Tag Archives: America’s 1st Freedom

Why More Gun Laws Are Not The Answer

Posted on by

ConstitutionUS.com notes that the Declaration of Independence states the following:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

One of those unalienable rights is the right to self-defense. Our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution are based on the Law of Nature and of Nature’s God. That law includes the right of self-defense.  Currently, we are seeing a move by many in Congress to change the Second Amendment and to infringe on the rights of Americans to bear arms. There have been a number of incidents recently where someone who should not have had a gun murdered innocent people. That is unacceptable, but the problem is not the gun, and the solution lies in the area of mental health–not in the area of disarming legal gun-owners.

In its magazine  (America’s 1st Freedom) and on its website, The National Rifle Association (NRA) has a page of testimonies where a good guy with a gun prevented a bad guy with a gun from harming innocent people. These incidents are often (purposely) overlooked in the media and need to be acknowledged.

Volume 24, No. 4 of that magazine includes several examples:

In Des Moines, Iowa, on January 5, a man and woman repeatedly walked in front of the doors of a tower apartment building. The apartment manager, who had her young son at her side, finally opened the door to ask if there was a problem, whereupon the two strangers allegedly grabbed the child. The woman claimed she was the child’s real mother and tried to run away with him. A struggle ensued until the manager drew her firearm and said “let go of my kid.” The man and woman walked off and were trailed by security personnel until police officers could arrive. Police told reporters, “It certainly looks like the big turning point here, the pivotal piece to keeping her child safe was the fact that she was lawfully armed with a handgun.” The man and woman were charged with felony child stealing.

…At around 5 a.m. on January 18, a man came into a gas station in Avondale, Arizona, with his face covered, mumbled something about “rob” and “money,” and then pointed a gun at the clerk and at a customer. However, when the suspect became distracted by another customer, the clerk reportedly drew his own firearm and shot the assailant. The would-be robber was taken to a hospital in critical condition, and neither the clerk nor any customers were hurt in the incident. While mainstream-media accounts often quoted an employment attorney advising clerks against arming themselves, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has found that about two-thirds of workplace homicides involved robbers. “I’m not happy I had to shoot him,” the clerk told reporters, “But I’m not stressing. The moment he pulled the gun on me, he set the situation and I just followed it. He made the situation what it was.” Police indicated the clerk would not be charged.

How long does it take for the police to arrive? In both of these cases, would it have been too late? I don’t want America to become the wild, wild west, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that good guys with guns save lives.  We need more good guys with guns and less bad guys with guns. That will not be accomplished by laws that restrict gun ownership–bad guys don’t pay attention to laws. These two stories are only a fraction of the recorded incidents where lives were saved because someone legally carried a gun and spent enough time at the gun range to shoot accurately. Let’s encourage that behavior–not legislate against it.

It Could Happen Here

Posted on by

Yes, it could happen here. The December issue of America’s 1st Freedom includes an article by Gabby Franco, a former resident and Olympian from Venezuela. Ms. Franco chose to leave her family and country and come to America in 2004. In the article she explains what happened to change Venezuela from the richest country in South America to one of the poorest.

The article notes:

Venezuela is surrounded by paradisiacal turquoise waters in the north and an enigmatic rainforest in the south. There are no seasonal natural disasters—no hurricanes, tornados, blizzards or wildfires—such as there are in various areas of the United States. But an idea that the government should be given so much power that it could take away every right of the individual citizen—even their right to self-defense—did lead to the country’s ruination.

As a former citizen of Venezuela who became a U.S. citizen, I am now hearing many of the same things I heard in Venezuela from certain anti-Second Amendment politicians. I was an Olympic shooting competitor representing Venezuela and am now a lawful gun owner here in America. I don’t want to see this right being threatened again.

…Venezuela was once a place where people could find jobs, prosper, dream about their future and, with hard work, succeed, despite social and political issues. My parents were born in a rural town where there were not even flushing toilets until the late 1950s. My mom became a high-school teacher, and my dad was a machinist who dreamed of owning a machine shop. They married in the late 1970s and lived on my mom’s salary for several years as my dad built his business. They showed my siblings and me that dreams are possible with hard work and dedication.

During that time, law-abiding Venezuelans could own firearms and apply for a concealed-carry license. My father was an avid hunter who filled up the freezer with venison, duck, rabbit and any other animals he deemed tasty. Children could go to the gun range with their parents to practice the shooting sports.

…Hugo Chávez took power in 1999 and ruled the country via executive orders from the beginning. The terrible implications of his actions were palpable, as he aimed to take farmland away from its owners. Chávez did not waste time in pushing his socialist agenda, influenced by Fidel Castro, seeding hatred and envy amongst Venezuelans. I remember one time a person on a motorcycle stopped next to my dad’s SUV and spat on it. It was a symbolic gesture showing his hatred toward us for having a good vehicle. What this man did not know is that my parents were born poor but rose through their will and dedication.

Hugo Chávez’s actions did not go by unnoticed. A Cuban friend, whom I’ll call Jose, warned many of us at the gun range about Venezuela’s future under Hugo Chávez. These warnings were, as Gabriel Garciá Márquez wrote, a “chronicle of a death foretold.” It was indeed a hard pill to swallow for many, who often replied with something like: “That would never happen here. Venezuela is the richest country in the region. Venezuela is not an island like Cuba.”

Ms. Franco notes the danger to America:

I know it is hard to imagine that any of this could happen in America, but it is. The same divisive rhetoric I heard in Venezuela and then from Obama is used even more today. Venezuela’s current situation is the result of giving more power to the government, eliciting corruption, mismanagement and excessive spending; moreover, it was not an immediate change. Socialists took Venezuelans on a one-way journey to misery one step at a time. Unfortunately, I see America heading in that direction if we continue with the current socialist agenda that favors a powerful government, gun control, more regulations and a politicized justice system. Thus, it is imperative that Americans rally to preserve our Constitution and our nation by voting out anyone who wishes to undermine our constitutional rights.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It is chilling to hear her story and realize that the same thing could happen here.

 

A Subtle Way To Infringe On A Constitutional Right

Posted on by

“America’s 1st Freedom” is a magazine distributed by the National Rifle Association. I am not including a link to the article I am posting about because I can’t find the article electronically although it is in the April 2020 issue of the magazine.

The title of the article is “The New Gun-Control Activism.” It deals with the strategy those who oppose the right of Americans to own guns are using to limit the availability of guns to Americans.

The article notes:

Last year, for example, Connecticut State Treasurer Shawn Wooden, who commands $37 billion in public pension funds, announced plans to pull $30 million worth of shares from civilian firearm manufacturer securities. Wooden also intends to prohibit similar investments in the future and to establish incentives for banks and financial institutions to adopt anti-gun protocols. The proposition was immediately praised by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and other Connecticut politicians who view the divestment from five companies–Clarus Corp., Daicel Corp., Vista Outdoor Inc., Olin Corp., and ammunition maker Northrop Grumman–as a step toward reducing gun violence.

…Wooden also requested that financial bodies disclose their gun-related portfolios when endeavoring to wok with the treasurer’s office. Wooden subsequently selected tow firms, Citibank and Rick Financial Product (both had expressed the desire to be part of the “solution on gun violence”), to take on the roll of senior bankers in Connecticut’s then-forthcoming $890 million general obligation bond sale.

Technically I guess this is legal. It is a very subtle infringement on the Second Amendment and would be very difficult to prove in court. It is also not a new approach. During the Obama administration, the administration put in place guidelines that prevented gun dealers from getting business loans from banks.

On May 19, 2014, The New American reported:

Following the Obama administration’s “Operation Broken Trust,” an operation that began just months into his first term, the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force was created initially to “root out and expose” investment scams. After bringing 343 criminal and 189 civil cases, the task force began looking for other targets.

The task force is a gigantic interagency behemoth, involving not only the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI, but also the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the U.S. Postal Service, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and the U.S. Secret Service.

The next target for the task force was credit card payment processors, such as PayPal, along with porn shops and drug paraphernalia stores. In 2011, it expanded its list of “high risk” businesses to include gun shops. Peter Weinstock, an attorney with Hunton & Williams, explained:

This administration has very clearly told the banking industry which customers they feel represent “reputational risk” to do business with….

Any companies that engage in any margin of risk as defined by this administration are being dropped.

In 2012, Bank of America terminated its 12-year relationship with McMillan Group International, a gun manufacturer in Phoenix, and American Spirit Arms in Scottsdale. Said Joe Sirochman, owner of American Spirit Arms:

At first, it was the bigger guys — gun parts manufacturers or high-profile retailers. Now the smaller mom-and-pop shops are being choked out….

They need their cash [and credit lines] to buy inventory. Freezing their assets will put them out of business.

That’s the whole point, according to Kelly McMillan:

This is an attempt by the federal government to keep people from buying guns and a way for them to combat the Second Amendment rights we have. It’s a covert way for them to control our right to manufacture guns and individuals to buy guns.

With the Obama administration unable to foist its gun control agenda onto American citizens frontally, this is a backdoor approach that threatens the very oxygen these businesses need to breathe. Richard Riese, a senior VP at the American Bankers Association, expanded on the attack through the banks’ back doors:

We’re being threatened with a regulatory regime that attempts to foist on us the obligation to monitor all types of transactions.

All of this is predicated on the notion that the banks are a choke point for all businesses.

How you vote matters.