News:

We need volunteers in sales, marketing, PR, IT, and general "running of an organization." 
Maximize your Appleseed energy to make this program grow, and help fill the empty spots
on the firing line!  An hour of time spent at this level can have the impact of ten or a
hundred hours on the firing line.  Want to help? Send a PM to Monkey!

Main Menu

A Letter to Lawmakers regarding Inescapable Facts about 'Gun Control' laws

Started by Another D.O.M., January 08, 2013, 11:37:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Another D.O.M.

Thank you for the opportunity to address this very serious issue with you, and for taking the time to listen to a reasonable position on the 'Gun Control' topic.

I would like to begin by stating the obvious:  There is no proof that 'Gun Control' laws have ever prevented a crime from being committed with a gun.

I'll follow up with another obvious statement:  Criminals are criminals because they refuse to obey the law, and madmen are madmen because they are incapable of rational thought or behavior.

What we are left with, then, is a paradox:  Why do our elected representatives continue to insist upon creating more ineffective laws that criminals and madmen will never abide by?  Logic suggests that either they are unaware that 'Gun Control' laws don't work; that they hold an irrational belief that after all this time criminals will suddenly decide to obey the law; that they don't care that the laws they create don't work; or  that the intent is not that the law works, but that it impedes the free will of law abiding citizens.

That last is disturbing and, unfortunately, the most believable.  Disturbing because it suggests a malicious intent by members of our Constitutional Government to take away something that was given by our Creator, something that cannot be taken, but can only be given away freely.  And believable because it is assumed that the members of our Constitutional Government are educated and rational individuals.

My first statement can be expanded upon.  While it is impossible for anyone to present proof that a 'Gun Control' law has ever saved a life, it is abundantly clear that such laws, by disarming law-abiding citizens, have created an atmosphere where armed criminals are guaranteed victims who cannot fight back.  The so-called 'Gun Free Zones' that have been created by 'Gun Control' laws are by far the most likely place for an innocent citizen to meet with gun violence.

Once again we are presented with a paradox:  Why do our lawmakers insist upon creating environments in which the wanton slaughter of innocent victims is guaranteed by legislation?  A reasonable person will come up with at least two possibilities:  because they are unaware of the fact that 'Gun Control' is causing more deaths; or because they don't care that these laws are causing more deaths.

The Constitution of the United States is the fundamental law of the land.  There is no higher law, and no lower law can overrule it.  The Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution binds the separate states to abide by the Bill of Rights.  On January 10, 1867 New York ratified the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.  Thus, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is binding upon the States, and upon New York State.

It is a recognized principal of our laws that "The law says what it means and means what it says."  Thus the wording of the law is the intent of the law and should require no interpretation.  The wording of the statement made within the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is written clearly and requires no interpretation:  "The right of the People to keep and bears arms shall not be infringed."  The intent is just as clear from the words:  No man may interfere in any way with the right of the citizens of the country to arm themselves for the purposes of feeding themselves, protecting themselves, or protecting their community.  This means, quite plainly, that no government servant may infringe the right; no elected representative may infringe the right; and no irrational mob of people may infringe the right.

Currently we are faced by exactly that - an irrational mob of emotional and paranoid individuals who are clamoring for our government to abandon our fundamental laws and demanding that the rights of their fellow citizens be forfeit because our school administrators refuse to take effective, responsible measures to minimize or eliminate the chaos caused by criminals and madmen.

In the past 50 years there has not been a single fire death in a school in the US.  Why is this?  Because our schools are actively promoting fire safety.  Yet while school administrators routinely invest resources making our school buildings nearly fireproof,  educating teachers and staff members in effective protocols for preparing for the possibility of a fire, and conducting regular drills to practice fire safety and evacuation procedures, they refuse to take even the most rudimentary precautions to protect our children from the carnage of lawless individuals taking advantage of the inherent insecurity of 'Gun Free Zones' to commit heinous crimes.  Zero fire deaths in 50 years, as compared to hundreds of gunfire deaths in just over a dozen - and the only thing our lawmakers can think of to prevent this is to deny the rights of law-abiding citizens and create environments that make the problem worse.

This is deplorable, it is unacceptable, and it is criminal.

On that last point, I note that there are several laws contained within the U.S. Code which deal with the subject of denial of rights to a citizen:

"TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 241 Conspiracy Against Rights

          If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;...

          They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."

"TITLE 42 U.S.C., SECTION 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia."

"TITLE 42 U.S.C., SECTION 1985, SUBSECTION  (3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges

If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; or if two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice President, or as a Member of Congress of the United States; or to injure any citizen in person or property on account of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the conspirators."

"TITLE 42 U.S.C., SECTION 1986 Action for neglect to prevent

Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of this title, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action; and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefor, and may recover not exceeding $5,000 damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the deceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued."

Thus once again a paradox presents itself:  Despite laws that clearly define what actions constitute the denial of rights or an intent thereof, why are members of our Servant Government apparently ignoring these laws and moving forward with more infringements upon the rights of The People.  Two possible answers come immediately to mind:  ignorance of the law, or a blatant disregard for it.

The Supreme Court of the United States has reinforced that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, and that it applies to every citizen.  The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits anyone from interfering with the right of The People to keep and bear arms.  And the members of our Servant Government are either ignorant of these facts or are blatantly disregarding both, pushing forward with yet another ineffective and unenforceable attempt to disarm The People.

The inescapable question we're left with is this:  How many U.S. Citizens are the members of our Servant Government willing to murder in an effort to enforce - by fear, intimidation and violence - a law that is clearly unconstitutional, and thus unenforceable?  How many will they exterminate for having the audacity to demand that the rights their Creator gave them  be respected?


Mark J Anspacher
"Dark & difficult times lie ahead.  Soon we must all face the choice between what is right, and what is easy."  Dumbledore