Uncategorized

All societies throughout history have had a few brave people who died standing against those who sought to enslave them.

• 300 Greeks stood against 100,000 Persian invaders.
• A thousand Jewish refugees were killed by Romans at Masada.
• Those who refused to affirm that Caesar was lord were fed to the lions. Those who refused to worship Emperors were often executed.  They had a choice to obey. 
• William Tell would have saluted the judge’s authority rather than be sentenced to death unless he could shoot an apple off his son. He chose to not obey government. We would not have a Switzerland today if Mr. Tell did not know that a salute was a form of worship.
• Braveheart William Wallace refused to pledge allegiance to the King of England. He was executed.
• In 1536 William Tyndayle was executed for the crime of translating the Bible into English.
• In the 1550s Catholic Queen Mary executed six mothers for teaching the Lord’s Prayer to their children.
• British Quakers were torn apart by teams of horses.
• American Quakers were executed in Massachusetts up to the 1850s.
• 180+ Americans died defending the Alamo against 2,400 Mexicans for about 20 minutes.

But you surrendered immediately without even questioning that you were being tricked out of your rights. “Live Free or Die” is the official motto of New Hampshire. It was written by General John Stark, New Hampshire’s most famous soldier of the American Revolutionary War. Those who risk death have something worth standing for.  Perhaps you should pay attention. 

America The Beautiful, verse 3:

3. Oh, beautiful for heroes proved
In liberating strife,
Who more than self their country loved,
And mercy more than life!
America! America!
May God thy gold refine,
Till all success be nobleness,
And every gain divine.

•  British subjects living in British colonies would not have started the American Revolution.  They had a choice to obey or risk death killing their government’s law enforcement officers. 
• Patrick Henry would not have asked for liberty or death. 
• Nathan Hale, who was a 21 year old Yale graduate when he was executed in 1776, would not have had one death to spend for his country.

• Rahab, a career criminal who helped overthrow her government, would not be considered righteous (James 2:25) and listed in Hebrews 11 as one of the all-time faithful.
•  there would have been no anti-Baptists (who became today’s Amish, Mennonites and Baptists), who refused to register their children.  They endured a painful execution burning at the stake rather than obey government. They knew that their orphans would be raised by their murderers but they still refused to register their children. 
• The early Christians in Cappadocia, just east of Galatia, would not have lived in caves to evade government.  They had a choice of allegiance.  
• The Presbyterian covenanters of 1638 to 1688 endured great hardship, strife and civil wars to keep their religion. Scotland is free today because William Wallace chose martyrdom rather than swear allegiance to King Charles the first.
• Cromwell suspended Parliament and executed King Charles.  If they had obeyed their government, the monarch would likely still be supreme over America.
• In 1637 John Lilburn risked death refusing to take a Star Chamber Oath.    He chose to disobey government.  The U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Miranda’s right to remain silent came from Lilburn’s refusal.
•  regulation IS persecution.

Stand, because when you stand, others will stand with you.  And God can’t stand with you if you don’t stand.  Once you stand you can expect the hand of providence to be over you. No matter how it ends, it matters how you stand.”
— Levoy Finicum

The following is research done by Brumby on Twitter, and published by principia-scientific.com

A study by researchers at the BMJ and Yale titled ‘Effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19: A Tale of Three Models‘ found that :

“Inferences on effects of NPIs are non-robust and highly sensitive to model specification. Claimed benefits of lockdown appear grossly exaggerated.” [1] 

A study in The Lancet found that:

“government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality” [2]

While a study published by Sage reported:

“Official data from Germany’s RKI agency suggest strongly that the spread of the coronavirus in Germany receded autonomously, before any interventions become effective” [3]

Another study at arxiv.org found that:

 “the decline in infections in England…began before full lockdown…[S]uch a scenario would be consistent with…Sweden, which began its decline in fatal infections shortly after the UK, but did so on the basis of measures well short of full lockdown” [4]

A study at datascienceassn.org reports:

“the UK lockdown was both superfluous (it did not prevent an otherwise explosive behavior of the spread of the coronavirus) and ineffective (it did not slow down the death growth rate visibly).” [5]

While reported in The Times of Israel we find:

“Given that the evidence reveals that the Corona disease declines even without a complete lockdown, it is recommendable to reverse the current policy and remove the lockdown” [6]

A study from medrxiv.org tells us:

“stay at home orders, closure of all non-essential businesses and requiring the wearing of facemasks or coverings in public was not associated with any independent additional impact” [7] 

Then again at medrxiv.org:

“these strategies might not have saved any life in western Europe. We also show that neighboring countries applying less restrictive social distancing measures … experience a very similar time evolution of the epidemic. Since the full lockdown strategies are shown to have no impact on the epidemic’s slowdown, one should consider their potentially high inherent death toll as a net loss of human lives” [8]

Then consider this at nicholaslewis.org where we read:

“The case of Sweden, where the authors find the reduction in transmission to have been only moderately weaker than in other countries despite no lockdown having occurred, is prima facie evidence” [9]

While back at bmj.com:

 “…general social distancing was also projected to reduce the number of cases but increase the total number of deaths compared with social distancing of over 70 only” “Strategies that minimise deaths involve the infected fraction primarily being in the low risk younger age groups—for example, focusing stricter social distancing measures on care homes where people are likely to die rather than schools where they are not….results presented in the report suggested that the addition of interventions restricting younger people.” [10]

Again, we find another study at medrxiv.org:

“We show that [lockdown] is modestly superior in saving lives compared to [focused protection], but with tremendous costs to prevent one case of death. This might result in overwhelming economic effects that are expected to increase future death toll”  [11]

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov has a study that tells us:

“For pathogens that inflict greater morbidity at older ages, interventions that reduce but do not eliminate exposure can paradoxically increase the number of cases of severe disease by shifting the burden of infection toward older individuals” [12]

From https://papers.ssrn.comwe learn:

 “Current policy can be misdirected and can therefore have long and even short-term negative effects on human welfare and thus result in not actually minimizing death rates (incorporating externalities), especially in the long run.” [13]

While we see at imgcdn.larepublica.co:

“For example, the data…shows a decrease in infection rates after countries eased…lockdowns with >99% statistical significance. Indeed…infection rates have declined after reopening even after allowing for an appropriate measurement lag. This means that the pandemic and COVID-19 likely have its own dynamics unrelated to often inconsistent lockdown measures that were being implemented.” [14]

Stay at home orders are exposed in the JAMA study at jamanetwork.com:

 “restrictions imposed by the pandemic (eg, stay-at-home orders) could claim lives indirectly through delayed care for acute emergencies, exacerbations of chronic diseases, and psychological distress (eg, drug overdoses).” “In 14 states, more than 50% of excess deaths were attributed to underlying causes other than COVID-19; these included California (55% of excess deaths) and Texas (64% of excess deaths)”  [15]

Disturbing data is shown in medrxiv.org

“We found that 180-day of mandatory isolations to healthy <60 (ie schools and workplaces closed) produces more final deaths if the vaccination date is later than (Madrid: Feb 23 2021; Catalonia: Dec 28 2020; Paris: Jan 14 2021; London: Jan 22 2021)” [16]

Again, from Europe we see more lockdown failings in papers.ssrn.com

“Comparing weekly mortality in 24 European countries, the findings in this paper suggest that more severe lockdown policies have not been associated with lower mortality. In other words, the lockdowns have not worked as intended” [17]

More evidence of no benefits come in nber.org

“Our findings … further raise doubt about the importance in NPI’s (lockdown policies in particular) in accounting for the evolution of COVID-19 transmission rates over time and across locations” [18]

Meanwhile, back at bmj.com

 “[the] President…has flatly denied the seriousness of the pandemic, refusing to impose a lockdown, close schools, or cancel mass events…Yet the country’s death rate is among the lowest in Europe-just over 700 in a population of 9.5 million” [19]

We learn at medrxiv.org

“living with children 0-11 years was not associated with increased risks of recorded SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 related hospital or ICU admission but was associated with reduced risk of COVID-19 death (HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.62-0.92).” [20]

In another telling paper from medrxiv.org

 “This study shows that the virus is already here, and we must find ways of living with it such that it caused no or minimal human and socioeconomic losses in … Nigeria as a whole…. going back to the lockdown should never again be entertained” [21]

Now check out this in nejm.org 

“recruits were under the constant supervision of Marine Corps instructors. Other settings in which young adults congregate are unlikely to reflect similar adherence to measures intended to reduce transmission.” [22]

Then we learn from frontiersin.org

“The national criteria most associated with death rate are life expectancy and its slowdown, public health context (metabolic and non-communicable diseases (NCD) burden vs. infectious diseases prevalence), economy (growth national product, financial support), and environment (temperature, ultra-violet index). Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia, including lockdown, did not appear to be linked with death rate” [23]

Lockdowners can see more bad news for their policy at tandfonline.com

“Whether a county had a lockdown has no effect on Covid-19 deaths; a non-effect that persists over time. Cross-country studies also find lockdowns are superfluous and ineffective (Homberg 2020). This ineffectiveness may have several causes. ” [24]

The insanity of lockdown exposed further at upmc-biosecurity.org

 “There are no historical observations…that support.. confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods…The negative consequences…are so extreme…this mitigation..should be eliminated from serious consideration” [25]

It was very predictable, according to medrxiv.org

 “we present data demonstrating that mortality due to covid-19… could have been largely predicted even before the pandemic hit Europe, simply by looking at longitudinal variability of all-cause mortality rates in the years preceding the…outbreak” [26]

Lockdown or no lockdown, the outcome was monotonously the same as shown in medrxiv.org 

“Our analysis shows that while infection levels decreased, they did so before lockdown was effective, and infection numbers also decreased in neighbour municipalities without mandates, There are of course anecdotal observations as well–e.g., Florida is doing better than California despite DisneyWorld having been open for months and California having no current plan to ever reopen anything, let alone Disneyland. I could do a similar thread on the harms of lockdowns (and school closures in particular) but that seems unnecessary as such harms have been well documented. If lockdowns were extremely effective, their desirability from a policy perspective would at least be a conversation worth having. However, these papers suggest they have limited effectiveness at best AND horrible side effects. ” [27]

References:

[1] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.22.20160341

[2] DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100464

[3] https://doi.org/10.31124/advance.12362645.v3

[4] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.02090.pdf

[5] Comment on Flaxman et al. (2020, Nature, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7): The illusory effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe’, Stefan Homburg, Christof Kuhbandner

[6] https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-end-of-exponential-growth-the-decline-in-the-spread-of-coronavirus/

[7] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260

[8] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717

[9] https://www.nicholaslewis.org/did-lockdowns-really-save-3-million-covid-19-deaths-as-flaxman-et-al-claim/

[10] doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3588

[11] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047860

[12] doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31817734ba

[13] Altman, Morris, Smart Thinking, Lockdown and COVID-19: Implications for Public Policy (May 22, 2020). Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 2020, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3607803

[14] https://imgcdn.larepublica.co/cms/2020/05/21180548/JP-Morgan.pdf

[15] doi:10.1001/jama.2020.11787

[16] doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.09.20210146

[17] Bjørnskov, Christian, Did Lockdown Work? An Economist’s Cross-Country Comparison (August 2, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3665588 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3665588

[18] DOI 10.3386/w27719

[19] doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3543

[20] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.01.20222315

[21] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.04.20168112

[22] DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2029717

[23] https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.604339

[24] https://doi.org/10.1080/00779954.2020.1844786

[25] http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/resources/publications/2006/2006-09-15-diseasemitigationcontrolpandemicflu.html

[26] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.25.20248853

[27] doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.28.20248936

– – – – –

You may also be interested in my posts on COVID-19: 

COVID-19 is a mild disease
Can Face Masks Stop a Virus? 
Pandemic or Dem-panic? 
WHO is behind the Plan-demic?  
Can 5G cause Coronavirus? 
Can a Governor keep you from Working? 
 Will COVID vaccines genetically modify you?  
Are coronavirus asymptomatic individuals contagious?  
The Rockefeller COVID-19 testing plan for military control of population  
COVID Virus Bailout   
Quarantine Constitutionality? 

And here is a link to Home – ICAN – Informed Consent Action Network (icandecide.org) 

Here is a followup to my post on Hunter Biden’s Justice Department investigation.

Here are some highlights of an old essay that I wrote in 2017. (Hint: it leads up to the IRS eagle logo, which I do not mention here).

Does the Department of Justice even exist as an official agency of government? The official story is that DOJ was created in 1870 to handle all the lawsuits resulting from the 14th amendment. But they have a difficult time explaining how they got the earlier motto and art work on their official seal. https://www.justice.gov/about/history/doj-seal-history-and-motto

The painting on the ceiling of the Capitol Rotunda depicts the goddess Justitia followed by an eagle holding arrows (implements of war and aggression). Justitia is holding a sword and a shield. Everyone below is crouching.

According to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justitia : “She is also often seen carrying a double-edged sword in her left hand, symbolizing the power of Reason and Justice, which may be wielded either for or against any party.”

Notice “EITHER FOR OR AGAINST ANY PARTY”

Wikipedia says the sword carrying is an attribute of the goddess Nemesis (vengeance). Nemesis “was the spirit of divine retribution against those who succumb to hubris (arrogance before the gods)”

This victorious eagle of war has conquered us and now offers an olive branch. (Peace through conquest). And you fell for it.

The Just-Us Department has a very curious logo. It shows the eagle who is depicted on the Capitol Canopy as following the goddess Justitia, With the motto “Qui Pro Domina Justitia Sequitur” which means “He who follows Justitia dominates”. Their official story is that they don’t know what their motto means. We know that the DOJ seal was changed by the FDR socialists in 1934 by Executive Order 6692 (1934).

What could possibly go wrong?

By the way, the IRS is not an agency of the United States. The IRS cannot take anyone to court. It is the Justice Department that prosecutes IRS cases.

Here is my new page for Homeschooler study guide.

By Steven Miller

“We The People” created a federal government by writing a constitution. “We The People” are the superiors. Oath-of-office takers are the subordinates (inferiors) who, by taking an oath of allegiance, owe us allegiance.

By writing a constitution and finding subordinates to obey us, we create a government.
We delegated to our subordinates the 18 things they are authorized to do in Article 1, section 8. We DID NOT delegate any authority that we ourselves did not have. (like taxing our neighbors, canceling their marriage, regulating travel).

Disclaimer: I am not saying that we need a government. We did not have a government for the first 10 books of the Bible. We did not need a government then, and we don’t need one now.

Before I can answer your question on law, we need to know what the laws of nature are.
The first sentence of the Declaration of Independence states that it is the Laws of Nature that entitle the United States to exist. Every Law Dictionary will tell you the maxim of law: “When laws of the state fail, we must resort to the laws of nature”.

The Declaration goes on to say that Governments are instituted among men to secure Creator-endowed (God-given) rights.
What are these God-given rights?
They are the rights of all mankind.

According to Tucker’s 1803 reprint of Blackstone’s Commentary on the Laws, that was updated to include 1803 Virginia laws:

• “residuum of natural liberty which is not required by the laws of society to be sacrificed to public convenience”. . . . ”
• “…these may be reduced to three principal or primary articles; the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right of private property: because, as THERE IS NO OTHER KNOWN METHOD OF COMPULSION, or of abridging man’s natural free will, but by an infringement or diminution of one or other of these important rights, the preservation of these, inviolate, may justly be said to include the preservation of our civil immunities in their largest and most extensive sense. “

That’s right. Government exists to protect you from being controlled.

Now that you know what the Law of Nature is, I can answer your question about what Law is: All Law is consistent with the law of nature. Neither can there be any other law.

Continuing on with Blackstone’s Commentary on the Law:

“This law of nature, being coeval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other – It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this: and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original….
…NEITHER COULD ANY OTHER LAW POSSIBLY EXIST… for we are all equal, without any other superior but him who is the author of our being. …”
…Nay, if any human law should allow [violation of natural law], we are bound to transgress that human law, or else we must offend both the natural and the divine.”

For more information read my essays at www.NotFooledByGovernment.com
You might just find out how you waived all of your rights.

A democracy cannot recognize individual rights.

In a democracy, a majority votes to force their will on others. But in a nation where everyone is created equal, those who know right from wrong will never covet their neighbors’ wealth, will not plunder the innocent, will not exercise dominion over others.

Alexander Hamilton:
“We are a Republic. Real Liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy.”

James Madison, 1787, Federalist Paper #10:
“Democracy is the most vile form of government … democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
Theoretical politicians who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would at the same time be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions”

Of course democracies are “spectacles of turbulence and contention.” They are only for those who would take the risk of loosing their rights in exchange for the chance to dominate others.

Patrick Henry:
“Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt.”

Fisher Ames, who was the author of the words of the First Amendment, said:
“A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way.”

John Adams, 1815:
“Democracy … while it lasts is more bloody than either [aristocracy or monarchy]. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”

John Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:
“Between a balanced Republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

Millions of Americans lost their jobs in the Great Depression, and one in four people lost their life savings after more than 4,000 U.S. banks shut down between 1929 and 1933. Bank depositors lost nearly $400 million when their bank accounts were seized.

In 1933 Congress passed the Glass-Steagall Act to prohibit bankers from using depositors’ money for high-risk investments – this provision was repealed by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in 2010, signed into law by Obama. But the FDIC provisions of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act remain intact. This FDIC insurance is now the extent of your guarantee — if you are lucky enough to collect.

The FDIC insurance fund can only cover one third of one percent of deposits. If your 401(k), IRA, or an annuity, exceeds the FDIC guarantee, then you are at risk. In the Great Depression only 25% of people lost their life savings. The next bank collapse misery will be worse.

The 2010 Dodd-Frank law created new government agencies to oversee the American financial system and the economy. It was written by Wall Street banking lobbyists. What could possibly go wrong? Speaking of Wall Street insiders controlling the government, don’t miss my essay on The Purpose of the CIA.

The act also removed any option for future government bail-outs of banks. It allows the largest banks to take money directly from its unsecured creditors.¹ YOU are an unsecured creditor. The Dodd-Frank law deemed the largest banks “too big to fail” and gave these banks the power to enforce these unlimited bail-ins. Instead of the prior policy of taking money from federal bail-outs, big banks can now take bank accounts directly from their account holders.²

Private bank accounts can now be confiscated in order to resolve any financial crisis. This means that the banks you depend on to hold your savings, 401(k), and IRA accounts are now some of the riskiest places keep your wealth.

With the U.S. debt now surpassing $27 TRILLION and increasing each day, every American (man, woman, or child) effectively owes over $82,000. Per taxpayer, your fair share of this debt is $219,000. (see USdebtClock.org) This is a greater per capita debt than Grece and Italy ³ – And their banks had bail-ins and their economies suffered from internationally imposed austerity measures.

ARE YOUR SAVINGS AT RISK?

What this really means is that bank accounts are by law owned by the bank—not by you, the depositor.

Depositors in European Union countries have suffered bail-ins trying to save their failing banks.⁴

The bank has a “provisional responsibility” to the depositor. This “provisional responsibility” may be honored by the bank, meaning the bank may give you stock instead of your money, if your deposit is confiscated to make up for a shortage in the legally required reserves needed to function. But the stock of a failing bank might not be worth anything. *

You may receive stock in a totally different bank from where the original money was deposited. If you think your bank is safe from such an event, some of the biggest banks in the United States—JP Morgan, Chase, Citigroup, and Bank of America—fall into the category of “too big to fail” banks.⁵

You could end up with a stack of stock certificates instead of the cash needed to pay bills.

Unfortunately, this is completely legal and could very well happen. Just like the bank bail-out that occurred in 2008, your money could be used to save the “to big to fail” (TBTF) banks during any possible economic crashes economists have been warning the nation about.⁶

FACTS ABOUT OUR ECONOMY⁷

Wall Street is still fighting financial reform despite the billions they made during thebail-out of 2008.

• The total corporate bond debt is $6 trillion and there is $2 trillion in junk bonds inissuance.
• The national debt is over $20 trillion and growing billions every month.
• Adjustable rate mortgages are popular again.
• The FDIC Insurance Fund contains just $33 billion in assets, while bank deposits total more than $9 Trillion.
• Big banks are now bigger than ever.

FOOTNOTE

*If this drastic action resembles the military term “comendeer” there is a reason. You are an enemy of the state. When the FDR socialists seized our gold coins in 1933 the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 was amended to include U.S. citizens. The 1933 banking laws are still in effect. Title 12 U.S. Code section 95(b) gives the Secretary of the Treasury pre-approved authority to control you with “actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken…”.

SOURCES

1.Congress.Gov. (2010, July 21). H.R.4173 – Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform andConsumer Protection Act. https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4173/text

2.Best, Richard. (2016, September 7). Why Bank Bail-Ins Will Be The Next Bail-Outs. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/090716/why-bank-bailins-will-be-new-bailouts.asp

3.HowMuch.net. Visualizing Your Country’s Unsustainable Debt Per Person. https://howmuch.net/articles/general-government-gross-debt-per-capita

4. https://geopolitics.co/2015/11/20/dollar-us-treasury-dumping-continue-while-civil-asset-forfeitures-exceed-burglary-bank-deposits-at-risk/

5. https://www.esrb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/wp/esrbwp7.en.pdf

6. The Big Bank Bailout. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/07/14/the-big-bank-bailout/#6a66122f2d83

7. Wall Street Survivor. (2013, December 6). 2008 Financial Crisis: 10 ShockingFacts That Prove We Didn’t Learn Anything. http://blog.wallstreetsurvivor.com/2013/12/06/10-shocking-facts-that-prove-we-learned-nothing-from-the-2008-financial-crisis/

YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN

My article Banks are the Enemy of Capitalism.

My post Biden’s Plan to Tax the Rich.

Biden’s Plan to monitor bank accounts

Biden Lied about federal authority to deficit spend

Pelosi’s Infrastructure Laws are Unconstitutional

Is it “excessive force” if a sheriff’s deputy beats and pepper-sprays a motorist who had been stopped only because the deputy saw the motorist without a fastened seatbelt?

A district court judge had concluded that the force was justified, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said that excessive use of force was for a jury to
evaluate.

The deputy’s explanation: The motorist, while waiting for the deputy to finish writing his report, was sitting on a curb eating a bowl of broccoli, so the deputy had to beat him down, he said, out of fear that the motorist would throw the broccoli at him and then attack him.

Read the case at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1578552.html

The U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment mentions a “well regulated militia”. What was a “well regulated militia” during the time of the writing of this amendment?

John Adams was there.* He would know the answer.

President John Adams in his October 11, 1798 letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of Massachusetts:

“An address from the officers commanding two thousand eight hundred men, consisting of such substantial citizens as are able and willing at their own expense completely to arm and clothe themselves in handsome uniforms, does honor to that division of the militia which has done so much honor to its country.”

That’s right. Almost 7 years after the Bill of Rights, and 18 years after Massachusetts was a state (by the way, John Adams wrote the Massachusetts Constitution) the militia consisted of citizens willing to completely to arm themselves at their own expense.

Don’t be fooled into believing that this has changed. The Constitution does not change. Those who swore to defend it must perpetuate it. “We The People” did not authorize mutiny.

Many people will try to tell you that the word “militia” only refers to government regulated National Guard. The second amendment was written by those who suffered and fought against their government’s national guard. The war was still fresh on their minds. Most of the Colonialists were for the British rule. To suggest that the authors of the second amendment would want government regulated soldiers to be within their ranks is suicide.

The people themselves are the first line of any national defense, while the army and navy are called into service pursuant to Article 2, section 2.

FOUNDER QUOTES

Henry Knox, Secretary of War, report to George Washington, January 18, 1790:
“An energetic national militia is to be regarded as the Capital security of a free republic; and not a standing army, forming a distinct class in the community.”
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-05-02-0009

George Mason:
“The Militia is the whole people, except a few public officers”
— Elliot, Jonathan (1937). The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution. Vol. 3 (3d ed.). page 425.

Patrick Henry:
“The great object is, that every man be armed. […] Every one who is able may have a gun… the militia, sir, is our ultimate safety. We can have no security without it.”
— Patrick Henry, speech of June 14 1788

Richard Henry Lee, a fellow Virginian and member of the first Senate, wrote: “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

“To disarm the people… was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
— George Mason, speech of June 14, 1788

Militia Act of 1792

Now that you know what a militia is, read the Militia Act of 1792:

https://www.mountvernon.org/education/primary-source-collections/primary-source-collections/article/militia-act-of-1792/

FOOTNOTE

• (signer of the Declaration of Independence, delegate to the Continental Congress, and former Congressman of Massachusetts, and who was one of the two Americans who signed the peace treaty that authorized the United States to exist)
  He knows more about the Constitutions restrictions on government than today’s politicians.

Steven Miller · originally answered February 9, 2019