Friday, August 22, 2014

We Said Goodbye to the Second Amendment Years Ago!

As we see it right now, we have absolutely no checks and balances for the military and police powers in the United States. I don't care if every citizen owned 5 handguns and 10 rifles, they would be irrelevant against tanks, helicopters, artillery, and the technology to deploy them. My guess would be that since the Civil War, the powers gained by the federal government grew by leaps and bounds, and all but eliminated any opportunity for the citizens to rise against a tyranical government again.

Think about the intent and the verbiage of the Second Amendment, and tell me if it is not already lost! "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." The entire purpose of this amendment is to insure the freedom of the State. That the people would always have the means, through a militia, to rise up against tyranny, was the assurance of the Second Amendment. This assurance is lost.

"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." ---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." ---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

"[W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it." ---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

Yes we still retain the right to bear arms, however the intent of the founders is, and has been for a very long time, lost. We already have a lame duck Second Amendment, and it will never revive in this nation. I am not allowed to own an M-1 Abram Tank in my yard. I will never have access to a 155 Howitzer for my personal ownership. There is not even an organized Militia out of the pocket of the State or Federal government that has access to these types of weapons! The faith of the people have no choice today but to rest in the hope that a branch of the military will revolt in the event of overwhelming tyranny.

Will this ever happen? Can we trust the military leadership to act on behalf of the people if the future should ever get so dire? The founding fathers did not seem to think so. As a matter of fact, that is precisely why the Second Amendment was insisted on.




The military pay is always being raised, the benefits are always increasing. Many accept these issues as being long overdue. The goal is to keep military members enlisted so that the military can continue it's campaigns. It is the anger by the American people, and the frustration of the military members who are tired of these types of conflicts that cause the need to ratify our benefits and give us a "pay raise." In other words, pay us off to continue to serve. For a military to be loyal to the side of the government that employs them, THEY MUST BECOME HEROES in the eyes of the people AND BE PAID LIKE THEM!! A military can be sold a shaky and weakly grounded ideal so long as their pockets are full and families are secure!

Even in the case of the protection of the citizen vs the exclusive job of the police for protection, we run into this danger.
The call by people like Rosie O'Donnell and Michael Moore continue us on the slippery slope of taking personal protection out of the hand of the individual, and putting it into the hand of the state. But here, the same methods and rules apply. The police are being lifted on a pedestal. The government finds more and more excuses to give benefits, new equipment, and higher pay to it's civil servants. This danger was foreseen by our founders, and I believe they would be appalled if they were here to witness where the rights of the individual have gone. So what do we do with the Second Amendment? Do we side with Rosie O'Donnell or Charlton Heston? Are the arguments for the Second Amendment enough to outweigh those against it, which are grounded in the safety of children and the people?

Actually, I think I have shown two facts, and a grave situation. 1. The government cannot be relied upon to do its job. The wisdom of the founders were taken from much knowledge of history and much wisdom in the tendencies of mankind. Thomas Paine said it best:

"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Thomas Paine

2. We have already lost the Second Amendment. I see no light at the end of the tunnel. We cannot stand against tyranny in this nation. We cannot protect ourselves. Even the laws of self defense are being weakened so that our strength lie in the hands of the police force. Military and Police officials are being bought off. We are becoming a government FOR the people only, not BY the people. There is a profound reason the Second Amendment was SECOND!! It was one of the biggest necessities to protect the First, and every successive amendment! We as a nation need to wake up. We need to be cautious and suspicious of every attempt to declare heroism on the part of the military or police. We need to be conscious of every law and judgment that punishes the act of self defense. We need to be wary of both Rosie O'Donnell and the NRA. Neither have the proper understanding of why we need the Second Amendment. I have heard nothing but inadequate answers from the gun rights lobby. They spend all their time on personal protection issues and hunter rights. That is only going to lose the fight for the second most important amendment in the Constitution. Our only option to crawl back into what America was, is to resurrect the arguments of the founders, and expose the evil of the Right Wing (heroism, pay offs, "military industrial complex") and the Left Wing (trust in the government leading to tyranny, loss of self defense rights, censorship).

A "Christian Nation?"

What really makes us such? What has EVER made us such? No one disputes that many of the Founding Fathers were Christians. Three of the most essential to our Declaration and Constitution being Ben Franklin, James Madison and John Adams! But if that is the case, why is our Constitution void of any references to Christ or at least the God of the Bible? Why does the Declaration of Independence reference a "Maker," but not Jehovah?

The fact is that Christians, and other religious men of that day, believed that God was not a God of coercion. That he made the mind free to make up it's own mind, and that the government had no place supporting the Christian religion even over Islam. Both were to be equally supported under the government of the United States and both parties were to be equally free of feeling suppressed by the other.

Unfortunately the more zealous demons of our nature do not inherantly support the wisdom that came from our Founding Fathers. These were men learning from the mistakes of the days of the foundings of Virginia and New England. Both of which had very oppressive laws and very strict punishment for breaking the tenants of what they considered the Christian faith. Strict church attendance, proper dress, and no ability to debate the ruling clergy were many issues that faced the pilgrims. Jefferson and Madison knew these lessons very well, and refused to repeat them. Even today we see the zealous demons reappearing in our culture. The over reaction of the ultra-secularist is leading to an over-reaction of the ultra-conservative. The 10 Commandments on the walls, prayer in schools, crosses on public property, etc. are all issues that can be better resolved with a more proper view of history.

America is a Free Nation, founded by religious men, mostly Christians, who believed that America was a nation that should represent the freedom to worship in all faiths, or none, and violently oppose the coercion to worship, or the push to uplift, any one particular faith over another. They believed in this because they were mostly Christians. They believed that in setting up a government free from oppression, the best way to honor God would be to respect the inherant freedom in man to choose for himself the God whom he would serve.

Thomas Jefferson "WHEREAS Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend to only beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumptions of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greater part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagations of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his personal contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards ..."

James Madison "Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, 'that Religion or the duty which we oweto our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.' The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in it's nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds, cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator... Because it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much to forget it. Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christianity, in exclusion of all other Sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?... Because the establishment proposed by the bill is not requisite for the support of the Christian Religion. To say that it is, is a contradiction to the Christian Religion itself, for every page of it disavows a dependance on the powers of this world: it is a contradiction to fact; for it is known that this Religion both existed and flourished, not only without the support of human laws, but in spite of every opposition from them; and not only during the period of miraculous aid, but long after it had been left to it's own evidence, and the ordinary care of Providence: Nay, it is a contradiction in terms; for a Religion not invented by human policy, must have pre-existed and been supported, before it was established by human policy."

This is not the talk we hear from the D. James Kennedys, Pat Robertsons, or Jerry Falwells. Rather, we hear an extreme Republican pundit version of history, in an effort to rewrite our Founding Fathers intentions for America.

First and foremost, America was a nation founded on allowing all men to worship freely. No matter who they worship. Insuring freedom for Christianity in America, meant separating the government from ANY religion, including Christianity!! It is not that good men shouldn't lead. It is not that government would not benefit from having moral, Christian men at it's leadership; butcan society benefit from another wannabe theocracy where fallible men, with false ideals, force the laws of God (in their own mind and interpretation) on all persons under that government?! Let it not be. As Americans we should see this and readily identify with the heart of Jefferson and Madison, when we see the failed policies and teachings of fallible men in charge of the "church" or government today. Yet in politics and government, many people still rally hard behind, and fight in force with, those who would rewrite our Constitution and name it a Christian nation.

It was not the intention of our Founding Fathers to establish a "Christian nation," but a nation where Christianity is as free as any other sect of any other religion under that government. Let us never forget that the majority of abuses of mankind over the last 2000 years was in the name of Christ, protected by governments who claimed Christianity at it's core.

Pet Peeves #1...Tint Laws!!! "Those Little Things That Annoy Me and Make Our Founding Fathers Role Over in Their Graves!"


What is the deal with tint laws? Why on earth are we not allowed to have the maximum privacy in our vehicles possible? Should a vehicle be considered public or private domain?

For search purposes, the vehicle is treated as private domain, where an officer needs to have a solid reason to inspect inside. So why the tint? I thought maybe it was for safety purposes. Too dark of tint does not allow you to use your mirrors at night. But then why would they let you tint all the back windows without restriction to it's tone? If safety for you because of driving visibility is the only reason, then I just cannot explain that inconsistency.

Safety and visibility for the officers? Are we not allowed to tint our windows because we need to keep the officers safe? Because we need to maintain their "right" to see inside and check if we are breaking the law? If this is the case, and public opinion says it is, then I have a big reason why this is my first installment of pet peeves!

Todays culture is a safety conscience culture. Gone are the days in the Midwest when a couple friends can jump into the back of their dad's pickup and cruise down the road. Gone are the days of smoking in restaurants acceptably, or not wearing a seatbelt, even for the smallest drive. Is all this good? Are we moving in the right direction and doing the right thing by regulating the safety of our fellow man?

I believe in the absolute sovereignty of the individual over the institution. In all of my ramblings that will come, the theme will always be that individual liberty trumps any good meaning, well intended law for the purpose of legislating my personal space. In the case of the tint and the safety of the officer, it is my personal right to privacy that trumps an officers right to view the cab of my vehicle. If I am a law abiding citizen, restricting my right to remain absolutely free and private, in any way shape or form, as a preventative measure to secure an officer of the states safety, is offensive.

In America, we have lifted up the stature of the public servant (Fireman, Police, Military) to that above a normal citizen. The average citizen has become "second class" in todays almost fascist society. The people who gave up their own liberties, willingly, to serve the public, have been put on a pedestal. We have lost the fact that the public servant had purposely taken the step down in the name of protecting the citizens liberty! The reason we are "public servants" is to preserve those liberties FOR THE PEOPLE! We cannot allow the officers of the state to become the primary concern of law, if so, we have just taken the first steps in empowering the government on the way to tyranny. It is the citizen first. The question must and will be answered in all cases of law in America: Which is the most sacred virtue, the sovereignty of the institution, or the sovereign freedom of the individual!

Give us our limo tint!!" 



Pet Peeves #2...Political and Religious Discussions In the Workplace "Those Little Things That Annoy Me and Make Our Founding Fathers Role Over in Their Graves!"



As anyone can tell by this blog, I love politics and religion. It is as much a hobby for me as cars and women are for other men. One of the most annoying and troublesome comment I receive is that politics and religion should not be discussed in the workplace.

Being in the military, you find either those people eager to engage in the discussion, or those quick to lay that line down on you. Sometimes, it comes from a senior officer.

What am I to do???

Well, add it to the list of pet peeves of course! First of all, unless there is a reason to silence my discussion for professional reasons due it distracting me from actual work, I will comply no problem. If the order, or complaint, comes to me during a break time or private conversation overheard by those who object, then too bad. There is no lawful regulation or order that allows one person, senior in rank or not, to silence me on political or religious terms. As a matter of fact, much more the opposite. It is discriminating and intolerable that people feel that Americans are not allowed to engage in conversations concerning religion or politics during leisure time at work.

It is one of the most un-American, communist minded bunch of crap I have ever been told. America was founded and bled for in order to preserve that very right. The right to free expression and having my political opinion is just as fundamentally American. If my fellow Marine, or co-worker in the civilian sector, has the right to talk about his latest weekend drinking escapades, then I have every right (and even more so) to discuss politics and religion.

If I am discussing these things with junior personnel and actually recommending courses of actions, trying to get co-workers "saved," or bullying my voting opinion then I am out of place. This is not the type of thing I do, nor is it what I encourage. But fundamentally, my right to discuss and share opinions about what I do WILL NOT be denied. Even were the President to try to order me silent.

Joe Shmoe has his cars, I have my God and country. Conversation among peers should not be, and are not, limited to mindless shallow ponderings of debase and primal instincts or meaningless hobbies. Free speach for all, always!

"Happy Mothers Day" Distracted by Teachers Appreciation Week

"Happy Mothers Day" Distracted by Teachers Appreciation Week

Yes, I said it. Teachers appreciation week! Before I get to why I am upset about it, I will ask any who knows me to admit to themselves that I have been wanting to be an American History high school teacher and/or college professor ever since I have entertained the idea of retiring from the military. Even in my current job, teaching those under me is the single biggest enjoyment with my work that I have. I love to help develop young minds, and in the process, exercise my own.

So here is the BIG problem with this week. Said simply, it glorifies the State institutions above the family and rewards those who CHOSE their own professions for reason all their own. 

For a service member, they can be deployed and gone anywhere from 1 month to 1 year. In the last 3 years I have gone on (2) 6 month deployments and a 1 year deployment in Okinawa. During this time my wife took care of the home. She must maintain the house, maintain the cars, drive the kids to school and doctors appointments. She was also a part time student earning 4 credits this semester twice a week in class. Also, my wife was a USMC reservist. During her drill weekends and ANY time she has a college class when the kids are off school, my wife drives over 60 miles to pick up her mother to watch our children. She fired on the rifle range, picked up the kids late driving a 100 mile round trip home and getting everyone to bed in the late evening. Waking up at 6 A.M. the next morning, she took the kids to school, and spent the day working on her homework before driving 40 round tri- miles to pick them up, then cook dinner, help the kids with homework, put them to bed, do more homework, and eventually fall asleep. WHAT A GREAT WIFE!!

However, this week is not "Mother Appreciation Week!" She only gets one day to call her own. Instead it is Teacher Appreciation Week, where my wife can add to her duties: buying a fresh flower, helping my daughter make a card for the teacher, and whatever else is "suggested" to do for the teacher on the (3) other remaining days of appreciation. (They do special projects or gestures all 5 days of the week)! Do you think my wife is so free of distractions and easy on time that she needs to spend (5) days thinking about how to appreciate the voluntary teachers of my kids who are PAID to do their job (9) months out of the year?Mommy gets (1) day, the teacher gets (5)?

This is so typical today of the fascist culture that teaches us that teachers are more responsible to teach our children than parents. That a parents, more specifically, a Mother's job is to go to work and pass off their child to daycare. How many teachers are so full of themselves in this society that they forget their job every time they sacrifice a kids education so that they can strike for more pay? We see this all the time.

It is sickening the "honor and glory" our society is placing on the "public servant." NEWS FLASH: A teacher GETS PAID to do what they do. A parent gladly PAYS for the privilege of being one. A teacher no more deserves reverence than a plumber. They are not Nuns who dedicate their whole lives to the service of God without the comfort of pay and normal living. They are not doctors or missionaries who have left society and comfort to go to Africa to do charity work for the better part of their lives. They are American teachers who receive a paycheck, pension, and in many cases can graduate your student even if they have never learned to read so long as the teacher has tenure!! I love my wife. And for that reason I hate this week. May god Bless Mothers everywhere who dedicate their lives to taking care of their children.

God Bless
Nate