.  It’s the difference between owning and being owned.  Those who think “the government will just take care of us” are just stupid.  The point of this whole article is that the government is BROKEN.  If it’s not fixed, and soon, the government won’t be taking care of anyone ever again.  Many people will starve, and yes, that’s “starve to death.”  They may say, “That’ll never happen here!  This is America!”  The same was said by the hundreds millions of starving people throughout the 20th Century, who also lived under governments much like that of the United States of America.  THEY’RE DEAD, and not because of time, but because they had no food, as a direct result of their governments inability to govern themselves, much less the country.

More government is less, while less government is more.  It’s an axiom our founding fathers knew very well, and which they built into our Constitution, the document which both establishes our government while strictly limiting it’s power and authority.  Several years later, they saw fit to nail the lid on the coffin of tyranny by crafting the Bill of Rights, the first ten Amendments to the Constitution which further limited the scope and authority of the federal government, and reserved any and all powers not expressly given the federal government to the States or to the People.

So:  Why are you reading this?  Simple:  YOU need to contact your Congressman NOW, so that thirty years down the road you might still have a penny to your name.  Just Google their name.  If that doesn’t work, just go to Who Is My Representative and enter your zip code.  You can find your Senators, here.

Tyranny: Obama Signs Gun Control Treaty

Tyranny is raising its head yet again in the Obama administration, as well as in Congress.

Obama can sign the International Gun Control Treaty on Monday, June 3, 2013 if he wants to, but it is illegal for him to do so.  Furthermore, another forty-six U.S. Senators support subjugating our Constitution under the authority of the United Nations.

This is tyranny.  It is also patently un-Constitutional.

Obama cannot legally sign the treaty unless two, and only two, concurrent exceptions are in existence, simultaneously:

– Only upon the Advice and Consent of the Senate

– Two-thirds of the Senate must approve

Source: “[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…” – U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2.

For Obama to even sign the treaty without the advice and consent of the Senate, and with the concurrence of two-thirds of their members, is a violation of Constitutional law.  This provision exists to prevent any single individual, not merely including the President, but especially the President, from obligating the entire country to be bound to treaty, unless it is within the will of the People for him to do so, as expressed through their representatives in Congress.

Countless surveys have proven it is NOT within the will of the People to enter into an International Gun Control Treaty, much less gun control at all.  Even the Democrat-controlled Senate flat-out rejected Obama’s post-Sandy Hook gun-control measures.  You think two-thirds of them will support this?  Heck no!  They will not, hence Obama’s illegal end-run around Congress.

Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has jurisdiction to declare any and all treaties un-Constitutional, either by content of the treaty (infringement on the right to keep and bear arms), or by violation of procedure (without the Senate’s advice, consent, and 2/3 approval):

Source: “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;–to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;–to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;–to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party…” – U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2

Obama's Illegal Treaty
The Face of Tyranny

It would be nice, however, and very helpful, if Congress passed a public resolution reaffirming the Constitution’s mandates concerning treaties.  The public has a right to know that their government will not tolerate tyranny, rogue elements such as Obama going off half-cocked and fully illegal, regardless of his reasoning or justifications.  Such authority is expressly denied by our Constitution in order to prevent tyranny in our country.  The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the rest of her amendments exist first and foremost to protect us from precisely the sort of tyrannical action Obama promises to commit on Monday, June 3, 2013.

The President, Congress, the Supreme Court, indeed the entire country are all bound by the Constitution. It’s not a “guide.” The President has no option to do an end run around Congress, regardless of how urgent or dire he deems a situation. Our Constitution is the “supreme law of the land.” Violating it is a misdemeanor, at best. Violations of certain rights are often considered felonies.

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” – U.S. Constitution, Article VI

Finally, Congress has the power to impeach Obama should he violate these provisions:

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” – U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 4

The House files impeachment charges against the President: “The House of Representatives … shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” – U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section II

The Senate tries impeachments of the President, and may convict on 2/3 vote: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” – U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 3

The consequences of being convicted of impeachment are, at the very least, removal from office, but may be far more severe: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” – U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 3

tyranny
The Glory of our Nation

Regardless of Obama’s justification or reasoning, his signing the treaty also violates the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constition, “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  The treaty is an infringement.  As such, even if he did have 2/3 approval of the Senate, it would still be un-Constitutional!

There is no pardon for tyranny, and the President cannot pardon himself from impeachment! “[The President] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” – U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2.

We are all bound by both duty and honor to fight Obama’s tyranny!

Newt on Benghazi

While reading Newt on Benghazi, I realized there’s a lot more to this story.  It’s far worse than the fact four Americans died.

Newt on BenghaziIt’s the fact they didn’t have to die.  It’s the fact that the man sitting in the White House is masquerading as a U.S. President.  It’s the fact that he got there through massive fraud and deceit, including rampant voter fraud.  It’s the fact that he conspired with our enemies to kidnap a U.S. Ambassador.  It’s the fact that when things went sour, instead of scrapping the plan and rescuing those he’d put in harm’s way, he not only LET them die, he went out of his way to ensure they received no help whatsoever.  It’s the fact that in so doing, he was already covering up, even as they were dying.  It’s the fact that he fired four General Officers, each of whom had more integrity in their little finger than he’s ever known throughout the entire half-century of his life, as a warning to others.

It’s the fact this only BEGINS to crack the surface of his hundreds of high crimes and misdemeanors, each of which quality for impeachment and jail time, if not a death sentence for being a traitor.  It’s the fact that, taken together, they are so incredibly damning that the only reason he wasn’t sentenced long ago is because half of Congress is COMPLICIT due to their refusal to do their duty and impeach him.

It’s the fact that WE THE PEOPLE have had ENOUGH.

He does NOT represent us.  He does NOT represent America.  He was NOT born in America.

Obama is NOT an American.

Open Carry for Demonstration Purposes, Yet…

Youtube is rife with various pro-2A activists who open carry firearms as much for show, defiance, or antagonism as the rest of do for self-defense.  I’d like to show you one such video, which I think is better than most.  However, I would also like to add the following comments.  Feel free to review the comments and video in any order you desire. 🙂

1.  I do not advocate open carry as a means of showing off, making political or sociological statements, establishing “turf,” or for any other reasons save for the following two:

2.  I only open carry for two reasons:  Response time and deterrence.

2.a. Response Time:  The least amount of time between drawing and hitting one’s target is achieved by means of open carrying on one’s hip.  That’s why competition handgun shooters carry on their hips.  It’s why all openly-marked law enforcement officers carry on their hips.  It’s why I and most members of the military who carried handguns into either combat or hostile fire zones carried on our hips.  And it’s why I open carry on my hip today.  My open carry response time is less than a second.  If I have to conceal, it ramps up to at least a second and a half, if not two seconds.  Should you ever find yourself in a firefight, things usually happen very quickly, hence the expression about “the quick and the dead.”  I’d rather not be the dead one.

2.b.  Deterrence.  The visible presence of a firearm in modern society is a deterrent.  This is quite different from combat, where the enemy could be anyone, and if you look like a member of the American military you may indeed be a target.  In modern American society, criminals want just one thing, but in two parts.  The one thing is to survive.  Most are in a situation where they feel they have to steal.  That’s Part A.  Most also do not relish becoming wounded or killed (Part B).  They have no interest in reliving any semblance of the “Wild West.”  In fact, the “wild west” really wasn’t the wild west, either.  That’s largely Hollywood fiction created to sell movies.  The firearms death rate per capita back then was a fraction of what it is today, even though several times more people routinely carried firearms.  Wait…  What?  You heard me.  In any given society, there is an INVERSE correlation between the percentage of citizens who’re routinely armed and the firearms death rate per capita.  Amazing how that inverse correlation keeps popping up, isn’t it?  🙂  You can’t compare between dissimilar societies, though, such as the U.S. and Yemen, because there are so many more factors at work than merely the number of firearms vs the number of firearms related deaths.  That’s why I said, in any given society, there is an inverse correlation between the percentage of citizens who’re routinely armed and the firearms death rate per capita.

Regardless, the visible presence of firearms in modern America is indeed a deterrent.  That’s the other reason why law enforcement open carries, that’s a primary reason why the military open carries, and that’s the other reason why I open carry.  Criminals are into stealing from you, not mixing it up with you.  They have no idea how fast or accurate you might be, or the nature of your demeanor of disposition.  If you’re carrying concealed, you or may not be a target, depending on other factors.  If you’re visibly carrying, you’ll probably not be considered a target.  The often-voiced objections of “they’ll kill you to get your gun” or “they’ll kill you first because you’re armed” bear no resemblance to reality, and are not supported by any number of crime statistics, for good reason:  When faced with a choice between walking away or attending their own funeral, criminals are pretty similar to the vast majority of you and I: Live to fight another day.  I always use my brain first (stay away from trouble), feet second (get away from trouble), and firearm third (deal with trouble, in that order.  All the testosterone posing in the world will only increase your chances of injury of death.  On rare occasion you might encounter a different response, but that’s the exception, not the rule.

3.  Speaking of which, I believe a large part of these YouTube “open carry demonstrations” are little more than a testosterone exercise, choosing to err on the side the of the law, hoping for the best, or recording the worst.  While I admit they’ve had have some utility with respect to checking the actions of a wayward department or catching a rogue cop in action, I’m not an advocate.  The vast majority of the planned ones seem rather silly, and some have been downright dangerous.  I think the unplanned ones have had the most utility, but usually only after serious civil rights violations.

4.  When I open carry, I simply go about my business.  Whether that’s to the bank, a restaurant, or the grocery store is really no one else’s business but my own.  I have a CC permit, and do so when it’s expedient or more appropriate to do so.  The choice, however, remains mine.  I exercise sound judgement, reasonable caution, and do so as I see fit given all involved circumstances.

This is a freedom upon which our country was founded, the freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, on our own terms, non someone else’s.  The criminal element in our society exists, but it’s a very small percentage of the remainder of us law-abiding citizens.  It’s up to us law-abiding citizens to ensure the over-zealous control freaks in our government remain in check and continue to work with us to enforce the laws as necessary without crossing the line, trying to force us to do their bidding.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the primary reason why we carry in the first place.  It’s both the first line in the sand against everything from aggression, robbery, rape, homicide, as well as the last line in the sand against tyrannical aggression.  Those in law enforcement who respect this, and they are many, we’ve got your backs, and we know you have ours.  Thank you.  You should know by now from the above reading we’re not in this for show.

Those who don’t, if I may, please start with the Library of Congress.  Better start at the beginning.  Follow the links.  Follow the history, lest we repeat it, and please, let’s not repeat the massacres of the 20th Century.

The Face of Widespread Human Extermination Under Socialism

human extermination
Yes we can!

State-sponsored socialism has many names.  Regardless of whether you call it Naziism, fascism, Leninism, Marxism, communism, Islamism, or Obamaism, they all have a huge downside:  Human extermination i.e Genocide.  It follows a three-step pattern:

1.  Registration – identifies those who will soon be disarmed.

2.  Disarm the people so they can’t resist the armed police state.

3.  Exterminate all who are either a burden to or a resistor of the police state.

By the way, extermination isn’t limited to only those who owned firearms.  In fact, extermination has

human extermination
Mauthausen,_Sowjetische_Kriegsgefangene

historically been visited primarily on the poor, as they’re the greatest burden on the state.  All those promises of “we’ll take care of you!” during the elections only last long enough for socialists to secure their stronghold in the government.  That’s when the masses start dying.

Extermination is then extended to the III% who would refuse to knuckle under and who stand against the massacre no matter what.  In the 20th Century alone, socialism exterminated 135 million humans, according to the U.S. Congressional Record.  The vast majority of those were NOT dissidents, but merely the poor, who could not exist without handouts from the state.  Most were relocated away from their farming tools, where they simply starved.

human extermination
Buchenwald Slave Laborers

That’s an infringement, people… Some interesting statistics

Our Second Amendment is abundantly clear:  “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.”  I’ve covered the details of each portion of it elsewhere.  and countless very bright and capable people, such as Penn and Teller, as well as Bill Whittle, clearly bring home the bacon.  Sadly, there remain far too many knuckleheads in Washington who can’t read, much less understand, the common American English in which our two-page Constitution and its Amendments were penned.

Consider the following news excerpt:  “With emotions running high in the aftermath of the Newtown Sandy Hook shooting, politicians on the State and Federal level have begun introducing legislative actions to curtail access to firearms…”

That’s an infringement, people, and it shall not be tolerated.  Ever.

“…parents may soon be forced to register firearms with their child’s school under threat of criminal penalties.”

That’s an infringement.

“In Massachusetts, another proposal would require storage of semi-automatic rifles at government approved storage depots.”

That’s an infringement.

“…in the State of New York, congressional representatives have already passed legislation that requires registration of every semi-automatic rifle…”

That’s an infringement.

“…and reduces maximum magazine capacity to 7 rounds of ammunition…”

That’s an infringement.

“…and Governor Cuomo has floated the idea of gun confiscation.”

That’s an infringement.  A massive one, at that.

What the hell is wrong with you people?  Did you fail out of fifth grade?  Did you never take Civics or American History like the rest of us?  What the hell is your major malfunction?  Why is it you don’t understand the meaning of the word “infringement” and why trespassing on this ground have killed hundreds of millions more people than all firearms in the United States?  If you can’t answer that question, you failed history.  Get thee to a library!

Merriam-Webster:  “an encroachment or trespass on a right or privilege,” and by the way, it’s the Bill of RIGHTS, not the Bill of “privileges.”

The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution very clearly states that “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Furthermore, our Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution very clear forbids ANY infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.

Since NO powers concerning firearms were delegated to the U.S., and since the Second Amendment specifically forbids any infringement on the right to keep and bear arms, these proposed infringements are illegal.

I repeat:  THEY ARE ILLEGAL.  They are un-Constitutional.  They are unenforceable (at least by law enforcement officers who adhere to their oath of office).  They are unlawful.  Every civil, military, and law-enforcement officer and naturalized citizen who took an oath of office to support and defend the Constitution has a duty to OPPOSE these outlandish un-Constitutional infringements on our right to keep and bear arms.

God willing, we will.  Armed societies are SAFE societies.  The next time Piers Morgan tries to convince you that his 35 gun murders per capita in the U.K. is somehow better than America’s 11,000 gun murders, just ask him why violent crime in the U.K. per capita is still THREE TIMES higher in the U.K. than it is in the U.S.  The U.S., despite it’s “massive” gun ownership rate, remains very close to the average for violent crime throughout the world.  Most anti-gun countries top the U.S. in terms of violent crime.  One that doesn’t is Switzerland, which requires every male homeowner to be fully trained and armed with a state-supplied assault rifle.  They have one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world.

So, do not let Piers Morgan, Feinstein, Pelosi, Obama, Sarah Brady, Matt Damon, Hillary Clinton, Rosy O’Donnell, or any other the other anti-gun jerks twist the facts on you.  KNOW the facts.  The truth will set you free.

By the way — Statistics don’t lie.  Tell you what, health care officials.  When you can equal our success rate, you will have earned the right to share your opinion with us.

Until then, shut it.

Health Care Stats
Health Care Stats