Why the 2nd Amendment is alway tied to school violence

Your diatribe was filled with insight and damn good information, though biased at times. We are all biased to a degree! Appropriately, you initial response was to repeat the 2nd Amendment as this was where I began after I understood the anti-gun lobby would surely attack. However, in attempts to digress and find an underlying cause for the violence and death we now see too often, a broader search is required. Let us first look at the Declaration of Independence and the entire Constitution for potential answers.

“When in the course of human events ( daily living) it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them to another ( King George and the Brits were so distant from the colonies, and their ways were inconsistent with the needs and interest of the colonials) and assume among the powers of the earth ( take control of our own lives as free men) for which the Laws of Nature and Natures Nature’s God entitle them ( as free men Natural Law provids moral lessons of right and wrong under the omniscient eye of the Supreme Architect of the Universe). A decent respect for the opinions of man requires that we declare the causes which impel the separation (Respecting our fellow humans we should explain to them (Brits) why we desire our independence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are CREATED EQUAL (emphasis added), that they are endowed by their CREATOR (emphasis added) with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their JUST power from the consent of the governed……. Within this golden apple are the rights of free men provided by Nature’s God, The Creator. Understanding from where all rights are derived is implicit in any and hopefully our Free Society. The Declaration answers the question why! The Constitution tells us how! That is, the Entire Constitution.

Freemasonry taught me that the Holy Bible is the one true light and that we should use the Holy Bible as a Rule and Guide for our lives. (Do not we still use the Bible to swear oaths and allegiances?) So, as we use the Holy Bible as a Rule and Guide for our lives, we must use the Declaration and Constitution as a Rule and Guide for our Great Nation. While the Bible has translations of languages, it has not been amended to reflect those changes in our society (let’s call it progressivism)! I believe neither should our Constitution be carelessly amended to reflect the changes of our “progressive” (actually I personally think the name should be “permissive”) society. Like the Bible, our Constitution is firm and should serve as a role model for which societal changes should reflect and acknowledge its principles.

“A well-regulated militia”? Does that mean we want chains-of-command; a Uniform Code of Military Justice? You expertly render life as it was in colonial America with the dangers fraught in the wild. Therefore to aid each other and any resemblance of governance, each must arm themselves with weapons and cache of ammunition to answer the call. After King George housed British troops at the colonist expense, and seeing what effects an ever present army had on citizens and business, standing armies were seen as a threat to the newly won independence. The distance between England and the colonies made militia a natural choice.

Armaments of the United States Military complex have dwarfed that of its citizen warriors. However, citizens predominantly serve in positions within the military. Those citizens take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic. Here lies one potential conflict!!!! The security of the Free-State could require a citizen militia. If so, how would a free standing army react to the will of a State or of a people if that State or people oppose an established government? The 1878 “Posse Comitatus Act” limited the Commander in Chief in utilizing the military to enforce U.S. Laws and domestic policies within the borders of the United States. (At the time State Guards were not U.S. Military) It was originally enacted by Congress in potential belief that President Lincoln violated his authority by suspending habeas corpus (how could he seize land and property without due process?) and creating military courts with jurisdictions over civilians during the Civil War.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 enacted closer to the early Congressional concerns limited the Presidential authority to deploy U.S. Military forces on American soil in the event of lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. The original intent was to allow individual states to manage their own affairs by using their militias or later, their National Guards. I think it interesting that the Insurrection Act of 1807 observes the 10th Amendment much more closely than does the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. As our Nation aged and progressive mindsets filtered into our midst, the further we become removed from the founding documents and their Constitutional intent.

Much maligned additionally is the real meaning of the 1st Amendment. “Congress shall make no laws with respect to the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof; or the freedom of speech, or the freedom of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Nowhere within the amendment does it ban religion from government. Baptist preachers from Danbury Connecticut wrote to President Jefferson in 1802 to ascertain their rights to practice their faith under the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Jefferson wrote back in 1803 explaining that their right to practice their faith came as a privilege from the State of Connecticut, but that the Federal Constitution via the 1st Amendment erected a “wall of separation” between the Church and Government (state). The intent of the 1st Amendment was to forbid the Federal Government from electing one national church or one national religion like the Church of England had done.

I whole-heartedly agree on the 10th. Another reason I am big on the Convention of States movement. If we are to ever gain control of OUR government, it must come by peaceably utilizing the Constitution (Article V) to initiate essential changes such as term limits and a balanced budget. Republics by nature are small as to allow a smaller distance from citizen to representative and vice versa. The representative that lives near you will now your desires better than one residing 3000 miles away. Fifty (50) individual Republics federalized to establish common needs such as protection from foreign enemies, a common coinage and commerce laws to insure equitable practices between the States, and a postage and highway system to facilitate trade between the States. All other needs should be handled at the local and State level.

As the number of formerly trained veterans rises, the ability to raise a militia at the State level should ease. I sincerely hope I never have to use any of my weapons for self-defense; but if the call becomes necessary to protect my family and my way of life, I will be available and heavily armed.

Tragedies occur from time to time; however, where they occur and how often cannot be tolerated by civil society. Why do they occur in gun-free zones? Dah, murderers are cowards and fear meeting resistance or authority. Should we arm the schools? No way! But we should recognize in what has become a permissive-progressive society that authority established by the governed must be respected for any society to survive. That means parents must stay in the home and see that their progeny learns and respects authority in the home, in the church, in the schools, and in society.

Teachers and counselors must recognize unusual behavior in children and assistance should be made available. Disgruntled employees at the post office, recently fired workers, students with repeated instances of bullying or being bullied may at any time began a rage of violence with a knife, a vehicle, baseball bat, or yes, maybe even a gun. We must treat the underlying cause, not outlaw or ban the method. Personally, I believe we need to bring God and Religion back into our lives, our schools, and our society; where else will humans learn morality?

Immigration & Sanctuary Cities

Terminology must be dissected toward a goal of removing superfluous minutia identifying underlying goals and intent. Never has this been more essential to understanding the whole sanctuary city fiasco. A sanctuary may be defined as a place of safety from persecution or harm. In the arena of immigration discussions, sanctuary cities are those municipalities who refuse to cooperate with federal authorities in reporting individuals who may be in violation of federal immigration law, i.e. illegal aliens, undocumented persons, etc. To reach an enlightened position of perspective, additional dissection of modality and intent must be pursued.


As a basis for American Constitutional Law deference must be given to those defined reasons and causes which impel the creation of the “rule of law”. Paraphrasing 17th Century philosopher John Locke, the laws of any society are created to protect the private person or property of the individual citizen of that society. Therefore, laws of a community or municipality should be crafted as to protect the persons, and their private property, of the community. One very important aspect of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of those within the community must be examined and defined. That morality engendered in the Declaration of Independence which invoked the “Laws of Nature” and “Nature’s God”, includes a certain rationale by which an individual may appropriately engage in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in lieu of coexisting within and for the common good of the community.


In cities or municipalities where businesses establish a “Chambers of Commerce”, motives which encourage principles toward optimal practices should be examined. One area of cost influential in business overhead is the cost of labor. Certainly, if labor costs could be minimized by utilization of inexpensive immigrant labor, more expensive alternatives would be excluded. The utilization of migrant workers in agriculture is rife with examples of labor cost-effectiveness of immigrant labor. Should we be surprised at the position of Chambers of Commerce opposing immigration reform? It is these Chambers of Commerce who often includes community leaders, councilman, and city mayors we now find bemoaning a federal government initiative to enforce existing immigration laws under a guise of “Sanctuary City”.


American values instilled by that morality found in natural law and reinforced by Devine theological oversight must be protected by rational application of Constitutional Law. The rationality of an individual’s protection from harm must be proscribed within that pursuit of happiness sought by any individual or business entity.

LGBTQ and Bathroom Bills



Privacies guaranteed by the 4th Amendment include the private actual or perceived characteristics of the individual. The right of the people to be secure in their persons must be a supreme goal of any Constitution. That separation between aspects of life guided by personal theology and those of civil considerations as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment remain foremost. Morality instilled by the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God exude the benefits of natural law and positive decision-making outcomes. Good moral decisions illicit good and positive outcomes: Bad moral decisions render negative outcomes unless an entity such as government intervenes to dampen potential lessons learned from poor decisions.

Theology offers guidance supporting positive decision-making skills. Personal theology is often supported by biblical passages whereby actions as those accepted in the LGBTQ are proscribed as an abomination toward God. Every being must accept responsibility for their own actions and choices; however, the outward and public demand by the LGBTQ community to be accepted as normal defies theology and biology. Governmental actions which enforce LGBTQ beliefs and actions are without merit as they are already protected by 4th Amendments rights. Any other public demonstrations approving or condoning LGBTQ characteristics are nothing more than collective attempts to sanctify social and public approval of deviant lifestyles.

These lifestyles while protected by the 4th Amendment in the privacy of their persons do not preclude a general civil acceptance; and therefore, private personal characteristics have no place being endorsed in civil matters.

You Make the Choice?

     The presidential candidate at the top of the ticket doesn’t really matter; the ideology behind the person determines the most likely path of governance for a minimum of four years. Democrats, the Left, or Liberals purport bigger centralized government providing what it thinks are needed by the general population. Funds to provide those services are produced by taxing the population in some manner. Republicans, the Right, or Conservatives believe in less or smaller government where individuals exercise personal responsibility to care for themselves and others as they deem charitable and/or appropriate.

In 1933, FDR (a democrat) introduced the Social Security Program which passed Congress in 1935 as the Social Security Act. FDR promised:
1. Participation in the program would be voluntary.
2. Participants would only pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the     program.
3. Money put into the program by participants would be deductible from their income    for tax purposes.
4. Money put into the program by participants would go into an Independent “Trust Fund” rather than into the General operating fund and would only be used to fund the Social Security Program and no others; and,
5. The annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

In 1958, a democratic controlled Congress voted to remove funds from Social Security and put them into the General Fund for Congress to spend. Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security withholding? The Democrat Party with Vice-President Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote. Which Political Party decided to give Social Security annuity payments to immigrants? James Earl Carter, a democrat, and the Democrat Party.

Democrat ideology takes money from some and gives it to others. Taking without permission is Tyranny. Republican ideology believes citizens know best how to handle their money. Americans are by their very nature charitable to those in need. Tyranny or Charity; you make the choice?

It’s The Court Stupid

Set forth in the Declaration of Independence in 1776, an affirmation that all men are created equal was inconsistent with a Constitution (1787) which allowed slavery until 1808. Politics in Congress failed to end slavery and a great divide polarized a young nation until 1861 and the U.S. Civil War. Since that great tragedy, political differences over the role of government in the lives of Americans has emerged as the polarizing agent in our “free” society in 2016.

From the industrial revolution of the 1870s, growth of so-called progressive ideology in government has been instrumental in the growth of government beyond that described by our duly adopted Constitution. Resulting from this growth of progressiveness, a new divide now threatens the very fabric of our Nation. A broadening gap separating right from left, or conservative and liberal, or republican or democrat has polarized the United States once again.

It is not the President, but the presidential nominations to the Supreme Court which may light the fuse of discontent. Conservative nominees will most likely maintain some resemblance of constitutional intent while liberal nominees will probably concur with increased progressive ideology and undermine the Constitution’s guidance. Roe v. Wade, the 2nd Amendment, and other areas of potential governmental interjections will be on the table.

All of the sudden those rights given by God may be restricted by government. A Representative Republic as Lincoln professed of, by, and for the people is governed by a ruling class of elitist; and that government designed by “We The People” with limited and specifically enumerated powers grows like a malignant tumor.  The prognosis is poor! Can the patient be saved? The voters will decide November 8th, 2016; a day that may determine destiny! Thanks to our government all we have is Obamacare.

Republic, Representative Republic, and the GOP

A common root word should possess at least some equality in its meaning when converted from a noun to an adjective; or even to a verb. Over many years of political bastardization, the root word Republic has morphed into multiple words for broader application toward a plethora of Quasi-conservative ideologies. A haphazard utilization of the root word republic for purposes of labeling has caused irreparable harm to its’ substantive representation in democratic governments.

A Republic is a democratic political unit where the supreme power resides with its citizens. Individual liberty and personal sovereignty are maintained in a society where citizens establish the “rule of law”. Democratic rule within a republic necessitates a smaller or controlled size of the political state. Rapid boundless growth in numbers of citizens would led to a true democracy being little more than mob-rule. The majority would rule while those in the minority would be trampled; therefore, individual state-republics must be limited in size. At the original founding, the colonies, or States, in America were organized around common theologies such as Presbyterian, Anglican, Jewish, Baptists, Quaker, etc.

Protection from foreign invaders on the East coast and Indian raids on the West frontier demonstrated a need whereby the common good of each individual state could be provided without repetition by a compact between the states. Articles of Confederation served the American colonies during the revolution against King George; however, the Articles were extremely limited and voluntary. The Founders realized for this young nation to survive, a federal system of government under an adopted Constitution with limited and specifically enumerated powers and restricted taxation would be needed. Individual liberties and State-sovereignty would be maintained by a “Bill of Rights”. Under Articles of the Constitution citizens within the States elect members to represent their desires and wishes in a larger Representative Republic. Fifty States within the United States of America are fifty individual republics within a federal system of government.

Republican is analogous to a political party, formerly the Whig party, which sought to limit any idea of royal power over that of the people. Initially Constitutional originalist, republicans seek to maintain a federal government with limited power, minimal taxation, individual liberty, personal sovereignty, and personal responsibility. The Republican Party has been the antithesis of the Democrat Party which favors expanded government where bureaucracies utilize taxation to provide services deemed essential for citizen’s well-being. Democrat ideology shifts personal responsibility from the individual to the government.

In 2016, the Grand Old Party (GOP) has migrated so far from the republic icon, it no longer represents true conservatism. Royalty within the GOP may have forgotten that the real power lies with “We the People”!