DENNIS RODMAN IN KOREA, A CONSTITUTIONAL EXERCISE – BY WAYNE JOHNSON, ATTORNEY, OAKLAND, CA

pb-130228-kim-jong-un-dennis-rodman-141p.photoblog900

Headlines:   “Two bizarre characters: Dennis Rodman and Kim Jong-un?”

I am continually impressed by the racism and reactionary comments of those who claim to love and want to see freedom around the world, and particularly in North Korea.

Following World War II, the Japanese Empire having lost to the United States of America lost its right to rule the Korean Peninsula.  The Soviet Union backed what is now North Korea, and the United States claimed South Korea.  In 1950, the North Koreans objected to the United States, who they believed to be expansionists like the Japanese, occupying South Korea so they attempted to re-unify Korea through military action.

Following a very strange chain of events, wherein the Soviet Union boycotted the United Nations, the United States was able to obtain a vote of the United Nations Security Council to invade North Korea.  That permitted a United Nations backed contingency supported by a force of 85% troops from the United States, and 100% arms, to invade North Korea.  When the United States army nearly pushed the North Koreans to the Chinese border, the Chinese, who did not want to see another expansionist government on its border, intervened and provided arms and soldiers.  The Soviet Union, that was in a “cold war” with the United States provided weaponry.

Eventually, the North Koreans with the aid of the Soviet Union and China pushed the United States down to the “38th parallel,” a circle of latitude that is 38 degrees north of the Earth’s equatorial plane, and the warring countries decided to enter an armistice.

The actual fighting occurred between June 25, 1950 and July 27 1953.  However, minor incidents continue to the present day, mostly over North Korean nuclear bomb testing.

Technically, the United States is still at war with North Korea.  An armistice is not a victory or a defeat, but a cessation of fighting.  In this case, the armistice agreement restored the border between the Koreas near the 38th Parallel and created the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), a 2.5-mile (4.0 km)-wide fortified buffer zone between the two Korean nations.   The United States also complains that North Korea has thousands of prisoners and that it suppresses speech and freedom.

On February 26, 2013, Dennis Rodman was in North Korea for a basketball event.  While Dennis Rodman made history as a NBA legend, he is indeed eccentric.  His body is riddled with tattoos and body piercings.  He participated in what some call professional wrestling, which is more like a soap opera than true wrestling.  He once wore a dress in a public event.   While in North Korea, Dennis Rodman, dared meet, greet, and hug Kim Jong-un and suggest dialog between the countries might be helpful.

When Rodman returned, United States diplomats and officials were disturbed that Dennis Rodman would dare travel to North Korea and “humanize” Jung-un, by giving him a hug, and expressing respect and love for him.  He even had the audacity to pass a message from Jong-un to President Obama.

George Stephanopoulos, a “quick –witted” television host who helped catapult Bill Clinton to the Whitehouse interviewed Dennis Rodman, inquired if Rodman was aware that North Korea jailed and tortured thousands of people.  Dennis Rodman, who ironically was born the same year as Stephanopoulos, and who attended Cooke County Junior College and Southeastern Oklahoma State University, replied: “Guess what?  We do the same thing.”

The exchange was pretty entertaining, as is the true purpose of television, and Rodman held his own despite the fact that George Stephanopoulos’ mission was to render Rodman an idiot.

Dennis Rodman being demonized for his “strangeness” probably made him more sympathetic to Jong-un.  It probably made him better qualified to stand up for himself during that interview.

Ironically, we do demonize many countries and “dictators;” however, we do support dictators, “our S.O.B.s,” and the United States possesses more nuclear bombs than any other nation, and it is the only country to have exploded an atomic bomb on another country.

It also claims a need for suppressing First and Fourth Amendment freedoms under the Providing Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, commonly known as the Patriot Act of 2001.  The United States also imprisons people in Guantanamo Bay, without trial, declaring them to be enemy combatants.

As bad as things may seem by individuals who do “bad things” under the guise of Constitutional rights, all Americans have is the Constitution.  The First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment are important tools for combating governmental abuses, even if you never exercise them.   The fact that you have the right say and feel what you want is irreplaceable. The fact that you can own a weapon without government interference makes it hesitate just a little, even though the government has far superior weaponry. The fact that the government cannot just search and seize you or take things from you without a fair hearing irritates those might just want to harm you without consequence.  The fact that you even have rights is an irritant to many.   Once the Constitution is eroded we will have nothing else.

Although African Americans fought in every major battle in American history, it took until the 1960s to get the entire country to even admit African Americans had Constitutional rights.

The United States eroded the rights of anyone, even its own citizens that it perceived as communist sympathizers.   In the 1950s it was bad.   If you were deemed a communist sympathizer you could not strike or boycott.  You could not protest.   Many were jailed and placed under surveillance.   The communists in the 1950s were the “terrorists” of the 2000s.

If you are classified as a terrorist you may not be able to travel.  You may be jailed without trial.   Heaven forbid you are classified as an “Enemy Combatant” or a sympathizer of an Enemy Combatant.  You will have no Constitutional Rights.  Ironically, the only body that will have the evidence of those under this classification is the United States Government, and they do not have to share it.  You can just be jailed for eternity without a trial.

In the words of Dennis Rodman: “Guess what?”  Today, when cops detain African Americans one of the first questions they may ask is if you are on probation or parole.

That was the question a Dublin, California police officer purportedly asked Stanley Kirk Burrell, “MC Hammer,” during their encounter on February 21, 2013, relating to Hammer operating a vehicle without current registration.  After his arrest for obstructing an officer and his release, Hammer began his tweets  with “chubby elvis looking dude was tapping on my car window, I rolled down the window and he said ‘Are you on parole or probation?'”

They ask these questions because those on probation and parole have profoundly eroded Constitution rights.  They can search you and do not have to make up lies about seeing you behave in a suspicious manner.  While on probation or parole you cannot exercise your right to remain silent and you lose some of your freedom of expression.  If you are a felon you cannot possess a firearm.  Some cannot vote.

The United States Constitution does not protect your right to possess a firearm to target shoot, hunt, commit a crime, or even defend your residence or person.  It does protect your right defend yourself from a corrupt and abusive government.  In that regard, the government should not have the right to know what arms you have or where you keep them.   I agree that all dangerous weapons should be stored and locked safely away so that they cannot be stolen or misused.

Defending yourself from a “tyrannous” government is not a snap decision or an easy undertaking.  It should not be considered on a whim for just any purpose.  It might be considered in the case of being jailed or beaten for no reason, having valued property seized without due process, and / or being taxed without receiving any benefit (a.k.a taxation without representation).  I suppose then one would have to organize or become part of a militia.  As in the case of the “American Forefathers,” it should be a well thought out process.  If the government can just enter your home and seize your arms, the Second Amendment is a meaningless tool.  Contrary to conventional opinion, the Second Amendment does not mention the word firearms.  It reads  “[A] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  Presumably, you should be able to possess whatever is necessary to protect the security of a “free State.”

If you think racial profiling is bad, just think how much racial profiling would take place without the United States Constitution.

These are not just issues that should matter to African Americans.  There are groups of people, even White people, who are treated like African Americans by default.  The “Urban Dictionary” might refer to them “Honorary Niggas.”  I don’t make these slang phrases up, but I can appreciate the First Amendment.  Travel to a neighborhood where White people live like Black people.  Or better yet, Travel to an area where there are no Black people, or there are only poor people who are not African American and see how the system treats them.  Go to the jails and prisons.   While Blacks and Hispanics may still be disproportionately represented, you will see an overwhelming number and an abundance of poor White people.

Never concede any of your Constitutional rights.  In fact, when pressed, insist on more.   Ask under what authority you are being detained or why you are to be searched.  When questioned about a criminal offense, whether you are guilty or not, always exercise your rights under the Fifth Amendment.  That is why you have rights under the Fifth Amendment.  If asked if you will consent to a search, just say no.  Legally, it does not imply guilt.  “Doing too much” or saying too much may land you in jail or even worse…get you convicted of an offense that you did not commit.  Let your attorney speak for you if at all possible.

Should you want to discuss a  case you may contact Wayne Johnson at (510) 451-1166 or johnsonlawfirm007@sbcglobal.net.   Wayne Johnson does civil and criminal litigation.

FROM THE BOOK: THE SYLLABUS OF MALCOLM X, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

Malcolm X

DO YOU SEE THROUGH A GLASS DIMLY?

Causation is a universal law. For every effect there are causes which are in turn effects of causes, ad infinitum.  But as is the case with most aspects of our lives the texture of our lives will not yield to truth by a simple identification of cause to effect.  So, a more difficult analysis of correlation is necessitated.  Things move together and scatter both up and down without them being either the cause or the effect of the other.   That makes it very difficult for one to answer the question ‘why?’  he or she is in their present circumstance.

Those laws are universal and each one applies equally to society as well. So, if you are seriously reading this book with the intent to change your life then you must know there are real tangible causes and correlations for you being incarcerated or socio/economically marginalized due to you having a felony record. Malcolm X makes an interesting commit regarding a conversation he had with his Bimbi.  Bimbi told Malcolm that he had some brains, if he’d use them.[1] Many of our problems could be solved if we’d only use our brains.

Logic is a neutral science.  Like any tool its design implies its purpose.  When logic is applied to one’s circumstances it effectuates outcomes that are either sound or unsound depending upon whether we apply it to truths or lies.  Logical thinking will always give you a conclusion but it won’t necessarily give you a sound or cogent conclusion.  If what you apply it to is false or illusory then you get false or illusory conclusions.

Many of the men and women in prison today would be out of prison if they had only used their brains by thinking logically on truths and had made choices which served their best interests at the time. Bimbi was speaking metaphorically. He was suggesting to Malcolm that Malcolm had not been thinking logically and truthfully before incarceration and that he was not thinking logically and truthfully when he was first incarcerated.  Nothing Malcolm had done had served his best interests.  But don’t be mistaken, Bimbi was not playing a blame game on Malcolm.

There were reasons why Malcolm X didn’t think logically and truthfully in his own best interest.  Malcolm was the product of an environment saturated with false premises about life and so he was unable to think outside his small social box.  Though he was a clever street hustler he could not exercise the foresight necessary to prevent his eventual social and physical deterioration because though thinking logically he was thinking on garbled and false premises about life.  For example, he couldn’t see the adverse effects which his use of drugs and alcohol would have on his brain.  He could not see the consequent adverse effect on his quality of reasoning brought on by alcohol and drug use.  He couldn’t see that alcohol and drugs reduced the quality of his reasoning and put him into a downward spiral of one poor judgment after the other.  Malcolm couldn’t see the causal connections between the quality of his thinking and his circumstances.  He could not see the relation of his thoughts to his circumstances; we do have the power to mirror our thoughts in our circumstances. But it’s a reciprocal relation between our thoughts and our circumstances.

We must polish the circumstances of our life and our thoughts simultaneously if our thoughts are to be reflected therein with clarity.  Malcolm could not see that thought and circumstances do reinforce each other as do cause and effect.  He didn’t understand that if thought is negative then circumstances are negative and that both then devolve together in a downward spiral of ever increasing opaqueness.  He could not see that before he went to Charleston State Prison he was already incarcerated; he could not see that he had literally lost his mind before he was put in prison.  That is why the other inmates called him ‘Satan’; Malcolm had literally lost his mind.

Malcolm described conditions in Charleston State Prison as medieval.  His description of no running water, pails for a toilet full of feces with the stench filling the cell rows all could be a metaphor of Malcolm X’s state of mind.  For, it was Malcolm’s mind which was the cause of his predicament and thus it was his mind which was mirrored in that medieval predicament.

Conversely, the opposite is true that if one’s logical thinking begins to increase in quality there will be a corresponding shift in one’s circumstances for the better.  This time with ever increasing clarity of thought one’s circumstances become ever more refined.  Bimbi didn’t just criticize Malcolm X he also offered sound advice to Malcolm.  He advised Malcolm to study by using the library and correspondence courses.  Afterwards, Malcolm did something very important; Malcolm X seriously listened to Bimbi.  But Malcolm did something else equally important; he acted on Bimbi’s advice. There is a famous passage in Shakespeare’s play ‘Hamlet’ (Yes, Malcolm read Shakespeare, too) attributed to Hamlet: “My words fly up, my thoughts remain below. Words without thoughts never to heaven go.” Hamlet is the character in the play who struggled to put his thoughts into action. When we decide to change our lives we must become causative in our lives. The light of our thought is incased in the very words which we express and there is power to change our world through words. Malcolm X began to act on thinking logically on facts and to thus start the long challenging climb out of prison to freedom.

Malcolm had not had a good education before he went to prison.  He states that he reached the 8th grade. The same holds true today. Most of you have a very low education level but that doesn’t mean that you have a low intelligence. The vast majority of you read below the 8th grade, your reading and comprehension level is low and you have a low vocabulary. The low education level of prisoners is reflected in the high school dropout rate which is nationally at 30% and amongst African Americans as high as 50% in many cities.  Two ironies should strike us here. First, it is ironic that after untold sacrifices to get the Supreme Court holding in Brown v. Board of Education so many African American youths turn their backs on formal and tax payer paid education and decide to drop out of school. Such a phenomenon is a good example of being in self-destruct mode.  Secondly, it is ironic that when the 13th amendment was passed in 1865 making slavery unlawful that today a million African Americans are slaves under the 13th amendment exception clause: “…except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted…”.

Under the 13th amendment, Malcolm was legally a slave because he had a felony conviction. But his mindset had been different as a youth because then he did have academic aspirations. Little boy Malcolm wanted to be a lawyer. But Malcolm X’s vision of himself to be a lawyer was intentionally crushed by a racist teacher. It only takes one or a few malicious persons to destroy a child’s self concept and sometimes the whole child. Millions of children have suffered that tragedy. It is a form of child abuse. You may have suffered it, too.

I read a book many years ago entitled: Learned Optimism.[2] The hypothesis of the book is a simple one. Pessimism is a learned response to adversity which in a child is related to feelings and perceptions of helplessness. Optimism is the opposite. Optimists believe that adversity is not permanent but rather a challenge. They see the light at the end of the tunnel because they reach out and turn the light on for themselves! Optimists strategize and overcome adversity in non-destructive ways. You may not know that you are a pessimist because in your mind’s eye you see yourself as having become a criminal hustler; but in fact, being a criminal money making hustler may be the product of your feelings of learned helplessness to live the life you could have lived.

Have you ever stopped to think that you are living the stereotype predetermined for you by the institution of slavery! Then as today we contend with the adversity of institutionalized racism. Racism is a global problem which is not going away anytime soon because it has been intentionally tied to primordial fear through mass stereotypical propaganda.  So, for those who want to reconstruct their lives they must do so in a logical and strategic manner and cease any and all impulsive fear within themselves. Impulsive fear is logically unacceptable because it will make you into a coward.  To face your impulsive fear and overcome it is what it means to have courage. Malcolm did it; he did it in a medieval prison. He overcame the adversity of a “cramped cell…”and the stench of his own feces in a covered pail and the pain of withdrawal from drug addiction! He was weak but he became strong. He overcame it all with his mind! He became courageous. You can overcome too!

But there is another twist to impulsive fear.  It is called internalized racism; that is when the victim of racism has anxiety associated with him or herself as their own object of loathing and is thus never comfortable with their own physical characteristics.  Such a person will share their self loathing by acting through involuntary impulse in overt or in nuanced ways against others who seek to improve themselves. Most of the inmates at Charleston State Prison stayed in the stench felled cell rows and never got out of the mind set which their circumstances reflected. They would stay in prison a few years then parole then violate parole or commit another crime to get back in prison like a dog trained to come back to its cage oblivious to its own stench. When confronted with the prospect of freedom that very prospect would trigger in them great anxiety and make them seek out a cage in which to be confined. They practiced helplessness like so many people then and now who believe that no matter what they do they cannot change their social conditions. Each and every one of them was a hater of Malcolm X in so far as what they said and did was like gravity pulling Malcolm X downward from his aspirations. Malcolm X faced a true dichotomy; chose to live or die.  There was no middle ground.  There is no middle ground for you either.  You will live or you will die.  You cannot escape the laws of causation and correlation.

 

 

 

 

 



[1] Malcolm X with Assistance from Alex Haley, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Penguin Books; Pub. Hutchinson of London, 2001, pp. 247

[2] Martin P. Seligman, Learned Optimism. New York, NY: Pocket Books. 1998

An Unarmed Citizenry Is To Government What An Unarmed Man Or Woman Is To A Home Invader, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

Firearms article photo ec (640x480)I lived on a family farm outside of Jackson Mississippi in the 1950s.  It was a beautiful farm of about 500 acres.  It was surrounded by a thickly wooded ring of Red Maple and Nuttall Oak trees with various small rivers and streams flowing through them.  Smack dab in the middle of the farm was the cow pasture covered with a rich green flora with a large lake in the middle.

Many a morning at the crack of dawn my cousin and I would walk the road to the pasture to walk a cow in for milking.  We’d walk at the pace of the cow down the dirt road quietly enjoying the early morning serenity and chirps from birds and crowing from roosters.

Once in the barn we’d position the cow for milking. The barn was an unusually quiet place; it was an unusually mellow place absent any disturbing sound. Maybe now and then I’d hear the sound of a soft thud from a mule or horse hoof as they moved about in their stalls but even those sounds had a relaxing effect on the body and mind. I’d sit on a wooden stool then grip one of the mammary glands on the cow’s udder and start to gently squeeze and pull downward so as to squirt the cow’s milk into a galvanized steel bucket.  Once the bucket was full I’d take it into the house and my cousin would walk the cow back to the pasture.

Next I would pour the milk into a churn barrel; it was then my job to churn the milk by grabbing a plunger connected to the barrel up and down until butter and butter milk formed from the sweet cream that the churning separated from the milk. I was part of an industry.  I learned how to make something. From the cow to the dinner table I played a role in the production of a commodity.

The family farm was a family business. Family is business.  The men would rip open the earth with ploughshares harnessed to mules. Drenched in sweat and within swirls of dust unseen they could be heard yelling ‘yo mule’.  We then planted the corn seeds, peanuts seeds, cotton seeds, different fruit tree, watermelon seeds, and a vast variety of vegetables seeds. We also raised animals such as horses, mules, pigs, chickens, cattle, and hunting dogs.  When it came time to plant we did it together. When time came to harvest we did it together. I picked cotton down the row with a five pound sack; I learned how not to cut my fingers. I learned to work in the extreme heat of the day. We took our commodities to market and sold them. We made money.  We were never hungry nor wanted for anything.  We ate together. We never begged.

There are hunters and there are gatherers. We had guns.  Rifles and shotguns hung on the walls or were put into the corners of the living room; hand guns were kept in drawers. I received my first gun when I was 4 years old.  My great aunt came to me one night and told me to sit down. She had a white towel neatly wrapped in her hand. She sat me down and said to me “I have something for you.”  I looked up at her.  She then put the towel onto my lap; it was heavy.  She told me to open it up.  I pulled open the towel and looked.  It was a Colt 45 that she had had since the turn of the 20th century.  She had been born in the 1860s in Arkansas and by then she was  in her late 80s.  She then looked me in the eye and said “you can have this if you promise me something.” I said “O.K.”  She then said to me: “promise me that whenever you see the devil you’ll shoot him.” I said to her “O.K.” I was awe struck. She then put me to bed and put my Colt 45 under my pillow. I went to sleep.  My mother came home later and discovered the gun under my pillow. Later she had the firing pin removed from the gun. My mother put the gun away and kept it for me for the rest of my adolescence. I had an inviolable right to possess my firearm even at the age of 4.  No one could legally deny me that right.  With my gun I would become a hunter with no fear of its sound and being steady of aim.

We hunted and fished by day and night. Hunting is a thrilling experience especially in a group. We hunted possum, rabbit, and crow.  We cleaned and ate what we killed.  My earliest biology lessons involved the slaughtering of animals for meat to eat.  Firearms to us were another tool like a fishing pole. I never saw anyone in my family point a firearm at another person nor have I ever pointed a firearm at another person.

No doubt misuse of firearms happens.  But there is no such thing as ‘gun violence’ there’s only ‘people violence’.  What that means is that the solution to violence is not the elimination of guns, knives, or baseball bats but a change in the way we as a society teach our children to value human life.

It is an illogical and thus fallacious argument that the whole is characterized by what one or some members of the whole do.  Are the large numbers of homicide by firearms in the United States enough to justify the denial of the right for all to possess firearms?  I answer no.  The U.S. Constitution is predicated on the assumption that citizens are judged individually in courts of law as reasonable persons and that unless there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt demonstrated in a court of state or federal criminal law to prove that a citizen has acted criminally with intent then that citizen’s rights under the Constitution are absolutely and categorically inviolable. The denial of a Constitutional right can only be applied to individuals for specific acts and intentions; it cannot be applied to all citizens because some citizens have acted criminally.

Today, tragic stories of mass shooting are being used to manipulate public sentiment about gun rights. African Americans should be very mindful that they as a group are a target for proposed new gun laws. Such a move conforms to another historic fact that when the 14th amendment was being debated one of the central issues was whether or not Freed Africans would have the right to bear arms under the 2nd amendment.[1] There were attempts to manipulate public sentiment then so as to deny African Americans the right to bear arms.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. 2nd Amendment, U.S. Constitution

The Supreme Court held in D.C. v. Heller, 2008 that U.S. Citizens have the right under the 2nd amendment to possess firearms in their homes for the purpose of self-defense and secondly the 2nd amendment mandates that states have a right to raise militias.  That decision is based upon the Constitution and the English legal traditions from which our bill of rights are derived. Blackstone argued that the people of England had among other rights a right to bear arms: “…the regular administration and free course of justice in the courts of law; next to the right of petitioning the king and parliament for redress of grievances, and lastly to the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense.”[2]  In both the Constitution and for Blackstone the self-defense phrase is clear. It means to protect against intruders who are judged by the occupant to be a threat to the occupant’s life and the life of those in their home and secondly to protect against tyrannical government.

There were no police departments in colonial America. There were no police departments in most cities and towns in the United States when it was formed and for decades well into the 19th century.  An armed citizenry was necessary and essential for self-defense and the enforcement of law and order.

Prior to the finalization of the Bill of Rights, citizens in the United States had high political anxiety because they feared a professional army and because of their knowledge of historical occurrences in Europe and in the rest of the world for untold centuries and that it could and would happen here if the citizens were not armed to prevent it or to overcome it if tyranny were to become established. They understood that government is violence. They understood that one facet of human history is what can only be defined as violent gangs seizing power over land and people and then ruthlessly ruling and economically exploiting them.  After all that is exactly what the Kings and Queens of England, France, Spain, and Portugal along with their aristocratic elite were doing to the colonies all over the world.  The authors of the 2nd amendment knew that an unarmed citizenry is to government what an unarmed man or women is to a home invader.

The author’s of the Constitution answer was the ‘checks and balances’ mechanism implicit in the Constitution.  No one branch would have absolute power to legislate (even Congress is divided into the House of Representatives and the Senate), interpret law, and to preside over government agencies. But how do citizens fit into the check and balance formula?  What if all three branches of government are irreparably corrupt and begin to undo the rights of the people or some specific minority or ethnic groups?  The check on corrupt government is the 2nd Amendment.

The authors of the Constituion saw how Charles II used law to disarm his political rivals in 1680.[3]  They saw how James II used the Game Act in 1668 to prevent Protestants from having arms.  In fact, that law targeted poor people by requiring that the right to possess a firearm depended upon one’s amount of wealth. (Today Congress and States have an alternate strategy to exclude the poor. Their plan is to attach mandatory insurance premiums to the cost of a firearm. It will also be a money making scheme for insurance companies so they will lobby for new gun laws.)

The pattern for disarmament continued throughout the century for again in 1689 the English Parliament passed ‘an Act to disarm Catholics’. This was a discriminatory law directed at a group because of its religious orientation. The English Bill of Rights, 1689, ensured Protestant people the right to bear arms.  That bill was a discriminatory law which excluded other religious groups from having the right to bear arms.

Controversy blankets the 2nd amendment. Some will argue that the intent of the 2nd Amendment was to employ slave patrols.  That is true.  It was used for that purpose.  Another prevailing view of the 2nd amendment was not the fear of slave rebellion but of government oppression. That fear is legitimate; political history proves it.  However, there are no more slave patrols though there are evil people. More than 500,000 men died to stop slave patrols and like John Brown’s stand at Harper’s Ferry they died with guns in their hands.  And millions stand to sacrifice their blood again so that neither that peculiar institution nor any facsimile of it will ever rise again on this American soil. African slavery ended under the 13th amendment except for those convicted of a felony. The 2nd amendment stood strong and is necessary today for the evidence of corrupt government is as old as written history and persists today.  Therefore the 2nd amendment is as necessary today as it was when it was written.

U.S. Citizens ought to have the same anxiety today which citizens had at the founding of this nation. We ought to fear because of the identical, unchanged, and unchangeable nature of governments and people in government.  We ought to fear a professional army for within the next 20 years it will consist of at least 1/3 non U.S. citizen soldiers and thousands of militarized police in cities across the U.S. Those soldiers will utilize immigration policies euphemistically called ‘pathways to citizenship’. Our government intends to formulate law to allow illegal aliens to become citizens if they serve as mercenaries in the armed forces. (Keep in mind the Posse Comitatus Act which is/was a law preventing U.S. troops from engaging militarily within U.S. borders has been for all intents and purposes nullified by the wide spread spying on U.S. citizens by the National Security Agency and the deployment of U.S. troops for active service for the first time on American soil.)

Today, the movement to modify gun laws is directly at odds with the 2nd amendment and is meant to disarm African Americans and Hispanic people most of whom are poor. They will be most adversely affected by any new legislation coming out of Congress.  It is indirect discrimination against them.  Constitutional experts employed by Government know that a law which discriminates against a minority group indirectly and is not written in such a way as to intentionally discriminate against them would procedurally nullify to that minority group the standing needed to sue in federal court for discrimination.

We cannot allow such measures to become law; we must stand for our rights and specifically the right to bear arms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


[1] The Adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, by Horace Edgar Flack, Pub. Palladium Press, 2003

[2] Blackstone, Commentaries, 1:139, 140

[3] The Role Of The Militia In The Development Of The English’s Right To Be Armed—Clarifying The Legacy, Joyce Lee                 Malcolm, 5 J. on Firearms & Pub. Pol’y (1993)