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.

Bureau of “Public Safety Law” Injury Prevention to the Rescue

“Public safety” as pushed by the legislature is to prevent some type of injury to the public and individuals.  Thousands of laws are passed supposedly to improve public safety.  Another aspect has occurred to me, we might benefit more by a Bureau of “Public Safety Law” Injury Prevention.

 

Perhaps we could discuss the great harm caused through financial and mental distress that occurred to some of our local business people by the OSHA in the last year or so.  While no injury occurred to persons or property from supposed dangers to persons or property by violating some OSHA regulations, an injury nevertheless occurred to the local businesses and owners.  In one case I am familiar with, a window was being repaired by a worker elevated on a forklift with no safety restraint, no surrounding safety guards or bars, and further there was no safety meeting with a supervisor to plan the repair of this little pane of glass.

Of course there was no discussion about the financial injury caused by the insistence of having a safety meeting with supervisor and machine operator and worker in a two person company.  All of which would have turned a $75 dollar job into a $250 plus job.  All of this would cause an additional injury to the customer by having to pay the added expense.  Perhaps if the true cost was known in advance the customer would have elected to do the job himself costing the glazier the injury of lost business and the community the injury of a loss of the economic activity.  Perhaps the nonprofessional customer would have been more susceptible to physical injury due to his lack of expertise in glazing repair.

Or what about the physical harm caused to a public who is prevented from providing their own personal protection by carrying a weapon of their choice.  Somehow government deems it too expensive to provide personal police protection for all the individuals as they go about their daily activities, but then turn around a say that you cannot protect yourself unless, for example, you use a nail file, or try to vomit on an offender (advice to women being raped from the ISP website at one time) among other ignorant suggestions.  You cannot have a cop with you all the time, yet the public will be injured by being arrested and charged by police and the prosecutor if we carry a truly equalizing weapon.

I am sure that the stories are endless of the injuries caused by so called government safety programs.  While I think the intent is good, what happens is that the bureaucracy loses common sense in its mindless attention to the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit of the law.  You cannot expect a bureaucrat charged with enforcement to ignore the letter.  His job depends on finding issues that justify his paycheck and his pension.  How many businesses leave a little flaw somewhere, like a dirty sink, just so the inspector will have something to write up.  Yep, it happens.

Our Founders instituted a method to solve issues of negligent behavior, that is called a justice system.  The Good Book makes it clear that the one who is responsible for the injury covers the cost (Exodus 21).  If there is a repeat negligent injury the penalty goes up substantially.  We have recourse to settle for an injury to our person or property by another person.  If the government injures via its Public Safety Agencies, just try and collect against an agency with an unlimited budget for legal fees.  Now you’re talking serious injury.  For that injury we need the new Bureau of “Public Safety Law” Injury Prevention.  Just in case a legislator is reading this please don’t take the suggestion of this new bureau seriously.  One more bureau really won’t help.  I am just trying to make a point.

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.

Judges are human too...

Judges are human too, subject to prejudice, mistakes and flaws of the human condition.  Well taking it a step further, have you ever wondered if the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) could get it wrong?  Well wonder no more.  The case known as the Dred Scott decision has been studied for years by both the law school types and by those of us who have a nonprofessional vested interest in preserving Liberty.  It is called the learning process.  You fall down, you get back up.  You make a mistake, you fix it.

SCOTUS issued a ruling in 1857 that forever changed the course of human history.  The Court ruled that states that outlawed slavery could not forbid slaveowners from bringing slaves into their states, the so called Free States, and holding them as slaves there. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote that blacks were,

“beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”

One has to wonder at what point the Feds feel that, in their so called superior wisdom (more like educated idiots), they can rule over the People and expect to win long term.  Their hope obviously, would appear to be that they can keep their legislative agenda alive long enough the People will get hooked and fully dependent on “Free Health Care.” 

I received a comment the other day online from someone who stated, “All I know is “it” (Obamatax) will benefit me.  My comment was, “the Signers (of the Declaration of Independence) pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred Honor, to help us escape the tyranny of King George.  Can we do less?  Or will we go for short term benefit of a “free” trip to the doctor.

Our men and women who serve aren’t out there to preserve your “free” trip to the doctor; they are out there to preserve your ability to choose.  I have stated previously that a free man has choices; a slave has no choice but to do that which the “massa” bids.  Will the military become the tool to enforce the “massa’s” bidding?  The very essence of Liberty must include the ability to make a choice, even if it is a destructive choice to you personally.  It has very little to do with safety and security.  If you want to sample safety and security at its finest and most intense, try jail.

I resort once again to the eloquence of one of the Founder’s, Patrick Henry, when he said, “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.”

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.