Alcohol Tobacco and Firearm (ATF) agents testified before Congress about Obama’s Fast and Furious program. They said 2500 firearms, including AK 47s and 50 caliber sniper rifles, were allowed to “walk” into the hands of known drug cartel members. One of those weapons was used to murder U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
The three ATF whistleblowers were all veteran law enforcement officers. They said walking guns into the hands of known criminals was something they had never seen before, or after, Fast and Furious. But has Obama or other gun control advocates expressed concern about Fast and Furious? Not that I’m aware of. Given this blatant double standard, Obama appears to be using the children murdered at Sandy Hook for political gain.
The opening statements of ATF whistleblowers demonstrate Obama’s gross hypocrisy on the issue of gun control. Agent Forcelli said the Department of Justice and Arizona’s US Attorney approved of Fast and Furious, and “we weren’t giving guns to people who were hunting bear, we were giving guns to people who were killing other humans”.
Contrary to the left’s portrayal of gun dealers, Agent Forcelli said they helped the ATF make a lot of cases, but dealers objected to Fast and Furious because it encouraged the sale of guns to criminals. ATF agents made it clear that existing laws could have prevented all 2500 weapons from getting into the hands of criminals. Concerned citizens should email this post to local attorneys, prosecutors, Sheriffs, State Attorneys General and U.S. Attorneys.
The Bismarck Tribune ran an AP article about Mexican citizens who’ve taken up arms to protect themselves against drug cartels. They’ve done so because their government has been unable to protect them. In spite of the Mexican government’s ban on citizen ownership of guns, the article said they have “hunting rifles, old pistols, and small bore shotguns”.
Guess what kinds of weapons the drug cartels have? According the the Fast and Furious hearing, drug cartels have heavy caliber, fully automatic machine guns and sniper rifles. Organized crime is a growth industry in America and all around the world, so why would U.S. citizens want to put themselves in the same position as these poor Mexican citizens?
Free societies cannot exist without the right of self defense. That’s why the States refused to ratify the Constitution without a Bill of Rights that included a second amendment, which established self defense, not hunting, as an unalienable right. Self defense is the ability to defend oneself, family, and property, independent of government. There have always been corrupt elites who want to enslave the people and it’s up to citizens to stand up for their rights.
America’s founders acknowledged the persistent threat of tyranny in the Declaration of Independence, which was a criminal indictment of King George III and his cronies. They said when a government fails to secure the unalienable rights of its citizens “it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and institute a new government”. For those who support the second amendment, suicide rates, murder rates, school shootings, etc., are not legitimate reasons to infringe on our unalienable right to bear arms.
The education systems of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union produced great scientists and engineers, but there was no liberty for the individual. Education can be used to promote tyranny or liberty, so societies based on democratic and republican principles should use schools to frame all knowledge in the context of our founding principles. And the framers of the U.S. Constitution drew heavily on Judeo-Christian values when drafting America’s founding documents.
In William Federer’s book titled America’s God and Country, he documents references to God in the original charters of the colonies, State Constitutions, and other historical documents. His work proves that Christian values were an integral part of American government, and they are the moral foundation making limited government possible. We must restore the framers intent regarding the first amendment, i.e., freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.
Kelly Shackelford is president and CEO of First Liberty Institute, the largest legal firm in the nation dedicated exclusively to protecting religious freedom for all Americans. But nearly all attacks on religious liberty are against Christians.
Dr. Charles Stanley had Kelly speak to his congregation. He gave the people insight into his work by laying out the cases he took on over a two week period. It was amazing, and Kelly received a standing ovation for his hopeful message. You won’t find a more informative and encouraging presentation, please watch it.
The principles codified in the Constitution and Bill of Rights did not fall out of the sky in 1789. The framers of the Constitution were students of history. They drew upon 2500 years of Western tradition beginning with ancient Greek democracy, the Roman Republic, the English Magna Carta, and Enlightenment. Most had read books by Plutarch, Cicero, Montesquieu’s “Spirit of Laws”, John Locke’s “Second Treatise on Government”, and Adam Smith’s books “The Wealth of Nations” and “The Theory of Moral Sentiment”.
Legitimate representative government depends on the informed consent of the governed, so the Constitution and Bill of Rights should be taught K-12. Schools should use interactive video games to teach children about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the need to preserve second amendment rights as a bulwark against tyranny.
High school seniors should be able to write about, and articulate the ideas expressed in books written by Montesquieu, Locke and Adam Smith. This would produce High School graduates prepared to utilize the public’s investment in higher education. And high school graduates would be far more informed than most of the people currently holding political office. If we had such a well informed citizenry, I don’t think we’d be experiencing the current problems with education and tyrannical government.
The video game and entertainment industries target children with products exhibiting the most irresponsible, immoral use of guns imaginable. So in fifth and sixth grades, incorporate interactive gun safety training into video games as an antidote to the barrage of gratuitous media violence. Interactive video games can simulate any situation and teach the proper response to home invasions and school shootings. Do this in conjunction with martial arts training that teaches discipline and restraint with regard to the use of force.
In order to limit school massacres, have marksmenship training in high school and involve top student marksmen (seniors) in a conceal-carry gun program with teachers. Students and teachers with conceal-carry permits should train with law enforcement and prepare a planned response to a school shooting.
Some say school sports build character and benefit society. To some degree that’s true, but in spite the huge public investment is sports, our society continues to decay. Money from traditional sports programs should be used to finance the aforementioned programs, including martial arts. For those who think seniors are too young to be involved in a conceal-carry program, let’s remember that students could be in Afghanistan shortly after graduation.
Implementing these educational programs would create a population trained in self defense and grounded in natural law and Constitutional rights. They would also deter most individuals who might consider shooting children in schools. It’s also preferable to the NRA proposal, i.e. police in every school, as this only leads us further down the road to a police state.
Bringing a child into this world is an inherently risky proposition, we need to accept this fact and teach our children to be self reliant. That’s why Native Americans sent young boys, on their own, into the wilderness as a rite of passage to adulthood.
Framing education in the context of Constitutional principles will require taking control of local school boards, and that will require community organizing, which has been given a bad name by the left. But the left’s commitment to community organizing is why they’ve been successful, so those who want a return to limited Constitutional government must do the same.
The founders ended the Declaration of Independence with these words: “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor”. They understood the price of freedom, and if we are going to preserve the Republic they fought and died for, we must commit time and resources to restoring limited Constitutional government.
The term “assault weapon” is misleading because it simply refers to the cosmetic appearance of a weapon. In other words, you can put the body of Corvette on a Prius, but it doesn’t change the performance of the vehicle. The focus on assault weapons is a backdoor attempt to eventually ban all semi-automatic weapons. Regarding high capacity clips, if a couple of armed individuals break into someone’s home, the homeowner will need a semi-automatic weapon and a very large clip to defend his/her family and property.
The Sandy Hook shooter stole weapons from his mother, so no amount of background checks would’ve saved the children he murdered. And only 2% of people killed by guns are killed by “assault weapons”. More people are killed by bats and clubs. Obesity probably kills more people than guns, so should we ban the forks and spoons that deliver those evil food bullets to the body? Unfortunately, gun control advocates don’t seem to care about facts or rational arguments. Instead, they hide their tyrannical agenda behind safety issues, and “protecting the children”, while chipping away at individual liberties.
When President Obama accepted his Nobel Peace Prize, he said his first responsibility was to “protect the American people”. President Bush used this same phrase to justify the Patriot Act, Homeland Security, and indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without due process. And President Obama has doubled down on policies that eviscerate the Bill of Rights. The oath of office says a President’s first responsibility is to uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, not the American people.
The world was just as dangerous when our founders created this oath, so why didn’t they write an oath that focused on protecting the people instead of the Constitution? It’s because the “protect the people” argument can be used to endlessly chip away at the Bill of Rights until we live in a virtual dictatorship. And that’s exactly what despotic bipartisan leaders are doing, meanwhile, they’ve partnered with China’s communist regime and turn a blind eye to the global network of Islamic extremism funded by Saudi Arabia.
Democrats tend to use environmental, gun control, and healthcare issues to chip away at individual liberties. Republicans use national security to advance tyrannical policies. They’re like tag team wrestlers, so no matter which party is in power, they can always find an issue to justify their incremental march toward despotism. That’s why K-12 Constitutional curriculum should emphasize the States refusal to ratify the Constitution without a Bill of Rights.
Specifically the tenth amendment which states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” For more possible solutions based of America’s founding principles, check out the post, The Boston Tea Party, It Wasn’t Just About Taxes.
Another interesting source is the book Godonomics, which illustrates the Biblical principles behind private property rights and market economies based on moral principles.