Showing posts with label gun rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gun rights. Show all posts

Thursday, December 08, 2011

Column for Dec. 8, 2011

“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.” - Second Amendment to the US Constitution.

Recently, I got my concealed carry weapons permit renewed here in Johnston County. I have held such a permit for over a decade. That means that I had to take a class, prove that I am proficient in the use of a handgun, pass a criminal and mental health background check, and give my fingerprints for the state to have on file. A class costs time and money, gun range time costs money, ammunition costs money, and the application and renewal fees cost time and money every five years. I also hold a federal firearms curio and relic collector’s license. That means that I also got a thorough background check by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Notice the text of the Second Amendment. There are no qualifiers on that statement. Is simply says that my right shall not be infringed. Unfortunately, many such qualifications have been placed on that right. I have to obtain and carry a permit for carrying firearms. I have to obtain a permit to purchase a handgun, and submit to a background check if I want to purchase a firearm. I am prohibited from carrying firearms through certain states. I am prohibited from carrying firearms in certain places.

There are several debates going on right now about compliance with a new state law that prohibits municipalities from restrictions on where one can carry a weapon such as in parks but allows exceptions for “recreational facilities”. Of course freedom hating gun control nuts will attempt to make those exceptions as broad as possible.

Close to home, Smithfield is still banning the carrying of weapons at the aquatics center and at certain parks. They want to keep as much of the ban in place as legally possible. The police chief in Smithfield seems to be in support of this, based upon his quotes on the subject. Then again, that is not surprising considering how whiny his department has been about their most recent budget and how they handled it, but that is another column for another day.

In Garner, the same battle is being waged. State level gun rights groups have gotten involved there in the fight there, as well as in Smithfield. Grass Roots North Carolina is a great gun rights organization, and while typing this, I am reminded to renew my membership with them.

There are a few exceptions to the control freak behavior. Down Highway 70 is the town of Havelock. Though the town’s athletic director proposed maintaining restrictions like Garner and Smithfield, two of their town council members are strongly opposed to the idea of maintaining any such gun restrictions. One councilman, George Liner, argued that concealed carry permit holders are law abiding citizens and have passed all the state requirements and expense outlined earlier. The other, Danny Walsh, said, “The problem is that for 200 years it has been understood in America, and one of the reasons no one has invaded us, is that everyone here has a gun and can use it. And the fathers of those 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds have been going to war for that right and other rights. I don’t want to infringe on a right that the federal government gave us 200 years ago that is reasonable." Walsh is exactly correct with the exception that it was not a right bestowed by the federal government, it was seen as a God given right and the federal government was to preserve it.

These debates are an example of why I am no longer a member of the National Rifle Association. They have been known for a lot of compromise on gun rights rather than being rigid such as Gun Owners of America and Grass Roots North Carolina. The NRA will attempt to influence national level elections, such as for Congress, but will not get involved in local elections, even though they have local field representatives. They can pull local databases to solicit local people for donations but refuse to use the same database for helping gun friendly candidates get elected to public office. I know since I have been down that road with them personally. Ironically, the very week that the NRA told me that local elections were not their concern regarding gun control, they moved their annual conference to another city because of the original venue’s stance on gun control. What hypocrisy.

I hope that all elected officials at the county and municipal levels take heed that people are tired of their liberties being eroded. Freedom loving, law abiding citizens are just that. It is the criminal element that is the problem, not people like myself who went through stringent scrutiny in order to exercise their constitutional right. There are no qualifiers on that right, but we still underwent unconstitutional requirements in order to “legally” exercise it . If that right is infringed, it is no more a right and is rather a privilege beholden to the privilege granter. Had people like me been around and were armed on the campus of Columbine High School, Fort Hood, or Virginia Tech, the outcomes may have been very different and lives saved.

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

Column for March 3, 2011

The United States Constitution in Article IV Section 4 states, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”. Not to be confused with the GOP (Republican Party), it simply means that we have a representative republic for a national government. We don’t have a democracy, an oligarchy, a monarchy, or a dictatorship. We allegedly have the rule of law, division of branches of government, and a system of checks and balances. That seems to be lost on our current Commander in Chief.

There were three decisions by the Obama administration that directly affect some or all of us, depending upon your status, all of which are beyond the constitutional authority granted to the executive branch of government. Over-reaching power is nothing new. As a matter of fact, as of this writing (Monday afternoon), I will be teaching in a few hours on a huge power grab by the Supreme Court in the Marbury vs. Madison decision of 1803.

The Obama administration has determined that they will continue to enforce the so-called Obama Care health care reform legislation even though two courts have ruled it as unconstitutional. In another instance, the Obama administration has refused to allow the re-importation of historic military surplus rifles back into the United States, thus violating the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. Thirdly, the administration has decreed that the Defense of Marriage Act signed into law by then President Bill Clinton is unconstitutional and therefore will not enforce its provisions.

In the instance of Obama Care, it is sheer arrogance to continue to ram down a defeated and unwanted agenda. The government and the American people have bought into the principle of judicial review, a power never granted the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) or judicial branch yet was usurped anyway. That power was specifically debated and denied the judicial branch during the Constitutional Convention of 1787. If the judicial usurpation is accepted, then it applies regardless and we can not cherry pick what laws they can declare null. Either the court’s decision stands or it does not. If the law is indeed unconstitutional, then its continuation must also therefore be considered as such.

In the case of rifle importation, the Obama administration has simply decided to disallow the return of what General George Patton termed “The greatest battle implement ever devised”, the M1 Garand rifle. It served us brilliantly in World War II. During the Korean War, we left nearly a million M1 Garands and M1 Carbine rifles with the South Korean government.

I am a federally licensed Curio and Relics firearms collector. That means like thousands of other collectors in the nation, I went through a background check with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Many freedom loving, law abiding Americans, and/or shooting and history enthusiasts would also love to own an M1. This right is being denied by Barack Obama under the guise of not wanting the guns to “fall into the wrong hands”. Somehow I doubt that criminals will be engaged in using a long gun designed in the 1930’s that only holds 8 rounds when handguns are the preferred weapon of your average criminal. It is sort of hard for gang members to conceal the rifle, to carjack a car with, or for burglars to carry an M1 Garand during a break-in. This ban on the re-importation of historic rifles made by Americans for Americans is ridiculous.

Believe it or not, I tend to agree with Obama that the DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) is unconstitutional. However, the opportunity for the executive branch of government to declare it as unconstitutional rested with President Clinton. A later President can not simply declare something as unconstitutional and therefore not enforce the laws of the country. If you find the law repulsive, repeal it. We have a process set up for that. If we really want DOMA to be the law of the land, we should make it an amendment to The Constitution.

I have a copy of the letter sent to the Speaker of the House by the Attorney General’s office. The reasoning that DOMA “violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment” is preposterous. Not only is the Attorney General in error (the equal protection clause is not in the Fifth Amendment, it is in the 14th), but the amendment was designed to provide equal treatment under the law to people regardless of their skin color. Homosexuals have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as I do, so there is therefore equal protection under the law.

For the executive branch to simply deem a law unconstitutional and therefore refuse to enforce the law is a dangerous precedent, not to mention that ironically is in itself unconstitutional. What if a future president decided that the Civil Rights Act was unconstitutional and therefore refused to enforce it? This sort of thing can cut both ways.

We are supposed to be a representative republic, but if we allow things to continue, we are well on the way to becoming the very sort of dictatorship that President Obama has recently condemned in Libya, Egypt, and the Middle East.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Column for Sept. 30, 2010

I recently sent a letter to the largest toy centered business in the world. I am not going to mention the name of the company, but I will share the letter with you.

"Just when I was about to continue my practice of getting my Christmas shopping done early for two boys and a bunch of nephews and nieces, I read that your company has unfortunately decided to disallow concealed carrying of firearms in your stores by law abiding customers like myself. It is not the law abiding citizen who has at his own expense taken classes on firearms law and handling, not to mention gone through an extensive background check by state law enforcement and local sheriffs that you have to worry about. You have to worry about the lawless, which steal weapons and use them to suit their own illegal practices. If there is ever a deranged or criminal shooter in one of your stores, it is people like me who you want to have as patrons in your stores to protect your customers and your employees.

"I make it a practice to not patronize businesses that wish to abridge the freedoms of honest Americans but still want our money. In America I not only have the right to carry a firearm to defend myself and those around me, I have the freedom to spend my money where I so choose. As long as your "no concealed weapons" policy is in effect, I shall choose to spend my money with your competitors."


Do you know why there are a lot of carjackings perpetrated near airports? It is because criminals know that anyone who just stepped off an airplane and is renting an automobile is unarmed because of security restrictions for air travel. That makes them an easy target.

Do you know what tells me that a business is an easy target for armed robbery? It is a sign on the front door that says something like, "All weapons prohibited", or "Concealed weapons prohibited". It announces that there is a good likelihood that there is nobody inside the business that is armed and can fight back. Then again, a house in an affluent neighborhood with a car in the driveway displaying a pro-Obama bumper sticker serves the same purpose to a burglar.

If schools allowed safe, concealed carry of firearms by trained, mature individuals, perhaps the shootings in Paducah, Columbine, and at Virginia Tech would not have been so deadly. Just maybe someone could have taken out the shooters before they killed more people. Police can not be everywhere all the time.

The State of New York proposed an amendment to the US Constitution for the Bill of Rights that explained the role of an armed populace. Their proposal included "That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms; that a well regulated Militia, including the body of the People capable of bearing Arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State". The responsibility was that of the citizenry to serve as the militia as well as to act as a constabulary force. The idea of a standing army was anathema to them, so it was expected that every able bodied man who could bear arms would be a participant in the putting down of insurrections, helping to repel invasion, and keeping order in their towns.

When I was asked why I would want to carry a gun, my answer was, "Because a cop is too heavy to carry around." I am a concealed carry permit holder. That means that I have demonstrated proficiency with a handgun, I have taken a class to learn the legal responsibilities of carrying a firearm, and have undergone a full background check by the State Bureau of Investigations. My fingerprints are on file with the state. In my own case, I have also undergone a background check by the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives because I also hold a Curio and Relics federal firearms license.

There are millions of people like myself who are law abiding, honest citizens. These are not the people you have to worry about. They are not criminals. They are the ones who have jumped through hoops of unconstitutional red tape in order to exercise their rights. Constitutionally, nobody should be required to get a permit to carry a firearm.

Business owners have every right to restrict what people should be allowed to carry into their establishments. At the same time, they are exercising their right to alienate their customer base and advertise themselves as easy targets for armed robbery.

Now compare the above to this business in the video below. I would do business with them in a minute.