Archive for category Liberty

Analyzing the 2nd Amendment Correctly

rippedThe 2nd Amendment is in the news again. As I come across various news stories and blog posts like this one, I repeatedly find attempts to present an explanation of this portion of the constitution. Some of these attempts err because they use modern definitions for terms that meant something else when the amendment was written; some fail because they don’t catch on to the difference between an instruction to government and an explanation to the reader; some are outright propaganda, written to conform to a point of view without regard to any intent to get at an accurate reading.

I’ve spent quite a lot of time looking at this over the years. Although you may begin to feel as you read this that I am pro-gun, in fact I am not. What I am is pro-constitution. As you’ll see if you read this completely, the constitution provides for change, and the obvious path is, if you want change, you should make that change — properly. Please read this to the end before you decide that I’ve got a foot in the door here, for or against the “rightness” of American citizens being armed.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

The 2012 Election – I Surprise Myself

8142797777_17cc1e55ec_nDeb and I had the pleasure of meeting some of the key democratic candidates for office for, and within our state (Montana) today. Each spoke for a few minutes about their aspirations, and spent some time “working the room”; I bent a couple of ears, as anyone who knows me might expect, and got some fairly good answers, actually.

I don’t normally jump on a soapbox, politically, but this year… here we go.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , ,

The Constitution is not just a piece of paper

rippedObama (and let’s be fair here — also the congress, and the judiciary, and state officials) has repeatedly demonstrated either a complete disrespect for, or absolute misunderstanding of, the constitution.

From the inversion of the commerce clause, ex post facto laws at both the federal and state levels, sweeping usurpation of article 5 powers via the judiciary, to blatant violations of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 14th amendments, our government is — at best — operating in an unauthorized fashion, wielding powers it was never granted by the people, and ignoring its obligation to protect the rights it was explicitly charged with protecting in return for being allowed to operate at all.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , ,

Nuclear Attacks – Survivable, say Feds

The feds have published a happy little book (available here) that lets us know we can expect to survive small nuclear attacks. The blogosphere has been muttering about it, mostly to the mistaken tune of “OMG, Global Thermonuclear War!”

But this booklet isn’t about a sophisticated attack by missile or bomber; this is about little tiny nukes, up to 10 kiloton, the kind of thing you might expect from an unusually sophisticated basement terrorist manufacturing operation. It is a guide for local officials that detail everything from what to expect in terms of injuries, damage and fallout, to what to do about people’s pets.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Is a corporation really like a person?

In the US, (IMHO very bad) court decisions have made it so that businesses – corporations – are commonly treated as if they were persons under the law. This leads more or less naturally to weighing the rights of the corporations against the rights of a flesh-and-blood person; and when a corporation contributes more to the public trough than the citizen does, the outcome is often a foregone conclusion.

Lately, it’s been rattling around in my old head that perhaps, instead of treating corporations like persons, we should treat them like useful, but very dangerous, viruses. Comparable to one that generates some useful end product, but would eat your flesh off if you got any on you. Because other than the end products they make, I’m really hard put to think of much good corporations do unless they’re legislated into a corner and forced into it.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , ,

SCOTUS empowers another ex post facto law

rippedThe Supreme Court ruled on May 17th, 2010, that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates after their prison terms are complete. The high court in a 7-2 judgment reversed a lower court decision that said Congress overstepped its authority.

Ex post facto laws are explicitly forbidden to the federal government and the states by two separate and quite specific clauses in the constitution, the government’s authorizing document:

The federal government: “Section 9 – Limits on Congress – No … ex post facto Law shall be passed.”

The states: “Section 10 – Powers prohibited of States – No State shall … pass any … ex post facto Law”

You may be asking, “What is an ex post facto law?” The legal definition is given by Calder v Bull (3 US 386 [1798]), in the opinion of Justice Chase, which defines four classes of laws:
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , ,

President Obama, you’ve put your foot in it.

Much as I like you, Mr. President – and I definitely do – you have really put yours foot in it this time. I’m not a sycophant. I don’t agree with all of your positions. For instance, I think your stance on gun control is outright unconstitutional, while at the same time, I understand why you’d prefer that it were otherwise, and, since the system itself is corrupt and largely unconstitutional these days, why you’d be willing to violate your oath in order to see things done the way you’d like them to be done.

This isn’t stupid; it’s calculating and it is very much political, “just the way things work today.” For instance, if you actually think the government presently is authorized to restrict citizens from owning arms, I’d love to sit down with you and show you why you’re 100% wrong. I think you’re far too smart to buy the standard arguments for your own position, though, and I suspect that in private, you’d simply admit that is the case. I understand political expediency. I also understand an urge to do good, and that the legalities of the system can frustrate that urge if not pushed to the side.

But this time… I’m disappointed in you.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

On "The Price of Freedom"

The price of freedom is risk.

The price of safety is conformity, restriction, and repression.

You can bank on it. Our leaders certainly have.

Tags: , , , , , ,