Police State Too Much? Send in a Marine!

I thought this was an excellent short speech by a marine speaking from the heart with knowledge and the experience of years.  This gentleman is Marine Colonel Peter Martino.  He is discussing the acquiring of an assault vehicle for the city of Concord, NH.  One key phrase among many is, "We are building a domestic army and shrinking the military because the government is afraid of it's own citizens."  Another is phrase is, "There is always free cheese in a mouse trap."  I suppose the armored vehicle would be a free gift or nearly free item from the Department of Homeland Security.

Enjoy...

Comments found below were on Youtube...

Published on Aug 15, 2013

This is how the Free State rolls. This is just the kind of active support for limited government, liberty and personal responsibility that's increasingly part of daily life in NH. Thank you FSP. What took you so long to get here...?
http://freestateproject.org/

During testimony at the Concord City Council public hearing regarding the acquisition of a ManBearPig-- er, I mean BearCat, the "Homeland Security" grant-subsidized (so, your money, regardless) armored attack truck (the manufacturer's description, although the cops prefer "rescue vehicle," which isn't exactly prominent in the marketing materials for some reason) by local law enforcement's Special Operations Unit, in Concord, NH, 8/12/2013, there was this little gem from retired Marine Colonel Pete Martino. Complete hearing at http://bikerbillnh.blogspot.com/2013/...

"Peter Martino is a citizen of the State of New Hampshire. Mr. Martino is a Colonel in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve who has been mobilized three times. During his military career, he commanded an infantry platoon, company, and battalion. He was also the senior U.S. adviser to an Iraqi Army brigade. Mr. Martino has had a successful civilian career providing training, consulting, and program management services to private companies and to state and federal agency contractors. Mr. Martino presently holds a top secret security clearance."
2008

And see the Colonel take on the NH House Commerce Committee regarding SB180, "establishing a recovery fund for victims of the Financial Resources Mortgage (FRM) fraud and continually appropriating a special fund," here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C92y0N...

Thoughts on the 9th Circuit Peruta v. San Diego County, CA.

Wow! Where to start…

On Feb. 13, 2014, the 9^th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals (9thC) produced a monumental decision on gun rights in Peruta, v. San Diego County, CA.  I have had many bad thoughts about the 9^th circuit and some of their decisions, however this time they hit one out of the park in favor of Liberty.  The quantity of legal decisions just keeps growing in support of the fundamental right to keep and to bear an arm.

This decision reflects powerfully on Illinois, since we have had very similar unconstitutional restrictions.  Illinois unfortunately remains the worst for the present.  Let’s look at some of the good stuff.  

• ·       “Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them, whether or not future legislatures or (yes) even future judges think that scope too broad.” (Heller).

• ·       “The Second Amendment secures the right not only to “keep” arms but also to “bear” them—the verb whose original meaning is key in this case.”

• ·       “At the time of the founding, as now, to ‘bear’ meant to ‘carry.’” (Heller)

• ·       “It was this inherited right of armed self-defense,” according to Heller, that “by the time of the founding [was] understood to be an individual right protecting against both public and private violence.” (Peruta)

• ·       “American edition of Blackstone’s Commentaries, id. at 594, St. George Tucker, a law professor… “The right to armed self-defense, Tucker insisted, is the “first law of nature,” and any law "prohibiting any person from bearing arms” crossed the constitutional line. (Heller/Peruta)(Bold is mine)

• ·       The 9thC reemphasizes, the Heller case “settled” two key elements, first the Second Amendment (2A) “has always” secured an individual right to keep and to bear an arm; second, that the right is, “and always has been, oriented to the end of self-defense.” (I shortened and paraphrased in part) “Any contrary interpretation of the right, whether propounded in 1791 or just last week, is error.” (Peruta p. 21).

• ·       The 9thC emphasized Heller, “[C]onstitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them. . . .”  A law that “under the pretence of regulating, amounts to a destruction of the right” would not pass constitutional muster “[u]nder any of the standards of scrutiny that we have applied to enumerated constitutional rights.”  Put simply, a law that destroys (rather than merely burdens) a right central to the Second Amendment must be struck down. Id.”

• -      “Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court [or ours] to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” (Peruta/Heller). Nor may we relegate the bearing of arms to a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees that we have held to be incorporated into the Due Process Clause.” (McDonald).

These are just a few of the gems pulled out of the decision by the 9^th circuit.  I would argue that in light of the last quote, that the courts definitely treat the 2A different than all other rights in spite of what they said in the last quote.  For example if you were to limit speech in any significant way as to where you can talk, what you can say and when you can say it, then it would be struck down.  Same is true with most religious issues among others.  Then they allow limitations as to where you can carry and what style, as to open or concealed, etc. 

I ask now, as I have asked any number of times before, “Will any criminal bother to get a concealed carry license?”  No.  He will carry anyway.  The greatest travesty in Illinois is the FOID card.  There is no criminal who will bother to get a FOID card.  The only advantage this gives to government is they can control retailers in the distribution of ammo and new guns to Illinois citizens.  It does not control ammo distribution to out of state persons.

The Next Alamo?

Texas declared her independence from Mexico, March 2, 1836.  Gen. Santa Anna was directed to put down the rebellion.  With as many as 6,000 troops he arrayed his soldiers against the Alamo in an epic take-no-prisoners battle.  Among those killed in the attack were Jim Bowie, and former U.S. Congressman Davy Crockett.  Out of this battle the cry, “Remember the Alamo” came about.  This attack was followed by the capture and annihilation of 350 Texans on the way to battle Santa Anna. 

I like these quotes from the Texas Declaration of Independence;

"When a government has ceased to protect the lives, liberty, and property of the people, from whom its legitimate powers are derived... and so far from being a guarantee for their inestimable and inalienable rights, becomes an instrument in the hands of evil rulers for their oppression... In such a crisis...the inherent and inalienable right of the people to... take their political affairs into their own hands... to abolish such government, and create another in its stead, calculated to… to secure their welfare and happiness....It has demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defense, the rightful property of freemen, and formidable only to tyrannical governments...

Today in Connecticut many of the People are in a state of civil disobedience to their government.  The state has called for the mass registration of certain guns and magazines.  To date the most conservative estimates say that only around 1 in 4 of the guns have been registered and very few magazines.  As of January 1, 2014 these people are now felons.  Estimates say there could be as many as 300,000 citizens who are now classed as felons

So is this the state where the next Alamo will be?  Note the quote in bold above.  The legislator’s home addresses have now been posted on the internet for all to find.  I have heard time and again the call of these rogue elements in government who think they can write any rule to take any Liberty without repercussion.  The People have been and are being patient, even here in Illinois, with some of the worst gun laws.

Who will the enforcers of this theft of Liberty be?  One thing you can bet on, they will be wearing a uniform.  Will the enforcers remember their oath to uphold and defend the constitution against all enemies, or will they be obedient so they can continue to receive their paycheck?  Will the cry, “Remember the Alamo” once again be heard in our land?

NOTE:  Thanks to Cleve Curry, Pike County Board Member, for the article which started this train of thought.

Sources:

http://americanminute.com/index.php?date=03-02&view=View
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Fannin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Alamo

The Porcupine and Liberty...

I like to think the humble porcupine represents the Libertarian principles of the Founders.  A simple analysis of this critter helps to understand freedom, or liberty, as envisioned by the Founders. 

This little animal goes along its way seeking to harm no one.  He just eats, moves around, and does not commit intentionally aggressive acts against anyone.  He just likes to be left alone to do what porcupines like to do.  Key phrase, “He likes to be left alone.”  Treat him with benign neglect.

However he also is uniquely equipped for self defense.  When threatened by an aggressor he curls up in a ball displaying sharp quills that become highly defensive.  It is a myth that says a porcupine can throw its quills.  This is not the case.  Their armament is strictly defensive.

Liberty is like that.  We should be free to do what we want until what we do bumps up against our neighbors’ right to do what they want.  At that point we must say, “excuse me,” or “sorry” and back up a little and go around.  the gracious individual says, “No problem.”  If we persist to aggress against our neighbor then we may justifiably get stuck with a quill.  Complying with the “Zero Aggression Principle” keeps us in line with natural law. 

Absolute freedom doesn’t exist in the real world of human interaction.  And many define liberty as freedom combined with the morality of “Natural Law” or “Natural Limits.”  The Bible says, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  An old Jewish saying is, “Don’t do unto others what you would not have them do unto you.”  Jesus took that saying and went a little farther stating, “Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.”

As we begin to move into the time of public carry of “quills” in Illinois, how we treat others, being gracious, not taking offense too quickly, treating others how you would like to be treated, becomes paramount.  Forgiveness is great as is turning the other cheek for small offenses.  Following the example of our brother the porcupine it is important to leave others alone to run their own life, be defensive and not aggressive.  A favorite quote; "An armed society is a polite society."