Are some rights more equal than others?

Sometimes the concepts of Liberty are just too simple to comprehend easily.  That is almost an oxymoron phrase.  We have been indoctrinated with the implications for so long in our schools that our rights come from the Constitution.  However the very simple truth is that they are a gift from our Creator, Higher Power, by right of birth, by the fact that we are born, etc.  Whichever one works for you will work for the thoughts expressed here.  

I recently ran across an article that really gave me another perspective that I thought I would share.  The Bill of Rights (BOR) describes or enumerates a number of very important rights that are essential to a free people.  The author made it clear that no one expressed right was of a higher value than another.  For example when the question, “Why would anyone need more than 10 rounds to hunt with?” would then become “Why would anyone need more than 10 books?” or “Why would anyone need more than 10 bibles?” or “Why would anyone need more than 10 letters to the editor?” or “Why would any one town need more than one newspaper or church?”

30 Round Mags...

I have been asked my opinion on the necessity of keeping 30 rounds magazines for guns.  To quote some comments: “The only reason for 30 round mag is to kill people – why should the government allow those?”  “What possible sporting use is a 30 round mag?”  And so it goes that it would appear to the average person that there is really no necessity for these large capacity mags, except to kill people.

So it is time to get down to the cold hard unpleasant facts that no one really wants to think about or consider.  The true purpose of the Second Amendment is not to preserve sporting purposes, or to make a better target shooter, or to hunt much of anything in the wild kingdom.  The true purpose is as check on, as last resort against, a government that has gone completely outside its boundaries. 

Furious...

In the past week my feelings have ranged from euphoria to fury.  Euphoria because a court has finally declared the complete ban of public carry of firearms by Illinois to be unconstitutional; fury at a government who would render citizens helpless against a broken rabid dog who takes his sickness out on young children and helpless teachers and staff at a school.

I am no more “mad” at a sick broken person than I would be against a rabid dog.  I am mad at the government who would prevent me or any other responsible adults from carrying protection against the danger.  I am mad at a system of officials who would continue to deny their oath to uphold the Constitution and its people and support a Chicago Machine government agenda to keep the People disarmed. 

It makes me furious that in the high school my children attend we have some willing staff that are unable to carry weapons which they have been trained to use responsibly that could defend my kids against rabid broken crazy people, yet they are not allowed perform that function.

Commentary on Moore/Shepard v. Madigan/Illinois

A few months ago the US Court of Appeals for the 7^th Circuit reviewed two cases that were similar in their merits.  One was a case by a party named Moore and the other by a party named Shepard.  In essence the argument was concerning the complete ban by the State of Illinois with regard to the carrying of ready-to-use firearms for self defense by the average citizen.  Frequently people have thought it was about concealed carry however the issues were far deeper than manner or method of carry.

This decision really has nothing to do with concealed carry.  It has everything to do with removing a complete ban of the right to “bear” arms "ready-to-use" in the public way by the private citizen for defensive or other lawful purposes.  Presently in Illinois there is a complete ban on a fundamental right to bear arms that are loaded and ready-to-use in the public way.  The complete ban has been struck down and left to the legislature to decide in what “reasonable” manner they will “allow” the “bearing” or carrying of firearms ready-to-use.  There may also be some restriction allowed for so called “sensitive” places such as schools.  I repeat the decision made NO DISTINCTION as to whether the form of carry was open or concealed that I could see.

The Might of the State Does Not Make Right

In a truly free country, such as ours has been, the government gains its power from the consent of the governed.  The governed is We the People.  When the People have made it clear that there are laws that get no respect from the People and further they are unconstitutional then it is time for the law to go.  In the case of Illinois we have a number of those laws, especially the gun laws. 

Now there are several ways to make these laws go away, or at least have their effect neutralized.  Let’s take a look at some of the ways.  They can be repealed by the legislature.  That isn’t going to happen anytime soon because the Chicago Machine rules with no consideration for the Constitution.  Another way is for State’s Attorneys and law enforcement officials to refuse to enforce unconstitutional law.  A third way is for sitting juries to refuse to convict when in their opinion they feel the law is not good.

Is Public Saftey Important?

I enjoy getting comments on my writing.  Two people called for clarification on my letter last week; they followed the theme, “Is any public safety important?”  My comments could have been taken to mean no attention to public safety is necessary.  That isn’t what I meant.  So let’s take this apart a little more.

What did the Pilgrims move to America for?  Was it for: better streets, better neighborhoods, safer environment, better working condition laws, improved sewer system, better police protection, etc?   No, they moved to no streets, an unsafe neighborhood, maybe environmentally safer if you don’t count wild Indians and wild animals, worse working conditions, no sewer system, no police protection.  So what did the Pilgrims value above public safety?  The answer is Liberty.

They moved to a distinctly risky environment, with no public (governmental) amenities or services.  They moved from an area of increased public safety and tyranny, but minimal Liberty, to an area of substantially greater risk for something we call Liberty.  The Pilgrims cherished Liberty above all of the previously stated government ‘services.’ 

Our Founders did not fight a war for independence for the purpose of gaining increased public safety; they fought a bloody war for increased Liberty.  What we find as we delegate more and more importance to a host of bureaus to increase public safety and security is that each one removes one more piece of Liberty.  So where does it end?

This week in the news we find a school in Florida is contemplating putting in cameras to see if students throw away their veggies in the school lunch program.  At what point will the powers that be decide to penalize adults if they eat too much of the wrong food, like say pizza, and not enough broccoli?  With the advent of Obamacare the government now has a vested interest in seeing what you eat, how much you eat and whether or not we are in full compliance with the recommended daily hygiene list. 

Thomas Jefferson said it best, “that government governs best that governs least.”  So what government services are absolutely essential?  Do I want to do without peace officers?  Well no, not really.  What about OSHA?  All I can say is Liberty has an element of risk.  Do I need government inspections to see if my business is clean enough for its intended purpose?  No, the public will determine that.  The People will vote with their dollars by taking them elsewhere, if my business doesn’t suit them.  If your eating establishment is filthy, don’t count on me eating there. 

A few weeks ago my son was badly injured in a horse accident.  He was transported to the hospital for emergency treatment and examination.  His pain was so great that morphine was administered for the pain.  However inadvertently the amount of morphine he was given was well in excess of what should have been given.  He became violently sick and was sick for several days from the overdose.  Now I don’t say that we should “outlaw” morphine, I would recommend that the overdose be corrected to an amount that is beneficial without harming the patient.  Another example is Warfarin or “rat poison,” administered in judicious amounts it can be beneficial.

The same is true for what I have called “Governmenticin.”  A judicious level can be good, too much and you have an overdose.  I say that we currently have an overdose in our country of Governmenticin.  That overdose is producing a very sick economy and a culture of people who have become dependent or addicted to Governmenticin and are very ill economically and/or socially because of it.

Thanks for the comments, keep them coming.  If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at: editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.

A Comment from Blackstone

Our Founders read and studied writings by Sir William Blackstone.  He wrote a four volume “Commentary on the Laws of England.”  Blackstone had a gift for clarifying the laws and the reasoning behind the laws.  I have been fortunate to acquire the four volumes.  I have not been able to completely read them and digest all of the ‘arcane’ language. 

This particular quote from Blackstone caught my interest lately: 

“… that the whole should protect all its parts, and that every part should pay obedience to the will of the whole: or, in other words, that community should guard the ­rights of each individual member, and that (in return for this protection) each individual should submit to the laws of the community; without which submission of all it was impossible that protection could be extended to any.”

Now this is interesting because on first reading it would appear that the People should be “obedient” to all the laws.  Then Blackstone turns around and clarifies by saying the community or whole should guard the “rights” of the individual.  Obviously after studying this we can see that the whole can only pass laws which do NOT steal or usurp the fundamental, God given rights of the individual.  Therefore it would appear to me that in order for a law to be just it must also refrain from infringing on a fundamental right.  Natural law does not infringe fundamental rights and would include such laws as: do not steal, do not murder, do not rape, etc. 

With that mouth full we can see that it is the responsibility of the legislator to see that he/she passes only those laws that are absolutely necessary for society to function without infringing the rights of the People.  We also need to remember that the true function of government is to secure the rights of the People, not to make sure they have safe food and safe jobs (OSHA) etc.  We are more likely to lose our fundamental rights from bureaucratic notions of public safety.  The theft of Liberty tends to come with all the thousands of so called “necessary” little stuff.  If they were so necessary then how could America have even gotten started without them?

We need to review, once in a while, the list of reasons in the Declaration of Independence that led to the American Revolution.  One stated reason to think about for today as a most important reason is:  “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass (sic) our people, and eat out their substance.”

Thankfully we do not, at least as far as I know, have any officers close by wanting to pass laws against selling politically incorrect drinks larger than 16 ozs.  You can guess it could be coming though if some zealous bureaucrat could get away with it.  I believe if we guard our Liberty, then peace and safety of society will follow.

I have had several attorneys tell me there is no such thing as society with absolute exercise of fundamental rights.  That may true, but I say, “There is no such thing as a society with absolute safety,” which is what so many of the useless Liberty stealing laws in the real world attempt bring about.

If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at: editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.