A Veterans Day Tale of Woe
This unpleasant experience began with a simple inquiry: Were we coming to the banquet honoring veterans, being held at the local high school?
I had previously declined a Tea Party invitation to speak at this venue, asking promoters: How can we celebrate Liberty when the law makes us felons if we don’t agree to void our Second Amendment rights? (It’s a third degree felony in Texas to bring a firearm into a school’s premises.)
I expressed doubt about attending, based upon this reflection.
Their response was that this was “not so much celebrating liberty as it is recognizing those who have served in our military.”
But how can the two be separated? The mental compartmentalization resulting from rationalizing is a great concern of mine. Experience has taught that humans are not so much rational as rationalizing.
My reply: Veterans offered their lives to protect our once-in-history Constitution that actually acknowledges Divinely-endowed inalienable rights, and that the government is supposed to serve the People. Why should we then turn around and let the government tell us we are the servants, and that we may not enjoy the God-given rights that so many gave their lives to preserve? I cannot in good conscience support such a dishonor against those who have honor, foisted upon us by those without honor in the name of safety and security. We either honor the words of the Founders and reject the illusion that the government, even if it wanted to, could provide security at the expense of Liberty, or we dishonor those who served to uphold those Founding principles.
Unfortunately, they chose to label themselves Patriot–implying I’m not–and tell me that considering my attitude, my presence “would be an insult to those who served.”
Disheartened, I submitted to the Oath Keepers for judgment on the matter.
Stewart Rhodes, Oath Keepers’ Founder and President, replied:
It’s disgusting and disturbing to have an event supposedly honoring veterans for their service “in defense of freedom” but also insisting that they disarm when they attend the event. Public schools are now nothing more than little Petri dishes of how the elites would like our whole nation to be – Bill of Rights free zones where only those in official power have the full rights of citizens, including the right to bear arms.
It’s a sad day, when we start rationalizing to justify support for government infringement of our God-given, Constitutionally-acknowledged, and honor-defended Liberty.
Except of course that law does not void the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms; just because you cannot carry a weapon everywhere does not mean you cannot own and carry a weapon anywhere, or at all.
It’s a really sad day when an extremist position is conflated with a sincere understanding of a right and a reasonable respect for a State’s responsibility to it’s citizens, and then used to attack and insult those holding an event to honor those who fought for all of our rights.
Yes, it’s a really sad day when the extremist position that the government knows what’s best is supported by statist wannabes who still believe that the state has any sense of responsibility to citizens. Before you post comments like yours, please review Supreme Court cases like Castle Rock v Gonzales and Deshaney v. Winnebago. You would have learned that state bureaucracies and police have no duty to protect.
Also, veterans took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, as did politicians. Only one group takes the oath seriously. Guess which one?
And yes, the law does void Second Amendment rights. Nowhere in the Second Amendment does it say the right to keep and bear arms can be infringed.
As I said, it isn’t being infringed; just because you cannot carry arms everywhere does not mean you cannot carry them anywhere.
Property rights still exist. The 2nd Amendment does not recognize a right to carry arms onto private property.
Only rampaging anarchists like those in the OWS movement believe that there can be no limitations on the use of public property. Just as the government can pass a reasonable restriction on the use of public parks it can pass reasonable restrictions on carrying arms into areas where they can have a disproportionate effect.
That includes places like courthouses, where weapons can present an immediate threat of intimidation against jurors and officers of the court to the detriment of the process of justice.
It can include places like state houses, where weapons can present an immediate threat of intimidation against lawmakers to the detriment of the process of government.
And it can include places like schools, where the government has custodial authority, and can reasonably prohibit the carrying of weapons among children.
Of course some people, particularly those inclined to strawmen arguments regarding the actions of police, or the hubris of those who pretend some private group who’s views have no legal sanction or authority must automatically be given greater credence in any discussion, will come up with various contortions insisting they can exercise a custodial authority to keep armed individuals away from their children but government is somehow prohibited.
It is usually those same individuals who forget that the 2nd Amendment bars Congress from passing such laws, not the several States, and that further only the much despised 14th Amendment permits any application of that to the States. But then why would knowledge of the Constitution be particularly important when pledging to defend it?
Of course this all begs the greater, simpler, fact that it is indeed possible to honor veterans while not carrying weapons.
Boy, where’s your disconnect? The People are the government. Or are you of the mind that the government rules the People? In that case, what are those humanoids occupying government positions?
“It is usually those same individuals who forget that the 2nd Amendment bars Congress from passing such laws, not the several States, and that further only the much despised 14th Amendment permits any application of that to the States.”
Thank you for publicly noting your racism regarding the 14th. And also your ignorance regarding the history and utility of the 14th in ensuring that the inalienable rights of the Bill of Rights are respected by the states. Heller and McDonald are only the latest in a series of Supreme Court rulings regarding that point.
Or are you going to ignore my Supreme Court rulings references again so you can repeat yourself again?
Carrying weapons isn’t the point here. It’s the laws regarding them that is the issue. Strawman yourself.
Every Veteran who swore that Oath to the Constitution has given something of himself for this great country. All gave some, some gave all.
Every Veteran holds a God-given unalienable right to bear his arms wherever he goes.
Every damned-by-God so-called “law” which would prevent any Veteran, or any American for which the Veteran fought, from carrying his personal defense weapon either openly or concealed as he prefers, in any place whatsoever within the borders of the United States of America, is an abomination cast upon the spirit of this nation’s Founding Fathers and the Constitution.
To think otherwise is to admit that one has fallen victim to the massive programming and conditioning brain-wash hypnosis issued by the Federal government, referred to as “Feducation”, to keep Americans from claiming their rightful heritage and Constitution-protected rights to keep and bear arms.
It says, “…shall not be infringed.” There are no exceptions, no qualifiers, no way around the clearly written words of the document all Veterans swear an Oath to uphold and defend. Every damned so-called “law” written after the 2nd Amendment was ratified is an infringement, and were that not so there would be no laws regarding the keeping and bearing of arms.
It is impossible to honor one’s Veterans while at the same time slapping them in the face with some unfounded, unlawful, immoral, and un-Constitutional prohibition against attending, on Veterans Day no less, a ceremony purportedly to honor Veterans. The Orwellian New-Think which is apparent in the minds of anyone who disagrees with this is just that – a pathology and an obvious sign that Feducation has claimed yet another American citizen’s mind.
Howard, thank you for standing for the right principle. Never mind the state-worshipping fools who would bow their knees to Caesar in clear opposition to the U.S. Constitution. As a Vietnam Veteran, USMC, 1966 and 1967, and as an officer in Oath Keepers, I stand with you proudly.
No other interpretation of reality fits. Ask those who’ve gone “home”.
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2011/11/11/tim-mcgraw-if-youre-reading-this/
I will be posting your excellent article on the front page at Oath Keepers’ national website, where Veterans of every stripe can see it. Thank you for being the kind of American every Veteran was willing to fight for.
Salute!
Elias Alias, Oath Keepers Board of Directors; President, Montana Oath Keepers
Every Veteran who swore that Oath to the Constitution has given something of himself for this great country. All gave some, some gave all.
Every Veteran holds a God-given unalienable right to bear his arms wherever he goes.
Every so-called “law” which would prevent any Veteran, or any American for which the Veteran fought, from carrying his personal defense weapon either openly or concealed as he prefers, in any place whatsoever within the borders of the United States of America, is an abomination cast upon the spirit of this nation’s Founding Fathers and the Constitution.
To think otherwise is to admit that one has fallen victim to the massive programming and conditioning brain-wash hypnosis issued by the Federal government, referred to as “Feducation”, to keep Americans from claiming their rightful heritage and Constitution-protected rights to keep and bear arms.
It says, “…shall not be infringed.” There are no exceptions, no qualifiers, no way around the clearly written words of the document all Veterans swear an Oath to uphold and defend. Every so-called “law” written after the 2nd Amendment was ratified is an infringement.
It is impossible to honor one’s Veterans while at the same time slapping them in the face with some unfounded, unlawful, immoral, and un-Constitutional prohibition against attending with their personal guns – on Veterans Day no less – a ceremony purportedly to honor Veterans. The Orwellian New-Think which is apparent in the minds of anyone who disagrees with this is just that – a pathology and an obvious sign that Feducation has claimed yet another American citizen’s mind.
Howard, thank you for standing for the right principle. Never mind the state-worshipping fools who would bow their knees to Caesar in clear opposition to the U.S. Constitution. As a Vietnam Veteran, USMC, 1966 and 1967, and as an officer in Oath Keepers, I stand with you proudly.
No other interpretation of reality fits. Ask those who’ve gone “home”.
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2011/11/11/tim-mcgraw-if-youre-reading-this/
I will be posting your excellent article on the front page at Oath Keepers’ national website, where Veterans of every stripe can see it. Thank you for being the kind of American every Veteran was willing to fight for.
Salute!
Elias Alias, Oath Keepers Board of Directors; President, Montana Oath Keepers
While I am a huge supporter of any American that has voluntarily put themselves in harm’s way in service of our country, I have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Nemerov’s point about our military defending our constitutional freedoms.
Technically, our constitutional freedoms are only protected by our judicial system, by our right to vote, and in the end our right to bear arms. If the federal government chooses to infringe on citizens’ constitutional rights (which now happens on a regular basis), the only recourse they have is a challenge through the court system. The military will not be employed to protect the constitutional rights or freedoms of an individual citizen or group of citizens within the US borders. And sadly, the activist and statist attitudes of many of our current federal jurists makes a protection of one’s constitutional rights in court unlikely.
The function of the US military is, in theory, defense of US lands against foreign aggression. The US military has rarely been used for such events. More typically, the US military has been employed to wage war on foreign soils for purposes of defeating those with hostile intent towards the US, our national interests, or occasionally hostile intent towards our allies.
Ironically, when one enters the US military they take an oath to protect the constitution while at the same time agreeing to surrender much of their personal freedoms while serving (freedom of speech, freedom of association, right to trial by jury, etc.). In a cruel twist of fate, our federal elected officials also take a similar oath to protect the constitution upon assuming office. While the military takes that oath seriously, the President and Congress blatantly ignore it.
As our founding fathers proclaimed, we are a nation of laws and not of men. In spite of how most liberals behave, we cannot pick and choose which laws to abide by. And I appreciate the fact that our combat veterans understand this. If I were asked to speak in tribute to our brave combat veterans on a day that honors them, I would give up one of my constitutional rights for a few hours, since that’s exactly what they did in service to our country.
This highlights the disconnect between ideology and reality, as I tried to examine in this post. For one thing, you are welcome to your ideology, as long as it doesn’t infringe on others’ rights. However, it does, because when those who want to rule us read comments like yours, they see that they are succeeding in conditioning us for more infringement. It justifies their lies that they are making us safer, when they know they are not. But it’s a facile excuse to return us to feudalism with our help.
Second, reality itself negates your ideology. See my newest post on the latest fallout from the Fort Hood Massacre. We’re still paying for politicians’ decisions to do just what you say they do in the military: require enlistees to forfeit rights.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/11/13/fort-hood-massacre-taxpayers-pay-again-for-government-infringement-of-second-amendment/
So you see, even though you may be justified in your thoughts, there is a bigger picture, and wrong or right, your ideology contributes to it.