RED FLAG on Red Flag Laws

The rising tide of red flag laws does not bode well for the United States of America.  Not only are they fraught with many potential avenues of failure and abuse, they’re also highly ineffectual, stopping less than 1/10th of 1% of their intended targets  — a statistically and absurdly tiny fraction of the problem.

For the first time in many years, I’m at a loss for world.  These proposals and the laws that have made the books are so ridiculously, unbelievably mind-bogglingly STUPID that I don’t know where to begin.

So, let’s begin at the beginning, with our United States Constitution.  Here’s a couple of key points:

THE BEGINNING

– The States were already in power at the time they agreed to join the Union.  They already had powers.  They still do.

– The Constitution specifically delineated a few key powers to the federal government and normalized relations between the States, primarily in the areas of commerce and common defense.

– Just in case anyone forgot that the people and the States retain the lion’s share of authority, our Founding Fathers included Amendments IX and X in our Bill of Rights:

Amendment IX:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X:  The 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.

– Amendments to the Constitution become integral parts of the Constitution itself.  As the Constitution itself declares in Article. V., “shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution.”

– Between December 7, 1787, and May 29, 1790, all thirteen states ratified the Constitution.

-Subsequently, whenever a territory has applied to become a State, they do so with the full knowledge of and consent to the U.S. Constitution.

– One of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, proposed in 1789 and duly ratified by the states on December 15, 1791, is “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”  Our Founding Fathers were so adamant about protecting this right they added an absolute:  “shall not be infringed.”  Moreover, this isn’t merely about restricting Congress from passing laws, as stated in the First Amendment.  Rather, it applies to the states, as well, and on December 15, 1791, all United States at the time become party to it, whereas all subsequent States became party to it when they applied for statehood.

WHERE WE ARE NOW

Sadly, instead of focusing on legitimate, science-based policing, these red flag laws throw that science out the window, criminalizing gun ownership itself, in a flagrant and very dangerous violation of the “shall not be infringed” clause of the Second Amendment i.e. the U.S. Constitution.

 

Palm Beach Atlantic Lacrosse Coach Bans Gun Pics

I’ve been a Christian since I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior at age 15.  Since then, I have participated in thousands of worship services, Bible studies, and scriptural studies.  I have three degrees, two in science, two graduate, and two summa cum laude.

I attended and graduated from Virginia Tech in the middle 1980s.  Virginia Tech is, as you may well know, the location of the massacre perpetrated against fellow students and teachers by Seung-Hui Cho.  The heinous nature of that incident affected all students, including we alumni.

At age 25 I became a U.S. military officer, serving our nation honorably for more than 20 years, beginning with the same oath of office as taken by every public servant including all judges, law enforcement officers, legislators and members of the executive branches (mayors, governors, the president):

I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Please keep the aforementioned facts firmly in mind with respect to my credentials across several fronts backing up what I am about to say below.  Put simply, this is not an “opinion piece.”  These are facts:

In a flagrant violation of both the First and Second Amendment U.S. Constitutional rights of its students, the lacrosse coach of Palm Beach Atlantic University forbade a student, Zach Scholl, from posting pictures “guns and this stuff.  Specifically, the coach said:

“You want to play lacrosse, you won’t post pics of your guns and this stuff.  That’s simple.  You want to continue to post this, you don’t play.”

Young Mr. Scholl displayed an exemplary level of mastery in his response to the coach’s flagrantly un-Constitutional mandate:

“As a citizen of this country, I have a second amendment right to keep and bear arms and a first amendment right to post the pictures of my firearms and photos from my hunts on my various social media accounts.

“These are my rights as a U.S. citizen and I’m not going to throw them away just to play ball under you.  As much as I love the sport it is not worth it to me to surrender.  So, thank you for the opportunity, but someone else will have to be wearing #40 this year.”

It’s more than a shame Mr. Scholl had to quit the team.  It’s a crime, prohibited by federal law, for a coach to force any student to forfeit their Constitutional rights in order to play on the team.  Now, to be fair, coaches, universities, and athletic organizations such as the NCAA can impose a very few limitations, such as maintaining a reasonable QCA/GPA, eating at an athletic dining hall, living in athlete dorms and maintaining a curfew during the season.  They absolutely can NOT, however, force a student to pick between posting tasteful pictures of a lawful and Constitutionally-protected activity — by two Amendments, no less — and playing a collegiate sport.

Fortunately, the university published an official response to this incident in the clearest of terms:

“As a Christian University, PBA strongly supports our Constitutional Republic, the U.S. Constitution and all individual rights protected under the Bill of Rights, especially freedom of religion, freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms.”

Such an outstanding official position needs no explanation or interpretation, and neither do the two Amendments from which it was derived, Amendments with which the lacrosse coach is in sorely need of  review:

Amendment I:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II:  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.

But hey, let’s watch what Dana Loesch has to say in her NRA video:

Well said, Dana.  Well said.

In light of the coach’s heinous actions violating the Constitutional rights of he student as well as official university policy, three things must happen:

  1.  The coach needs to be officially reprimanded, and if he insists on repeating his erroneous ways, he needs to be fired for wrongly imposing his NPOV (narrow point of view) i.e. political bigotry on his players.
  2. Palm Beach Atlantic University needs to issue an official and public apology to the student
  3. The student needs to be invited to re-join the lacrosse team, without prejudice, and in the same position and degree of play he held before.

If you would like to contact PBA’s Athletic Staff Directory, you can reach them, here.

If you would like to contact the university directly, their contact information is listed on the bottom of their home page.

For more information on Students for Concealed Carry, see:

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY — Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com or tweet @CampusCarry.

 

Appeals court: 2nd Amendment protects open carry of arms

“A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Second Amendment protects the right to openly carry (aka “open carry”) a gun in public for self-defense.”

Good.  We the People have known open carry was not merely “legal” but “the supreme Law of the Land” for 229 years, since before the ink on our Bill of Rights was dry.  Same goes for concealed carry.  Never forget our Founders and Framers were “We the People” citizens, too.  It’s nice to see that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals knows how to read the Constitution.  Well, two of them, anyway.

How to Read the U.S. Constitution

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

“Keep” means to “own” or “posses.” You can keep your firearm at home. You can keep it in your car. You can keep it about your person. You can keep it with you wherever you go.  In the context of the day it was written, it meant the people were not going to be required to turn them in to an armory, or worse, for destruction.  Instead, recognizing the God-given right to procure food, protect one’s self, family, and property, and in accordance with “the pursuit of happiness” and other freedoms, our Founding Fathers rightfully recognized, respected, and codified God’s inalienable right in the form of keeping arms.

“Bear” means to “carry.” You can carry it along with you on a hike, while shopping, getting gas, at the library…  Pretty much anywhere you want. Since the amendment doesn’t restrict mode of carry to either concealed carry or open carry, it’s both.

Moreover, since “shall not be infringed” is an absolute, lacking any restriction on the type of arms, or the location or manner in which people keep and bear arms, both open carry and concealed carry are equally and fully within the right of the people.  All other arguments to the contrary, including those stated in this pathetically biased article, are mute.  There are no “except when…” allowances in the Second Amendment, for very good reason.  Those who wrote it knew if they allowed even an iota of room for exception, that people and powers opposed to our Constitutional covenant between We the People and our Republican Government would indeed infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

Why are these very straightforward concepts so difficult for liberals and Demoncraps to comprehend?

It’s because they don’t WANT to comprehend them, or, if they do, they want to advance their blitheringly idiotic anti-gun agenda.  For example, “Hawaii Attorney General Russell Suzuki said … ‘We are disappointed in the decision that would undermine Hawaii’s strong gun control law and our commitment to protect the public’ and ‘well-reasoned dissent supporting the constitutionality of this law.”

No, Suzuki, the dissent is not “well-reasoned.”  It’s an extreme violation of Constitutional law, quite alarming coming from a judge who swore to uphold it.  Furthermore, disarming honest, law-abiding citizens does not protect them.  England, also an island, tried that and their crime rate more than tripled.  It’s still 274% greater than it was before their ban.  Grow a brain, you blitheringly idiotic, anti-Constitutional fool.

Nope! Our U.S. Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Says so itself, right there in Article VI: “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.”

IT’S THE LAW, people.

But it’s not just “guns,” there, Associated Press. “The right of the people to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed.”

The term “arms” is short for “armaments,” not “firearms.” Obviously, it includes firearms, but it also includes knives, machetes, spears, bow and arrow, rifle, handgun, revolver, pistol, AR-15, lance, sword… ALL ARMS. ALL forms of armament.

Why?  Because some people may not be able to afford  a firearm, that’s why.

“In 1623, Virginia forbade its colonists to travel unless they were “well armed”; in 1631 it required colonists to engage in target practice on Sunday and to “bring their peeces to church.”26 In 1658 it required every householder to have a functioning firearm within his house and in 1673 its laws provided that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to purchase a firearm would have one purchased for him by the government, which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do so” (Note 1).

As I mentioned before, the article is chock full of liberal bias

Notes

  1.  William Hening, The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia from the First Session of the Legislature in 1619, at pp. 127, 173-74 (New York, 1823), as referenced in the 1982 Congressional Report on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

On Banning Bump-Fire Stocks…

What do you think, folks? Should we ban bump-fire stocks?

 Or should we ban the blitheringly idiotic, mentally unstable liberals and/or Demoncraps who keep murdering people en masse?
 
Perhaps we should ban the Mudstream Media that continues to poison their brains with worthless crap that simply isn’t true.
 
We could ban Hollywood for giving these mass-murderers the ideas in the first place.
 
Maybe we ought to imprison the communist teachers who FAILED to teach our kids proper, helping them learn things like, “On my honor, I will do my best. To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”
 
But banning bump-fire stocks? What’s next, guns in general? Knives? Quarter-staffs? Socks full of pennies? Spears? Rocks?
 
I mean, seriously… Are you going to ban ROCKS? Because, as you know, there was a guy who was murdered less than a quarter mile away from where I lived. He was murdered in the parking lot of a sports bar when someone hit him over the head with a ROCK.
 
So, go ahead. Ban rocks. This is, however, the ROCKY Mountains, so it’s going to take you a few hundred (if not tens of thousands) of years to get rid of all the rocks.
 
Until you do, I think I’ll keep my knives, guns, and anything else I damned well please, thank you very much.

Mass Shootings and Random Acts of Violence

I’ve long been a strong advocate of an armed populace as the best means of self-defense. I also believe it is by far the best deterrent and way to stop both mass shootings and terrorist attacks involving firearms.
 
Back when I first became interested in the topic of mass shootings, however, there weren’t as many, and at least here in America. It was largely relegated to the occasional insane person run amok. Aside from 9/11, we did not yet have to worry Muslims conducting their own mass shootings in the name of terrorism.
 
Now we do, and it looks to get a whole lot worse before it ever gets better.
 
Society has several tools available to deter terrorism and mass shootings:
 
– Intelligence (costly, even when highly focused)
– – requirements
– – planning and direction
– – collection
– – processing and exploitation
– – analysis and production
– – dissemination
– Security (the physical deterrence and protection of people 
– – Law enforcement (federal, state, county, and local)
– – Personal protection (planning, training, and weapons)
 
So, should we make it more difficult for people to obtain guns?  Should we reduce magazine capacities?  Increase background checks?  Reduce calibers?  Limit ammunition capability?  Create more “gun-free” zones?  Mandate the use of “smart” guns?  Increase waiting periods?  Ban certain types of firearms based on their appearance or general level of public trepidation?  Put a cop on every street corner?
anti-gun desperation
No.  NONE of these measures has proven effective in either deterring or stopping mass shootings or random acts of violence, and most of them significantly increase the cost of obtaining a firearm to the average law-abiding citizen who seeks protection.
By far the most immediate and most effective deterrent against both mass shootings and random acts of violence, whether the result of insanity or terrorism, is a well-armed general populace comprised of law-abiding U.S. citizens who are both properly armed and well-trained.
 
The greatest threat to our security comes not from the lunatics and terrorists, but rather, from those second-guessers, the Monday-morning armchair quarterbacks who are NOT well-trained (if at all) yet who for whatever blitheringly idiotic reason feel like they’re *somehow* qualified to force their opinions down the throats of an otherwise free and well-trained general populace, usually in the form of ideas that sound good but either do nothing or actually do more harm than the harm they’re supposed to address.
mass shootingsThroughout history, a well-armed/trained populace has always been the most effective deterrent and counter to mass shootings and random acts of violence.

Got Murders and Violent Crime? ARM YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS. IT WORKS.

Letter to a message forum I frequent…

I can’t tell you how often I’ve logged in here over the last year only to see that no Hot Topics thread has been active since the last time I logged in, which, over the last year, has been of much longer duration (less than 1 in 5) since that of previous years (at least 4 in 5).

Not that I actually want a Hot Topics issue to rear its head every time I turn around, so, perhaps I should be grateful…

Regardless, the problems with crime that we continue to experience continue to be a problem for precisely the same reasons, at least partially:

A. By far, there’s not enough armed law-abiding citizens compared to the criminal population as a whole.(1)

Thankfully, I think a lot of these issues lost steam after Black’s judgment in Alamogordo. I think they lost more steam after Heller and McDonald. I think they lost even more steam after the 2012 election, where the American electorate made a significant switch, not only to having conservatives in both the House and Senate, but more towards that in many state governments, as well. That trend continued in 2016, to the point where we have the most conservative majority of elected and appointed representatives in each and every office throughout America ever except one: The top 1,000 most populous city mayors. Liberals still hold a majority in that area, almost certainly due to Bloomberg’s concentration effort (million$ if not billion$) in his Mayors against guns effort.

The most interesting this about that effort is that despite the fact that population size only correlates with gun violence across the top twenty to fifty cities, all 1,000 of them surged. Obviously, a lot of citizens of even the bottom half of that 1,000 list identify with the largest ones with the most problems.

Quite frankly, I don’t know why. If I lived it a big city, I would not EVER aspire to have anything to do with any of these categories:

Category 1: The Most Dangerous Cities in America ([URL=”http://www.kare11.com/news/the-most-dangerous-cities-in-america/328232115″]KARE 11, Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN, October 1, 2016[/URL]), by Violent Crimes per 1,000 and 2015 murders (strangely enough by violent crime, first, and only then by murder rate):

1. St. Louis, MO: 1,817 / 188
2. Detroit, MI: 1760 / 295
3. Birmingham, AL: 1,746 / 79
4. Memphis, TN: 1,740 / 135
5. Milwaukee, WI: 1,596 / 145
6. Rockford, IL: 1,583 / 19
7. Baltimore, MD: 1,536 / 344
8. Little Rock, AR: 1,485 / 32
9. Oakland, CA: 1,442.5 / 85
10. Kansas City, KS: 1,417 / 109

Category 2: The Most Dangerous Cities in the United States ([URL=”http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-united-states.html”]WorldAtlas, 2016[/URL]) (Violent Crimes per 100,000 people for cities with over 250,000 people):

1 Detroit, MI 1,988.63
2 Memphis, TN 1,740.51
3 Oakland, CA 1,685.39
4 St. Louis, MO 1,678.73
5 Milwaukee, WI 1,476.41
6 Baltimore, MD 1,338.54
7 Cleveland, OH 1,334.35
8 Stockton, CA 1,331.47
9 Indianapolis, IN 1,254.66
10 Kansas City, KS 1,251.45

This list roughly agrees with the previous one, so let’s proceed to the third, which measures MURDER ([URL=”https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/top-lists/highest-murder-rate-cities/”]Neighborhood Scout, 2016[/URL])

The countdown for the Top 30 Murder Capitals of America:

Rank City
30 Chicago Heights, IL
29 Baton Rouge, LA
28 Buffalo, NY
27 Hattiesburg, MS
26 East Chicago, IN
25 Birmingham, AL
24 Desert Hot Springs, CA
23 Compton, CA
22 Myrtle Beach, SC
21 Fort Pierce, FL
20 Harvey, IL
19 Bridgeton, NJ
18 Flint, MI
17 Rocky Mount, NC
16 Pine Bluff, AR
15 Petersburg, VA
14 Newark, NJ
13 Baltimore, MD
12 Harrisburg, PA
11 Jackson, MS
10 Wilmington, DE
9 Trenton, NJ
8 Riviera Beach, FL
7 New Orleans, LA
6 Camden, NJ
5 Detroit, MI
4 Gary, IN
3 St. Louis, MO
2 Chester, PA
1 East St. Louis, IL

No additional details given.

(1)This is a change from what I’ve previously said. However, I’ve since identified a very decided difference the ratio of (A) armed law-abiding citizens to (B) armed criminals with respect to both the per capita rate of violent crimes and murders. Thus, we can definitively state two near iron-clad axioms at this point:
1. States where the ratio of (A) armed law-abiding citizens to (B) armed criminals is higher will have a distinctively lower per capita rate of both violent crimes and murders.
2. States where the ratio of (A) armed law-abiding citizens to (B) armed criminals is lower will have a distinctively higher per capita rate of both violent crimes and murders.

Given the fact that these correlations are not only strong, but are using rates based not on everyone in the entire population, but those individuals in the population who are either actually using firearms to commit or to stop crimes, these statistics very strongly support, in Kennesaw, GA style, measures to adequately arm and fully train your average law-abiding citizen.

Where is Our Enemy?

Contrary to popular misconception, I do NOT hate all Muslims. In fact, I don’t hate ANY Muslims.
 
I DO, however, “hate that which is evil and cling to that which is good.” – Romans 12:9
 
This begs the question, “What is evil?”
 
As Justin Tolomeo, acting special agent in charge for the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Phoenix, said in a statement: “People who are plotting to death to Americaharm America and Americans are no longer a world away.” According to a variety of sources ranging from several within our federal government to various security think tanks, somewhere between 3% and 30% of Muslims currently in the United States would take innocent American lives given the right opportunity. Tens of thousands of Muslims were certainly observed cheering in the streets when Muslims attacked all Americans on September 11, 2001.
 
I’d call that evil, and encourage you to remember that such evil is already here in America, among us.
 
So what are we to do? Kill them all? If we did that, America would probably not survive the ensuing global backlash.
 
I would love to be able to differentiate between the good ones and the bad ones, but that’s just not possible. The problem involves taqiyya, the Islamic practice of deceiving your enemy. They’re apparently very good at it, having fooled the American government many times, including at the security checkpoints leading to those four fateful flights on September 11, 2001, eluding security at the Boston Marathon, attacking our recruiting centers, our hospitals, and many more.
 
When your enemy is inside your borders, and there’s no way to discern the difference between your enemy and a peaceful Muslim neighbor until it’s too late, what is an honest, law-abiding American citizen to do?
 
Remember, we didn’t start this war. Islam waged war against the rest of the world for 400 years before the Western world throughout Europe grew Jihad is their dutytired of the bloodshed and mounted a counter-offensive we know as the Crusades, kicking their butts back to the Middle East. It has only been in the last century, with a boldness and wealth resulting from oil, that they have resumed their global conquest.
 
So, again, what’s an honest, law-abiding American citizen to do?
 
Buy a firearm. Make sure it’s good, simple, and reliable. Get the best training possible. Know how to use it, when to use it, where to use it, and just as importantly, when not to use it. Train often, carry it with you whenever possible, and be ready at a moment’s notice.
 
Just remember this: Islam knows no bounds, and Muslims can be unbelievable cowards. They have often strapped bombs to their children, much like this smiling young girl, to do their dirty work for them.
American Muslim Girl
So good luck, God bless, and Carry On.