I haven’t posted much about the new laws that opponents of our freedoms are trying to push through Congress lately.  Honestly, I’ve been saving it for the right moment.  Yes, I’ve continued to contact my representatives in Congress, and I hope all of you have as well, but I tried to not become background noise.

It’s time to break that silence and ask you to either get with us or keep hammering at the Congress.

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill requiring universal background checks, introduced by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, on a party line vote yesterday.  He pinkie swears that the information that is gathered during these checks will never be used to create a national database of who owns what gun, but then again, they swore in 1934 that all they wanted to do was get machine guns and sawed off shotguns out of the hands of gangsters and they would never ask for anything ever again.  The same committee is scheduled to vote on a renewed and more stringent assault weapons ban on Thursday.

We need to pick this hill to die on, because there isn’t much room behind us to retreat into via compromise.  We either win this fight or we chance losing everything.  Compromise has never gained us anything, and it has taken too much from us already. 

My friends, it is time we cranked up the pressure on our servants in the House and Senate.  My senators are Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, and my representative is Thomas Massie.  I have written to all three of them, and the responses I got back from Senator Paul and Representative Massie were heartening.  The one I got from Senator McConnell, who is the leader of the Republican minority in the Senate, was less so.  I need to transcribe it and publish it here,but it was nowhere near the resounding “NO!” I heard from my other two representatives.  I’ll be contacting all three of them again, but I will be stressing to Senator McConnell how much I want him to change his focus and stop this legislation.

I urge all of you to do the same. Those who stand with us need to know that we support them in great numbers.  Those who are wavering need to know how the ground lies with their constituents so that they will make the right choice.  Those that oppose us need to know the sleeping giant they have kicked in the shin is up, is angry, and will remember this when the polls open again in 2014 and 2016.

Email, call, and visit your representatives.  Be polite, be professional, but be firm.  Not one step back.

Vice-President Biden appears to be showing a bit of frustration at us plebs who refuse to get in line and support his boss when it comes to gun control.  He seems amazed that we would have the temerity to question their motivations when it comes to infringements on our civil rights, and opines that we don’t ‘need’ an AR-15 to protect ourselves or to have fun.  It appears that he’s forgotten that my ‘need’ for any legal object that I want is my desire for it.  That’s why it’s called a ‘right’.  I don’t have to demonstrate a ‘need’ to exercise my rights in order to do so.  You’d think that someone who’s sucked at the government teet for so many decades, supposedly in support of the Constitution, would know that.

Here’s a few other things someone doesn’t need:

• One doesn’t ‘need’ government funded country retreats, wide body jets, gourmet chefs, and a staff of hundreds to be the chief executive and his head gofer/comedy relief/anti-assassination insurance, especially during a time of economic stagnation, but rank hath its privileges, huh, Mr. Biden?
• One doesn’t ‘need’ armies of armed troops, military or not, to protect two men, their wives, and their children, for the rest of their natural lives, just because they failed their way into a temporary government job for a few years, but I don’t see you two giving that one up, do I?
• And, yes, one doesn’t ‘need’ an Ar-15, FAL, AK clone, Saiga shotgun, M&P pistol, or an assault slingshot for protection and recreation, but if your mother had raised you right and taught you to read something more in depth than the wrapper on your bubble gum, you’d know that how I choose to enjoy my rights and protect my family are none of your damned business, now wouldn’t you?

I’m glad to know that Mr. Biden believes in the bottom of his heart that no-one is going to try to take away his shotguns, so at least there seems to be a level of gun control that even he won’t countenance.  Let’s just say that some of us paid attention in history and math class, and we can see where this downward leaning curve is taking us:

• When my grandfather came to this country, a citizen could own pretty much any firearm he wanted to and could afford.  Heck, the best names in mail-order had entire sections devoted to shotguns, rifles, and pistols that the nice man on the Wells Fargo wagon would bring right to your doorstep.
• When my father was born, a citizen could legally buy a gun at the hardware store, that gun could be carried just about anywhere in the country without being afoul of the law, and the government actively advocated the teaching of gun safety and marksmanship to children.
• When I was born, a citizen could legally purchase a brand new machine gun for a few hundred dollars, my cousins drove to school with guns in the gun rack of their trucks, and the Boy Scouts taught gun safety with BB guns in the basement of my elementary school.

With each successive generation, our right to keep and bear arms has been progressively narrowed and weakened.  Reasonable compromises have been the death of our rights.  I’m tired of being reasonable.  I’m sick of compromising just a little more.  The past few generations have been perfectly willing to passively watch as their rights have dwindled, but I won’t.

Mr. Vice-President, I would oppose the measures you and your ilk are proposing if George Washington himself was to rise from the grave and propose them.  I will oppose you through my representatives in Congress and my legislature here in Kentucky.  I will oppose you in the courts through the NRA, the SAF, and other organizations who stand up to litigate away any gains you make in this push to strip me of my rights.  And I will wave the bloody shirt of gun rights in your face in 2014, 2016, and for the rest of my natural life.

You, the President, and the rest of your band of semi-accomplished twits have picked this fight.  You have made radicals out of moderates, and pushed people who were lukewarm about guns into the markets of firearms and of ideas.  You have sewn this garden of thorns, and I will weep with joy as you are whipped with them.  I don’t ‘need’ to watch your utter failure and humiliation in the Congress, the ballot box, and the courts, but it will be very sweet to do so.

A few months a go, the federal courts found that the state of Illinois has been acting unconstitutionally when it gives its citizens no legal manner in which to carry a firearm outside of their homes.  Illinois is the only state with no provisions for legal carry.  The court gave the state 180 days to pass a law that regulates this constitutionally protected behavior, and apparently the state legislature has been arguing how many dead voters can dance on the head of a pin ever since.  In other words, business as usual seems to be happening in Springfield.

Something novel happened the other day, though.

But Paul Castiglione, policy director for the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office, told lawmakers there is no need for a new law.

“Only the Illinois Supreme Court can declare a statue from (the legislature) unconstitutional,” Castiglione told lawmakers Tuesday. “I heard (someone) say that after 180 days our UUW (unlawful use of weapon) statute is unconstitutional. Not so.”

Did y’all get that?  A lawyer who represents one of the largest cities in the country believes that only the courts of a state have the authority to rule on the constitutionality of a law passed by that state’s legislature.  I’m guessing things like Brown v. Board of Education, or maybe Roe v. Wade, or maybe McDonald v. Chicago mean nothing to him.  I’m no lawyer, but I’m pretty sure we settled the supremacy of the federal Constitution over a century ago.

But this raises a good point.  Let’s say that Chicago ignores the courts on this issue, whether or not the legislature passes a new law.  People found carrying a gun in Cook County are arrested and possibly even imprisoned.  The local government continues its obstinacy, defying the federal courts.

What recourse do those who are harmed by this have?

Do you think the Holder Justice Department is going to lift a finger to file a civil rights complaint?   Do you think that Obama and his minions will enforce contempt citations drawn up by the federal courts if they are against his most intimate political allies and in relation to gun rights?

What happens to our system of Constitutional jurisprudence when those with powerful friends defy it and those charged with executing its laws ignore it?

This is, to me, a chilling prospect.  A precedent of ignoring the courts’ interpretations of the Constitution and, by so doing, the Constitution itself, with no repercussions will lead to others ignoring it, and eventually its rending and destruction.  I know that sounds melodramatic, but to me, it’s true.  Our system is not based on territory, or blood, or culture, but on trust.  We must trust that the Constitution is the overarching law of the land, and that the authority of the Judiciary will be enforced by the Executive.  Anything else will be a boost of speed in a death spiral that we cannot survive as a republic.

I pray that calmer minds prevail in Illinois.  Provoking a Constitutional crisis is a dangerous thing, and I fear that even should those who hold the Constitution dear prevail, we will not survive the damage it causes.

Well, the wave of anti-gun rights legislation has struck the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

First, we have SB 92, which seems to be OK, but has a section that would have made automatic weapons, SBR’s and SBS’s, and “plastic fantastics” illegal.  I wrote this to my state senator, Julie Denton:

Dear Senator Denton,

It was with some disappointment that I read section 2 of SB 92, which would amend KRS chapter 237 to make it a felony to possess automatic weapons, short-barreled shotguns and rifles, and any notional firearms which can be made transparent to security apparatus such as an X-Ray.

While the rest of the bill seems to be in line with the duty of the Commonwealth to protect the rights of its citizens and keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, section 2 does nothing that will increase security and safety in the Commonwealth.

– Fully automatic firearms are already heavily regulated items, and possession of one without going through an extensive criminal background check or owning one manufactured since 1986 is already a felony.  In addition, they are rarely, if ever, used in crimes in the Commonwealth.

–  Owners of automatic weapons tend, in the vast majority, to be law abiding citizens who have a rather expensive hobby.  In addition, events such as the Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot bring in hundreds, if not thousands, of tourists to the Louisville area every year, along with their money.  Making automatic weapons illegal in the Commonwealth would make the law-abiding citizens who own them divest themselves of an investment that cost them thousands of dollars, and drive tourism dollars away from the Commonwealth without having any positive impact on safety or security.

– Ownership of a short barreled rifle or shotgun also requires that the buyer undergo an extensive criminal background check.  Possessing such a firearm without going through proper procedures is already a felony, so adding this law will do nothing that will increase safety and security to the Commonwealth.

– I challenge the authors and sponsors of this poorly thought-out piece of legislative tripe to give me a commonly found example of a firearm, assembled or disassembled, that does not have enough metal in it to set off a metal detector or be seen on the X-Ray machine at an airport or a courthouse.  Even modern pistols that have bodies made with polymers still have a large amount of their parts, including the barrel and chamber, made out of steel.  The existence of weapons that will not show up in security systems is a myth that has been thrown around by anti-rights extremists since the 1980s and they have yet to show an example of such an object.

I respectfully request that you work to have section 2 of SB 92 removed from the bill, and if it is not, to vote against it in the event that it comes to a vote on the floor of the Senate.  Our rights, both those that deal with firearms and others, have already had enough abuse.  We should not be restricting them further.

Respectfully,

Daddy J. Bear

——————————

Not to be outdone, the House has also had a bill, HB 265, introduced that will require universal background checks, “safe” storage,  and a plethora of other anti-rights measures.  I wrote this to my Representative, Ron Crimm:

Dear Representative Crimm,

Daddy J. Bear

——————————

If you’re in Kentucky, now’s the time to make your voice heard.

Below is the response by Senator Rand Paul to my emails thanking him for his support of Second Amendment rights and opposition to anti-gun legislation:

January 28, 2013

Dear Mr. DaddyBear,

Sincerely,

Rand Paul, MD
United States Senator

President Obama is complaining that the Republican majority in the House of Representatives is not willing to compromise on his anti-gun rights agenda, and opines that the Republicans are not listening to public opinion on the matter.  He again states that he has a lot of respect for the Second Amendment.  He says that he understands the traditions of hunting that most rural families have, but that the realities of how guns are handled in urban settings must trump such things.  Surprisingly, he asserts that he has used a gun in the past, and regularly shoots skeet at Camp David.

Mr. President, those things mean precisely diddly over squat to me.  Hunting, skeet, and the inability of your urban constituency to raise a generation of people who don’t maim and murder each other at will have nothing to do with my right to keep and bear arms.  To be perfectly blunt, my right to keep and bear arms is there so that when someone who holds your office decides to rule rather than govern, then people like me will have the instruments to contest that decision.

My gun rights aren’t for hunting deer or shooting skeet.  They’re for hunting dictators and shooting tyrants.  Until you learn the difference, the fact that you can knock a clay out of the sky and mourn the death of urban youths at the hands of other urban youths is worth nothing.

To the pro-rights crowd in Congress – Keep it up.  If the President is having to turn to his lap dogs in the media and whine, then you must be doing what I and millions of other gun owners have been telling you to do for the past several months.  Thank you and please keep up the good work.

Today, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, showed her hand in the latest round of the anti-rights fight that has been brewing in this country since 1934.  In a shameless attempt to capitalize on the murder of children in order to further her radical and absolutist anti-gun agenda, she is proposing the most sweeping, permanent gun control legislation I have ever seen.

Her new gun control bill would

• Require “safe storage” – Because who would want to be able to get to their gun in a hurry, even if there are no children in the home?
• Provide federal money for gun buy backs – Because they’ve been so successful so far. 
• Prohibit the manufacture and transfer of magazines that can carry more than 10 cartridges. – Because no-one could manufacture a piece of folded sheet metal or molded plastic in their garage.
  
• Classify 150 gun types by name as “assault weapons”, such as the popular AR-15 rifle platform. – Because no-one will think to call it an AyeAre-20 or a Russky Model 1947.
• Further classify other semi-automatic guns that have a detachable magazine and have any of the following features:
  • Pistol grip – Because being able to hold the gun securely against your shoulder is evil.
  • Forward handguards and heat shrouds –Because holding your gun steady and not burning your hand is evil
  • Threaded barrels – Because compensators, flash hiders, and gun mufflers are evil.
  • Adjustable stocks – Because having a gun that I can adjust so that both I and Girlie Bear can shoot is evil.
  • Grenade launcher or rocket launcher – Ummm, yeah, whatever.  You know, I have to get a bigger safe because all of my rifles have that big honking grenade launcher on it, and that RPG-7 that goes on a Picattinny rail is so sweet.
• Ban the manufacture, sale, or transfer of new ‘assault weapons’ – Because they’re evil.
• Require that the transfer of existing ‘assault weapons’ go through the same process and cost as are currently done for short-barreled rifles and shotguns, machine guns, and suppressors.  – Because people who want to let others own their guns are evil.
• Have no sunset –  Because a law that requires you to think about its impact after a few years is evil.

Ladies and gentlemen, here are the best examples of an ‘assault weapon’, as classified under Senator Feinstein’s bill, that I could find:

Friends and neighbors, both of those semi-automatic rifles use detachable magazines.  Both have forward grips, and the 10/22 has a threaded barrel.  By the definition of Senator Feinstein and her ilk, they are ‘assault weapons’, and would be treated in the same manner that this is when it comes to civilian ownership:

Of course, we all know that passing this bill into law will make all the bad things in the world go away, and eventually the ‘grandfathered’ guns will wear out or get seized.  Human nature will change, and criminals and crazy people will respect the new gun laws in the same manner they already respect the laws against murder, theft, and rape.

Now, they can’t hide behind the excuse that they don’t want to keep us from exercising our rights.  Now they can’t say that all they want to do is take away AR-15’s and AK-47’s.  They’ll classify the deer rifle with walnut furniture that you inherited from your grandfather in with my modern sporting rifle just to make life as miserable for gun owners as they can.  Their intent is fully in the open.  At best, they want to be able to dictate to us what our rights are, how we may exercise them, and allow them to dwindle with age and wear until all we have left is those rights they choose to allow us to exercise.

If you haven’t gotten angry yet, what in the name of all that is holy are you waiting for?  Get off your butt, get in touch with your senator and representative, and tell them exactly how you feel.  Just for kicks and grins, here is a list of United States Senators who are up for re-election in 2014, and of course the entire House of Representatives is up for a job review then too.  If your legislator is on the fence about this, don’t be shy to remind them about that.  Support organizations like NRA and SAF, which are at the forefront of fighting these laws in the legislatures, Congress, and the courts.

Hammer this message home:  No compromise.  No retreat.  Not one step back.

Senators Feinstein and Schumer, Mayor Bloomberg, and President Obama, thank you for finally stepping out of the shadows and being honest and open about what you want and what you’re willing to do in order to get it.  You can propose so many laws and make so many emotional appeals that they block out the sun, but we will fight you in the shade.  Molon Labe.

This is the response to the emails about gun legislation that I sent to  Congressman Thomas Massie, who became my Representative after redistricting last year.  I must say, I’m happy to hear what he has to say.  It’s much better than what I would have gotten from Yarmuth.

Dear Mr. DaddyBear,

Thank you for contacting me about the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you.

On December 14, 2012, our nation experienced an unspeakable tragedy in Newtown. My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims, as well as to their families and loved ones. Now is the time to reflect on how we can best prevent acts like this in a way that does not violate our Second Amendment rights.

In response to this tragedy, several pieces of legislation are expected to be introduced in the 113th Congress by gun control advocates. For example, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein has already announced her plan to introduce a renewal of the “assault weapons” ban.

President Obama has announced his own gun control agenda.   His plan calls for various legislative proposals and threatens to implement twenty-three “executive actions.” These include the passage of a federal gun trafficking law, and background checks on all gun sales. I oppose such gun control proposals because they are unconstitutional, and they do not keep Americans safe.

I will work vigorously to defend the rights of gun owners.  The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not principally about hunting or recreation.  In fact, the Second Amendment to our Constitution is our Founding Fathers’ restatement of our natural God-given right to defend life, liberty, and property.

I’m a decade-long concealed carry permit holder and Class III firearms collector.  When I was twelve years old, my father bought me my first gun, an H&R .410 shotgun.  In the course of hunting in the woods of Kentucky, he taught me the great responsibility that comes with ownership of a firearm.  Now that I am a father of four, I enjoy teaching these same lessons to my children through hunting and target practice.

On January 3rd, I introduced H.R. 133, the Citizens Protection Act of 2013. This bill would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. Gun-free zones prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves, and create vulnerable populations that are targeted by criminals.

In the coming weeks, I will discuss with my colleagues and constituents the best ways to combat horrendous acts of violence without violating the Second Amendment.  I value your input and will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress debates these issues.

Sincerely,

Thomas Massie
Member of Congress