On July 19th Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey unilaterally banned the sale of most semiautomatic rifles in the State simply because they share characteristics with already banned “assault rifles”.  This is the newest in a long series of threats to our right to bear arms.  The best way to fight against these threats is by arming ourselves and others with knowledge about the original meaning and purpose of the Second Amendment.   We must combat all of the distortions and out right lies about the Second Amendment.  Most of the distortions of the Second Amendment come from those on the left however those on the right are also guilty on a couple key points so please keep reading even if you consider yourself to be an expert on the Second Amendment.

How many times have you heard the one about the Second Amendment being just about hunting?  If you’re like me you’ve heard it way too many times.  The framers of the Second Amendment made it abundantly clear the purpose was defense — self defense, defense of the community, defense of the State, and defense of the nation.

The Virginia Declaration of Rights, which was written in 1776, served as a model for the Bill of Rights.  It is very similar to amendments proposed during the New York and North Carolina ratifying conventions for the Constitution.  The final version of the Second Amendment was an edited down version of this which conveyed the same meaning with less words.  Here is section 13 of that document:

That a well-regulated Militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that Standing Armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Two common distortions which are linked together are that the Second Amendment is a collective right that only applies to members of the militia and the militia was exactly same as the National Guard is today.  Both points are incorrect.  None of the rights mentioned in the Bill of Rights are collective rights.  The framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights believed only in individual rights.  The National Guard, which came into existence in 1933, is made up of formal military units composed of a limited number of individuals.  The militia was made up of the entire population.  That was clearly stated in the Virginia Declaration of Rights and the amendments proposed during the ratifying convention.  Here are two more quotes regarding the make up of the militia and scope of the right to bear arms:

Richard Henry Lee Federal Farmer 18

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…

George Mason Virginia Ratifying Convention 1787

I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”

The right to bear arms is not granted to us by the Second Amendment.  That right is granted to every individual by God.  It is one of the God given Natural Rights.  The Second Amendment protects and preserves that right by preventing the federal government from interfering with that right in any way.  All federal restrictions and regulations involving firearms are unconstitutional.  The only role the Supreme Court should play involving the Second Amendment is to declare all federal restrictions unconstitutional.  Unfortunately the federal government, including the Supreme Court, stopped following the Constitution decades ago.

I know I’m going to take heat from some on the right about this but the Second Amendment does not prevent the States from placing restrictions on firearms.  The Bill of Rights does not apply to the States in any way.  That is quite clear from the transcripts form the drafting and the ratifying of the Bill of Rights.  James Madison proposed extending some of the Bill of Rights to the States but that was shot down.  The US Constitution created a bottom up federal republic not a top down national government with the federal government in complete control.  No rights are absolute,  At some level decisions have to be made to determine where exercising your rights becomes an abuse of your rights,  If freedom of speech is absolute what would prevent someone from standing outside your bedroom window all night screaming threats and obscenities at you?  If freedom of religion is absolute then there would be no way to prevent human sacrifice.  The framers of the Constitution believed these decisions should be made at the State level.

There are two levels of defense built into our constitutional system to prevent the States from becoming abusive to our rights.  The first line of defense is the State Constitutions.  Every State Constitution has a Bill of Rights.  All but a few protect the right to bear arms.  Here is what the Massachusetts Constitution has to say on this subject:

Article XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.

Since guns are meant for common defense and those so called assault weapons are perfect for common defense aren’t they protected?

The ultimate line of defense is “we the people”.  It is up the people of the States to decide when the State governments go to far in the regulations of firearms,  They must play an active role and hold the State governments accountable.  They must educate their fellow citizens, organize protests, and vote out all that want to go to far with restricting guns.  I firmly believe that permit less open carry with no restrictions is the model for all States.

Who is Jon Fournier — Im a strict constitutionalist who has studied the Notes on the Debates in the Federal Convention, the transcripts of the State ratifying conventions, The Federalist Papers, The Anti-Federalist Papers, and the writings of the framers of the Constitution. I have also studied economics through the writings of Adam Smith, F A Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman.

A note from DaTechGugy: I hope you enjoyed Jon Fournier’s piece. Remember we will be judging the entries in Da Magnificent tryouts by hits both to their post and to DaTipJar So if you like Jon Fournier’s work please consider sharing this post, and if you hit DaTipjar because of it don’t forget to mention Jon Fourniers post is the reason you did so.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Every single Person participating in said sit in is of the same political party as the Orlando shooter and like said shooter “likes Hillary Clinton” or in Mr. Mateen’s case “liked”

That is all.

Update: Via Insty and of course Iowahawk

“And that one?” I pointed to a man up to his chin in boiling blood. He was screaming in agony so his face was distorted, but he looked Oriental.

“New one,” Billy said. “Seung, something like that. Went out and shot a bunch of people in the college he was at. Allen, it puzzles me that a man can shoot thirty-two full-grown men and women before the sheriff’s men gun him down. You’re more his time, maybe you can tell me. Why didn’t someone just shoot the son of a bitch?”

I scratched my head. Billy’s viewpoint seemed skewed, alien.

“Five of ‘em where teachers,” Billy said. “They had to protect their kids. How could they not be armed? It’s as if someone has been taking away their guns.”

Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle:  Escape from Hell

“We would have preferred to hit a US frigate, but no problem because they are all infidels.”

Spokesperson Army of Aden

 

 

Rather than write about all the various concepts concerning 1st amendment rights and a business being allowed to make their own decision and point out one simple thing:

This restaurant owner by making this public declaration against guns and gun owners has informed any lawbreaker that they are unlikely to get any kind of resistance either from the owners or from the patrons as those who are most likely to be able to offer any resistance will be eating elsewhere. While, vendettas against Christian bakers notwithstanding, the owner has the right to do this, I question its wisdom.

Given the number of other places to eat I see no reason to dine somewhere that has provided an incentive to the violent or the lawless to stop on by.

Just an FYI A documentary film maker who believes the facts are you their side never does this:

or this:

The irony of the cowardice by a group of anti-gun activists is not lost on me.

One of the basic facts that Christianity teaches is that humans have a sinful nature which is why it was so necessary for Christ to redeem them in such a dramatic and painful way.

This means that believers will sin, sometimes in spectacular ways not only because of the temptations of the Devil but because it is in our fallen human nature. It’s one of the reasons why confession, instituted by Christ is one of the bedrocks of the church. For example while you are much less likely for a believing christian to get or encouraging their child to have an abortion, vs a non christian, the sheer number of abortions in this country suggest it wouldn’t be hard to find an example of one doing so.

Or to put it another way, something that is a million to one shot should happen regularly in a country of 300+ Million

By the same token sooner or later the press will find a campus shooter who is a devout christian, a tea party member, an outspoken conservative, a NRA life member who has attacked liberals online and has expressed a desire to eliminate them brandishing a machine gun in a non-gun free zone.

Just not today.

Question, given the number of California gun laws the San Bernardino attackers happily violated how would new ones deter them?

Take your time.

Update: via Instapundit ATF Says Weapons Used in San Bernardino Shooting Were Illegal in California.

In fact they were illegal under federal law:

Modifying a gun for fully automatic fire is illegal in every state, it’s a federal law. A VERY SERIOUS federal law.

I’m going to shock a few people here by saying how pleased I am to see John Bel Edwards win in Louisiana

To regular readers of the blog this might be a shock, why on earth would I want to see the democrats get a morale increasing win at a time when things look very bad for them, much better to see them continue to be crushed without mercy.  Particularly if you look at his record on certain issues:

Edwards campaigned as a moderate Democrat; he is an Obama supporter.  One of the first things Governor Edwards will do is to accept the Louisiana Medicaid expansion portion of Obamacare.

Another problem I saw with Edwards is that he is in the pocket of the trial lawyers and would do little to support the tort reform that is contributing to the anti-business climate in this state.  The business climate in this state is dismal…that is unless all you want to come in is more chain restaurants and tattoo parlors.  Not much else is happening here.

Edwards also wants to raise the minimum wage — another anti-business move.

I also find it unsettling that Edwards seems to have no clear position on whether or not he would accept more Syrian refugees into Louisiana and that he has been obfuscating his earlier positions on this for what is apparently a more popular stance.  The Hayride outlined this word-juggling here.  Initially, Edwards posted on Facebook that he would be an “active participant” in talks with the feds so that “we can be partners in the effort to accommodate refugees…”.  Well, if we can forgive Vitter for adultery eight years ago, (as his wife did, by the way), certainly we can forgive Edwards a little verbal nuance, no?  Everyone’s entitled to change their mind, except when they lie about it.

Initially, Edwards want to accommodate and assist the Syrian refugees coming into Louisiana.  After his Facebook posts advocating this position, and the grief he took for it in the comments, he changed his mind.  Curious.

These are all valid points & if I was a republican whose only goal was victory for the republican party  I’d be pretty upset.

But I’m not a republican, I’m a conservative catholic and when I look at John Bell Edwards this is what I see:

His Catholic upbringing and strong family ties have shaped both his commitments to his own community as well as his family. John Bel’s mother taught him both the compassion he demonstrates as a legislator and his belief in the power of prayer. Meanwhile, his family credits his father with ensuring that John Bel carefully considers all sides of an issue before making difficult decisions on behalf of his constituents. This compassion and good judgment, coupled with his ability to understand the details of legislation, has made him a force to be reckoned with among his colleagues in the Louisiana Legislature.

John Bel is married to his high-school sweetheart, the former Donna Hutto and they live in Roseland, Louisiana, with their three children, Samantha, Sarah Ellen, and John Miller. Donna is a public school teacher in Hammond, Louisiana, and John Bel practices law with his nephew in Amite. The Edwards family attends St. Helena Catholic Church in Amite.

And when I look at him on the issues I care about this is what I see:

Like the governor, he is an anti-abortion, pro-gun rights Catholic; his voting record is unblemished on both issues. Edwards is also known in the House as one of the most studied and disciplined legislators on either side of the aisle. Like Jindal, he has a sharp mind for policy.

and has lived this example: emphasis mine

In the 30-second TV spot, Edwards’ wife Donna describes being 20-weeks pregnant when a doctor discovered their child had spina bifida and encouraged her to have an abortion. `I was devastated,` Donna Edwards says. `But John Bel never flinched. He just said, ‘No. No, we’re going to love this baby no matter what.’`

The commercial shows their grown-up daughter with her fiancee as Donna Edwards says, `Samantha’s getting married next spring and she’s living proof that John Bel Edwards lives his values every day.`

Edwards said the ad was his daughter’s idea `to make sure people understood where we are on that issue as it relates to our Catholic Christian faith, being pro-life.` It also draws distinctions from the national Democratic Party, as Edwards positions himself as the kind of moderate Democrat that Louisiana used to regularly elect to statewide office.

Now there was a time when a Democrat who supported Gun Rights, was opposed to abortion and were actual faithful church Catholics was nothing unusual.  Unfortunately that time was over two decades ago back in the days when I was a democrat. It’s why I left the party in 1992

Now he’s weaseled a tad on funding planned parenthood for my taste but as Jazz Shaw put it:

The answer may not be what you think. One part of the equation is that the Democrats found the right guy to run. Edwards’ biography lays it all out. A West Point graduate and Airborne Ranger, Edwards is pro-gun, hawkish and touts his family’s deep religious faith and ties to the church. If you dropped this guy anywhere else in the country he’d be a Republican. Heck.. .he’d be toward the right wing of the party.

Meanwhile in the Lt Gov race the Democrats ran a fellow named Kip Holden who has argued this on abortion

Kip Holden, a Democrat, said: ”You’ve heard that life begins at conception. That’s disputed by a number of people and a number of those people have scientific backgrounds.”

Mr. Holden said the proposed law ”boils down to the haves and the have nots. Yes, abortions will still be performed on those women who can afford to go to other states.”

Holen is also a member of Bloomberg’s Mayors against illegal guns group.

The result?  While Edwards beat Vitter by 12 points, Holden the pro-abortion anti gun democrat lost by 10 to republican Billy Nungessor.

That’s exactly the type of result I want to see.

Now normally an Obama supporting, pro-obamacare Democrat winning the Gubernatorial race in the south would be a huge story for the MSM and we’d see huge headlines and in depth coverage of the winning democrat from the MSM for a week.

But given that this is also the win of  a pro 2nd amendment, anti common core anti-abortion religious catholic combined with a loss for a anti-2nd amendment pro abortion running mate, I think they might give it a miss.

Closing thought, I’m sorry for my friend Pat Austin that she is going to have to deal with a governor who is going to be bad on a lot of issues that are important to people living in Louisiana.

But if the Democrat party decides to start running anti-abortion pro-2nd amendment candidates for governor all over the nation, nobody will be happier than I

****************************************************************************

The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and to date we’re only at $5200

Given that fact I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

10th Doctor: You’re not …..{Pulls out & extends sonic Screwdriver , 11th Doctor pulls out longer one with a grin } Compensating?
11th Doctor: For what?
10th Doctor: Regeneration. It’s a lottery.
11th Doctor: Oh, he’s cool. Isn’t he cool? I’m the Doctor and I’m all cool. Oops, I’m wearing sandshoes!

Doctor Who The Day of the Doctor 2013

You know there are some stories that are so foolish, so stupid that when you read them you’re convinced that they are simply plants.

University of Texas at Austin students plan to carry dildos around campus next year in protest of recent legislation that allows concealed carry permit holders to carry their firearms to public colleges’ campuses.

No you’re not reading that wrong, it’s not an article from Cracked or Mad it’s actually happening.

And the leader of this protest thinks that carrying a gun is all about SEX!

 

Jin told the Houston Chronicle in an interview that she chose the sex toy as “it spotlights the masturbatory nature of the power which people derive from gun ownership, and the self aggrandizing ‘I’m one of the good ones, I’ll protect you’ arguments we’re so often expected to simply trust.”

The truth of course is that having a concealed carry permit says something quite different as evidenced by this tweet:

But I do think there is something psycho sexual about all of this.

The people who will be carrying around sexual devices are actually advertising their impotence.

They don’t have the discipline to learn how to carry a firearm safely, they don’t have the ability to protect themselves, they don’t have the historical perspective to understand how bearing arms is a basic right of a free person and finally they don’t have the self-confidence to defend themselves or the courage to defend others.

So I think it’s totally appropriate for such people who have none of these historically manly qualities and are terrified of manhood to parade around bearing items to make up for their inadequacy.

It’s who they are

For those of you who don’t understand the difference between how media in Red States and Media in blue states see the world here is an excellent example using almost identical stories in two different states over the weekend.

Blue State Media adjective: Victim

Used by a reporter in a sentence: Police have not yet identified the victim.

Definition: Used to describe a person shot and killed when attempting an armed robbery in a Connecticut restaurant

Media involved NBC Connecticut

An armed man was shot dead by a patron after the suspect tried robbing the Waterbury, Connecticut, cafe and the patrons inside, police said.
Police are investigating the fatal incident as a homicide.

Red State Media Adjective: Robber

Used by a reporter in a sentence: The Waffle House crew was busily going about its typical early-morning ritual — smothering and scrambling breakfast, clanking through the dirty dishes — when a robber jolted them out of their routine.

Definition: Used to describer a person shot and killed when attempting an armed robbery in a North Carolina Restaurant.

Media involved: The Post and Courier

A customer decided he was having none of that and opened fire in the North Charleston eatery, thwarting the holdup Saturday by fatally shooting the suspect.

The young man who tried to rob the restaurant was rushed to Medical University Hospital, but he later died, police spokeswoman Angela Johnson said…Said an officer at the scene: “It says something about firearms … for good people with firearms being in the right hands.”

In both cases an armed person attempted to rob a restaurant, in both cases a citizen with a licence to carry was present. In both cases the person with the licence to carry killed the person attempting to rob the place but in blue state america the dead criminal is a victim while in red state america he is a robber.

Any questions?

****************************************************************************

The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000.

Given that fact and the discovery that the repairs needed for my car that failed inspection will run between $500-$1000 I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

Yesterday President Barack Obama had this to say about the shootings at an Oregon College:

Well now, phony profiles created after death not withstanding there is one thing we have established on the record from named witnesses present in the room as he was killing people.

The killer in Oregon was deliberately targeting Christians

Now if I was the president of the US

Whose policies were extremely anti christian

Who was suing catholic nuns in order to force them to abet commit mortal sin.

Who has been ignoring the slaughter of christians worldwide.

Whose party regularly attacks christian belief as “hate speech”

Whose closest supporters spent the last 26-38 hours going absolutely batshit nuts over the single most popular religious figure in the world meeting with Kim Davis the Christian most hated by my supporters

I think that even if it did take people’s minds off of Syria for a week, if people politicize a mass murder committed by a young black man specifically targeting Christians in a zone so gun free even the guards who were supposed to protect the student weren’t allowed to have them, it just might not work out so well for my party in general and for me in particular.

But that’s just me

Update: three things 1st Some good advice but one solid conclusion:

As for the 26 year old scumbag who did this – there’s a lot of information swirling around about him on various internet sites and not all of it is reliable. It is probably best to step back for a day or two to see how things shake out, before much is said about him. One thing is certainly safe to say: He did not like Christians.

A harsh assessment on RedState per Obama’s directive on politicizing:

Let’s be clear on this. Obama does not care about dead bodies in the street. If he did he’d set up a tent in Chicago so he could be on site as a dozen or so people are killed or wounded each weekend. He won’t do that because those people are primarily black or Hispanic and he knows his liberal base thinks that is just what minorities do. If he was really interested in dead bodies he’d be down on the Arizona-Mexico border where the actions of his own Justice Department have made that area a war zone by illegally passing weapons to unauthorized buyers. If he actually cared he would have shown some vague interest when a military recruiting station was shot up in Chattanooga. He is, allegedly, the commander-in-chief. But he couldn’t show concern because the shooter was a Muslim radical (or radical Muslim, YMMV). He could have shown concern when three Muslim students were gunned down in North Carolina but the shooter was one of his lunatic supporters.

and an interesting theological point:

If the reports are correct, men and women declared their faith and died for it. That is the classic definition of a martyr, and may their families be comforted by the words of the Savior: “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven.”

That leads to a sobering question for any Christian: “Is your belief strong enough that you would declare it openly if you knew it meant your death?”

****************************************************************************

The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000.

Given that fact and the discovery that the repairs needed for my car that failed inspection will run between $500-$1000 I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.