-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Anti-gunners say...
- Thread starter actaeon277
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
As promised, here's more.
The only way leftists could be triggered more? If there was an American Flag in the picture too.
There's a basketball goal, probably Indiana.
I'm guess 317 or 219 area code, too flat to be the 812.
We have a family. A couple with two young kids. The boy is on a John Deere (looks like it could pull a 2-bottom plow with that thing) and the girl is on a bike with training wheels. Marxists want to replace the family with government so this is a threat. What's worse they are reproducing... that runs opposite of the "we need all these illegals" argument.
There is nothing else around in the picture. This scares the left even more than the firearms because their vote counts and we have the Electoral College.
I don't remember 1968, I have to think we are a more divided nation than we were in 68. 1860? Maybe, I lean towards no. It's a very different world now. Our Nation was torn apart in the 1860s without the 24-hour news cycle and social media.
I can't see the last two posts
Feminist News
many of the comments on this post are unhinged, and we apologize that any of our audience or the country has to be exposed to this dangerous incitement and violence. The gun extremists and right-wing violence are two peas of the same pod, and despite what the extremists angrily post on comment threads, there is a direct line from raising children with the values of bigotry, discrimination, and gun nuttery to the political violence and mass atrocities happening all too frequently.
Shannon Stephenson
I wish there was a way to mass block people based on their laughing response emoji! I don't want to come across these people in life let alone social media. There are 1.5k with
They must be tired of deleting comments.
Because I'm starting to see some taking them to task
Ren Lucy Jackson
Why do all of you think its okay to be upset about someone judging your lifestyle, culture, and traditions but then you turn around and do it right back? That is the whole problem to begin with and fire dont stop fire. How do more people not get this?
Chris Rucker
Imagine being bothered by a family raised on tradition. Based family.
Madison Sully
love seeing a family support the 2nd amendment and teaching their children to do the same!
John Cameron
It is actually called responsible parenting. Teaching respect for firearms instead of fear of them.
Because I'm starting to see some taking them to task
Ren Lucy Jackson
Why do all of you think its okay to be upset about someone judging your lifestyle, culture, and traditions but then you turn around and do it right back? That is the whole problem to begin with and fire dont stop fire. How do more people not get this?
Chris Rucker
Imagine being bothered by a family raised on tradition. Based family.
Madison Sully
love seeing a family support the 2nd amendment and teaching their children to do the same!
John Cameron
It is actually called responsible parenting. Teaching respect for firearms instead of fear of them.
Not sure this is the right spot for this.
Colion tells about how the rich don't care about the 2nd Amendment because they can just hire guys with guns to protect them.
Just like the $200 tax stamp. It wasn't made so you couldn't own those evil firearms but that only the rich could have access to those firearms.
They are trying to brainwash the masses into accepting their ideals by using the children and playing on their feelings.
We need to take this battle to the public schools and colleges and give our children a different view than the elitist propaganda.
Now how do we get our toe in the door of our education system yo offer a different view?
Ok, bear with me this is a long one.
I received a new Indiana House district and Representative for 2023. My new Representative asked for feed back, and this is what she received. I received a non-automated response, with an offer to set up a meeting after the holidays.
The following was originally developed for my prior State Rep. For a formal letter. Conversion to am email and then this post has corrupted some of the formatting.
The included footnotes lost the associated superscript identifiers, but I am sure you can figure out the references. As always, if it supports the cause, plagiarism is encouraged.
Write to your government critters. What they most often see and hear are main stream media sources, and the loudest best funded radicals from either side. (most of INGO knows that far more money is being dumped into subverting the Constitution than upholding it)
Just as the left have used public schools to undermine this Nation's culture and Constitution, "we" can use the public schools to protect and reinvigorate the Constitution. I know of no better method than the visceral and very physical reminder of skill at arms.
"Representative XXXX, District 25
Since the time of the Plymouth colony our forebears have recognized the right of the individual to bear arms for defense of self and community.i Our predecessors who worked to craft a constitution for a new nation over two hundred years ago did so after careful thought and hard fought experience. Their efforts resulted in a document which addressed the failings of past societies, governments, and most importantly the basic but undesirable characteristics of the human creature.
My challenge to you is to author a State law proposal to implement forthwith the following actions, to limit the continued decline of our State and Nation, and ensure a robust citizen militia for defense of same against enemies both foreign and domestic.
All students at schools which receive State government funding must be required to take and pass the current Federal government citizenship test (or a later more difficult test) prior to receiving a diploma.
1. The syllabus, coursework, and testing must include reading assignments for the Constitution of the United States of America, selected Federalist Papers, selected portions of Judge Joseph Story's “Commentaries on the Constitution, and finally either the Militia Act of 1792, or the Militia Act of 1903.
2. Require all schools which receive State government funding to offer and require a firearms safety course before the High School years, based upon the standard U.S. Military or NRA safety guidelines.
No editorializing or anti-gun propaganda can be permitted as a component of this instruction.
3. Require all schools which receive State government funding to offer and require demonstration of firearms marksmanship during the High School years, based upon the standard U.S. Military or NRA marksmanship guidelines.
The State must be required to request the Selective Service select those who did not pass the marksmanship demonstration for Selective Service, prior to selection of those citizens who did so, as these persons will require additional training
4. There need to be harsh, even extreme penalties, for persons in government service (schools, child welfare, law enforcement, judiciary) who do not act on evidence of persons who present a danger to the community. (See paragraph below, as this was written prior to the FedEx active shooter event.)
5. Indiana's “Red Flag” law and the FedEx facility active shooter event have disclosed one of my abiding concerns over such laws. See item 4 above.
7. Indiana needs to use the State's strong financial position to correct taxation distortions. While I have strong opinions regarding what government's authority to confiscate the labor of its citizens; I will limit my suggestion to the following. Indiana's current fuel taxation system is unnecessarily punitive, especially to those of limited means. If Indiana is going to raise revenue from the sale of fuel, then it should be on a per volume basis, not price basis. Please fix this in the 2023 legislative session.
8. Indiana has a "pointing a firearm" offense, which is a liability to those who draw a firearm in lawful defense but do NOT discharge the weapon. This needs fixed in the 2023 legislative session. Refer to the 2022 legislative session proposal SB 143 for an acceptable change. Any change which either rescinds this provision of the current statute, or absolves an individual if the firearm is used in a defensive manner will be an improvement.
9. ALL law enforcement organization top positions need to be elected positions. Those charged with enforcing our laws MUST be directly accountable to the people. Further, they cannot be subordinate to the local Executive. Never again should a local Executive have the authority to direct the head of local law enforcement to "stand down" and allow the citizens of the locality to be terrorized and property destroyed to support the political whims of the local government entity!
The remainder of this correspondence is explanatory to my focus above on firearm related matters. I hope you find it useful, but in your new position it is mostly an optional read.
An early American jurist and legal scholar St. George Tucker in his annotated edition of Blackstone; which quickly became known as the American Blackstone, assessed the 2nd Amendment relative to the English "right to bear arms" as follows "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government. Whoever examines the forest, and game laws in the British code, will readily perceive that the right of keeping arms is effectually taken away from the people of England. Blackstone himself informs us, (Vol. II, p. 412) , “that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistence (sic) to government by disarming the bulk of the people, is a reason oftener meant than avowed by the makers of the forest and game laws.” Today, you can replace “makers of the forest and game laws” with “those who promote Gun Control” and disarmament.
Ample evidence of the intent of the ratifiers of the Constitution, and those first legal scholars who recorded for posterity the expectations of the people and judiciary post ratification, exists in the written record. These documents provide “book end” vantage points to what was required to gain ratification of the Constitution and the Bill-of-Rights, as well as the original citizens expectations for the protections the Constitution would provide. Examples abound, a few of which include such documents as Hamilton's Federalist Paper 28ii and Madison’s 46iii; as well as the Honorable St. George Tucker iv in his annotated edition of Blackstone and the Honorable William Rawlev, and Justice Joseph Story vi.
The Honorable William Rawle, founder of one of the United States oldest law firms wrote the following in a text which was once used at West Point. “The corollary, from the first position, is, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if by any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.” This is not a weak statement, but a broad declaration that the intent of the 2nd Amendment was to protect the people from any attempts by the Federal government of disarming the people in any manner; for the prohibition is general against actions of the Federal government and the States. (Ed. Emphasis added)
Sadly, in today's age it is the citizens of the constitutionalist States which need to protect the fundamental principle embodied in the Second Amendment from the Federal government.
Justice Story, while strongly supporting the view of the 2nd Amendment of his predecessors, did lament that there was a growing indifference to the practicing of militia skills by all the people which threatened the utility of “the people” in rapidly assembling in militia as was the custom in the 17th century. Justice Story also authored a book intended for the wider popular audience of the American people, the Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States” which explained the 2nd Amendment as follows.
“The next amendment is, “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.” One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offence to keep arms, and by substituting a regular army in the stead of a resort to the militia. The friends of a free government cannot be too watchful, to overcome the dangerous tendency of the public mind to sacrifice, for the sake of mere private convenience, this powerful check upon the designs of ambitious men.
The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and it will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burdens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our National Bill of Rights.” (Ed. Emphasis added)
It is entirely arguable that Justice Story's last sentence above, is prophetic in its content. Justice Story was still of a generation which could understand the historical context of the 2nd Amendment by their own experiences. For this reason Justice Story exulted that when citizens are armed, they can resist usurpation; the right to bear arms allows the “people to resist and triumph over” their oppressors. Indeed, Justice Story explicitly promoted the dispersion of armed force in a society as facilitating needed changes in government. Nor was violent resistance to tyranny an abstract notion to Justice Story; his father had been one of the Indians in the Boston Tea Party.
On the basis of Justice Story's counsel I ask that you propose and support by all means the legislation I have requested in items 1 through 3 above. This United States was once able to rely upon our agrarian and rural existence to ensure an adequate population of citizens with skill at arms. Urbanization and cultural changes have eroded familiarity with arms, which needs to be supplemented and reinforced in our urban / suburban society. An explanation in more modern times of why this is important is the Battle of Athens (1946) - Wikipedia
After due consideration I believe our forefathers did not err in the demand for a strong and unlimited right to arms. We, the American people, have not held up our end of the duty the right levies on us. As Justice Story noted so long ago, that “indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights”. I am afraid just such an event has occurred, but it can be corrected. As President Washington cautioned against parties, and President Eisenhower cautioned against a large standing military-industrial complex, our predecessors have foreseen this danger to the Republic. In so doing they have also provided us potential solutions which can be executed in today's environment.
As both a matter of national security, and a reaffirmation of our natural rights I propose the following actions be undertaken. These actions are most desperately needed in our urban centers, and therefore the initial efforts should be put forth in our largest metropolitan areas.
I encourage State Government to support of our children's understanding of our nation's most fundamental laws. I suggest that in order for public school systems to receive ANY State funding dollars, the school system be required to provide firearms safety training between the ages of 10 and 14. In order to receive continued funding these same entities should be required to provide effective live fire safety and marksmanship training between the age of 14 and 18. This training should not be tainted with political or social agendas but rather be straight forward in addressing the types of firearms, their maintenance, and the safe operation and handling of common individual arms. This training must include live fire marksmanship training sufficient to produce competent marksmen to a recognized standard.
Just as we purport to teach our citizens their rights under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 14th Amendments. We as a nation should endeavor to provide the same consideration to the 2nd Amendment. For it is the 2nd Amendment which underpins all others, and uniquely empowers and applies a burden of responsibility upon our citizens.
States should be encouraged, for those citizens who are not in the military, to provide for basic marksmanship training for each citizen. For this purpose existing ranges under the control of State government agencies should be opened, and new facilities built. Subsidy should also be provided to ensure that each lawful citizen has the opportunity to procure a suitable arm for defense of self and the State.
Citizens of Indiana should not be lied to. Our State Legislature should be clear that each Indiana citizen is there own first responder. Send a copy of Attorney General Todd Rokita's "Gun Owners Bill of Rights" to each Indiana residence.
As your constituent, I urge you to vote against all legislation which would restrict law abiding citizens from exercising their Right to keep and bear arms. Obviously having gone to this much trouble, I'll be monitoring your performance.
If you or your staff have made it this far, I would like to leave you with what I believe is a hopeful sign for the future. North Carolina Lt Governor Mark Robinson came to prominence due to a video on YouTube, when he spoke passionately in defense of the 2nd Amendment. Prior to becoming Lt Governor Mark Robinson, he addressed an audience largely made up of those the left want to pigeon hole in to neat collective groups to pit against each other. This groups reaction left me with hope that there are still Americans who truly understand the Constitution and what being an American means.
Mark Keith Robinson speaks at Young Black Leadership Summit watch the video and marvel at what happens when our citizens see themselves as Americans, and not some hyphenated subset of our citizenry. Marvel at what Americans look like when they are not taught to be and portray themselves as victims or told they are oppressors of others.
-- Sincerely,
JWamplerUSA
iJohn Ordronaux, Constitutional Legislation In The United States: Its Origin, And Application To The Relative Powers Of Congress, And Of State Legislatures (1891) “This was recognized by the laws of the Plymouth Colony, which required that “each person for himself have piece, powder, and shot—viz., a sufficient musket or other serviceable piece for war, with bandeleroes, swords, and other appurtenances for himself, and each man-servant he kept able to bear arms.”
iiFederalist No. 28, sixth paragraph “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state.”
iiiFederalist No. 46 “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”
ivThe Honorable St. George Tucker in his annotated edition of Blackstone, Constitutional Appendix stated "This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer , or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house with out being subject to a penalty." (Ed. Emphasis added)
vWilliam Rawle’s 1825 A View of the Constitution of the United States of America had this to say in regard to the 2nd Amendment "The corollary, from the first position, is, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if by any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both. In most of the countries of Europe, this right does not seem to be denied, although it is allowed more or less sparingly, according to circumstances. In England, a country which boasts so much of its freedom, the right was secured to protestant subjects only, on the revolution of 1688; and it is cautiously described to be that of bearing arms for their defence, “suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law.” An arbitrary code for the preservation of game in that country has long disgraced them. A very small proportion of the people being permitted to kill it, though for their own subsistence; a gun or other instrument, used for that purpose by an unqualified person, may be seized or forfeited. Blackstone, in whom we regret that we cannot always trace the expanded principles of rational liberty, observes however, on this subject, that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistance to government by disarming the people, is oftener meant than avowed, by makers of forest and game laws. This right ought not, however, in any government, to be abused to the disturbance of the public peace."
viSupreme Court Justice Joseph Story authored Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States in 1840, and provided this analysis of the 2nd Amendment. "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised that, among the American people, there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burdens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed, without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights." (Ed. Emphasis added)"
I received a new Indiana House district and Representative for 2023. My new Representative asked for feed back, and this is what she received. I received a non-automated response, with an offer to set up a meeting after the holidays.
The following was originally developed for my prior State Rep. For a formal letter. Conversion to am email and then this post has corrupted some of the formatting.
The included footnotes lost the associated superscript identifiers, but I am sure you can figure out the references. As always, if it supports the cause, plagiarism is encouraged.
Write to your government critters. What they most often see and hear are main stream media sources, and the loudest best funded radicals from either side. (most of INGO knows that far more money is being dumped into subverting the Constitution than upholding it)
Just as the left have used public schools to undermine this Nation's culture and Constitution, "we" can use the public schools to protect and reinvigorate the Constitution. I know of no better method than the visceral and very physical reminder of skill at arms.
"Representative XXXX, District 25
Indiana House of Representatives
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Representative XXXX,
We spoke at length in my homes entry way when Mrs. XXXXXX brought you to our home. Unfortunately I had driven off your daughter and her companion when they came to solicit my vote for your candidacy. I apologized, and I believe the event was illustrative of just how heated the election season had become.
You asked for my input, and I am going to provide it. Much of this was directed previously to my prior Representative. My hope is that yourself and this Legislature can be more effective.
As your constituent I would like to place before you a challenge. A challenge to help restore this State and Nation to its intended form, and push back against the communists (AKA Democrats) which have gained control of our Federal government and portions of Indiana.
This Nation is a republic of republics. The Federal government's role, as specified in the Constitution was to address limited tasks which individual States were ill prepared to address, and to ensure the protection of certain Rights and authorities to each citizen of ALL States. This Nation has strayed too far from its principle of limited government as documented in the Constitution. If the Republic is to be saved, it will be by those States which still hold a majority of Constitutionalist citizens pressing back against the Federal government and reducing it to its intended form.
I believe Indiana is one of those States which have the citizenry and ability to lead this Nation back to its founding principles, excepting certain local areas. I propose that Indiana can begin by asserting the Rights of our citizens and the authority of our State under the Constitution of the United States of America.
Preamble to the Bill of Rights
“The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.”
Amendment IX. “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Amendment X. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Much of what the Federal government does today is NOT delegated by the Constitution. All to often Federal government activity and authority is assumed, awaiting a successful judicial challenge. Far worse however; is the Federal government's exercise of power by extortion. Each program and demand made on the States, underpinned not by Constitutional authority but by the dangling of State taxpayer dollars as an incentive to do the Federal government's bidding, is a violation of the principles upon which this Nation was founded. It is time the States reject such extortion, and leave the Federal government with a Hobbson's choice. Leave the States business, as this State will no longer be extorted.
This citizen is more than willing to see a rejection of Federal tax dollars for education, to remove the Federal government from our educational system. The same can be said for numerous other areas of governance and service. If like minded States band together and refuse to be extorted, then the Federal government's power will be materially diminished, as it should be. If like minded States pool their resources and target selected excesses under the 9th and 10th Amendments, my hope is the excesses of the Federal government can be checked or even rolled back, in a peaceful manner.
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Representative XXXX,
We spoke at length in my homes entry way when Mrs. XXXXXX brought you to our home. Unfortunately I had driven off your daughter and her companion when they came to solicit my vote for your candidacy. I apologized, and I believe the event was illustrative of just how heated the election season had become.
You asked for my input, and I am going to provide it. Much of this was directed previously to my prior Representative. My hope is that yourself and this Legislature can be more effective.
As your constituent I would like to place before you a challenge. A challenge to help restore this State and Nation to its intended form, and push back against the communists (AKA Democrats) which have gained control of our Federal government and portions of Indiana.
This Nation is a republic of republics. The Federal government's role, as specified in the Constitution was to address limited tasks which individual States were ill prepared to address, and to ensure the protection of certain Rights and authorities to each citizen of ALL States. This Nation has strayed too far from its principle of limited government as documented in the Constitution. If the Republic is to be saved, it will be by those States which still hold a majority of Constitutionalist citizens pressing back against the Federal government and reducing it to its intended form.
I believe Indiana is one of those States which have the citizenry and ability to lead this Nation back to its founding principles, excepting certain local areas. I propose that Indiana can begin by asserting the Rights of our citizens and the authority of our State under the Constitution of the United States of America.
Preamble to the Bill of Rights
“The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.”
Amendment IX. “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Amendment X. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Much of what the Federal government does today is NOT delegated by the Constitution. All to often Federal government activity and authority is assumed, awaiting a successful judicial challenge. Far worse however; is the Federal government's exercise of power by extortion. Each program and demand made on the States, underpinned not by Constitutional authority but by the dangling of State taxpayer dollars as an incentive to do the Federal government's bidding, is a violation of the principles upon which this Nation was founded. It is time the States reject such extortion, and leave the Federal government with a Hobbson's choice. Leave the States business, as this State will no longer be extorted.
This citizen is more than willing to see a rejection of Federal tax dollars for education, to remove the Federal government from our educational system. The same can be said for numerous other areas of governance and service. If like minded States band together and refuse to be extorted, then the Federal government's power will be materially diminished, as it should be. If like minded States pool their resources and target selected excesses under the 9th and 10th Amendments, my hope is the excesses of the Federal government can be checked or even rolled back, in a peaceful manner.
Since the time of the Plymouth colony our forebears have recognized the right of the individual to bear arms for defense of self and community.i Our predecessors who worked to craft a constitution for a new nation over two hundred years ago did so after careful thought and hard fought experience. Their efforts resulted in a document which addressed the failings of past societies, governments, and most importantly the basic but undesirable characteristics of the human creature.
A very concrete example Indiana can take, one which will set an example for other Constitutionalist States and citizens is to restore the concept of the citizen militia to its correct place in our communities and educational system.
I am therefore challenging you to author a Bill to require that all accredited primary educational institutions licensed by Indiana be required to address the Constitutional basis of the Militia. The student's relationship with the Unorganized Militia (Militia Act of 1903 as amended and 10USC 246 b 2), and to demonstrate both firearm safety and marksmanship prior to receiving a State sanctioned diploma.
I am therefore challenging you to author a Bill to require that all accredited primary educational institutions licensed by Indiana be required to address the Constitutional basis of the Militia. The student's relationship with the Unorganized Militia (Militia Act of 1903 as amended and 10USC 246 b 2), and to demonstrate both firearm safety and marksmanship prior to receiving a State sanctioned diploma.
My challenge to you is to author a State law proposal to implement forthwith the following actions, to limit the continued decline of our State and Nation, and ensure a robust citizen militia for defense of same against enemies both foreign and domestic.
All students at schools which receive State government funding must be required to take and pass the current Federal government citizenship test (or a later more difficult test) prior to receiving a diploma.
1. The syllabus, coursework, and testing must include reading assignments for the Constitution of the United States of America, selected Federalist Papers, selected portions of Judge Joseph Story's “Commentaries on the Constitution, and finally either the Militia Act of 1792, or the Militia Act of 1903.
2. Require all schools which receive State government funding to offer and require a firearms safety course before the High School years, based upon the standard U.S. Military or NRA safety guidelines.
No editorializing or anti-gun propaganda can be permitted as a component of this instruction.
3. Require all schools which receive State government funding to offer and require demonstration of firearms marksmanship during the High School years, based upon the standard U.S. Military or NRA marksmanship guidelines.
The State of Indiana must keep a record of those students who DO NOT pass the marksmanship demonstration.
The State must be required to request the Selective Service select those who did not pass the marksmanship demonstration for Selective Service, prior to selection of those citizens who did so, as these persons will require additional training
4. There need to be harsh, even extreme penalties, for persons in government service (schools, child welfare, law enforcement, judiciary) who do not act on evidence of persons who present a danger to the community. (See paragraph below, as this was written prior to the FedEx active shooter event.)
5. Indiana's “Red Flag” law and the FedEx facility active shooter event have disclosed one of my abiding concerns over such laws. See item 4 above.
6. Indiana's "Emergency" act law(s) need to be rescinded and replaced. Never again should the State's Executive (Governor) have the authority used by Governor Holcomb during the "pandemic". This State places the control of government in the hands of the Legislature. I strongly request that any replacement "Emergency" authorization legislation severely limit the Executive government's power after 72 hours. Any further actions for an event to be considered by the legislature. This same replacement legislation can empower the Speaker of the House and the Senate President Pro-tem to call the legislature to session in case of such an occurrence.
7. Indiana needs to use the State's strong financial position to correct taxation distortions. While I have strong opinions regarding what government's authority to confiscate the labor of its citizens; I will limit my suggestion to the following. Indiana's current fuel taxation system is unnecessarily punitive, especially to those of limited means. If Indiana is going to raise revenue from the sale of fuel, then it should be on a per volume basis, not price basis. Please fix this in the 2023 legislative session.
8. Indiana has a "pointing a firearm" offense, which is a liability to those who draw a firearm in lawful defense but do NOT discharge the weapon. This needs fixed in the 2023 legislative session. Refer to the 2022 legislative session proposal SB 143 for an acceptable change. Any change which either rescinds this provision of the current statute, or absolves an individual if the firearm is used in a defensive manner will be an improvement.
9. ALL law enforcement organization top positions need to be elected positions. Those charged with enforcing our laws MUST be directly accountable to the people. Further, they cannot be subordinate to the local Executive. Never again should a local Executive have the authority to direct the head of local law enforcement to "stand down" and allow the citizens of the locality to be terrorized and property destroyed to support the political whims of the local government entity!
The remainder of this correspondence is explanatory to my focus above on firearm related matters. I hope you find it useful, but in your new position it is mostly an optional read.
An early American jurist and legal scholar St. George Tucker in his annotated edition of Blackstone; which quickly became known as the American Blackstone, assessed the 2nd Amendment relative to the English "right to bear arms" as follows "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government. Whoever examines the forest, and game laws in the British code, will readily perceive that the right of keeping arms is effectually taken away from the people of England. Blackstone himself informs us, (Vol. II, p. 412) , “that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistence (sic) to government by disarming the bulk of the people, is a reason oftener meant than avowed by the makers of the forest and game laws.” Today, you can replace “makers of the forest and game laws” with “those who promote Gun Control” and disarmament.
Ample evidence of the intent of the ratifiers of the Constitution, and those first legal scholars who recorded for posterity the expectations of the people and judiciary post ratification, exists in the written record. These documents provide “book end” vantage points to what was required to gain ratification of the Constitution and the Bill-of-Rights, as well as the original citizens expectations for the protections the Constitution would provide. Examples abound, a few of which include such documents as Hamilton's Federalist Paper 28ii and Madison’s 46iii; as well as the Honorable St. George Tucker iv in his annotated edition of Blackstone and the Honorable William Rawlev, and Justice Joseph Story vi.
The Honorable William Rawle, founder of one of the United States oldest law firms wrote the following in a text which was once used at West Point. “The corollary, from the first position, is, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if by any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.” This is not a weak statement, but a broad declaration that the intent of the 2nd Amendment was to protect the people from any attempts by the Federal government of disarming the people in any manner; for the prohibition is general against actions of the Federal government and the States. (Ed. Emphasis added)
Sadly, in today's age it is the citizens of the constitutionalist States which need to protect the fundamental principle embodied in the Second Amendment from the Federal government.
Justice Story, while strongly supporting the view of the 2nd Amendment of his predecessors, did lament that there was a growing indifference to the practicing of militia skills by all the people which threatened the utility of “the people” in rapidly assembling in militia as was the custom in the 17th century. Justice Story also authored a book intended for the wider popular audience of the American people, the Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States” which explained the 2nd Amendment as follows.
“The next amendment is, “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.” One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offence to keep arms, and by substituting a regular army in the stead of a resort to the militia. The friends of a free government cannot be too watchful, to overcome the dangerous tendency of the public mind to sacrifice, for the sake of mere private convenience, this powerful check upon the designs of ambitious men.
The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and it will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burdens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our National Bill of Rights.” (Ed. Emphasis added)
It is entirely arguable that Justice Story's last sentence above, is prophetic in its content. Justice Story was still of a generation which could understand the historical context of the 2nd Amendment by their own experiences. For this reason Justice Story exulted that when citizens are armed, they can resist usurpation; the right to bear arms allows the “people to resist and triumph over” their oppressors. Indeed, Justice Story explicitly promoted the dispersion of armed force in a society as facilitating needed changes in government. Nor was violent resistance to tyranny an abstract notion to Justice Story; his father had been one of the Indians in the Boston Tea Party.
On the basis of Justice Story's counsel I ask that you propose and support by all means the legislation I have requested in items 1 through 3 above. This United States was once able to rely upon our agrarian and rural existence to ensure an adequate population of citizens with skill at arms. Urbanization and cultural changes have eroded familiarity with arms, which needs to be supplemented and reinforced in our urban / suburban society. An explanation in more modern times of why this is important is the Battle of Athens (1946) - Wikipedia
|
After due consideration I believe our forefathers did not err in the demand for a strong and unlimited right to arms. We, the American people, have not held up our end of the duty the right levies on us. As Justice Story noted so long ago, that “indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights”. I am afraid just such an event has occurred, but it can be corrected. As President Washington cautioned against parties, and President Eisenhower cautioned against a large standing military-industrial complex, our predecessors have foreseen this danger to the Republic. In so doing they have also provided us potential solutions which can be executed in today's environment.
As both a matter of national security, and a reaffirmation of our natural rights I propose the following actions be undertaken. These actions are most desperately needed in our urban centers, and therefore the initial efforts should be put forth in our largest metropolitan areas.
I encourage State Government to support of our children's understanding of our nation's most fundamental laws. I suggest that in order for public school systems to receive ANY State funding dollars, the school system be required to provide firearms safety training between the ages of 10 and 14. In order to receive continued funding these same entities should be required to provide effective live fire safety and marksmanship training between the age of 14 and 18. This training should not be tainted with political or social agendas but rather be straight forward in addressing the types of firearms, their maintenance, and the safe operation and handling of common individual arms. This training must include live fire marksmanship training sufficient to produce competent marksmen to a recognized standard.
Just as we purport to teach our citizens their rights under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 14th Amendments. We as a nation should endeavor to provide the same consideration to the 2nd Amendment. For it is the 2nd Amendment which underpins all others, and uniquely empowers and applies a burden of responsibility upon our citizens.
States should be encouraged, for those citizens who are not in the military, to provide for basic marksmanship training for each citizen. For this purpose existing ranges under the control of State government agencies should be opened, and new facilities built. Subsidy should also be provided to ensure that each lawful citizen has the opportunity to procure a suitable arm for defense of self and the State.
Citizens of Indiana should not be lied to. Our State Legislature should be clear that each Indiana citizen is there own first responder. Send a copy of Attorney General Todd Rokita's "Gun Owners Bill of Rights" to each Indiana residence.
As your constituent, I urge you to vote against all legislation which would restrict law abiding citizens from exercising their Right to keep and bear arms. Obviously having gone to this much trouble, I'll be monitoring your performance.
If you or your staff have made it this far, I would like to leave you with what I believe is a hopeful sign for the future. North Carolina Lt Governor Mark Robinson came to prominence due to a video on YouTube, when he spoke passionately in defense of the 2nd Amendment. Prior to becoming Lt Governor Mark Robinson, he addressed an audience largely made up of those the left want to pigeon hole in to neat collective groups to pit against each other. This groups reaction left me with hope that there are still Americans who truly understand the Constitution and what being an American means.
Mark Keith Robinson speaks at Young Black Leadership Summit watch the video and marvel at what happens when our citizens see themselves as Americans, and not some hyphenated subset of our citizenry. Marvel at what Americans look like when they are not taught to be and portray themselves as victims or told they are oppressors of others.
|
-- Sincerely,
JWamplerUSA
iJohn Ordronaux, Constitutional Legislation In The United States: Its Origin, And Application To The Relative Powers Of Congress, And Of State Legislatures (1891) “This was recognized by the laws of the Plymouth Colony, which required that “each person for himself have piece, powder, and shot—viz., a sufficient musket or other serviceable piece for war, with bandeleroes, swords, and other appurtenances for himself, and each man-servant he kept able to bear arms.”
iiFederalist No. 28, sixth paragraph “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state.”
iiiFederalist No. 46 “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”
ivThe Honorable St. George Tucker in his annotated edition of Blackstone, Constitutional Appendix stated "This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer , or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house with out being subject to a penalty." (Ed. Emphasis added)
vWilliam Rawle’s 1825 A View of the Constitution of the United States of America had this to say in regard to the 2nd Amendment "The corollary, from the first position, is, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if by any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both. In most of the countries of Europe, this right does not seem to be denied, although it is allowed more or less sparingly, according to circumstances. In England, a country which boasts so much of its freedom, the right was secured to protestant subjects only, on the revolution of 1688; and it is cautiously described to be that of bearing arms for their defence, “suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law.” An arbitrary code for the preservation of game in that country has long disgraced them. A very small proportion of the people being permitted to kill it, though for their own subsistence; a gun or other instrument, used for that purpose by an unqualified person, may be seized or forfeited. Blackstone, in whom we regret that we cannot always trace the expanded principles of rational liberty, observes however, on this subject, that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistance to government by disarming the people, is oftener meant than avowed, by makers of forest and game laws. This right ought not, however, in any government, to be abused to the disturbance of the public peace."
viSupreme Court Justice Joseph Story authored Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States in 1840, and provided this analysis of the 2nd Amendment. "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised that, among the American people, there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burdens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed, without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights." (Ed. Emphasis added)"
Of course the rich can get guns.
Governor floats "grandfathered" AR CONFISCATION… Get’s SMOKED even by DEMS and gun control groups...
Oh boy.
What a load of DUNG
Mags have nothing to do with rapid fire
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
GodFearinGunTotinSuper Moderator
Members online
- KARP
- mgross28
- lance
- DCR
- S8MS-01904
- GodFearinGunTotin
- snapping turtle
- REM299
- Jeffrey
- maceace
- Jlangenberger
- Lifeform50
- mshogren
- Vanguard.45
- Bowman78
- STEEL CORE
- Hwseeker
- Craigh
- El Conquistador
- slims2002
- Magyars
- Myrradah
- duff
- SSE
- PlaysInTheDirt
- sgreen3
- Hkindiana
- Kalashalite
- Funk97
- Bassat
- Gabriel
- Timjoebillybob
- Hopper
- igotdiesel2
- BAgun
- sharpetop
- akethan
- Rburney
- 55fairlane
- gill
- Gunmetalgray
- OutdoorDad
- KYLogger
- wwdkd
- tjones
- Triton
- Shay
- mikek
- radar8756
- cobber
