What the hell is happening here? Government is just running amok.
The Los Angeles PD is once again being sued because they simply will not follow a court order - dating back to the 1990's - that requires them to have CCW forms and instructions in every one of their stations. The shocker (not)? Their practices are duplicated in most counties in California.
The Indiana Supreme Court has decided that a person has NO RIGHT to defend themselves if an illegal intruder that breaks into their house happens to be a police officer (yeah, you're an illegal intruder if you don't have a search warrant).
Then, a federal judge in California tells us that we don't have a Constitutional right to carry a concealed weapon.
What part of, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," Or, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." do they find ambiguous?
Really, they are very easily understood. Those grotesque, unabashed assaults on specific Constitutional affronts aren't even the worst part.
It's the things the government does that skirt the Tenth Amendment. Ya know, the one that basically says that, unless the Fed was granted specific powers, they don't get to do it.
This kind of stuff just fries my rice -
How dare the federal government tell me what I can put into my body, be it heroin or raw milk?
How dare they tell me on whom I can spend my money for services rendered, be it a dentist or a prostitute?
How dare they tell me how many spouses I may have, the type of weapon I may choose to defend myself, and how much of my hard-earned money I can take with me out of the country?
On the federal level, as long as my actions do not infringe on your ability to live as you see fit, I supposedly can do as I please.
What's most maddening in all of this is that the Tenth Amendment actually prohibits the feds from doing all of these things. Yet they do them at will.
Our country has morphed from being a Constitutional Republic into a Democratic Republic. The difference? A Constitutional Republic is a representative form of government where the powers of the representatives are constrained by a Constitution. A Democratic Republic is a representative form of government where the laws can be changed by a simple majority of the representatives agreeing to the change.
In the Constitutional Republic, the judiciary is supposed to ensure the Legislative and Executive branches adhere to the Constitution.
How's that workin' out?
Anyways, these are some of the things I'm pissed off about. The key question is, what to do about it?
Like my suggestions for personal finances, is the answer to do what you can to minimize the impact? Is that even possible, since so much of the federal power grab has been to make previously lawful acts illegal?
Look at our drug laws. If I want to sit in my house and smoke a pipe full of meth, I'm breaking a whole litany of laws. Drug possession and drug paraphernalia possession as a start. If I've got some bureaucrat-determined "weight", I get popped as a distributor as well.
I'm harming no one other than myself, just as I can do with a cigarette or a bottle of Jack Daniels if I use either to excess.
Unless the drug was sold to me by a company in another state or country - triggering the "commerce clause" - the federal government has absolutely no Constitutional power to control this behavior. Yet this type of action has been illegal since at least 1914 (Harrison Narcotic Tax Act).
A majority of representatives at the time voted the Executive branch powers outside of the Constitution, and the Judiciary gave them the green light.
BAM! It's the law of the land.
Maybe things have changed. Certainly, I could get some meth and a pipe, sit in my living room, call the feds and inform them of my actions, be arrested and fight the case on Constitutional grounds.
How ya think that would end?
Accept The Challenge
With so many freedoms and rights having been trampled, what do we do? What are our options?
The status quo would be to continue to allow the federal government to grow unchallenged. It would certainly be the easiest to do, and would likely have the most support amongst most Americans. Most folks can't conceive of standing up to a DMV clerk or police officer, much less a federal bureaucracy. They believe the government has their best interests at heart, and just go with the flow.
The other end of the scale is an armed insurrection. Unless regular military units or national guard units were to participate, it is unlikely this would succeed. Sadly, I think most police officers would side with the government, so that makes the odds even longer.
What falls somewhere in the middle? Something between capitulation and civil war?
If you were to follow a, "looking out for Number One" strategy as many (including myself) are doing financially, I think it eventually bites you in the butt. That means that the rest of society is following the status quo, and the government is growing more powerful. Eventually, that ends up with everything being owned or controlled by The State, and any masterful plans of "riding it out" evaporate.
Is there any realistic way to get things slowed and eventually turned around via the ballot box? I think the best hope is via the states nullifying federal orders. There have to be enough states to push back to make it work. This could then bring the national guard units into play should armed conflict result.
Perhaps something like the Free State project in New Hampshire is the right idea. Get enough liberty-thinking people in enough states to control the state legislatures and executive offices, and draw a big fat line in the sand.
It's a great idea in theory, but a bit more difficult in practice. The Free State Project has been trying to get 20,000 people to move to NH, and they've yet to meet their goal. In 9 years, they've gotten a bit under 11,000 to commit to moving to NH, but only around 1,000 have done it.
Maybe it would work better in a larger state with more gravitas. Texas, Florida and a few southern states come to mind.
An exodus of sorts has been happening from some states, such as California. Working, "Native Sons" are leaving, and largely being replaced by immigrants from other countries - legal and otherwise. The main state of choice for most liberty-loving Californians has been Texas.
Nullification seems like our last, best hope. Any other ideas?
Eh. Maybe I'm getting too bent out of shape, considering the world is coming to an end tomorrow.... ;-)
Copyright 2011 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com