D.C. Gun Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

As many of you know, this month the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the long-standing Washington D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. In deciding the case of Parker, et. al. v. D.C., the court concluded, “that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the citizen militia. […] The individual right facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second Amendment's civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia."

Amen, my black-robed brothuhs! In 2001 the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously came to the same individual rights conclusion in U.S. v. Emerson.

Of course the gun banners will say that this recent decision (as they did with Emerson) contradicts their favorite case, U.S. v. Miller. In this 1939 case two suspected moonshiners were charged with violating the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) by transporting an unlicensed sawed-off shotgun across state lines. In Miller the Supreme Court said that the NFA could stand constitutional muster. It concluded: "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a [sawed-off shotgun] at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense... The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

That’s hardly the stinging rebuke of the individual rights interpretation that the gun-grabbers make the Miller decision out to be. In fact, you could interpret the decision as meaning that individuals have a right to own only military style weapons and no others.

However you interpret the U.S. v. Miller decision, it’s important to note that the Supreme Court rendered its decision without ever hearing the defense’s argument. Neither the defendants nor their legal counsel appeared at the U.S. Supreme Court! That’s why the court prefaced its decision with, "In the absence of any evidence…” The lead defendant Jack Miller’s bullet-riddled corpse was found shortly before he could testify before the court and the other, Frank Layton, quickly rolled over and accepted a plea deal. (Convenient, eh?)

If the Parker case goes to the Supreme Court it may give us a long overdue chance for a fair hearing of a Second Amendment case by that body, one where BOTH sides can present their case. But if I was one of the Parker claimants, I’d start filling out those organ donor cards just in case.

IF MORE GOVERNMENT IS THE ANSWER, IT WAS A STUPID QUESTION

For those of you who have read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, you will know why I sometimes consider changing my name to Dagny Taggart. Working for the government in a bloated, top-heavy, inefficient bureaucracy which seeks only to perpetuate itself and scam more money from the taxpayer, the only thing that keeps the whole ball of wax from completely collapsing is a handful of dumb, dedicated, stubborn idealistic "Dagny Taggarts" surviving on budget crumbs down at the bottom of the food chain. Some of us still remember we are PUBLIC SERVANTS and that the land we are supposed to be stewarts of is PUBLIC land. The rest of the government, in just about any agency you care to name, has completely forgotten the public is supposed to be the master and government the servant.

So without further ado, I present to you an e-mail I received, author unknown, that offers an insider's view into how just about any governmental entity functions in this day and age...

The Old Forest Service and the Modern Forest Service decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race. On the big day, the Old Forest Service won by a mile. The Modern Forest Service, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Old Forest Service had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the Modern Forest Service team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. Feeling a deeper study was in order, Modern Forest Service management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. They advised, in the National Rowing Plan, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure how to utilize this information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Old Forest Service, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendants and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager, with none of them having any rowing experience.

They also implemented a new performance system that would make the 1 person rowing the boat more professional and accountable. It was called the "IFPM Rowing Team Program", with meetings, classes and deadlines for the rower and a requirement to take 15 more courses on AgLearn (on-line training). There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses, but it never occured to anyone to add additional rowers.

The next year the Old Forest Service won by two miles. Humiliated, the Modern Forest Service management abandoned the National Rowing Plan, laid off the rower for not meeting the deadline, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Albuquerque Service Center as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to private contractors.

The End.

INVASION USA

No, I'm not going to go on about illegal immigration again. I want to talk about a very interesting video I viewed recently. It was done by the Naval Surface Warfare Center and showed the Marine Corps' "Project Metropolis". http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...a_ining&nl=en

For those of you who never attended one of Uncle Sammy's Schools for Wayward Youth, the military has an acronym for everything. Taking a crap is DDEP, Directed Defecation Evacuation Procedure. And MOUT stands for Military Operations in Urbanized Terrain. Simply translated, that means city fighting, ala Stalingrad, Hue City, Grozny, Baghdad.

I guess I am dating myself here, but back in my active duty days, every MOUT site looked just like a Central European village as, before the Iron Curtain came down, this was where the high command expected to have to fight the next war.

If the government and the military truly is preparing to fight the next war, I find it pretty chilling that the Project Metropolis MOUT site looks exactly like Mainstreet, USA, complete with a big old church on the corner and a red brick schoolhouse amidst the apartments and single-family dwellings.

Our troops are actually fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and, if certain politicians get their way, will probably be fighting in Iran soon, although troop strength is so thin already they may have to take away their ships and sent in the Navy on foot. At any rate, how come Project Metropolis doesn't closely resemble typical Southwest Asian and Persian Gulf Arab cities?

Maybe it's just me, but watching the first minute or two of that video, with the Marines storming into Mainstreet, USA from an air assault, supported by Harriers, Cobras, and LVTPs, seemed positively Orwellian. Who among our possible enemies, from China to North Korea to the Gulf states, could possibly land on this continent an invasion force large enough to take over a U.S. city? Or maybe the government forsees the need to suppress its own peasants, aka "us", at some future date? Recall Stalin "collectivizing" the farms of the Ukraine via machine gunning everyone who said, "No."

Nothing against the Marines, but back in the 90's a survey was sent out amongst the jarheads stationed in California to see how many of them would confiscate firearms from the American public by force if ordered to do so.

Just some things that make me go, "Hmmmmmm."

POLITICAL CHOICES AHEAD....FECES OR DUNG?

Well, it is pretty obvious that the Republikrats learned absolutely nothing from the mid-term elections. As if they haven't turned off and spit upon their conservative base enough, look at who they are trying to run as presidential material.

In this corner we have Rudy "Da Nu Yawk Gooomball" with his fine record of banning guns and supporting gays and abortion, guaranteed conservative crowd pleasers; we won't even go into his personal life. Then there's John "The Manchurian Candidate" , one of the Keating 5 from the now forgotten Savings & Loan scandal, media "Maverick" who is real close to Billy Jeff Bubba Bob Klinton when it comes to his deeply-held "Core Values"; i.e. "I'm saying whatever the polls are saying today." Last and certainly least is Mit the pet "RINO", Republican in Name Only. Now really, has anything good come out of Taxachussettes in the past 150 years? I see he just recently joined the NRA to show his long-term deeply held convictions about the 2nd Amendment, which he just now discovered might bring him a few votes.

The only halfway decent folks the Republikrats are running are Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul, either one of which I would come back to the Republikrat Party to vote for. Neither one, of course, has a snowball's chance in Hades of even getting support. Both the mainstream media and the Republikan Party blue-blood old-money snobs loathe real conservatives, just like they did Ronald Reagan, who certainly did better than any of the flunkies they wanted to run.

And in the Red corner...hoooo boy...The Wicked Witch of the East. I do not use the term evil lightly, but in this case I find it justified. Even fellow Demonrats are getting disgusted with this megalamaniac. On the other side of the coin, we have Hussein Obama, whose claim to fame seems to be mainly, "Hey, I've never been indicted for anything." To top it all off, the Dems had a muslin Iman give the opening "prayers" at their convention. To thos who may have been living under a rock for the past 30 years, the "Religion of Peace" calls us the Great Satan, has called for us to be destroyed, and has committed numerous acts of terrorism that cost thousands of lives.

Meanwhile, let's check out who we've already got "leading" the nation. We won't even bother to beat the dead Bush horse; I have trouble even finding the hard-core Bushies who once defended him. So how about Nancy Pelosi's "The Most Ethical Congress in History"? As a short aside, how come during 8 years of scandals and mysterious deaths the press never mentioned Bill Clinton's first inagural promise to have "The Most Ethical Administration in History"?

Anyway, of the 535 boys and girls on the Hill, 36 have been accused of spousal abuse, 7 have been arrested for fraud, 19 are bad check writers, 117 have helped bankrupt at least 2 businesses, 3 have done time for assault, 71 have such bad credit they can't get a credit card, 14 have been arrested on drug charges, 8 have been caught shoplifting, 21 are currently undergoing lawsuits, and 84 have been arrested for drunk driving. And yet they somehow know better than us peasants who have to play by the rules, and legislate how we live (they exempt themselves from the laws they pass), and can be "responsible" for billions of our tax dollars?

Anyone noticing a trend here? Like maybe the Federal Government is rapidly spinning out of control? And when given a choice to cast your vote for either feces or dung, does it really even count for anything anymore?

"The Hunt for Confederate Gold"

I just finished reading Thomas Moore’s novel “The Hunt for Confederate Gold.” The book is two books really, one part set during the fall of the Confederacy intertwined with one part set in the present. The part set in the past follows the adventures of a young Confederate officer who is charged by the Confederate treasury secretary with the task of keeping the Confederacy’s gold reserves out of the hands of the invading Yankees. The part set in the present follows a disillusioned Iraq war veteran who returns to college and ends up on a quest to find the hidden treasure before the Feds do.

I actually enjoyed the part set in the 19th century more than the present, although there is less of it in the book. That part was more of a rousing adventure, filled with danger, as the young officer must sneak the gold out of the south, aided only by a handful of military cadets. (I’m being deliberately vague here, in case you read the book.) The part set in the present is less exciting and more political. The present day heroes are neo-Confederates who have plans for the gold to secure the liberty of the Southern people.

Author Thomas Moore is apparently a true son of the South and paints a glowing picture of the Confederacy as the last great hope for human freedom. While he rightfully points out the tyrannical sins of the 19th century Union and it’s modern day Fed successors, he seems to gloss over the sins of the Confederacy. Besides affecting the slaves, slavery was an immoral institution that had to be propped up with equally immoral laws. If you can get busted for teaching a black person to read the Bible, for instance, a libertarian utopia it ain’t. Still, the book is useful in challenging the notion of many of us Yankees that the Union was absolute good and the Confederacy was absolute evil, that the war was between high-minded abolitionists and wicked slave owners. Moore points out that the Civil War, like many wars, was more about money than ideals.

All in all, I recommend “The Hunt for Confederate Gold.” It’s from Fusilier Books and available wherever fine books are sold.