Monthly Archives: April 2012

Gun control: A Historical Reminder

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to posses arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” — Adolph Hitler

“Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.” — Janet Reno, Former U.S. Attorney General

Rabid socialists, communists and so-called progressives in America have been pushing for stricter and more invasive gun control legislation for decades. Their attacks against the 2nd Amendment are mostly based on murders and other crimes but more recently have been opposition to Stand Your Ground legislation. Stand Your Ground maintains that a person does not have to retreat from a criminal’s threats, especially if the criminal is in the victim’s home.

The easiest way to navigate this site is to visit the TABLE OF CONTENTS. There you will find brief descriptions and links to all my 90+ writings. OLDTIMEYMAN

The reality is the axis of evil gun control advocates know how difficult it will be for a complete subjugation of the American people if the people are armed with guns. They could care less about crime. Crime is only the excuse to disarm the American people.

Leading the charge against the guaranteed constitutional RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and especially concealed carry laws, are Democrat Sen. Charles “Chuck” Schumer of New York, Attorney General Eric Holder and of course, Illegal-Alien-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama. Schumer is currently pushing for an investigation as to whether Stand Your Ground actually works in favor of armed citizens or has led to an increase in violence.

Holder stands accused of instigating the criminal Fast and Furious scheme that armed Mexican rebels and led to the death of at least one Border Patrol agent. The list of Obama’s actions against the 2nd Amendment are far too many to list here.

Obama joins a long list of world leaders who advocate(d) strict gun controls.

 In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. (Stalin) From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938. (Hitler) From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. (Mao Tse-tung) From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. (Idi Amin) From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. (Pol Pot) From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. SOURCE

 One of the best articles I have ever read concerning the importance of being armed was written by blogger Marko Kloos. Read this before passing judgment on gun owners or gun ownership.

 The Gun is Civilization

 by Blogger Marko Kloos

 Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation… and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

We must  not allow the Axis of evil Americans disarm us lest we end up like the countless millions of people who lost their lives when only the government has guns. Fight for the 2nd Amendment as if your life depends on it – and it does.



Filed under Uncategorized

How much power and liberty have the feds and the courts stolen from the states and the people?

Are you sick and tired of seemingly constant federal intrusion into every aspect of your life? If so, you are not alone, but the question is, other than outright treason, how did this happen to us?

So many of America’s God-given rights have been stolen, ignored or legislatively changed it would take a book to list them all. But the list must begin somewhere so let’s begin by examining our rights. As we proceed, please always keep two things in mind: first, the Constitution was written by our Founders to guarantee virtually unlimited rights, liberties and freedom for the people and second, at the same time putting chains on the central or federal government.

The easiest way to navigate this site is to visit the TABLE OF CONTENTS. There you will find brief descriptions and links to all my 90+ writings. OLDTIMEYMAN

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

In plain English the Ninth Amendment acknowledges the first eight enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights, but also retains for the people all other rights not specifically mentioned or enumerated. The Ninth Amendment addresses a “great residuum” of rights that have not been “thrown into the hands of the government,” as Madison put it.

Tench Coxe, a member of the Continental Congress and later Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, compiled at least two lists of state and individual rights to illustrate the powers constitutionally denied to the federal government.

A partial list includes:

1. The federal government cannot appoint a judge, constitute a court, or in any other way interfere in determining offences against the criminal law of the states… Yet, in spite of that restriction the federal government maintains an extensive network of federal judicial districts and frequently brings criminal charges against state citizens.

2. The federal government cannot enact laws for the inspection of the produce of the country, a matter of the utmost importance to the commerce of the several states, and the honor of the whole… In my opinion, this makes the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) unconstitutional.

3. The federal government cannot interfere with the opening of rivers and canals (repeatedly violated by the U.S. Corps of Engineers); the making or regulation of roads, except post roads (why do we have a Department of Transportation?); … regulating the police of cities, towns or boroughs; executing the state laws; altering the criminal law (too many federal violations to list); nor can they do any other matter or thing appertaining to the internal affairs of any state, whether legislative, executive or judicial, civil or ecclesiastical (a classic example of overreaching federal authority is the denial of oil drilling permits in the Louisiana Gulf).

4. Each state can appoint every officer of its own militia, and can train the same, by which it will be sure of a powerful military support attached to, and even part of itself, wherein no citizen of any other state can be a private sentinel, much less have influence or command.

5. Every regulation relating to religion, or the property of religious bodies, must be made by the state governments, since no powers affecting those points are contained in the constitution. Let’s face it, the federal government, mainly through federal courts, has openly declared war on Christianity – in violation of the plain intent of the Constitution and the writings of several founders.

6. The federal government shall not regulate the law of descents [inheritance], and forbids the entail of landed estates, since these are exclusively in the power of the state legislatures … This shoots IRS regulations concerting death and inheritance taxes out of the saddle.

7. Any state may repel invasions or commence a war under emergent circumstances, without waiting for the consent of Congress. As I see it, this means that Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California could legally send armed forces (state militia) to protect their borders against the illegal alien invasion. It would also mean the federal border patrols are illegal.

8. The states not only elect all their own officers, but they have a check, by their delegates to the Senate, on the appointment of all federal officers. The 17th Amendment stopped this extremely important check on federal power by allowing senators to be elected by the general population.

9. The states are to hold separate territorial rights, and the domestic jurisdiction thereof, exclusively of any interference of the federal government. The federal Bureau of Land Management controls millions of acres in the west due to illegal federal land grabs.

The Founders were virtually unanimously in agreement that the powers granted to the federal government by the Constitution are enumerated and few while the powers retained by the states and people are numerous.

Fortunately, the 10th enumerated right guaranteed in the Constitution can end nearly all federal abuse if only state legislative and executive bodies would enforce the amendment. The 10th Amendment says simply: “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.” This can be accomplished through the process of nullification.

Every state can always give its dissent to federal bills, as each has a vote in the Senate secured by the constitution. Hence it appears, that the state governments are not only intended to remain in force within their respective jurisdictions, but they are always to be known to, and have their voices, as states, in the federal councils.

County sheriffs also have enormous power to restrain the federal beast. It is time the states and sheriffs begin to use those latent powers and put an end to the expansion of the central government.

See also: Habeus Corpus and posse comitatus, safeguards of liberty, threatened by the federal government

 Can sheriffs save America?

One sheriff claims it is time for citizens to arm themselves

Leave a comment

Filed under authority of the federal government

The Ant and The Grasshopper – A modern day fable

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

Be responsible for yourself!


The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

The easiest way to navigate this site is to visit the TABLE OF CONTENTS. There you will find brief descriptions and links to all my 90+ writings. OLDTIMEYMAN

CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so? Kermit the Frog appears on MSNBC with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, “It’s Not Easy Being Green.” Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We shall overcome.” Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper’s sake.

Democrat leaders, in every media outlet they can find, exclaim that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper and call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer! The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary Clinton gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Barack Obama appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients. The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him because he doesn’t maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

Be careful how you vote in 2012 – Be VERY careful.


Filed under Uncategorized