Rebuttal Email to Christian Science Monitor

I would like to begin with the deep and sincere sympathy and sorrow felt for those who lost their “babies” – little children who should not have suffered such cruel ends and those that survived be so traumatized. … 
Is it Mr. Zimmerman have a lack of knowledge of history or conveniently leaving out details when addressing historical facts? 
His “opinion” is full of holes … 
First … 

Yes, the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the “right to bear arms.” But that means individual citizens – as opposed to state militias – cannot carry (bear) firearms anywhere they want, someone forgot to tell our 19th-century forebears. As law professor Adam Winkler has found, 10 states passed laws in the 1800s barring the possession of concealed weapons. Mr. Winkler is an example that a sheepskin does not guarantee the ability to wield common sense. 

The 2nd Amendment (in full text): 

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

Zimmerman forgot the word “people” when he quoted “militia”, of which is made up Of the People, just as any nation is not a nation without people
In United States v. Cruikshank, 92 US 542 (1875) …The US Supreme Court held that gun control regulation was a state’s rights issue, and that the Second Amendment didn’t apply to the states. 
Yet, the 10th Amendment was ignored by the Supreme Court and the Second Amendment was “interpreted” incorrectly, just as Mr. Constitution lawyer, Adam Winkler… until recently, [ District of Columbia v. Heller] and that is how and why state governments began changing their attitude toward the Second Amendment and allowing citizens to “bear arms” as long as they met permit requirements. The Second Amendment applies to ALL citizens of the United States, and the 10th Amendment requires state governments to comply to the Constitution and its amendments as part of their membership within the union of states. 
Most citizens have no problem with the requirement to obtain a permit that includes a background check in order to “bear arms“. 

the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia. 

The militia, mentioned in the 2nd Amendment was because citizens could be called to arms to assist the US Army that had not been formed to the degree of taking over the defense of our early nation. The people militia is the last line of defense against foreign and domestic enemies. In addition, the People have the right to protect property, family, community, and self. If that brave principal at Newton who died trying to overtake that gunman had a firearm – the scenario would have been different. 
SECONDLY – Zimmerman states …

Adam Winkler has found, 10 states passed laws in the 1800s barring the possession of concealed weapons.

Winkler also uses Texas (1800s as an example. People back East in the cities thought nothing, in the 1800s of carrying a concealed revolver or derringer for protection as they walked the streets of the cities, some adding a cane for additional protection. In the western states, “frontier”, however, a man was not considered honest who carried a concealed weapon and thus the attitude that Winkler mentions, but left out the details. As all progressives do, they leave out details and only relay those quotations that match their ideology or advocacy. If Winkler were a true constitutionalist, he would not be trying to find loopholes in the Constitution like lawyers are taught to do in law school – thus my opposition of lawyers elected for political office. As a person of law, he should be safeguarding the Bill of Rights, not tailoring it to his personal convictions. However, I digress …
Cowboys and Aliens film image
Those 1800 laws did not affect those citizens that openly, in an open holster or on the saddle of their horse in a scabbard carry (bear) firearms – looked upon as dishonest individuals with intention to commit a crime.

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic.
Joseph Story

Mark Nuckols, also in Christian Science Monitor stated:

Year after year, 100,000 Americans are shot or killed in gun-related incidents. That is the equivalent of a war.

The FBI just released the 2011 report on death by firearm incidents, and unlike Mr. Nuckols separated murder by firearms (8,583 nationwide) with other incidents, but still does not come close to 100,000 American deaths by firearms and also shows murder by firearms by state. Maybe he got confused by the data chart that stated the rates are per 100,000 people. Which means out of 100,000 people, 1,220 firearms homicides occurred in California, one of the most restrictive gun control states. Colorado, where the movie theater massacre took place: 73 firearm homicides. The overall percentage of firearm homicides nationwide is 2.75, compared to firearms used in robberies at 39.25. There is not data in that report that shows firearms used in self-defense. And neither does the article Nuckols wrote or Zimmerman. Nuckols admits that firearm control is a political issue and in the next breath states that constitutionality of the Second Amendment is fictional:
Regulation of guns is in fact almost entirely a political issue, for which a wide range of politicians has dodged responsibility by hiding behind a fictional cover of constitutionality …
It is only recently that the Supreme Court overrode the 1800s decision and the myth that the Second Amendment does not state what it means –

the right of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

The Constitution was written so all Americans can understand, and Founders like Thomas Jefferson wanted assurance that American youth would be educated in order to understand it. The recent Supreme Court decision finally stated that the Second Amendment states what it means and that lawyers and others have constantly insisted to read into what is not in that simple paragraph – and blame groups like the NRA of misinterpretation as well as outlandish accusations of being a racist gun nut organization. The NRA promotes responsible handling of firearms in all circumstances, whether at the range or when carrying legally a concealed weapon. It also promotes that those who own firearms ensure that they know and understand basic safety procedures. I am a proud member of the NRA. I also vote and sign reasonable and responsible petitions to the federal government. More Americans need to self educate and become aware and involved of what is happening in Washington and their state legislature. What is legislated could affect their lives, freedoms, and liberties.
It is strange that citizens would try to “interpret” the Bill of Rights that was designed to guarantee citizens freedom and liberties. They complain about the Second Amendment, but say nothing of how citizens are denied the rights of the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment. They do not see that the Supreme Court decision aforementioned in the 1800s was against the Tenth Amendment – where citizens of the United States, living in every state of the Union are afforded the freedoms and liberties in the Bill of Rights and amendments of the US Constitution. State governments who are part of the United States cannot legally counter rights and liberties in the amendments. That is basically what the Supreme Court recently and finally decided correctly.
The same people who would water down or remove the rights of the Second Amendment say nothing about federal and state governments taking away property rights – not only rights insisted by the Founders, but a right of natural law. As long as a person with property does not violate the rights of other citizens – those rights should not be infringed.
The same goes for the misguided assumption that the NRA “rights” are a modern configuration. As an organization it is, but the NRA goals and policies are not. The following quotes from Founders will prove against the points that the Founders did not fathom what we hold dear today or recognize that the NRA insists upon constitutionality and does not read into the Constitution. In fact, Mr. Zimmerman is doing what he accuses the NRA of.

There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation.
James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788

They define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men.
John Adams, Novanglus No. 7, 1775

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, quoted by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book

The Second Amendment is the Palladium of all othersJoseph Story [Supreme Court Justice]

More recent comments:

Why does Rosie O’Donnell give others advice that she doesn’t find applicable to herself? . . . O’Donnell may be able to afford bodyguards and pride herself that she does not ‘personally own a gun.’ Yet many other people have just as great a need for protection. Guns are the poor man’s bodyguard. John Lott

The common citizens’ bodyguard is a rifle, shotgun, and/or handgun. Most of us cannot afford bodyguards. Indeed, if one falls in line with Zimmerman and Nuckols mindset, one could say that the Constitution does not state that citizens have the right to have a bodyguard. But that would be against common sense, something that has been lost in recent generations. 
The issue about these mass murders, that are truly horrifying, is about people, not firearms. We need to scrutinize society and find what produces people that would perform such horrendous actions – or even think in those line of thoughts. It is disturbing, just as those shooters are extremely disturbed. The witnesses and folks who knew Adam Lanza stated that there was something odd about him – yet he was not monitored (Nancy Lanza paid that mistake with her life) nor was it determined if Adam required some sort of psychological therapy. If Nancy knew those problems, her only blame is that the legal firearms were not secured where Adam could not get to them – like a firearm safe, which costs less than the firearms she owned. We the People are allowing politicians (and lawyers like Winkler) to play upon our emotions to justify taking away fundamental rights that human history shows that tyrants have ulterior motives in doing so.
The media states that it is not the time to discuss Adam’s mental condition, but certainly headlines knee-jerk reactions of outlawing home defense and sport weapons that are incorrectly called “assault weapons”.  Just as Adam should have been suspect before the shooting, so are the people suspect who side with those who are eager to take away rights of others to please their personal convictions. Firearms in the wrong hands can cause injury and death, as well as horrific occurrences like the movie theater, shopping mall, and against little innocent children in a school; but it does not justify taking firearms away from lawful citizens who use firearms responsibly – including defense of self and others. The media is just as much to blame as politicians because they only publicize and focus upon horrific incidents of unjustified and mass murder, and choose to ignore that every day many people are saved from violent ends or injuries by using firearms for defense. I am sick of brainwashing via media and government-controlled educational institutions, they have become tools of the Big Brother government instead of a means of accessing information and knowledge For the People and an instrument to ensure that government does not go beyond its limited powers clearly defined in the US Constitution. 

Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
Federal FarmerAnti-federalist Letter, No. 18, 1787

Wisconsin Constitutional Convention Delegate #004
Author/Publisher/Constitution Advocate:
Searching For Truth in a Sea of Misinformation

The White House and the Democratic operatives in OUR government are so hypocritical …
  • Attorney General Eric Holder stated: We have to ask ourselves some hard questions and talk about the freedoms that we have. This is the man who played the “I don’t know” character when asked “hard questions” by congressional committee investigating the Fast and Furious debacle. As Mark Alexander stated at Patriot Post:
Let’s start with some hard questions about why the Department of Justice was selling Mexican drug cartels the same types of weapons Obama now wants to ban. Another of those Fast and Furious weapons just turned up at a Mexican murder scene in November.
  • Not to let a tragedy go by without an opportunity to exploit it, President Obama after an emotional speech at Newton last week has used the incident in his continued fundraising. Fundraising? He has not begun his second term officially, and constitutionally he cannot run for a third term.
  • When giving an emotional speech to the Newton community, he stated:

Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

First, he is explicitly saying, as Bill Clinton did as president, that some freedoms must be lost for the “good of all”. I do not remember any mention of that in the talking points of the Federalist Papersor written into the Constitution – because it is not. The president and his political comrades have sponsored killing children the “pillar of their platform”, where 54 million children are sacrificed for their version of freedom of choice (which they only recognize when it comes to abortion, and disregard in other matters). Since 1973 that equates to a rate of 3,200 unborn infants every day – their life terminated mostly because of irresponsible sexual activities. 
Those that do not choose to murder unborn; expect the taxpayers to pay for their “entitlements” as they give birth via different fathers and remain unwed, raise their children in dysfunctional family scenarios.  Children raised in those family situations are certainly ripe for a life of crime, such as that which Obama and friends want to solve by taking away firearms from law abiding citizens, or at least limiting what they can purchase. I am certainly not saying that the Second Amendment guarantees that citizens should own things like rocket launchers, grenades, and automatic weapons (true assault weapons) – that ordinance reserved for the armed forces.
As Mark Alexander wrote:

According to the FBI, two-thirds of murders that involve guns were perpetrated with handguns. In fact, it’s pretty embarrassing for Feinstein that her own summary statement says that her ill-defined, so-called “assault weapons have been used in at least 459 incidents, resulting in 385 deaths and 455 injuries” since the ban ended, because that’s less than one-half of 1 percent of all gun deaths in that time period. Twice as many people are killed with an assailant’s hands, fists or feet — and almost five times as many with a knife — than with a rifle. Furthermore, the gun-death statistics that leftists tend to trot out are invariably skewed by gang-on-gang violence. Just this year in Chicago — Obama’s hometown and a city with the toughest gun restrictions in America — 62 young people between the ages of six and 18 have been murdered with guns — and nearly 500 people total. Not a word from Obama.

  • Obama and anti-firearm friends also did not put into the equation that the incident at Newton, and the one in Aurora, Virginia Tech, Columbine, et cetera, occurred in declared gun-free zones. Putting up such signs or restricting faculty or business employees from legally packing concealed firearms is certainly an advertisement to morons and mentally disturbed individuals like Adam Lanza that they can cause death and destruction without defense retaliation, at least until the law enforcement arrives. Sociopaths and criminals do not care about laws. When are the progressives and nut cases like Code Pink going to learn that crime will not be slowed or stopped by keeping the populace unprotected. Law enforcement invariably shows up AFTER death and destruction has occurred – there are no measures of prevention. Only armed, law-abiding citizens can prevent such occurrences – before the local law enforcement can respond. It is not any detrimental allegation against law enforcement, but merely facts. One of the biggest morons is Mayor Bloomberg, who is now attacking the integrity and responsible policies of the NRA. If anyone requires a mental screening or examination, it would be members of Code Pink – known for their violent protests while screaming for peace. Did you ever see such violence in Tea Party movement protests and rallies? The Democratic Party has been built upon hypocrisy from the days of the southern Democrats and their pro-slavery politics to today’s support of the social parasitic entity called labor unions. Their policies lead to money trails, yet they decry capitalism and free trade advocacy – and blame corporations for that which they are guilty as well.
When are American citizens going to learn that political parties do not deserve, nor should they receive, ultimate loyalty of voters – the Constitution is what every citizen of the United States has been tasked to protect. That task was given in return for the freedoms and liberties Americans are afforded, or at least those that still exist.
Nothing more sickening is to use a horrific incident like Newton and others for political and policy agenda – and worse, to gather campaign funding into their political club treasuries. Frankly, I am sick of both of the traditional two-party system. We need constitutionalist statesmen and stateswomen – not political prostitutes.
Word of advice: Do not vote for lawyers or politicians who point fingers elsewhere for blame and do not owe up to their own mistakes. They spend more time seeking scapegoats rather than solving the problem. 

It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worth cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst if he fails at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.
Theodore Roosevelt {speech given in Paris, 1910}