By Jake MacAulay:
What are the two solutions for the recent disastrous usurpation of Californians’ elementary right to self-defense?
Fox News recently reported, “After postponing the order multiple times, the nation’s highest court rejected a review of Peruta v. California. In the case, gun rights activists argued that a ‘good cause’ requirement on concealed carry permits is too restrictive.”
At issue in this case is concealed carry and whether a county can define “good cause” to carry a weapon outside of one’s home as strictly as some California counties — specifically San Diego — do.
According to the San Diego Sheriff’s department, that “good cause” must be more specific than just a general concern for wellbeing; a person must list a precise fear, such as domestic violence or carrying a large amount of money.
A three-judge panel found the San Diego County Sheriff’s policy unconstitutional, but was reversed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Since the Supreme Court did not take the case, the 9th Circuit’s ruling appears to prevail.
If anyone is to begin discussing the topic of Americans’ right to bear arms we MUST understand it has never been the government’s responsibility to protect us as individuals.
What did you say, Jake?
That’s right. Courts have even ruled to support the fact that police are not responsible to protect individuals. If you call 911 and no police officer shows up and you or someone you know is vandalized, brutalized, or killed, you have no legal right to sue the police department for negligence.
You see, it has always been the people’s responsibility to protect themselves; the government’s responsibility is to protect the right of the people to protect themselves.
The promulgation of emotional ignorance has always been the tool to convince people to give up this right of self-preservation in favor of trusting that criminals will give up their crimes and that government can boundlessly protect you.
As seen in every single mass shooting, the government is completely incapable of protecting the citizenry from these kinds of attacks. If the people do not protect themselves, there is no protection. All “gun-control” laws fight or obstruct the people from protecting themselves.
What are the two solutions for this disastrous usurpation of Californians’ elementary right to self-defense?
First: It’s time to elect a new Sheriff who knows the Constitution!
Second: Acknowledge that these gun control measures are NOT law. They are what our founders called, in the Declaration of Independence, “pretended legislation”.
This God-given right given to all men to preserve their lives is codified into the Constitution, which is the Supreme Law of the Land. “The right of the people to keep (i.e. ownership) and bear (i.e. carry publicly) arms, shall not be infringed.”
I believe Americans need to call on sheriffs and police officers to declare their intention to uphold the law by refusing to enforce these measures. Moreover, Americans should ask these same oath-takers to keep the oaths they have sworn before God by actively protecting and defending us against those who would violate the law by seeking to enforce these vain enactments.
I leave you with this assertion of founding father Samuel Adams: “The Constitution shall never be construed … to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
Let me repeat, gun control measures ARE NOT law.
Learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.
© Copyright by Jake MacAulay, 2017. All rights reserved.