| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Gun Control Laws are Copied From Hitler
U.S. Gun Control Act of 1968 is word-for-word identical to the Nazi gun control laws. Congress wants it that way. http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/GCA_68.htm Don’t be fooled by national socialists who have overthrown your government.
According to the Declaration of Independence, Governments are instituted among men to secure unalienable rights. The most fundamental right is the right to defend yourself against assaults by those who do not respect basic rights. IT IS THE REASON WE CREATED GOVERNMENT. Those who deny this right are denying the legitimacy of government.
In 1788 Alexander Hamilton stated:
[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude[,] that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens.
The Supreme Court considers the colonial era law textbook Blackstone’s Commentary on The Laws as proof of the received law-of-the-land as it existed when the original states wrote their constitutions.
According to Blackstone’s Commentary on the Laws we are all created equal therefore everyone is “entitled by the same natural right to security from the corporal insults.” This right to defend yourself is an unalienable right, a “natural liberty which is not required by the laws of society to be sacrificed to public convenience”.
In addition to the unalienable right to self defense, we also have the Bill of Rights ratified in 1791 which added “further restrictive clauses” to the Constitution.
The Constitution prohibits a standing army. In the 1939 Supreme Court case U.S. v. Miller 307 US 174 we learn what the Second Amendment was about. In order to suppress a military coup that overthrows the government, we must be able to show up on the battlefields with weapons equal to the military, in order to take back our government. If you are prohibited from buying weapons equal to the military, then you do not live in a free country.
Have Congressmen violated their oaths of office? We depend on government to uphold the reason it was created. Denying the purpose of government is mutiny against legitimate authority.
Some people like to argue about the word “militia” in the Second Amendment. They argue that the right to bear arms is only for the organized militia, or that militias are government agencies with government weapons, or that the militia is only State National Guards. But John Adams was there and he never had such thoughts.
President John Adams (signer of the Declaration of Independence, and former Congressman of Massachusetts, and one of the two Americans to sign the peace treaty authorizing the United States to exist) in his October 11, 1798 letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of Massachusetts:
” An address from the officers commanding two thousand eight hundred men, consisting of such substantial citizens as are able and willing at their own expense completely to arm and clothe themselves in handsome uniforms, does honor to that division of the militia which has done so much honor to its country.”
Almost 7 years after the Bill of Rights, and 18 years after Massachusetts was a state (by the way, John Adams wrote the Massachusetts Constitution) the militia consisted of citizens willing at their own expense completely to arm themselves. Don’t be fooled into believing that this has changed.
Defending yourself and your community is a private decision, and cannot be done with government weapons. It is never a governmental function to execute someone without a trial. Police had to provide their own weapon if they wanted to defend themselves or their community. Government weapons could never be used for a private purpose of self-defense (at least until Grover Cleveland became chief of the NY State Police then, under martial law, converted the police into a military force).
Don’t be fooled by the word “regulated” in the phrase “A well regulated militia”. It does not mean “disciplined” nor even subject to a chain of command. The word regulated means governed by rules, or “subject to governing principles”. From Latin Regula “a general rule”
We are already regulated by “a general rule” that created government. This rule of conduct applies with equal obligation to individuals and to nations. The first sentence of Declaration of Independence states that the Law of Nature entitles government to exist. And indeed the jura summa imperii is the force that government must obey. For all political power is vested in the people.
RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE.
The received-law-of-the-land had three human rights (called “the rights of all mankind” and also called “the residuum of natural liberty”) that could never be surrendered to government: The right to personal liberty, the right to self-defense, and the right to own private property. The English common law considered these to be the residual of natural liberty which could never be “required by the laws of society to be sacrificed to public convenience . . . ” The preservation of these rights, inviolate, secured the preservation of civilized society (according to the introduction to the 1769 law textbook Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Law, Book 4). We are all created equal therefore everyone is “entitled by the same natural right to security from the corporal insults.” This is the received-law-of-the-land that existed when the States wrote their Constitutions.
RIGHT TO DUEL is inherent in the right to contract
I added this topic to help explain the Constitutionally allowable restrictions to your right to bear arms. Before we review the restrictions of gun rights, we need to understand that the mental stability of those who are prone to violently settle their disputes and held to a higher standard than the rest of us is still irrelevant to their right to keep and bear arms.
The first duel in non-native America was 1621 at the Plymouth settlement. Christian Pilgrims, fleeing the religious persecution of King James (and his government published Bible) brought forth on this continent a new nation conceived in liberty.
Andrew Jackson survived three duels before we elected him as president. In his election campaign he ran as “the common man”. Yes, the common man has every right to duel to the death in a free country.
Vice President Burr had every right to duel with Treasury Secretary Hamilton, in a free country.
David Terry, CHIEF Justice of the California Supreme Court, defended himself on a dueling field against U.S. Senator Broderick. In a free country
Ben Franklin said that anyone who would give up liberty to achieve temporary safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Thomas Jefferson swore eternal hostility against people who would want to control the mind of men.
Ronald Reagan warned us that “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.” (speech to Phoenix Chamber of Commerce 3/30/61)
THIS IS WHAT I’M DOING.
Why don’t liberals want us to live in a free country? Answer: because socialism is not compatible with individual liberty.
RESTRICTION TO GUNS
No congressman can swear an oath to uphold the right to bear arms and then act against his oath. Rights are “susceptible of restriction only to prevent grave and immediate danger to interests which the state may lawfully protect” (West’s Constitutional law, key 84, 90, 91) and THE STATE MAY NOT RESTRICT SELF-DEFENSE (one of “the rights of all mankind”). Nor may a congressman violate his oath of office. For the purpose of government is to defend the right to keep and bear arms.
The Mentally Incompetent (those who cannot care for themselves) do not have many rights. And they have NO rights once they become wards of daddy government.
Others may, but are not required, step in to manage the affairs of those who cannot take care of themselves. “An implied procuration takes place when an individual sees another managing his affairs and does not interfere to prevent it”. (law dictionary definition of procuration) Those who are managed have no say in how they are treated. There is no remedy for those who are damaged by their agent. Procurationem adversus nulla est praescriptio. And I can provide dozens of other legal reasons, just ask.
THOSE WHO ARE PRONE TO DEADLY VIOLENCE (such as Andrew Jackson, vice President Burr, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, U.S. Senator Broderick or California Chief Justice David Terry) even after they announce their deadly intent to shoot someone, STILL HAVE A RIGHT, UNDER YOUR UNCHANGING* CONSTITUTION, TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.
If you want to live in a free country, you have no right to government regulated safety. Your only safety is your ability to defend yourself, and that is only after you present yourself as a target. Read Ben Franklin’s safety quote
There are categories of people who CAN be denied access to guns. These are the categories of those who cannot manage their own affairs. They are under a legal incapacity. As we shall see, this includes welfare recipients.
The Constitutional Convention was constituted under the Articles of Confederation. It was established and ordained by the same We The People who are the jura summa imperii who created government for their (our) own purposes. Pre existing law remains as the Common Law of the land, and is enforceable under the Constitution (as for example, your Constitution’s Article VI first sentence). The pre existing law of the land prohibits paupers (supported by public expense) from having any say in how they are treated. It is a conflict of interest for them to vote. Article IV of the Articles of Confederation requires that “… the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States;…” That’s right. THOSE WHO ARE SUPPORTED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS A FUGITIVE.
* CONGRESS CANNOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION
U.S. Supreme Court in S. Carolina v. U.S. 199 U.S. 437 (1905): “The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now…”
In the 1966 famous case of Miranda v. Arizona http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=384&invol=436 the Supreme Court said of our rights: “And in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, they were secured “for ages to come, and . . . designed to approach immortality as nearly as human institutions can approach it,” Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 387 (1821).
The Federalist Papers are not just some antiquated editorial opinion, they are, according to the Supreme Court in Cohens v. Virginia, the exact record of the intent of the Constitution.
Cohens v. Virginia 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 at 418
The opinion of the Federalist has always been considered as of great authority. It is a complete commentary on our constitution; and is appealed to by all parties in the questions to which that instrument has given birth. Its intrinsic merit entitles it to this high rank; and the part two of its authors performed in framing the constitution, put it very much in their power to explain the views with which it was framed. These essays having been published while the constitution was before the nation for adoption or rejection, and having been written in answer to objections founded entirely on the extent of its powers, and on its diminution of State sovereignty, are entitled to the more consideration where they frankly avow that the power objected to is given, and defend it.
Just in case you think a law or an amendment changed the intent of your Constitution, Think again. A congressman cannot swear an oath to support and defend your constitution and then suggest an amendment to change something that he is sworn to perpetuate. Article V allows amendments TO the constitution, there can never be an amendment OF the constitution. It’s meaning does not change.
This is Black Law Dictionary, first edition, 1891, entry for Law of Nature.
Unfortunately, this dictionary entry no longer appeared in subsequent editions. It disappeared. No mention remains of the very law that entitles the United States to exist, even though it “applies with equal obligation to individuals and to nations”.
Unfortunately, today’s lawyers are only told to “See Natural Law”. But the Natural Law entry now mentions only “the philosophical speculations of the Roman jurists of the Antonine age, and was intended to denote a system of rules and principles for the guidance of human conduct which… might be discovered by the rational intelligence of man… to grow out of and conform to his nature.”
Not only have ungodly lawyers obliterated God’s rules of conduct; they have reverted back to the same brutal pagan law that executed Christ and forced gladiators to fight to the death, and entertained the public by executing Christians. Are you forced to fight in their arena?
Today’s lawyers are never exposed to the legitimacy of government, or “a rule of conduct… established by the Creator” or the restraining force of moral values that has been taken out of the way. The lusts of their father they will do, for there is no truth in them.
Also related to the Law of Nature in Black’s first edition, we find:
Cling to your Bibles and your guns.
Because we are all equal, the Law of Nature vested everyone in a state of nature to punish crimes against nature. Such as murder, child rape and sodomy.
The Supreme Court still refers to Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Law when it upholds the received law-of-the-land.
Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Law, Book 4:
· “As to the power of human punishment, or the right of the temporal legislator to inflict discretionary penalties for crimes and misdemeanors. It is clear, that the right of punishing crimes against the law of nature, as murder and the like, is in a state of mere nature vested in every individual … since all are by nature equal.
· “In a state of society this right is transferred from individuals to the sovereign power; whereby men are prevented from being judges in their own causes, which is one of the evils that civil government was intended to remedy. Whatever power therefore individuals had of punishing offences against the law of nature, that is now vested in the magistrate alone; who bears the sword of justice by the consent of the whole community. And to this precedent natural power of individuals must be referred that right, which some have argued to belong to every state, (though, in fact, never exercised by any) of punishing not only their own subjects, but also foreign ambassadors, even with death itself; in case they have offended, not indeed against the municipal laws of the country, but against the divine laws of nature, and become liable thereby to forfeit their lives for their guilt
· “This right, therefore, being thus conferred by universal consent, gives to the state exactly the same power, and no more over all it’s members, as each individual member had naturally over himself or others. Which has occasioned some to doubt, how far a human legislature ought to inflict capital punishments for positive offences; offences against the municipal law only, and not against the law of nature
That’s right. The authority to execute “murderers and the like” is delegated to government by the society that created it.
Government’s right to execute “murderers and the like” does not come from congress. It comes from God, through us, when we delegated Natural Law to our civil servants by creating our government.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Ben Franklin, November 11, 1755; Reply to the Governor. This is inscribed on a plaque in the stairwell of the Statute of Liberty.
Recent History of Gun Grabs:
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians were rounded up and slaughtered.
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents were rounded up and slaughtered.
In 1935, China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents were rounded up and slaughtered.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others were exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956, and from 1975 to 1977 one million educated people were exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964, and from 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians were exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970 and from 1971 to 1979, 300,000 people were exterminated.
Estimates say that as high as 56 million people have been exterminated in the 20th century alone because gun control left them defenseless. Make no mistake, even with the Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia vs Heller stating that the Second Amendment protected an individual’s right to possess a firearm unrelated to service in a militia, they also listed in dissenting opinions the many instances that the courts had ruled on prohibitions to firearm ownership as being well within the spirit of the Constitution.
2013-01-07 08:20:13
Source: http://itmakessenseblog.com/2013/01/07/gun-control-laws-are-copied-from-hitler/
Source:
