What Rights do we REALLY Need?


English: The Bill of Rights, the first ten ame...

We have rights!  These right are laid out in the Bill of Rights as listed in the United States Constitution.  This means that while there might be some restrictions on these rights, such as no bang bang for felons, these rights can not be outlawed by one of the very groups that these laws protect us from i.e. the government.

So it is kind of odd that while one section of the Constitution declares the Constitution to be the “supreme law of the land” some judges have held that the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states.  So I guess it is a good thing that most states have included, in their individual Constitutions their own version of the Bill of Rights and the Right to Bear Arms

The problem here is that some of these Judges have taken the mention of the “militia” to mean the state, or federal government, will the Constitution says “the rights of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”.  We are the “people” not the government, who is supposed to get their authority from us, the people.

Recent Supreme Court opinions have even affirmed that the 2nd amendment applies to “the people” and that decision has been used to strike down a number of state, and city, law that banned people from owning hand firearms.

The Gun Control crowd may have the right motives, like trying to cut down on the number of criminals who have access to weapons but, the question come up : how would they do this without violating the Constitution?  It would be hard to, for example, ban the so called assault rifle when the supreme court in, I think it was the Miller case, had said that a ban against sawed off shotguns would invalidate its use by a ” well regulated militia”:.  So it is actually the right of the people that makes it possible to arm the military, and that barring the people from owning firearms would also ban the military from the same, as the military/militia is made up of citizen soldiers.

Even if the various “Gun Control” people were to ignore this fact and attempt to pass laws based on what they perceive to be our need, the constitution says this is our right, and since this is one of a number of enumerated rights the question come up : who will decide which rights we really need?

Which other rights will they decide we DON”T NEED?  The freedom of speech?  Religious Freedom, or others.

I hate that criminals can get access to firearms but, I also hate the idea that some bureaucrat could decide which of my rights I don’t need.

I don’t believe that the law abiding citizens of this country should be punished for the crimes of others, and see this as a start down the road to tyranny.

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” so said Benjamin Franklin, and he was right.

To close this off I will repeat the old saying “the price of freedom, is eternal vigilance”. 

The Never Ending War.


We prohibit addictive drugs.  We have done this for years.  Why?

When it was discovered that laudanum, for example, was a highly addictive, and destructive, drug, it was prohibited.

At one time the United States saw alcohol pretty much the same way, and went so far as to prohibit it in a constitutional  amendment.  They eventually understood that this approach would not work, and it was repealed.  This time came to be called the Prohibition Era, and is credited with the rise of organized crime.

For that period of time alcohol was seen as a dangerous drug.  Users would often become addicted to it, and their whole life would fall apart, so we had to protect them from themselves, and alcohol.  That might have been nice, if it had worked.  The trouble was that people gathered at “speak easies” where they could drink the forbidden elixir and mingle with both the people who made the beverage, people like Al Capone, and the cops who were supposed to be rooting it out, and destroying it.

So, we had the illegal alcohol, the gangs who made it and fought each other to control their areas, the cops who tried to destroy it, and then we had the cops who got paid to protect it.  Somewhere in the mix we had the people who go caught in the cross fire. as the gangs, with their gang wars, shot up neighborhoods in an effort to get rid of the

North Side Gang members following the St. Vale...
North Side Gang members following the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

competition, or even killed people who had seen them kill rival gang members, or even other witnesses.  Crime was rampant, and still the alcohol came.  Criminals became celebrities and acted as such.  More people died, and still the alcohol continued to enter the country.

Prohibition did not work, and so we quit it, at least for alcohol.

We still have prohibition for other drugs. We also still have the gangs who manufacture them, transport them into this country, and then sell them to people who are adversely effected by their use.  We also have the occasional law enforcement official who gets paid to protect them. For a number of years now we have had a “war on drugs”, and still they come.  Thousands of people have been killed in the gang violence in Mexico.  Even here, in the U.S. we have people killed in gang violence as they vie for who will control the streets.  Who are we protecting?  The drug users?  The pedestrian who get shot up by gang members, who don’t bother to aim, as attempt to get rid of their competition.

Is the protection of people who take drugs really worth the death of any law enforcement officer? We have mourned the loss of military people who gave their lives in our wars but, at least those wars come to an end, even if we lost,  the problem with the “War on Drugs” is that no matter how many people are killed, either the users, the cops, the gang members, or just the bystanders, the drugs just keep coming, and the criminals just keep making money.

This is the WAR that never ends.

Conspiracy Anyone?


I love a good conspiracy, and I really love one that is based on a little fact…

Often times a GOOD conspiracy theory is based on a little fact, a lot of assumptions, and a whole lot of twisted facts..  That is what would make them fun.

Think how boring life would be if there had not been people who could put mystery into the killing of President Kennedy.  Lets thank they guy who, supposedly, found all of the coincidences between the killing of JFK and President Lincoln.

I am sure you know what I am talking about..  It like Lincoln was supposed to have had a secretary named Kennedy who told him not to go to the theater, and Kennedy was supposed to have had a secretary named Lincoln who told him not to go to Dallas.  I was even mentioned that Lincoln was killed in a theatre and his killer was killed in a barn, think warehouse, while Kennedy will show from a book depository, think warehouse, and the killer was caught in, or near, a movie theatre.  Of course NONE of this connects to John Dillinger getting killed as he was leaving a NY movie theatre but, I wonder if anyone has ever tried to make a connection there.

There have been a number of theories about the reason that Kennedy was killed and they range from the Mafia killing him, because his bother, the Attorney General Robert Kennedy, was trying to break up the mob, to the CIA killed someone they thought was secretly an agent of the U.S.S.R and there was even a book, though I can not remember the name at this time, that suggested that while Oswald fired a number of shots at Kennedy he was really killed when, as the motorcade came to a stop at the sound of the shots, a secret service agent, who was standing in the car to the rear, stumbled and accidentally discharged his weapon hitting President Kennedy in the head.

In recent year there have ben claims that President Bush II was behind the events of 9/11, and that it was so he could eventually invade Iraq to finish what his father failed to do.

An interesting article I just saw, in the last day or so, is The Conspiracy Theory of Ander Breivik.  There is a link below to the blog.  This killer was supposed to be a Knight of the Templar Knights, and there seems to be an attempt to connect them to the Freemasons, or Masons.  You know the guys.  When they are not busy plotting how to take over the world they ride around in little motor cars wearing red fezzies.

In the 1980s I attended a couple of Patriot meetings here in Sarasota Fla.  They had a lot to say about things like the Bilderberg, the Freemasons, the New World Order, and many other names that have become connected to plots of world domination.

Some of their theories had some fact in them, which is what made them semi-believable, and that is why you could listen to them and think they might be right.  At one the the last meetings I attended, the the Veterans Hall, there was a presentation about how they had proof that the U.N. was going to send troops in to take over the country, and that it would happen while President Clinton was in office.  The presentor  was explaining that the proof was there, and all you had to do was know what to look for.  He further said that you could see it locally, just go out to I-75, this was med 1980s, and look at the concrete power polls that ran by or across the interstate.  You would see various colored dots painted, or decals, placed on the polls so that the U.N. troops, who might not read English, could tell what route to follow.

I later mentioned this to a friend of mine who worked for Paragon cable, I think the name has been changed, and he laughed at me.  He knew what they were.  The cable guys had a chart, as did the power company, the phone company and the other utilitiey people, that showed the colors referred to things like Blue for water lines, and other colors to tell where gas and electric lines where.  It like if you wander around a residential area and see those little blue reflectors placed off center in the road.  They are so that Fire Department will know there is a water hydrant on that side of the road.  Any U.N. Troops trying to follow this method would soon become lost.

I quit going to those meetings as I was sure they were a wast of time, and filled with people who had too much time on their hands, though they were indeed interesting.

So.  Don’t believe everything you hear but remember the old saying “just because you are paranoid, doesn’t mean they are not out to get you”.

osama bin laden is dead


As much as I appreciate the news of Osama bin laden‘s death I am troubled by some of the news clips showing young people rejoicing at his death.  You have probably seen the clips of young, college age, people waving and cheering on the Washington D.C. streets.  I am happy he is dead, and I hope it will help cool things down but, I am reminded of the clips from various Muslim nations, just after 911, that show about the same thing going on the those countries.

While his death was necessary  it is, to my mind, a sad thing that we can take such joy in the death of anyone, no matter how evil we see them.