I, Alvaro Garcia Ramirez III, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
On February 23, 1991 I stood before the Flag of my Country and in the presence of 12 other enlistees took the above oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, and that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I am not the only person to enter this oath since it was ratified by Congress in 1962 every enlisted man and woman who has entered the service of this Country has entered into the same oath of allegiance. I've never forgotten that oath and I take it seriously. My oath didn't mention until the day that my enlistment in the armed forces should terminate, or until I feel that I no longer wish to support such oath. I raised my hand and proclaimed my allegiance and willingness to pay the ultimate sacrifice if so needed for this Country and it's Constitution.
Those who stood with me that day were willing to do the same. None of us were there for school money. We weren't there for anything other than to enlist to defend our Country. We enlisted in time of war, we jointed the hundreds of thousands who have answered their Country's call to arms and service in time of war. Americans have always come forth in defense of the down trodden and oppressed. There have always been those who have not desired to serve their Nation, and that has been OK. Our Constitution defends and protects them as well. The service to this Nation does not necessarily lie in the ranks of military service. Every American whether born in this Country or not has the ability and obligation to serve the Nation. This service can come via military service if chosen or by serving in the community where the individual lives. This service can and ought to be rendered with love for Nation and community. The service can be as easy as volunteering to spend time with local children at a community school as a mentor, or maybe even supporting local events. Your service to this Country should entail being familiar with the activities of politicians throughout all levels of government and holding them accountable for the dissemination of their duties under the Constitution. We as a people hold the keys of government. We as a people hold the power and we relegate it to our elected officials and we are to hold them accountable. I am sickened by the attitude which I have encountered as I've begun my crusade to try and save America. Now don't misunderstand me, I do not suppose myself more than a mere man with limited ability. Every American from the West coast to the East coast from the Southern border to the Northern border including Alaska and Hawaii need to each individually take up the crusade to save America.
My call to arms offended some and caused others to take a laissez-faire attitude and place the "burden" upon someone else. They don't want to make waves or disturb the status quo. That is fine, I respect your choices, although I don't agree with them I respect your choice because that is the beauty of America.
The indifference of others won't effect my determination to push forward, until I can find those people in whose hearts burn the spirit of freedom which is the Spirit of Christ. My call is the same, stand up America for your Country, for your Constitution, that divinely inspired document. The day will come, we know not when, when we will look upon our Nation and wonder where it went. We will no longer recognize our Republic, our Constitution will be but a distant memory, and we will be fettered by the shackles of oppression. Then there will be some who will try and change it, but it will be too late for us as a Nation. Whether that day comes in my lifetime or after I've gone the way of all the earth, I will not be counted with those who took no thought to defend the Nation when there was still time. The flag, that title of liberty is planted in my heart, I have written the oath upon my heart, I have taken the knee and prayed for this Nation, and I've gotten up girded upon myself the armour of liberty, which is the whole armour of God. I shall utter the truth, and there will be those who refuse to hear it, I shall proclaim liberty and there will be those who are offended. I will stand up for this Nation and its Constitution, and there will be those who sit idly by and wait for others to save them.
I will not despise that which was given to me by the Founding Fathers of this Great and Inspired Nation. I am grateful to have been born in this Country. I honor the Founding Fathers for their sacrifice and service. I honor every person who has worn the uniform of this Nation in service to their Country. I honor the families of those servicemen and women who have given a loved one for this Country. I honor those who serve in their communities across this Great Nation. I honor those who work hard to support their families and don't look to government for deliverance. Those who have sold their birthright, those who have despised their freedoms, those who have spit upon the face of those serving this Nation whether today or in times past, I pity you. And though you care not for this Country, my crusade to save America incorporates you. Because the beauty of America is our freedom to choose what we will do. Therefore, I utter the same proclamation uttered by Joshua in the Bible, choose you this day whom you will serve, but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord, and our Country!
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Confession of an American Coward
As of now most people have heard about Attorney General Eric Holder's comment that America is a Nation of cowards. So therefore since I've been outed I will come out and admit it, my name is Alvaro Ramirez and I am an American coward. I am afraid that my Country that I love has been hijacked by Socialist Pigs who are hell bent on destroying this Nation as we know it. There I've said it, and I feel better for having done so. Confessing something as big as that can be so liberating.
Now in seriousness, this is truly how I feel. I feel that the whole body government is infested with traitors and cowards who are selling our freedoms and liberties to the highest bidder. The government is rogue, it is operating outside the parameters of the Constitution. My fellow Americans, my brothers and sisters, citizens of the United States of America it is time that we as a Nation come together in defense of our National Sovereignty. Our fore fathers came forward and pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. WE must be willing to do the same if we are to retain our freedoms. We cannot sit idly by and watch as things happen expecting not to be held accountable for our actions. God will hold us responsible for the demise of this Nation if we do nothing. The time for the summer soldier or sunshine patriot is gone, and we must come forward as did those who came before us. We the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. For those of you who don't know, this is the preamble to the Constitution. It was appropriate then and it is appropriate now, and more so.
Are you aware of those actions being taken by your government which would limit your freedoms and in essence place philosophical shackles upon your wrists and ankles causing you to loose your freedoms? Now I don't care whether you're a Democrat, republican, green party, libertarian, or any other political affiliation. I don't care whether you're white, black, brown, Asian, or any other race, we are ALL Americans, and whether you want to be a hyphenated American or just an American that is up to you. The attacks on our freedoms are going to and will effect all of us regardless of social standing. This article is a call to arms. Hold on I am not advocating rebellion, nor revolt of any kind. I am calling for all Americans or those who would like to call themselves Americans to take up their pens and phones and call their Representatives in Washington and State and Local Representatives. Let them know that you love America and will not sit idly by allowing them to sell away your future and your children's future. There will come a day when your children will ask you what you did when America when in crisis, and what will be your answer? Will you be able to say that you defended America for you and them or will you say that you did nothing but sat idly and watch America destroyed? Do not allow yourselves to lulled to sleep by the sophisticated babbling of the Washington Elite who believe that they know how to live your lives better than you do. Tell me the truth, do you believe that they know how to spend your money better than you? If you do, I feel sorry for you and you are unworthy of the appellation of American and are undeserving of the sacrifice made by every American fighting man and woman since we declared our Independence in 1776. I know that sounds harsh, but the time for polite dissent is gone. This is what I mean that I agree that Americans are cowards. We have allowed ourselves to believe that if we speak out against Obama we are racists, or if we don't like all the social programs being considered we are heartless socialites who don't care for the poor, (as a side note it has been proven that Conservatives give more to charities than liberals). We've been bullied into believing that the Constitution only protects those who hold a liberal viewpoint, but if we want to stand up for what is right we cower and hold our tongues. Those who support the fairness doctrine, I would say have denied the Constitution and have come out in open rebellion against the freedoms of Americans. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that things must be "fair", "balanced", "equal", or nor does it mention anything about the right to be heard. I am appalled by the current situation in America and Americans obvious disdain for their birthright. I can't stand by and watch it happen a moment longer. This is why I am issuing this call to arms for all Americans. If you agree that America must be preserved and not re-made as declared by Obama in his inaugural address then I ask to to download the Constitutional Pledge located at www.anationunited.org/constitutionalpledge.pdf. Upon signing it send it back to at:
A Nation United
PO Box 775
West Jordan, UT 84084
If you prefer you may scan it and send it as an attachment in an email to aramirez@anationunited.org or fax it to my attention at 267-434-8703. At the end of the year I will put all the Pledges together and mail a copy of The Constitution along with all the signatures received to the President, both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court. We together will make our voice heard. We will stand united together in a common cause, all races, all political backgrounds, all social standings, together, united, one as Americans. We will come together as our Founding Fathers did and we will establish this Nation as United under one flag, under one Constitution. We will ever remain a Nation United!
Now in seriousness, this is truly how I feel. I feel that the whole body government is infested with traitors and cowards who are selling our freedoms and liberties to the highest bidder. The government is rogue, it is operating outside the parameters of the Constitution. My fellow Americans, my brothers and sisters, citizens of the United States of America it is time that we as a Nation come together in defense of our National Sovereignty. Our fore fathers came forward and pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. WE must be willing to do the same if we are to retain our freedoms. We cannot sit idly by and watch as things happen expecting not to be held accountable for our actions. God will hold us responsible for the demise of this Nation if we do nothing. The time for the summer soldier or sunshine patriot is gone, and we must come forward as did those who came before us. We the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. For those of you who don't know, this is the preamble to the Constitution. It was appropriate then and it is appropriate now, and more so.
Are you aware of those actions being taken by your government which would limit your freedoms and in essence place philosophical shackles upon your wrists and ankles causing you to loose your freedoms? Now I don't care whether you're a Democrat, republican, green party, libertarian, or any other political affiliation. I don't care whether you're white, black, brown, Asian, or any other race, we are ALL Americans, and whether you want to be a hyphenated American or just an American that is up to you. The attacks on our freedoms are going to and will effect all of us regardless of social standing. This article is a call to arms. Hold on I am not advocating rebellion, nor revolt of any kind. I am calling for all Americans or those who would like to call themselves Americans to take up their pens and phones and call their Representatives in Washington and State and Local Representatives. Let them know that you love America and will not sit idly by allowing them to sell away your future and your children's future. There will come a day when your children will ask you what you did when America when in crisis, and what will be your answer? Will you be able to say that you defended America for you and them or will you say that you did nothing but sat idly and watch America destroyed? Do not allow yourselves to lulled to sleep by the sophisticated babbling of the Washington Elite who believe that they know how to live your lives better than you do. Tell me the truth, do you believe that they know how to spend your money better than you? If you do, I feel sorry for you and you are unworthy of the appellation of American and are undeserving of the sacrifice made by every American fighting man and woman since we declared our Independence in 1776. I know that sounds harsh, but the time for polite dissent is gone. This is what I mean that I agree that Americans are cowards. We have allowed ourselves to believe that if we speak out against Obama we are racists, or if we don't like all the social programs being considered we are heartless socialites who don't care for the poor, (as a side note it has been proven that Conservatives give more to charities than liberals). We've been bullied into believing that the Constitution only protects those who hold a liberal viewpoint, but if we want to stand up for what is right we cower and hold our tongues. Those who support the fairness doctrine, I would say have denied the Constitution and have come out in open rebellion against the freedoms of Americans. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that things must be "fair", "balanced", "equal", or nor does it mention anything about the right to be heard. I am appalled by the current situation in America and Americans obvious disdain for their birthright. I can't stand by and watch it happen a moment longer. This is why I am issuing this call to arms for all Americans. If you agree that America must be preserved and not re-made as declared by Obama in his inaugural address then I ask to to download the Constitutional Pledge located at www.anationunited.org/constitutionalpledge.pdf. Upon signing it send it back to at:
PO Box 775
West Jordan, UT 84084
If you prefer you may scan it and send it as an attachment in an email to aramirez@anationunited.org or fax it to my attention at 267-434-8703. At the end of the year I will put all the Pledges together and mail a copy of The Constitution along with all the signatures received to the President, both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court. We together will make our voice heard. We will stand united together in a common cause, all races, all political backgrounds, all social standings, together, united, one as Americans. We will come together as our Founding Fathers did and we will establish this Nation as United under one flag, under one Constitution. We will ever remain a Nation United!
Monday, February 9, 2009
Spending "US" into the Black?
I've spent some time reading over the first 150 pages of the "stimulus" bill that Obama is pushing as well as the Democrats in the House and Senate, and I must say I am very impressed. I calculated well over $100 Billion in spending with no jobs creation whatsoever. The interesting thing about that is that this is being sold as an immediate remedy for the ills of the economy which will put people back to work and create jobs. It creates a lot of new Grant programs and appropriates money for rural housing and other loan programs, and some subsidies for rural power development, which won't create jobs, just help those companies involved with rural power development.
I skipped ahead to the mid 500's and then the 700's and I saw some incentives for companies already in the business of making alternative fuel cars, which I guess could be loosely conceived as a method of creating jobs, but that money is not available until 2011.
As far as I can tell the over 750 pages of spending doesn't really do anything to help America today. I am unable to support such nonsense and I encourage everybody within the sound of my voice (or within view of this article) to quickly notify your congressman or senator of your displeasure with this. I heard that our legislatures in DC are being inundated with opposition 100:1 to this bill, but that the Democrats will pass it anyway. Spending more money never helped anybody avoid economic disaster, and it won't help US (The United States).
I skipped ahead to the mid 500's and then the 700's and I saw some incentives for companies already in the business of making alternative fuel cars, which I guess could be loosely conceived as a method of creating jobs, but that money is not available until 2011.
As far as I can tell the over 750 pages of spending doesn't really do anything to help America today. I am unable to support such nonsense and I encourage everybody within the sound of my voice (or within view of this article) to quickly notify your congressman or senator of your displeasure with this. I heard that our legislatures in DC are being inundated with opposition 100:1 to this bill, but that the Democrats will pass it anyway. Spending more money never helped anybody avoid economic disaster, and it won't help US (The United States).
Thursday, February 5, 2009
A Nation Divided!
Well I am going to break away from my commentaries on the Bill of Rights for the moment and discuss the Constitutional dilemma which is facing America today. I am talking about our speedy flight down the path to socialism. I know the news media paints those who feel as I do as crazy and alarmist, but I don't share that view. I have a deep and enduring love for this Country, the United States of America, and that is what pushes me to do what I do.
So despite what you might think, I strongly believe that we as a Nation are faced with two choices. We can either choose to stick to our Constitution, or do away with it and do as Obama said in his inaugural speech, re-make America. I for one don't think we need to re-make America. We do need to fix it and re-establish our freedoms, but America doesn't need to be re-made.
Let's take a look at the "stimulus" package being pushed by the Obama administration. Now before you cry foul thinking that I don't support it just because it is Obama, I didn't support T.A.R.P. either. As a matter of fact I haven't supported any federal funds going to bail out any industry. I don't even agree with federal funds going to fund public education either, but that is another subject all together. Let's get back to Obamanomics. This administration seems to view economic stimulation in a different view than I do. It is not surprising that they would believe that only government involvement can spur the growth of the economy, since they believe that government is pure and unbiased whereas the private sector is greedy and too unregulated. This belief is leading them to believe that by packaging the economic stimulus package the way they have will ensure that the economy will grow quickly, unfettered by the greed and corruption which is naturally inherent in the private sector. Obama recently said that if the Senate doesn't pass the stimulus package as he's prepared it the Nation will NEVER Recover! So basically if we don't immediately spend $50 million for the endowment for the arts our Nation will collapse economically, the $300 million to battle against violence against women will cause irreparable harm to the economic feasibility to this Country. If Americans don't get their $650 million for digital tv converter boxes we will be put into a destructive economic downturn which will be felt by Americans for centuries to come (that is what is inferred by the words never recover). Can anybody explain to me just how these things are meant to stimulate the economy? Where is the economic plan that he released in January of 2008? The one he is pushing now has nothing to do with that one, and that is the one he ran on to win the presidency. Dare I say it? Is the change that Obama ran on really his ability to change his mind? It makes one with any iota of common sense and economic understanding wonder what in the world are we doing. Our government is doing all they can to take over the private sector in the name of economic stimulus.
Ok, to be fair there are items in the bill which would create jobs, but when will those jobs be created? For example the money being set aside for green fuel technology research. Has anybody tried getting government money for a project? I have and it is a very onerous process which takes months and can take up to a year. On the other hand if the stimulus package created tax cuts and tax breaks the results would be felt immediately and jobs would be created. That is right, I am saying that to really stimulate the economy you have to put more money into the hands of those who spend it, the people, and the people get their money from their employment, and jobs are created and incomes rise when companies are less burdened by taxes.
I've said it once and I'll say it again no country has ever taxed itself into prosperity. It is not the duty of government to take care of the people. We are to take care of ourselves, government's job is to maintain the peace and protect our Rights. We are not protected by the systematic removal of freedoms. We are not protected by the never ending overreaching tentacles of big government.
We are facing a dilemma which is causing a rift in society. We have one group who is cheering for the government to move quickly and take away the rights of business owners and those who are viewed by society to be affluent, and we have those of us who are decrying the government's interference with the natural process of a cyclical market. I would issue a warning to those who see no problem with taking money from one group and re-distributing said money to another. Once you let a cancer grow it becomes more aggressive and moves into other areas of the body. This will happen to you if you sit idly by and allow the government to take from others. We cannot sit isolated from the effects of this monster which our government is quickly becoming. It is a society which no longer represents the wishes of the people, but of special interest groups and those with a populist bent. If we are to remain free as a Nation we need to band together in defence of our freedoms and work together to ensure that our Nation remains one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, not the few.
God bless America! May we awaken to our sense of duty before it is too late, is my prayer for this Country. May we ever remain a Nation United.
So despite what you might think, I strongly believe that we as a Nation are faced with two choices. We can either choose to stick to our Constitution, or do away with it and do as Obama said in his inaugural speech, re-make America. I for one don't think we need to re-make America. We do need to fix it and re-establish our freedoms, but America doesn't need to be re-made.
Let's take a look at the "stimulus" package being pushed by the Obama administration. Now before you cry foul thinking that I don't support it just because it is Obama, I didn't support T.A.R.P. either. As a matter of fact I haven't supported any federal funds going to bail out any industry. I don't even agree with federal funds going to fund public education either, but that is another subject all together. Let's get back to Obamanomics. This administration seems to view economic stimulation in a different view than I do. It is not surprising that they would believe that only government involvement can spur the growth of the economy, since they believe that government is pure and unbiased whereas the private sector is greedy and too unregulated. This belief is leading them to believe that by packaging the economic stimulus package the way they have will ensure that the economy will grow quickly, unfettered by the greed and corruption which is naturally inherent in the private sector. Obama recently said that if the Senate doesn't pass the stimulus package as he's prepared it the Nation will NEVER Recover! So basically if we don't immediately spend $50 million for the endowment for the arts our Nation will collapse economically, the $300 million to battle against violence against women will cause irreparable harm to the economic feasibility to this Country. If Americans don't get their $650 million for digital tv converter boxes we will be put into a destructive economic downturn which will be felt by Americans for centuries to come (that is what is inferred by the words never recover). Can anybody explain to me just how these things are meant to stimulate the economy? Where is the economic plan that he released in January of 2008? The one he is pushing now has nothing to do with that one, and that is the one he ran on to win the presidency. Dare I say it? Is the change that Obama ran on really his ability to change his mind? It makes one with any iota of common sense and economic understanding wonder what in the world are we doing. Our government is doing all they can to take over the private sector in the name of economic stimulus.
Ok, to be fair there are items in the bill which would create jobs, but when will those jobs be created? For example the money being set aside for green fuel technology research. Has anybody tried getting government money for a project? I have and it is a very onerous process which takes months and can take up to a year. On the other hand if the stimulus package created tax cuts and tax breaks the results would be felt immediately and jobs would be created. That is right, I am saying that to really stimulate the economy you have to put more money into the hands of those who spend it, the people, and the people get their money from their employment, and jobs are created and incomes rise when companies are less burdened by taxes.
I've said it once and I'll say it again no country has ever taxed itself into prosperity. It is not the duty of government to take care of the people. We are to take care of ourselves, government's job is to maintain the peace and protect our Rights. We are not protected by the systematic removal of freedoms. We are not protected by the never ending overreaching tentacles of big government.
We are facing a dilemma which is causing a rift in society. We have one group who is cheering for the government to move quickly and take away the rights of business owners and those who are viewed by society to be affluent, and we have those of us who are decrying the government's interference with the natural process of a cyclical market. I would issue a warning to those who see no problem with taking money from one group and re-distributing said money to another. Once you let a cancer grow it becomes more aggressive and moves into other areas of the body. This will happen to you if you sit idly by and allow the government to take from others. We cannot sit isolated from the effects of this monster which our government is quickly becoming. It is a society which no longer represents the wishes of the people, but of special interest groups and those with a populist bent. If we are to remain free as a Nation we need to band together in defence of our freedoms and work together to ensure that our Nation remains one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, not the few.
God bless America! May we awaken to our sense of duty before it is too late, is my prayer for this Country. May we ever remain a Nation United.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
The Freedoms: Commentary on the Bill of Rights, The Fourth Amendment
Now let's look at the Fourth Amendment. This is one that is very often quoted and claimed as a personal right of the people. It is most often referred to as the people's right of privacy. Here it is:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
As you can see this is a very important right guaranteed to the people by our Founding Fathers. The deemed it very necessary to ensure that the people's right to be protected against being violated by those authorities authorized by the government. Why would they feel it necessary to include this in the Bill of Rights? Well, like all the other rights guaranteed within the Bill of Rights we can find evidence of abuses perpetrated upon the people in America by the English government which eventually led to the Revolution, these abuses are referenced in the Declaration of Independence.
The customary practise in early Colonial America was one of which the government authorities carried with them general purpose warrants which gave them authority to search any home or asset which they deemed necessary of search. The practise was generally practised by tax collectors who by virtue of the Excise Act of 1754 were given authority to question any individual as to the use of goods received and search homes to ensure that all taxes were being paid that the individuals upon all goods. This law gave tax collectors powers to collect taxes upon all items found and seize those items which were prohibited or unaccustomed goods. When King George II died all heck broke loose. The law required that all the general warrants issued by his edict be expired within 6 months of his death and be re-issued by his successor. American courts ruled the writs as illegal and the Massachusetts Assembly passed a law requiring that local state judges issue writs and warrants, this rule was over turned by the English appointed governor of the State. John Adams viewed this issue the spark which ignited the Revolution.
If I were to write of all the Supreme Court rulings and decisions, clarifications and definitions it would fill volumes. Needless to say this Amendment has seen its day in court several times over. As a brief overview of these decisions it has been determined by the High Court that the Fourth Amendment is meant for the government and not private citizens. And that the right to privacy is only to the extent of a normal person's expectation of privacy.
I am grateful to our Founding Fathers for having placed this Amendment within the Bill of Rights. It shows that they were not power hungry and desired that the government which they were setting up would not be permitted to harm the people. The Founding Fathers believed in the people, which is something that our government has obviously stopped doing.
Our government must review the past, and remember the mindset of our Founding Fathers. If our government doesn't, the words of John Adams will be revived.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
As you can see this is a very important right guaranteed to the people by our Founding Fathers. The deemed it very necessary to ensure that the people's right to be protected against being violated by those authorities authorized by the government. Why would they feel it necessary to include this in the Bill of Rights? Well, like all the other rights guaranteed within the Bill of Rights we can find evidence of abuses perpetrated upon the people in America by the English government which eventually led to the Revolution, these abuses are referenced in the Declaration of Independence.
The customary practise in early Colonial America was one of which the government authorities carried with them general purpose warrants which gave them authority to search any home or asset which they deemed necessary of search. The practise was generally practised by tax collectors who by virtue of the Excise Act of 1754 were given authority to question any individual as to the use of goods received and search homes to ensure that all taxes were being paid that the individuals upon all goods. This law gave tax collectors powers to collect taxes upon all items found and seize those items which were prohibited or unaccustomed goods. When King George II died all heck broke loose. The law required that all the general warrants issued by his edict be expired within 6 months of his death and be re-issued by his successor. American courts ruled the writs as illegal and the Massachusetts Assembly passed a law requiring that local state judges issue writs and warrants, this rule was over turned by the English appointed governor of the State. John Adams viewed this issue the spark which ignited the Revolution.
If I were to write of all the Supreme Court rulings and decisions, clarifications and definitions it would fill volumes. Needless to say this Amendment has seen its day in court several times over. As a brief overview of these decisions it has been determined by the High Court that the Fourth Amendment is meant for the government and not private citizens. And that the right to privacy is only to the extent of a normal person's expectation of privacy.
I am grateful to our Founding Fathers for having placed this Amendment within the Bill of Rights. It shows that they were not power hungry and desired that the government which they were setting up would not be permitted to harm the people. The Founding Fathers believed in the people, which is something that our government has obviously stopped doing.
Our government must review the past, and remember the mindset of our Founding Fathers. If our government doesn't, the words of John Adams will be revived.
Monday, December 1, 2008
The Freedoms: Commentary on the Bill of Rights, The Third Amendment
Most often the most ignored right in the Bill of Rights itself is the Third Amendment. If I were to ask anybody on the street I believe 99.99% of the people asked would not know what the Third Amendment was. So just incase you are one of those who are unfamiliar with it, here it is:
"No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered
in any house, without the consent of the Owner,
nor in time of war, but in a manner to be pres-
cribed by law."
Why do we have this in our Constitution? Is there a threat that our military will attempt to take quarter in our homes and that the American people will be forced to billet the troops at our own expense? The answer to these questions are no, of course not, our military has adequate housing and never in the history of our Nation has this been an issue that we've needed to fret. So why was it added into the Constitution by our Founding Fathers then? The answer is both simple and complex at the same time.
First the simple answer. If we read the Declaration of Independence we will see that one of the complaints against Ol' King George was that he had a large amount of standing troops during times of peace during the colonial days of America. These troops were permitted to take over any home of their choosing and would eat all the food and behave in manners unbefitting proper gentlemen of the day. The colonist were obliged to feed, house and care for (in a manner similar to servidtud) the troops for the duration of their stay. These billeting requirements usually lasted until the colonist had no more to give then the soldiers would move on to their next host. This was a sore spot to the colonist therefore when there was a push by the federalist to ensure a standing army during times of peace in the new fledgling nation, those opposed to this insisted on having a guarantee within the Constitution protecting the American people against the tyranical advances of a rogue army. That is pretty much the short of it.
Similarly, just as the First and Second Amendment protected the Citizens against an oppressive government, the Third was added with the same purpose in mind. Our Founding Fathers, understood that if there was a desire by the government who controlled the military to oppress the people, there would be no barrier to protect the person in their property from full scale "invasion". They therefore knowing once again the steps which would be taken by an oppressive government, having been subjected to one and studying the oppressive regeims of the past, placed into the Constitution various laws and protections to ensure that the Citizens would have a chance against their government if need arose.
Indeed as stated at the begining of this treatice, the Third Amendment has been widely forgotten and ignored. No litigation has arisen from this particular Amendment although it has been used to cite the Constitutions guarantee to privacy and property. In one instance which was brought before a lower court, in a case regarding a group of corrections officers who were on strike and subsequently expelled from their State sponsored housing to house the National Guard who were taking over guarding duties at the prisons effected by the strike, the court ruled that the corrections officers' Third Amendment rights were violated by the actions of the State. This ruling was appealed to an Appeals Court and the ruling was vacated, stating that due to the circumstances surrounding the eviction from the housing facilities, and the necessity to provide security at the prisons the State had not violated the rights of the guards and therefore there was no issue of Constitutionality at hand. Other than this one court case no other case has been brought up with regards to the "original" meaning or intent of this Amendment.
This is one Amendment which needs to be watched carefully, because when we forget and ignor something that at one time was a problem, it will usually come back to haunt us in the future. The old addage, those who ignor history are usually doomed to repeat it is very true. This Amendment is important for the sole fact that it shows a clear picture that our Founding Fathers understood historical events and endeavored to protect us from the cycle which has destroyed every major power in the history of the world. It also shows that they desired to protect us from the burden and expense of a tyranical government.
"No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered
in any house, without the consent of the Owner,
nor in time of war, but in a manner to be pres-
cribed by law."
Why do we have this in our Constitution? Is there a threat that our military will attempt to take quarter in our homes and that the American people will be forced to billet the troops at our own expense? The answer to these questions are no, of course not, our military has adequate housing and never in the history of our Nation has this been an issue that we've needed to fret. So why was it added into the Constitution by our Founding Fathers then? The answer is both simple and complex at the same time.
First the simple answer. If we read the Declaration of Independence we will see that one of the complaints against Ol' King George was that he had a large amount of standing troops during times of peace during the colonial days of America. These troops were permitted to take over any home of their choosing and would eat all the food and behave in manners unbefitting proper gentlemen of the day. The colonist were obliged to feed, house and care for (in a manner similar to servidtud) the troops for the duration of their stay. These billeting requirements usually lasted until the colonist had no more to give then the soldiers would move on to their next host. This was a sore spot to the colonist therefore when there was a push by the federalist to ensure a standing army during times of peace in the new fledgling nation, those opposed to this insisted on having a guarantee within the Constitution protecting the American people against the tyranical advances of a rogue army. That is pretty much the short of it.
Similarly, just as the First and Second Amendment protected the Citizens against an oppressive government, the Third was added with the same purpose in mind. Our Founding Fathers, understood that if there was a desire by the government who controlled the military to oppress the people, there would be no barrier to protect the person in their property from full scale "invasion". They therefore knowing once again the steps which would be taken by an oppressive government, having been subjected to one and studying the oppressive regeims of the past, placed into the Constitution various laws and protections to ensure that the Citizens would have a chance against their government if need arose.
Indeed as stated at the begining of this treatice, the Third Amendment has been widely forgotten and ignored. No litigation has arisen from this particular Amendment although it has been used to cite the Constitutions guarantee to privacy and property. In one instance which was brought before a lower court, in a case regarding a group of corrections officers who were on strike and subsequently expelled from their State sponsored housing to house the National Guard who were taking over guarding duties at the prisons effected by the strike, the court ruled that the corrections officers' Third Amendment rights were violated by the actions of the State. This ruling was appealed to an Appeals Court and the ruling was vacated, stating that due to the circumstances surrounding the eviction from the housing facilities, and the necessity to provide security at the prisons the State had not violated the rights of the guards and therefore there was no issue of Constitutionality at hand. Other than this one court case no other case has been brought up with regards to the "original" meaning or intent of this Amendment.
This is one Amendment which needs to be watched carefully, because when we forget and ignor something that at one time was a problem, it will usually come back to haunt us in the future. The old addage, those who ignor history are usually doomed to repeat it is very true. This Amendment is important for the sole fact that it shows a clear picture that our Founding Fathers understood historical events and endeavored to protect us from the cycle which has destroyed every major power in the history of the world. It also shows that they desired to protect us from the burden and expense of a tyranical government.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
The Freedoms: Commentary on the Bill of Rights, The Second Amendment
Now that we’ve reviewed the First Amendment to the Constitution, let’s take a look at the most attacked and controversial of freedoms granted within the Constitution, the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment reads as follows:
“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.”
First, let us define Militia. What exactly is a Militia? The textbook or dictionary definition of a militia is as follows: An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers, a military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency, the whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service. Many of the Founding Fathers distrusted a standing army of professional soldiers. They believed that a Militia comprising of citizens would keep the government “honest” and America’s borders secure. Their main fear of a standing army of professional soldiers was that in their experience a standing army could be utilized against the people thereby putting in jeopardy the Nation as a whole. They insisted that when a Bill of Rights was adopted and amended into the Constitution that a provision for the Citizens to defend themselves against oppression from their Federal government and defense against enemies from abroad and domestic by permitting the formation of a Militia and the individual arming of the Citizens of the Country be added thereto.
The argument that has been made by proponents of the First Amendment is that the reasoning behind the positioning of the amendment indicates its importance and therefore you can’t infringe upon that right because of its great importance. If that argument is to stand uncontested, then one must agree that the positioning of the Second Amendment makes it equally as important. It is my belief that the Founding Fathers understood the events, which would lead to an enslaving of the people and the actions, which would be taken by the government to oppress its Citizens. It is clear by the wording of the Second Amendment that it was intention of the Founding Fathers to establish the individual right to bear arms and therefore establish the right of the Citizens to own weapons.
Opponents to the Second Amendment have repeatedly claimed that it makes no guarantee of an individual right to own weapons. One argument that has been made is that gun ownership in Colonial America was scarce and uncommon. They’ve come to this conclusion by reviewing probate records from that era. They say that there is seldom any mention of a gun in the lists of assets found within those records. As an estate planner let me explain the holes found within this argument made by gun ownership opponents. Typically when an asset list is made for the intent of an estate items of worth are made more particular mention of. That is when a list of assets is made you would list furniture, jewelry, personal treasures, etc. Items which hold a particular value to you and your family which would be passed on to family members that they would consider valuable. An asset list would not include clothing, kitchen utensils, and other common household items typically found in everybody’s home because those items would not be of great importance in establishing a value. The absence of guns on the probate lists of the Colonial America era does not necessarily mean that gun ownership was uncommon. As a matter of fact gun ownership was more than common, more so than owning multiple suits of clothing. The obtaining of food was in most cases an individual endeavor. It was not common to go to the neighborhood grocery store and pick up your meat for the day. Another indication that gun ownership was common was the fact that many townships of the day shared Constables and County Sheriffs; this meant that the people were responsible for their own personal protection from highway men, thieves and Indian attacks and any other danger which should present itself during the course of daily life.
The Second Amendment has consistently come under attack by groups claiming that the mere existence of firearms promotes crime. Many Nations throughout the world have taken steps to ban the ownership of firearms to their citizenry with the hopes of lowering and eliminating crime. The outcome of these Draconian measures has been dismal for those Nations adopting such regulations. For example, a recent article on crime in England claimed that a person would be safer walking the streets of New York City, NY than walking the streets of London, England, and England has in place strict gun bans which include even novelty (toy, non-operational) guns. There was a recent incident in which a woman was attacked while walking home by a group of thugs desiring to do her harm, she had in her possession a toy handgun that she had taken from her grandchildren and presented it to her assailants to effectively escape. Upon reporting the incident to the local police she was arrested for threatening bodily harm with a dangerous weapon. England is not the only Nation to see an increase in violent crimes since adopting either all out gun bans or strict restrictions on personal gun ownership. Here in the United States we have seen the opposite happen as States have relaxed restrictions and provided Conceal Carry laws allowing their citizens the right to carry a firearm. The most recent of these would be Minnesota where the anti-gun lobby including several of the State’s Chief’s of Police insisted if the State passed a law allowing the individual right to carry a weapon “blood would run in the streets.” Over the past 7 years that the law has been on the books, murder rates have steadily decreased and crime has been kept at bay and in some areas decreased as well. This has been the trend in every State that has adopted less restrictive gun laws for its citizens.
When the Assault Weapons ban expired a few years ago and Bush refused to renew it, the anti-gun lobby once again bemoaned the fact that millions of children would needlessly die and that the U.S. murder rate would skyrocket to unparalleled precedents. This has of course not happened nor has the increase of crimes using assault style rifles occurred as they prophesied would happen. Time and time again the anti-gun lobby has been proven wrong in their dooms day predictions, yet we as a people still give credence to their drivel. Recently Stanford Law Professor Don Kates along with a Canadian law professor named Gary Mauser conducted a legal analysis in the which they reviewed dozens of existing studies from around the world on the subject of gun bans and the reduction of crime and murder rates. Their research proved the mantra from the anti-gun lobby to be not only wrong but blatantly false. There is no empirical evidence to support the statements made by the anti-gun lobby or their cohorts in the legislative bodies of government.
These defenses of the Second Amendment are not meant to imply that firearms are not used in the commission of crimes. Firearms are used in the commission of 66% of murders in the U.S. Yet even this number is misleading due to the fact that it includes crimes committed by guns obtained illegally. If the number were to be removed for crimes committed by legally obtained weapons the numbers would fall dramatically. After firearms the next weapons of choice are those classified by the FBI as other weapons, which include rocks, arrows, tools and so forth. Close behind those are knives and other cutting instruments. My intention in pointing this out is the fact that firearms are not the only weapons of choice for the committal of murder. Even if we as a society could effectively rid America of all firearms including those obtained through illegal means, murder would still be where it is today. In other words, guns don’t kill people, people kill people. It sounds trite but it is true. An SUV can’t drive itself into a pedestrian, and a gun cannot discharge itself, it is operator initiated in both instances.
In summation, the individual right to keep and bear arms is in fact a Constitutionally guaranteed right granted us by our Founding Fathers. In their minds the right to defend oneself from violent crime from criminals or oppression from government was one in the same. Any attempt to remove the individual right to keep and bear arms should be met with most strenuous resistance that we can sum up within ourselves. The only reason why anybody would want to remove our right to self armament is to enslave us and give themselves the ability to trample under foot the rest of our freedoms within the Constitution.
To view the study conducted by Professors Kates and Mauser , follow this link: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2
“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.”
First, let us define Militia. What exactly is a Militia? The textbook or dictionary definition of a militia is as follows: An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers, a military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency, the whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service. Many of the Founding Fathers distrusted a standing army of professional soldiers. They believed that a Militia comprising of citizens would keep the government “honest” and America’s borders secure. Their main fear of a standing army of professional soldiers was that in their experience a standing army could be utilized against the people thereby putting in jeopardy the Nation as a whole. They insisted that when a Bill of Rights was adopted and amended into the Constitution that a provision for the Citizens to defend themselves against oppression from their Federal government and defense against enemies from abroad and domestic by permitting the formation of a Militia and the individual arming of the Citizens of the Country be added thereto.
The argument that has been made by proponents of the First Amendment is that the reasoning behind the positioning of the amendment indicates its importance and therefore you can’t infringe upon that right because of its great importance. If that argument is to stand uncontested, then one must agree that the positioning of the Second Amendment makes it equally as important. It is my belief that the Founding Fathers understood the events, which would lead to an enslaving of the people and the actions, which would be taken by the government to oppress its Citizens. It is clear by the wording of the Second Amendment that it was intention of the Founding Fathers to establish the individual right to bear arms and therefore establish the right of the Citizens to own weapons.
Opponents to the Second Amendment have repeatedly claimed that it makes no guarantee of an individual right to own weapons. One argument that has been made is that gun ownership in Colonial America was scarce and uncommon. They’ve come to this conclusion by reviewing probate records from that era. They say that there is seldom any mention of a gun in the lists of assets found within those records. As an estate planner let me explain the holes found within this argument made by gun ownership opponents. Typically when an asset list is made for the intent of an estate items of worth are made more particular mention of. That is when a list of assets is made you would list furniture, jewelry, personal treasures, etc. Items which hold a particular value to you and your family which would be passed on to family members that they would consider valuable. An asset list would not include clothing, kitchen utensils, and other common household items typically found in everybody’s home because those items would not be of great importance in establishing a value. The absence of guns on the probate lists of the Colonial America era does not necessarily mean that gun ownership was uncommon. As a matter of fact gun ownership was more than common, more so than owning multiple suits of clothing. The obtaining of food was in most cases an individual endeavor. It was not common to go to the neighborhood grocery store and pick up your meat for the day. Another indication that gun ownership was common was the fact that many townships of the day shared Constables and County Sheriffs; this meant that the people were responsible for their own personal protection from highway men, thieves and Indian attacks and any other danger which should present itself during the course of daily life.
The Second Amendment has consistently come under attack by groups claiming that the mere existence of firearms promotes crime. Many Nations throughout the world have taken steps to ban the ownership of firearms to their citizenry with the hopes of lowering and eliminating crime. The outcome of these Draconian measures has been dismal for those Nations adopting such regulations. For example, a recent article on crime in England claimed that a person would be safer walking the streets of New York City, NY than walking the streets of London, England, and England has in place strict gun bans which include even novelty (toy, non-operational) guns. There was a recent incident in which a woman was attacked while walking home by a group of thugs desiring to do her harm, she had in her possession a toy handgun that she had taken from her grandchildren and presented it to her assailants to effectively escape. Upon reporting the incident to the local police she was arrested for threatening bodily harm with a dangerous weapon. England is not the only Nation to see an increase in violent crimes since adopting either all out gun bans or strict restrictions on personal gun ownership. Here in the United States we have seen the opposite happen as States have relaxed restrictions and provided Conceal Carry laws allowing their citizens the right to carry a firearm. The most recent of these would be Minnesota where the anti-gun lobby including several of the State’s Chief’s of Police insisted if the State passed a law allowing the individual right to carry a weapon “blood would run in the streets.” Over the past 7 years that the law has been on the books, murder rates have steadily decreased and crime has been kept at bay and in some areas decreased as well. This has been the trend in every State that has adopted less restrictive gun laws for its citizens.
When the Assault Weapons ban expired a few years ago and Bush refused to renew it, the anti-gun lobby once again bemoaned the fact that millions of children would needlessly die and that the U.S. murder rate would skyrocket to unparalleled precedents. This has of course not happened nor has the increase of crimes using assault style rifles occurred as they prophesied would happen. Time and time again the anti-gun lobby has been proven wrong in their dooms day predictions, yet we as a people still give credence to their drivel. Recently Stanford Law Professor Don Kates along with a Canadian law professor named Gary Mauser conducted a legal analysis in the which they reviewed dozens of existing studies from around the world on the subject of gun bans and the reduction of crime and murder rates. Their research proved the mantra from the anti-gun lobby to be not only wrong but blatantly false. There is no empirical evidence to support the statements made by the anti-gun lobby or their cohorts in the legislative bodies of government.
These defenses of the Second Amendment are not meant to imply that firearms are not used in the commission of crimes. Firearms are used in the commission of 66% of murders in the U.S. Yet even this number is misleading due to the fact that it includes crimes committed by guns obtained illegally. If the number were to be removed for crimes committed by legally obtained weapons the numbers would fall dramatically. After firearms the next weapons of choice are those classified by the FBI as other weapons, which include rocks, arrows, tools and so forth. Close behind those are knives and other cutting instruments. My intention in pointing this out is the fact that firearms are not the only weapons of choice for the committal of murder. Even if we as a society could effectively rid America of all firearms including those obtained through illegal means, murder would still be where it is today. In other words, guns don’t kill people, people kill people. It sounds trite but it is true. An SUV can’t drive itself into a pedestrian, and a gun cannot discharge itself, it is operator initiated in both instances.
In summation, the individual right to keep and bear arms is in fact a Constitutionally guaranteed right granted us by our Founding Fathers. In their minds the right to defend oneself from violent crime from criminals or oppression from government was one in the same. Any attempt to remove the individual right to keep and bear arms should be met with most strenuous resistance that we can sum up within ourselves. The only reason why anybody would want to remove our right to self armament is to enslave us and give themselves the ability to trample under foot the rest of our freedoms within the Constitution.
To view the study conducted by Professors Kates and Mauser , follow this link: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)