Tag Archives: gun restrictions

Nullification Is Essential To Maintain Freedom

Posted on by

I’ve been hearing about jury nullification as a defense against prosecution for marijuana crimes. It is an interesting concept, where the jury just refuses to convict the defendant just because they disagree with the law or because they believe it should not be applied in a particular case. This was used extensively to stop the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act before the Civil War and the Volstead Act during the prohibition of alcohol. During prohibition, as many as 60% of the alcohol violations were nullified by juries. With greater than 50% of Americans now believing that marijuana prohibition should end, it is very likely you could get a member of your jury to vote for your acquittal. NJWeedman, Edward Forchion, a New Jersey medical marijuana patient, has used jury nullification as a way to avoid prosecution. Forchion is an outspoken critic of the war on marijuana and has some very good ideas about mounting an effective defense in court against prosecution. He spent 6 months in jail for exercising his freedom of speech when he made commercials that called for an end to marijuana prohibition, yet he still marches on as a warrior in the fight against prohibition.

The states that have moved to legalize marijuana for medicinal or recreational use have also nullified Federal marijuana laws to a certain extent, by stopping the enforcement of those laws by local authorities. It has been an uphill battle where some local law enforcement have refused to honor the will of the voters in their state and enforce Federal marijuana laws anyway. Still progress is being made where a wave of acceptance for medical marijuana has swept the country and over 50% of Americans now believe marijuana prohibition should end, and that it should be regulated and taxed similar to alcohol.

Oath Keepers is an organization of active and former military, police and first responders that have vowed to uphold their oath to support and defend the Constitution of The United States, by refusing to obey unconstitutional orders such as, to disarm the American people, detain Americans as enemy combatants to be held without trial and to conduct warrantless searches. This also is a form of nullification that protects our freedoms and rights that are under attack by the Federal Government. Their motto is “Not On Our Watch”.

When those we elect to lead us, refuse to honor their oath to support and defend the Constitution, the responsibility falls on us to stand together and defend our rights and way of life. Our best defense against this assault on freedom, is to watch those we elect to represent us and hold them accountable by removing them from office when they fail to protect our rights. That system seems to have failed, where our two-party system yields more of the same, regardless of which party is in majority. Our rights of freedom of speech, the right to privacy, the right to be secure in our personal effects, and the right to self-defense are constantly being eroded by our government. Nullification can be a very powerful tool to prevent the loss of freedom if we just refuse to play their game.

Randy Johnson

We Have Rights Our Government Refuses To Honor And Obligations We Have Neglected

Posted on by

Recently I have noticed that a large percentage of people I have talked to, did not know who Edward Snowden is. Most would add that news is depressing and they try to avoid it. Even my wife has told me the same thing. She avoids news because it is depressing. But we all suffer from information overload. In our society, we are constantly bombarded with new and often unimportant information mixed with information that we need, so it is not in our best interest to ignore it. We take it all in and filter what we believe is relevant or important and ignore the rest. We also live in a society where communication is almost as easy as looking at a watch and entertainment is as close as our phone. We can play interactive games, text, watch movies and surf the internet virtually anywhere, yet we have become disconnected from the things I believe are most important. Keeping watch over those we elected to lead us and protect our freedom.

Those we elected to represent us in government have failed to protect our rights and to uphold their oath of office. They refuse to acknowledge our second amendment as a right and treat it more as a privilege that can be legislated away incrementally, locally as well as at the federal level. All Constitutional rights and natural rights should be the same in any state or territory in our union. It is the job of Congress, the President and the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution of The United States of America as the supreme law of the land and protect our freedom, yet those in office are constantly looking for ways to circumvent the Constitution. Greed and corruption are rampant and it has become business as usual for Congress to pass laws favoring one business over another to create wealth and reward campaign contributions. A revolving door system of bureaucrat’s go back and forth from the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve, the same can be said for companies like Monsanto and Cargill and the Department of Agriculture and the FDA and the pharmaceutical companies. Lobbyists from the richest and most powerful industries meet in private with members of Congress and the President and form federal policy and law without the voice of the people. If and when our rights, get in the way of this profit machine, government lawyers look for ways around the Constitution and our freedom suffers. Our fourth amendment rights against unlawful searches has also been attacked. Our elected leaders have allowed and likely encouraged the NSA, FBI, DHS, CIA and who knows what other government agency to view and record all of our phone, text, email, banking records and now the IRS will have access to all of our medical records. Even the Supreme Court which is supposed to be the last line of defense against unconstitutional laws passed by legislature, unanimously decided that dogs can authorize searches.

We have failed as well, in our obligations as citizens of society and to our government. We must work if we can and support our government by paying taxes, obey the laws and be willing to serve as jurors in the judicial process. We also are obligated to watch over those we elect to lead us and hold them accountable when they fail to uphold the Constitution. We are also obligated to come to our country’s defense if needed in time of war or any other national calamity. Regardless of whether we agree with one another, we have to live in this country together and find a way to get along. Yet we continue to push our elected officials to pass laws to keep us safe or to keep us from being offended. That leads them to pass laws that restrict freedom in almost all cases. Free people are no longer allowed to act on their freedom for fear of offending someone or getting sued. Communities are passing laws preventing all kinds of things such as smoking, gardening, clothes lines and lemonade stands. Our children were put on a diet by Federal mandate and one child was expelled from school for chewing a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun. Reason and common sense have given way to panic and hysteria where knee jerk reactions from our leaders further our loss of freedom. Discipline among our children has been lost and the judicial system has become the backup plan and we have the largest per capita prison population of any nation on earth. What happened to the “Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave”?

Randy Johnson

Dear Congresswoman Pelosi

Posted on by

Dear Congresswoman Pelosi and other distinguished members of Congress,

I recently read in the news where you said at a press conference concerning the Edward Snowden affair, that your job is to keep Americans safe. I believe you are in error in that belief. Your oath of office if you will recall says that your job is to support and defend the Constitution of The United States of America. The Constitution says that Congress is to provide for the common defense of this nation, not to keep it safe. Keeping America safe is our job by volunteering to serve in the military or even being drafted into service if the need arises. We also must be willing to serve as jurors and police if needed to preserve the rule of law. Your job is to make sure that our Constitutional rights are protected and to make sure the military and police have what they need to defend our great nation. Which means planes, ships, tanks, bullets, guns and bombs to fight those who would threaten The United States or our Constitution. Never should we have to give up any of our rights to have the illusion of safety. If we can’t have both, this American would rather be in a state of war. I would never choose safety over freedom. That would be an act of a coward and a disgrace in light of those who have valiantly fought to preserve our freedom and way of life. Just issue me an M4 rifle or I can bring my own and a ride to the enemy and I will gladly risk life and limb in defense of our nation, our Constitution and way of life. Our rights against illegal searches and privacy should never have to be surrendered to have the illusion of safety, nor should our right to bear arms. When Congress believes that we must surrender our Constitutional rights to be safe, they become the enemy. What defense do we have to that?

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

Marijuana Does Not Make Us A Danger To Children

Posted on by

I love my children. They are grown now and have moved away and begun their own lives as adults, but that love endures. Still, I would gladly give my life to preserve theirs. Anything that I have will always be at their disposal. My limited wealth, my home, any possession or time that I may have is theirs for the asking. I feel the same way about any future grandchildren that God may bless me with. Their family is my family. I can think of no worse punishment for a parent, than taking away their children.

While I realize it is sometimes necessary to remove children from families to prevent further abuse of children from errant parents, it should only be done as a last resort, and only after justification in a court of law. I also understand that sometimes obvious physical or sexual abuse would necessitate a preemptive removal of children to prevent further abuse, but there still must be a presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court.

All too often possession or use of marijuana has been used as an excuse to remove children from a parents custody to further punish marijuana users by harming their family. Would society accept children being removed from the family if wine or beer was found in the refrigerator, or if one of the parents actually drank the alcohol? When one considers that alcohol has a much stronger association with domestic violence and irresponsible activity than marijuana, it makes more sense to remove children from homes where alcohol is present, but that is rarely the case. Our Congress and President insist on continuing this failed war on marijuana. They claim it is no longer called a war, but the only thing that has changed is an increase in the use of paramilitary style raids on medical marijuana distributors and others accused of selling marijuana. The laws governing the use and sale of marijuana are largely ignored, because they are unjust laws, built on lies, racial intolerance and greed. But for those unfortunate enough to come to the attention of authorities, the punishment is severe and vengeful, where laws were written to punish marijuana use even further by declaring any marijuana possession a danger to children, and any possession of a firearm or ammunition an automatic felony.

There are many things in most homes that can pose a risk for children. Knives, hot water, bleach, stoves and electricity just scratch the surface. Children in homes where marijuana is consumed are in no more danger than in homes where beer or wine is consumed. Taking people’s children away is a pretty severe punishment for using marijuana as medicine or choosing a safer alternative to alcohol.

Randy Johnson

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/25/boise-police-seize-children-of-marijuana

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/16/hakken-couple-could-face-life-sentences

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/09/josh-hakken-man-who-kidnapped-kids-after

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/10/hakkens-back-in-us-custody-children-retu

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/04/anti-government-couple-who-abducted-thei

http://www.today.com/health/parents-police-removed-our-child-after-we-sought-second-medical-6C9708419

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/8×11.pdf

http://reason.com/blog/2013/05/02/colorado-legislators-drop-plans-to-cance

https://itsmycountrytoo.org/2013/01/12/drug-violence-is-increasing-exponentially/

https://itsmycountrytoo.org/laws-built-on-lies/

https://itsmycountrytoo.org/2012/08/08/197/

https://itsmycountrytoo.org/2012/07/29/marijuana-is-safer-than-alcohol-or-tobacco/

http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/VRITHED.PDF

$60,000 Fine For Selling Cigarette Lighter

Posted on by

Remember when we were kids and we wanted the toy guns that looked real. Just like the ones used in the western shows and movies that our hero’s would carry like Roy Rogers or the Lone Ranger. We weren’t worried about being shot by the police. I thought all boys played with toy guns and trucks and sticks and rocks. It was just normal life. When I was seven my brother and I were allowed to save our money and by a BB gun and it looked just like a real rifle. Mine was a pump and my brothers was a lever-action. We would roam the neighborhood shooting at cans and bottles and the occasional sparrow. It never alarmed the neighbors and the police never objected. The police were our friends or at least that is what my parents said.

What happened to America in the last 50 years? Now we have a primary school kid being expelled from school for chewing a pop tart into the shape of a gun. Another child was expelled and arrested after wearing a shirt with a gun on it. Another child expelled for pointing his finger at other kids, like when we would play cowboys and indians but didn’t have a toy gun. Are these actions really any worse than playing World At War or some of the other video games that are currently in use by children today. Today I read a news article about a merchant who sold cigarette lighters that look like real guns and was fined $60,000. Really, is this where we are as a society? The article said that if the lighters had been a color such as blue or green, they would not have been a problem. Have they not seen the pink revolvers that are being sold to women in this country?

How about lets stop the paranoia about guns? Guns have been a part of our society since day one. If people are not threatening others with their gun, they should be left alone. We actually do have the right to bear arms just like it says in the Constitution. The militia was never part of the standing army in America. It was just armed citizens who banded together to help protect our home from tyranny. The reason we have the second amendment, is so we can protect our families and our homes from all enemies, even tyrants like King George or gang bangers that take over neighborhoods where police are helpless to stop them. In places where people have the right to bear arms, that kinda crap don’t happen near as often. Yet in places like Chicago where guns are all but illegal, street wars have been going on for decades with gang bangers fighting over turf that they didn’t buy, and terrorizing the disarmed citizens who bought homes or businesses and now can’t sell them because of the violence. The police seem helpless to stop this total disregard for law and justice, and a disarmed public is at the heart of the problem. When people aren’t allowed to defend themselves they become victims to those who are stronger or more numerous. Like the saying goes ” When seconds count, the police are only minutes away”. When victims fight back, violent crime decreases.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/smoking_gun_nets_fine_mULOkpw09uyrCdvzFwsFqL

Randy Johnson

Marijuana And Money

Posted on by

In their effort to forge laws governing marijuana sales in Colorado, legislators are debating about the amount of taxes that should be associated with the sale. Colorado House of Representatives wants a 15% excise tax and a 10 or 15% tax on all sales in addition to the 2.9% state sales tax and any local taxes. Other cost relayed to the consumer will include the high licensing and application fees associated with starting a marijuana distribution center. Other legislative efforts that will continue to drive up costs are the rule governing that 70% of all marijuana sold must be grown by the distributor and no more than 30% may be furnished to another distributor. Also the legislators are considering limiting the amount of marijuana that can be sold and limiting the number of distributors state-wide which could create a shortage of legally sold marijuana. Shortages of supply would tend to drive the cost to consumers higher.

With taxes on sold marijuana approaching 30 to 35% it will be difficult to keep costs low enough to discourage a black market for marijuana. Brick and mortar stores have the added cost of a building, with all of its associated cost such as mortgage or rent, electricity, water, insurance and wages paid to a staff. Citizens of Colorado are allowed to grow their own marijuana and the profits of black market sales will be just too tempting for some to pass up, especially if the legal market is unable to meet demand.

Another problem facing marijuana distributors in Colorado is the continued prohibition of marijuana at the federal level. Since marijuana is still illegal by US law, it is difficult to find banks and insurance companies to do business with the distributors, forcing them into a cash only business with elaborate security systems. I’m sure the Federal government would not allow armed security in a business selling marijuana according to the Gun Control Act. This leads to increased security risks associated with robberies and burglaries and makes it difficult to obtain financing for startup and operating expenses. In addition the Federal Government has a long history of circumventing the will of the people by raiding marijuana distributors and confiscating their assets and property and incarcerating the owners.

All of these things combined make black market marijuana more appealing and profitable while making legal marijuana more expensive and easier targets for the Feds.

http://www.coloradoan.com/viewart/20130430/NEWS11/304300007/Marijuana-taxes-prove-sticking-point-Colorado

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/29/colorado-legislators-pile-on-pot-restric

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/29/smallbusiness/marijuana-cash/index.html

http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/30/if-high-cigarette-taxes-fuel-a-booming-b

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968

Randy Johnson

Police Survey About Gun Control

Posted on by

A few days ago my wife and I were traveling to a graduation and winging ceremony for our youngest son. We were listening to Glenn Beck on talk radio and his show was centered around a survey from PoliceOne.com of 15,595 police officers from around the country about the proposals for gun control restrictions. The questions ranged from the size of the police force and rank of the officer, to questions about magazine capacity and restrictions on (so-called) assault weapons. The results of the survey indicate that the officers that responded overwhelmingly oppose gun restrictions on magazine capacity and type of gun restrictions and support (91% approval) concealed carry among law-abiding citizens. The survey showed that 80% of the officers surveyed believe armed citizens would have decreased the casualties in tragedies like Aurora and Newtown, and 76% support school personnel being armed as a deterrent to such tragedies.

Our second amendment right is as much about protecting each other, as it is about self-protection and it is the only right that protects us from tyranny by our own government. Many good men and women have given their all in defense of our nation and freedoms and many more have risked life and limb for the same. I for one, just can’t give up that right for the fallacy of safety. If you can’t protect yourself or those around you, you are vulnerable to any who would do harm, be it armed assault, rape or robbery.

Glenn Beck article from TheBlaze.com http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/10/survey-law-enforcement-personnel-overwhelmingly-oppose-obamas-gun-control-proposals/

PoliceOne.com survey  http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

Randy Johnson

If You Don’t Want The Right To Bear Arms Then Change The Constitution

Posted on by

My right to bear arms in defense of me and mine are rights that had been honored in free societies for hundreds if not thousands of years before the Constitution of the United States was written. The founders of our nation and signers of the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution believed so much in our right to bear arms that they enshrined that right in the Bill of Rights. My right to bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of the United States. It is my second amendment right and states should not be able to deny that right, just like they can’t take away my right to freedom of religion or my right to speak out against tyranny. These rights spelled out in the Constitution were put there to protect our freedom and the right to bear arms is crucial to that end. The type of weapon that can be owned or used should not matter because the right to bear arms, among other things, is also to stop tyranny from our own government. To surrender our guns to any government would be Un-American. Congress, Presidents past and present and the Supreme Court have failed to protect that right from state and local governments and that right has been under federal attack as well. As citizens we have failed to oversee those that we elected to lead us. Without our voice, our elected officials assume we approve of what they have allowed to happen to our second amendment right. We must speak out against this tyranny now or that right will continue to be infringed.

For those of you who hate guns and want to get rid of them consider this. There are an estimated 300,000,000 guns in this country and without the government going door to door, searching houses and killing all who oppose them, these guns are not going to go away. Most of these guns at the present are in the hands of good people who believe in the rule of law and would stand in your defense if need be. But when you make criminals out of us for exercising our rights and demand that we be defenseless, that changes the whole game. Now you are going against the Constitution that many Americans have sworn to protect against all enemies foreign and domestic. For our elected officials to refuse to support that right is a direct violation of their oath of office. As long as the Constitution says that we have the right to bear arms, that right should be honored anywhere in the United States or its territories. If society can’t accept our right to bear arms, there is a set procedure to change the Constitution spelled out in Article 5 of the Constitution. But if our own government refuses to follow the Constitution, we are no longer a nation ruled by law, but subjects, ruled by decree from the elite who believe they are above the law. Either change the Constitution or honor our rights.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/charters.html

Federal employee oath of office.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Article. V. of the United States Constitution

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Amendment II of the United States Constitution

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.

Randy Johnson

3D Printing Of Guns Is Improving

Posted on by

In an update to an article published January 18th, titled “3D Printing May Be The Key To Our Freedom” about a printed lower receiver for an AR15, Defense Distributed has improved on the initial model that failed after six shots. The improved version has fired over 600 shots without failure. Also available is a CAD file to print a 30 round magazine for AR15 style rifles. Keep in mind there are many parts for an AR15 that currently would not be feasible to print out of plastic such as the springs, barrel, upper receiver, bolt and firing pin, but these parts are not currently regulated and can be purchased through the mail without an FFL dealer. The ability to make your own gun has been within the realm of anyone who has access to a lathe and milling machine for as long as I can remember and it is perfectly legal to make a gun as long as you don’t make a gun that is currently prohibited, such as a machine gun or a short barrel shotgun. Rep. Steve Israel of New York, is currently trying to ban 3D printing of guns in anticipation of untraceable weapons that do not show up on metal scanners. Similar to the idea of eliminating nuclear weapons, stopping this technology is like trying to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle. Guns simply cannot be un-invented and any attempt to confiscate or eliminate gun ownership is destined to fail. Even if the current 3D gun files available for download could be tracked down and erased, it would not be long before someone else came up with another version. Our government’s attempt to control every aspect of our lives is starting to meet resistance in ways they never imagined. States legalizing marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes and 3D printable guns are just the beginning. However, I am concerned about The Department of Homeland Security’s recent acquisition of 2 billion rounds of ammunition. What horrible plans do they have in store for us next? Are our elected officials so worried about maintaining control that they would use deadly force against us to stay in power? Is it too late to vote them out? I sure hope not.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/27/gun-control-laws-increasingly-irrelevant
http://defcad.org/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/govt-preparing-for-soviet-style-purge-of-americans.html
Randy Johnson

Why Do We Go To War

Posted on by

A few days ago, as I ate lunch at the park in front of the Hutchinson County Veterans Memorial. I started wondering what we fight for as a nation and individually, and why we send our sons and daughters to war. Words come to mind like, duty to country, honor, national defense, and security. Today our armed forces are all voluntary, but many of the soldiers honored here were drafted into service. Does that change the reasons we fight? Society needs to be able to assemble armies in its defense, even a conscript army if needed. The survival of our nation and way of life may demand such action. We faced real threats to our sovereignty and security in WWI and WII and so did our allies, but what about Korea and Vietnam? Was our sovereignty and security in danger then, or was that just our attempt to stop communist aggression amid the Cold War? Were we able to achieve those goals? I would call Korea a partial success. South Korea is a democratic country with an economy built on free enterprise and it is prospering. But the Korean people are divided, with their kin to the north governed by a desperate and aggressive despot, who rules his people with fear and punishment. And they are technically still at war with a real threat of the violence ensuing again. If we had not maintained a military presence there, it is very likely all of Korea would be under communist control today. None of our goals were met in Vietnam with the communists taking control of Saigon as we were leaving and yet, today they are a united, peaceful people. Who decides when we go to war and what the motivations are? The reasons to go to war are never simple and may cover any variety of considerations from economics to survival but certainly the preservation of our freedom should be one of the reasons we fight. Our nation was born with a struggle for freedom from the rule of England. Our Declaration of Independence lists a number of violations of basic human rights by the King and extols our right to shed that rule in favor of self-rule as all men are created equal with rights granted to us by God and not men. This was an act of treason under English rule and those who signed that document did so knowing that it put their lives and fortunes at risk, yet those brave men and those who fought by their side, did so willingly. Our Constitution goes further describing our rights as a people, by enumerating them in the bill of rights, to ensure that government would not be able to take them away. These are important rights that ensure that we can live safely and securely among others without the worry of being governed by tyrants.

All of our servicemen take an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. But how many of the recent wars we have been involved in were about a threat to our Constitution or the sovereignty and security of our nation? Were we defending an ally from a threat to their sovereignty or security? Certainly if our country is attacked we should respond in defense. Even preemptive strikes against known threats are justifiable, but all acts of war have consequences. Because of the brutality of war, some of our young will always be killed or wounded. And then there are the mental scars from being witness to the horrors of war. The fear of death or injury and seeing your friends killed or injured are hard to imagine, let alone learn to live with. Just the longing for home to reunite with the ones we love tends to wear on most people. And then there is the memory of the killing of others and watching the enemy suffer or die. Is it any wonder that the suicide rate among our servicemen is so great. War is a terrible thing for both sides of any conflict and even when the hostilities end, the painful memories of war endure. War should always be a last resort.

Our Congressmen and Senators also take the same oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, yet rarely do they face imminent danger in their daily lives. But their responsibility to defend the Constitution is just as important because they write the laws governing all aspects of our lives. They are on the front lines of protecting our freedom in the laws that they vote for or against. Their responsibility to ensure that all laws passed, maintain our freedoms as described in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence cannot be overstated. These  documents should be the guiding principle in all laws passed by Congress or signed into law by our President.

Often as I read the news and study current events I am reminded that not all members of Congress share the same reverence and respect for the Constitution of the United States. The recent debates about the right to keep and bear arms are a perfect example of that. Even before the Sandy Hook massacre, our right to keep and bear arms was seriously infringed and it was all done at the hand of Congress and backed up by past and current Presidents and supported by the Supreme Court. My second amendment right to keep and bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of these United States, yet our Congressional leaders have allowed a patchwork of differing laws governing our rights to bear arms to become the law of the land. Even if we follow the safe passage clause of the Firearm Owners Protection Act, we can still be in violation of state or local laws if we are delayed because of car trouble or if we are too tired to continue our journey. In order to pass through a state with restrictive firearm laws a person must unload and lock the gun in the trunk of their car and are not allowed to stop except for food and gas. Would we surrender our right to a trial by jury or our freedom of speech so easily? What about our freedom of religion? Isn’t our right to self-defense one of those rights granted by God?                          http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926A                                                                                  And what about the tenth amendment where the powers not delegated to the United States as described in the Constitution are reserved to the states or to the people? Do our Congressional leaders understand that? Where in the Constitution do they get the power to tell states that they cannot experiment with medical marijuana laws or even recreational marijuana laws? Our Congressional leaders should be actively defending our rights, not circumventing state law to keep us under the thumb of oppression. Since Congress authorized the oath of office for all Federal employees, they should know that they are obligated to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and our rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. We, as Americans, should demand and expect as much from them. Their obligation to preserve our Constitution and freedom should be no less important than that of our sons and daughters that we ask or require to risk life and limb in war.

The Constitution does not provide the wording for this oath, leaving that to the determination of Congress.  From 1789 until 1861, this oath was, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” During the 1860s, this oath was altered several times before Congress settled on the text used today, which is set out at 5 U. S. C. § 3331.  This oath is now taken by all federal employees, other than the President:

“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God.” http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/oath/textoftheoathsofoffice2009.aspx

The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights   http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html

http://house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org

3D Printing May Be The Key To Our Freedom

Posted on by

As the printing press helped to forge the way for freedom and the increase of knowledge in our history. I believe the 3D printer will usher in a new type of freedom. The freedom to create whatever you may wish or dream up. In light of the recent and current gun ban proposals, Defense Distributed is in the process of creating a sharable file to print a working gun on a 3D printer. They have tested an AR15 that was built with a lower receiver that was printed on a 3D printer. It successfully fired 6 rounds before it broke. While it may seem as though a printed gun is too fragile to be useful, the technology is still new and developing rapidly. Also new technologies are emerging to print in different medias such as different polymers, glass, stone, ceramic and various metals. It will be near impossible to keep guns away from people if they can be printed at home.                                                                             http://defensedistributed.com/about-us/                                               http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/12/03/heres-what-it-looks-like-to-fire-a-partly-3d-printed-gun-video/                                                                                                                          These Printers are becoming available to hobbyists for prices ranging from $2200 dollars and up. Larger more expensive 3D printers are being made that will print in more than one media at the same time. As these 3D printers become more widely used, greater capability will be available at lower cost to the home hobbyist, or anyone for that matter. Soon a 3D printer may be as common in our homes as microwave ovens and computers. Similar to the replicators on Star Trek Next Generation, 3D printers will be able to create many household items we currently use, for example you may want to design and print parts for a lamp and assemble it yourself. At least one company, RepRap, plans to build a 3D printer that can print copies of itself, making it a self replicating printer. It is already capable of printing some of its parts and work is underway to complete the task.  Fab@Home printer lists chocolate as one of its printable medias. As this technology evolves, who knows what may or may not be possible. Consider that we may soon be able to print medicines or household chemicals or maybe a part to repair your car. How about a replacement hip where the ball is permanently made into the socket. The possibilities are almost endless.    http://fabathome.com/                         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RepRap_Project             http://www.stratasys.com/Products/Overview.aspx  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing

Randy Johnson

itsmycountrytoo.org