America and the Deathly Hallows

There is a scene in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 where the heroes are closing in on the relics of the villain’s (Voldemort) power, the Horcruxes:

Harry Potter: “He knows.  You-know-who.  He knows we broke into Gringotts.  He knows what we took, and he knows we’re hunting horcruxes.”

…

“Well, he’s angry, and scared too.  He knows if we find and destroy all the horcruxes, we’ll be able to kill him.  I reckon he’ll stop at nothing to make sure we don’t find the rest.”

…

Ron Weasley: “Maybe it’s the horcruxes.  Maybe he’s growing weaker.  Maybe he’s dying.”

Harry Potter: “No. No, it’s more like he’s wounded.  If anything, he feels more dangerous.”

This scene came back to me when I was reviewing some stories about the shenanigans the Regime is going through right now.  I was thinking, they are getting desperate.  They can feel the power slipping through their fingers.  All their policies…all their interventions…all their overreach and narrative is failing spectacularly right before their eyes…and the masses are waking up to it in alarming (for them) numbers.

In this context, the “horcruxes” are their lies, distortions, pseudo-intellectual narratives that have blinded large  segments of the population and unnaturally extended their political lives.  Like Voldemort, the Regime has their own useful idiots…true believers…Death Eaters.  These are the ones in the press and celebrity classes (Ministry of Magic) that do the bidding of the Regime without question, and without any intellectual curiosity at all.  These too are getting rather shrill in their rhetoric.

To those of us who have not been blinded, or who have recently woken from the spell, this may all seem good…and it may be.  But I worry that they may just be “wounded”…”more dangerous.”  Like a cornered animal, they may do anything to maintain their power.  Here is, perhaps, where we have to be most careful.  They have shown over and over that the Constitution means nothing to them, or if anything, a barrier that must be hurdled.  We also know that the Regime has run false flag operations on foreign soil (Iran in 1953 to overthrow elected president), and have at least considered it on our own soil (Operation Northwoods).  Who knows they may do to keep their power in tact.

I hope, which at my level is about all I can do, that the mid-term elections are a huge setback to the Regime’s power.  Hope, however, is not a strategy.  People of good will, who really seek the good of society, need to stand up and be heroic to bring to light the horcruxes left…to take away the power of the lies, by shedding light on what is really happening.  This will not be easy, or without risk, but our freedom stands in the balance.

Nullification: The Rightful Remedy

 

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act.  In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a Federal, and not a National constitution." - James Madison, "Federalist 39"

The United States (Plural) of America are not a Nation (singular state), but a Confederation, at least as it was originally conceived and was codified in it's founding documents.  Unfortunately, however, we have been taught a false history of this founding for more than the last 100 years.  Today we are told that the States are subordinate to the Federal Government, when this is the opposite of the U. S. Constitution's intent. It was the States, after all,  that formed the central government and gave it a "few and defined" set of powers.  The States that created the Federal government, and not the other way around.

The States need to remember their true place in the scheme of our system.  They are to be a key check against the power of an over-reaching central government.  This was the common understanding among the founding States and was spelled out in 1798 by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions:

"[T]his Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the Federal Government, as resulting from the compact, to which the States are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact as no further valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the States who are parties thereto, have the right, and are duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them."  ~ The Virginia Resolution of 1798 

“Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non fœderis) to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them.” – The Kentucky Resolution of 1798

It is time, and well past time, for States to reclaim and reassert their sovereignty!  A key method of doing this is by directly nullifying unconstitutional Federal laws and policies.

Here are some videos on the subject of Nullification by Dr. Thomas E. Woods:

This one is only just under 3 minutes...

If that video served to whet your appetite for more information, here is a longer, more in-depth video:

And, if you would like to poke some fun at the mainstream mass of uneducated zombies who none-the-less feel empowered to spew the same old talking points on nullification, here is Interview with a Zombie:

Dr. Woods' book, Nulification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century

For more reading on the balance of power proscribed in the Constitution, here is a compilation of previous blog posts on the subject: The Federalism Series - A Primer

China's Strangle Hold on High-Tech Manufacturing

 

Why is China so dominate in high-tech manufacturing?  Is it because of cheap labor?  No.  It is because the West has ceded the Rare Earths market to them, and now they demand that manufacturing gets done in their country. Rare Earth elements are vital in the creation of high-tech electronics from smart phones and computers to defense industry.

The United States and other western powers must rebuild our Rare Earths capabilities, or be held hostage to the whims of the communist government of China.

Here are two videos that lay out the issues:

The False Flag of Socialism

I believe that there has never been a Socialist government...or Communist, for that matter. Communism and Socialism are just false flag operations. They offer the pretty promises to take care of the "regular people," to make things "fair," to destroy the dragon of the day (Robber Barons, The 1%, Racists, etc.). But, these systems have never, and can never work. Why? It is quite simple: people will not willingly work hard to take care of other people's families. I'm not talking about voluntary charity, but having the fruits of their labor taken for the "common good." 

The only way to make such a system work is there must be force applied by someone, some body to enforce this wonderful vision. This becomes the Central Planners...The "Experts," "Technocrats," "Intellectuals," or the "Educated."  These are the ones who presume to know best what you need to do, and how you need to live.  And, since they are the deciders, they always place themselves above the system's requirements...they always use the force to accrue power to themselves. To get this power in the beginning, though, they must paint themselves as righteous crusaders of the people...but it is a lie. It is all about central power. All of these governments are "Statist" in reality...but you're not supposed to look behind the curtain.

Anatomy of a Panic

UPDATE:  Just to be clear, when I speak of COVID not being as bad as other flu epidemics, I'm talking about the number of deaths.  That is the bottom chart on this page.  And, the vast majority of cases, by the reported numbers, worldwide and in the US, are MILD.  I understand that this does not mean fun.

While the statistics, and some very distinguished experts are saying that COV-19 is not as bad as other, seasonal flu epidemics...that the recovery rate is good...that those at risk of death are basically the same as any other flu seasons (the elderly and those with preexisting medical conditions), why does it seem like politicians, companies, schools, sports teams, etc. are completely in support of the extreme measure of shutting down the economy?  That HAS TO MEAN that it really is bad, right?

Well in my opinion, NO!  How, then, did this happen?  Here’s how I see it:

RATINGS:  The 24/7 news media loves this stuff.  They live for panics, catastrophes, and other mayhem, because it brings them big ratings.  It makes the individual reporters and talking heads feel important.  We have seen this many times before, and they don’t care who they hurt, as long as they get their ratings.  That’s the start of it.

This is not all of media, of course.  Many in media are just like many in the general public, unfortunately, they just uncritically pass along what they are being told.  What makes even most of these followers so bad, though, is that they have to play up what they are repeating, by using grim tones, and looking very serious...for their own ratings.

POLITICS: It is an election year.  The press HATES President Trump.  That’s the next part.  They have been using this issue, like other panics (real or manufactured), to blame it on Trump.  To claim that he is not properly responding to the latest likely apocalypse.  You know, like they tried to blame Hurricane Katrina on President Bush.

Then Trump’s political rivals chime in...they have to make the panic big so they can make the blame big.  The most important thing to politicians is getting their power...and they, like the press, don’t care who they hurt.

Now the lower tiers of politicians have to get into the act to prove that they are on top of things.  So Governors, County Executives, and Mayors, all have to go on TV to show that they are taking proper actions. They don’t want anyone to blame them for improper response, you know, just in case any of this is true.

Then other institutions...universities, and the schools, heaven forbid one of their students gets the virus, even though it’s milder than other forms of flu for the vast majority of people.  They would be crucified by the parents.

SNOWBALL EFFECT:  Now, the momentum is large enough that, even though the epidemic is already on the down swing in China, where it began...even though the statistics show it’s not that bad, compared to other common outbreaks...it’s too late.  The snowball is rolling down hill too fast to stop it now.  Now cities are canceling parades...sports leagues are canceling seasons...businesses are canceling all travel and expanding work from home.  Because they don’t want to be seen as uncaring or ineffectual.

The majority of people are now fully invested in the narrative.  They call for government to "save them."  They want more and more strict actions to make sure they don't get this horrible "novel virus."  And the snowball grows...and the snowball moves faster...and the snowball destroys what's in its path.

PERSPECTIVE: Is COVID-19 a pandemic?  Yes, of course it is.  But that just means that it has spread around the world, not that it is the zombie apocalypse.  Have people died?  Yes, unfortunately.  But this happens EVERY flu season.  Can the virus become particularly nasty? Yes...like many strains of Influenza.  Should you wash your hands and avoid other sick people?  Of course.  Should we even take unusual actions to protect the most vulnerable, like those in nursing homes, and those with other high-risk factors?  Yes, those people should take precautions and probably practice an appropriate amount of isolation.

But should we panic?  Absolutely not.  This thing is way overblown.  Hospitals are becoming
overwhelmed, not by a horrible pestilence, but by panicked overreaction.

How can I say this?  Because the numbers are clear.  Looking at the numbers being published from all over the world, the vast majority of those who get the virus have MILD symptoms (94.57%) to those with SERIOUS/CRITICAL (5.43%).  Similar in the US (MILD-97.53%; SERIOUS/CRITICAL-2.47%).  But, I hear what some of you are saying..."What about Italy, smart guy?  It is horrible over there.  We could be just weeks...or days behind them."  Italy is having a bad time of it, but they have the oldest population on the oldest continent in the world.  This is the most vulnerable group.   Italy (MILD-94.38%; SERIOUS/CRITICAL-5.62%)

There are, at the writing of this post, 99,908 active cases in the US.  2,463 are SERIOUS/CRITICAL.  This is across the whole country.  In general, Serious means hospitalized...Critical means in the ICU.  We are not given the percentages between these categories.

Certainly there are higher concentrations of active cases in more populous areas, like New York City.  But at 2,436  SERIOUS/CRITICAL cases in the whole country, how is it that the US Healthcare System is in danger of being overwhelmed?  In fact, hospitals around the country are furloughing people because of the lock-down.  They just don't have the patients.  If some hospitals are overwhelmed, is it from serious cases, or from panicked people clogging the ERs because they have some kind of symptoms and have been scared by the hype.  Would they have even called their doctor this time last year for the same symptoms?  We're not being told those statistics, but refer back to 97.53% MILD from above.

Do some searching on the Internet.  You will find dire predictions from past flu seasons also.  You will also find isolated areas where a hospital or two were being overwhelmed.  But we never locked down the country...even with past "novel viruses."

Businesses will lose billions of dollars.  The stock market is tanked.  Jobs are already being lost...because, like every few years, there’s a new virus strain.  This one just happened to take off quickly in a region of China, and we are at peak media frenzy.

Additionally, this:

"British scientist Neil Ferguson ignited the world’s drastic response to the novel Wuhan coronavirus when he published the bombshell report predicting 2.2 million Americans and more than half a million Brits would be killed. After both the U.S. and U.K. governments effectively shut down their citizens and economies, Ferguson is walking back his doomsday scenarios."

"But after tens of thousands of restaurants, bars, and businesses closed, Ferguson is now retracting his modeling, saying he feels “reasonably confident” our health care system can cope when the predicted peak of the epidemic arrives in a few weeks. Testifying before the U.K.’s parliamentary select committee on science and technology on Wednesday, Ferguson said he now predicts U.K. deaths from the disease will not exceed 20,000, and could be much lower."

You may disagree, but that’s how I see it. Just my opinion.  That and four bucks will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.  But, I just don't see a lot of critical thinking around this subject.  Those experts who are making the case for more reasonable response and lack of panic are being drowned out by the noise.

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it." ~ Agent K, Men In Black

Are You Really "Red Pilled?"

A lot of people, especially conservatives, are using the red pill/blue pill plot device of the 1999 movie The Matrix as a metaphor for political awakening in today's world. In this movie, Keanu Reeves' character, Neo, is confronted by a mysterious man named Morpheus, played by Lawrence Fishburne. 

Morpheus offers to show Neo the "truth" that we are all living our lives in a computer-based simulation called The Matrix.  He says that , "It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth."  He further explains that the truth is, "That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage. Born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind."

Morpheus then offers Neo two pills...a red pill and a blue pill.  "You take the blue pill, the story ends; you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe."  But if, "You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."

Of course, Neo takes the red pill, or we wouldn't have had much of a movie.  His eyes are opened to the truth.  He can finally see what the world really is.

The metaphor is typically used to talk about how people on the Left have had their eyes opened to the fact that they have been lied to all these years about the Democratic Party's true motivations.  That the Democrats have been using race relations not to make lives better for minorities, but have actually fomented racial tension to accrue power for themselves.  That they really don't care about "the working man."  That, in general, everything that comes out of their mouth, and much of what comes out of the propaganda mainstream media, are lies.  And these people have believed it all these years.  It's like they took the red pill one day and woke up from a dream to see the truth.

As it goes, it is a pretty good metaphor.  We certainly are being lied to all the time.  In recent years, it has become blatant, though the masses still can't see it.  But even in the past it was true.  As Winston Churchill tells us, "History is written by the victors."   He went on to say that, "History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."  Then he did.  It is much like the concept from Orwell's novel 1984...history is what the state, or accepted dogma of whatever flavor, tells you it is.  And, for most of us, we are fed that approved truth in state-controlled schools that preach...er, ah...teach the party line.  It is no wonder most people cannot see the "real truth."  But you can't blame the schools, they are just purpose-built programs that perform the function for which they were created.

The problem with the metaphor, as currently used, is that it does not go far enough.  Those who consider themselves "red pilled," many times are only seeing part of the truth.  They #WalkAway from the Democrats, but walk toward the Republicans.  What they fail to see is that the Republicans are also just a part of the Matrix.  You see, even the supposed good program in the story, the program called the Oracle, was part of the Matrix.  While the Oracle was better than the program Smith, "she" never meant to help Neo destroy the Matrix, but just to reboot it...so that it would continue.

Don't get me wrong, I believe the Republican party is better than the Democratic party...but only marginally.  Both still exist to perpetuate the Matrix...their power structure.  I believe that in reality, while there are some "true believers" within the parties, for the most part, they only exist to provide a contrast.  This contrast is "the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth."  It makes you think you have choice...that you have power.  The parties also keep us divided.  They give us things to hate about the others.  As long as we hate "them" and believe "our guys" are on our side, we pose no threat to the order of things.

So let's look at this a little closer.  The Republicans purport to be for small government.  But in fact, every year, for more than the past 100 years, the Matrix has grown, spending has gone up, more control has been exerted...regardless of which party has "control."  Oh yes, there have been insignificant tax cuts that seemed positive...for a time.  But in fact, they were just mortgaging your future by increasing spending with borrowed money, or by devaluing your money by printing more currency.  

When the Republicans have had power...when they could have taken steps toward real change...what did they do?  Nothing.  They continued to perpetuate the Matrix. Oh, they made noise about how they were going to do something...yep, we're getting ready to, they assured us.  But then just excuses about how they, in the end, couldn't really do what they promised...you know, because of those other guys...or because of the children...or because of our allies...or etc..

Let me show you some more truth about the parties.  What have we been taught about our system of government?  Well one thing is that the so-called "Two-Party System" is sacrosanct...handed down by the founders from Mount Rushmore, or something.  Why, it is the very bedrock of our democracy!  But why?  A reading of the history of the founding of our country shows no such system was codified in either our founding documents or the ratifying debates.  In fact, when parties began to form, many saw it as a dangerous thing for the republic...and I agree.  But since then, they have ingrained this system in our culture...in our psyches.  We are warned not to vote for any of those crazy third-party weirdos.  Why you'll just be wasting your vote!  Those other guys, the ones you REALLY dislike will win if you don't vote for "our guys."  They have rigged the system so that only the Republicans and Democrats can really succeed by the way the voting system is set up.  There are guaranteed slots for the two "respectable" parties, after-all.  But why?  Why does it have to be two?  Why do we have to give these parties so much power over us?  Matrix.

I haven't even touched on the Military-Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower warned us about...or the massive surveillance state...or the constant move toward global hegemony...the increasing social experimentation.  And so much more.

What if I told you that you can never really be red-pilled unless you see the whole the truth.  Unless you see that the system, the entire Matrix, is set up to perpetuate itself.  And, an "R" after someone's name does not change this fact.  But you have to be willing to see it...to take the real red pill.  Only then can actual change be considered

"Remember, all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more." ~ Morpheus

Cult of the State

I was just accused of being a cultist on a social media thread because I stated that I did not believe Jesus advocated the taking of people's money, by threat of force, and giving it to others as a proxy for the individuals taking care of the poor themselves.  Yes.  This is what we have come to.  People truly believing that the nameless, faceless, feckless mass of government bureaucrats are God's instruments on earth and without them, we would certainly all die.   And I am a cultist?

No, the true cultists are those who look to the State for their sustenance, comfort, and security.  Those who believe that without the all-mighty State, all forms of modern life are impossible.  Who excuse the State's misdeeds and criminal activity as necessary for our safety.  These cultists are so blind that they believe that the ever-broadening violations of our God-given and Constitutionally-codified rights actually somehow secure our liberty.  And the funny thing is, these same Statists would certainly look down their noses in disdain or pity at the citizens of countries like North Korea for believing that their leader is a god.

Look, don't many religious cults start with a twisting of the basic tenets of their religion?  Then, they build up individuals and groups of people as divine representatives.  Their leaders or dogma must not be questioned.  There is no thought or debate over these things, only calls of "heretic" for those who dare oppose the divine order.

How are these rabid Statists any different?  They have allowed the basic tenets of our republic, the Constitution and founding documents, to be twisted and tortured in ways that defy logic to accrue more and more power to the deified State.  While they may grumble about certain government representatives or individual agencies, they may never question the over-all necessity for government to sustain our "way of life."  I have yet to see one of these people answer objections with thoughtful, objective apologetics for their view.  You are only met with name calling...kook, racist, idiot, cultist...or changing of the subject. Many times I have prompted them to speak to just one specific point in my argument and tell me how I am wrong...They never do.

Then, to make the deification of the State complete, the true believers co-opt religion to justify their worship and eradicate any last resistance of the sheeple.  They twist sacred scriptures to make you believe that it is unrighteous to question the truth of their dogma.

In particular, Statists use the Bible to attempt to justify the theft by government of more-and-more of your wealth.  They say Jesus advocated taking care of the poor, the sick and the orphans...and indeed he did.  Since they have been so indoctrinated in the Cult of State, though, they can't imagine how this can mean anything other than forced redistribution of wealth.  In his book Biblical Economics, theologian R. C. Sproul, probably a cultist himself, I guess, begs to differ with the Statists:

"I am convinced that political and economic policies involving the forced redistribution of wealth via government intervention are neither right nor safe. Such policies are both unethical and ineffective…. On the surface it would seem that socialists are on God's side. Unfortunately, their programs and their means foster greater poverty even though their hearts remain loyal to eliminating poverty. The tragic fallacy that invades socialist thinking is that there is a necessary, causal connection between the wealth of the wealthy and the poverty of the poor. Socialists assume that one man's wealth is based on another man's poverty; therefore, to stop poverty and help the poor man, we must have socialism."

The evidence is overwhelming that the government is a failure at caring for the poor.  Trillions of dollars spent on the so-called "War on Poverty" and we have millions and millions of people who are  generationally dependent government hand-outs.  I am convinced that it is counter-productive and irresponsible to trust government with caring for the poor.  In his book Rollback, Dr. Thomas E.  Woods points this out about our so-called Welfare system:

"Another way to approach it is to recall that at least two-thirds of the money assigned to government welfare budgets is eaten up by bureaucracy. Taken by itself, this would mean it would take three dollars in taxes for one dollar to reach the poor. But we must add to this the well-founded estimate of James Payne that the combined public and private costs of taxation amount to 65 cents of every dollar taxed. When we include this factor, we find the cost of government delivery of one dollar to the poor to be five dollars."

Is this good stewardship of the wealth with which we have been blessed?  How would the master of the Parable of the Talents view this?  Even the foolish servant only buried the talents.  He did not waste them on some crooked scheme that had a long and continuous history of waste and failure.  Especially in view of the fact that the government has no money.  It continues to amass huge, crushing debts that will be pushed off to future generations not yet born to pay for its wonderful largess to the poor.

In his article Rendering Unto Caesar: Was Jesus a Socialist,  Lawrence W. Reed provides this summary after an exhaustive study of the Bible:

In Jesus's teachings and in many other parts of the New Testament, Christians — indeed, all people — are advised to be of "generous spirit," to care for one's family, to help the poor, to assist widows and orphans, to exhibit kindness and to maintain the highest character. How all that gets translated into the dirty business of coercive, vote-buying, politically driven redistribution schemes is a problem for prevaricators with agendas. It's not a problem for scholars of what the Bible actually says and doesn't say. 

Search your conscience. Consider the evidence. Be mindful of facts. Ask yourself: When it comes to helping the poor, would Jesus prefer that you give your money freely to the Salvation Army or at gunpoint to the welfare department? 

Jesus was no dummy. He was not interested in the public professions of charitableness in which the legalistic and hypocritical Pharisees were fond of engaging. He dismissed their self-serving, cheap talk. He knew it was often insincere, rarely indicative of how they conducted their personal affairs, and always a dead end with plenty of snares and delusions along the way. It would hardly make sense for him to champion the poor by supporting policies that undermine the process of wealth creation necessary to help them. In the final analysis, he would never endorse a scheme that doesn't work and is rooted in envy or theft. In spite of the attempts of many modern-day progressives to make him into a welfare-state redistributionist, Jesus was nothing of the sort.

I am all for helping the truly needy.  I am all for defending the defenseless.  I just don't think Jesus will credit it as righteousness to steal your neighbor's wealth, through government force, to give it to the poor.  And, if we are going to look to the Bible, let's look at the whole of scripture:

" For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat." - 2 Thessalonians 3:10

"Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." 1 Timothy 5:8

They never want to talk about these passages.

Related Links:
The Ten Commandments of the Federal Government
Godless Socialists
The Sin of Redistribution

Consider the Humble Pencil

In 1958, Leonard E. Read published an article titled,
I, Pencil: My Family Tree as told to Leonard E. Read.  This short story very succinctly describes what Read calls the "miracle of ...millions of tiny know-hows" that go into producing something as simple as a pencil. It has become a classic amongst proponents of free markets.  The actual article can be read here.

What is this miraculous process?  There is the harvesting of the cedar wood used to make the body of the pencil and all of the tools, transportation, housing and food for workers, etc. that are required for this seemingly simple task.  The graphite that is mined in Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka), mixed with clay from Mississippi, acid, tallow and other ingredients to make the "lead" of the pencil, with all of the background tools processes, and requirements. Not to mention the rubber for the eraser, the metal for the ferrule, and the lacquer to paint the wood.

All-in-all, millions of people, all with their own skills and knowledge, their know-hows, are involved in the production of something as mundane as a pencil.  

"I, Pencil, simple though I appear to be, merit your wonder and awe, a claim I shall attempt to prove. In fact, if you can understand me—no, that's too much to ask of anyone—if you can become aware of the miraculousness which I symbolize, you can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing. I have a profound lesson to teach. And I can teach this lesson better than can an automobile or an airplane or a mechanical dishwasher because—well, because I am seemingly so simple."

How can a pencil represent such an important concept as to be important to our very liberty?  It is in understanding the concept that the process of making something so simple takes so many millions of voluntary interactions between people spread across the world.  That all of these processes could never be planned, let alone controlled by one person, group or even government...and this one of the simplest of items.  How then can the central planners of government think they can control whole industries?  Economies?  The climate?  They cannot.

"Once government has had a monopoly of a creative activity such, for instance, as the delivery of the mails, most individuals will believe that the mails could not be efficiently delivered by men acting freely. And here is the reason: Each one acknowledges that he himself doesn't know how to do all the things incident to mail delivery. He also recognizes that no other individual could do it. These assumptions are correct. No individual possesses enough know-how to perform a nation's mail delivery any more than any individual possesses enough know-how to make a pencil. Now, in the absence of faith in free people—in the unawareness that millions of tiny know-hows would naturally and miraculously form and cooperate to satisfy this necessity—the individual cannot help but reach the erroneous conclusion that mail can be delivered only by governmental 'master-minding.'"

But, since 1958, it has been more than proven that the government is grossly inept at delivering the mail.  Companies like FedEx, UPS and others have proven that private firms can bring innovation and efficiencies to the process and allows them to turn a tidy profit.  The US Postal Service would have been defunct years ago if it weren't subsidized by taxpayers.  And this is just one of thousands of areas where government is completely inept.  Yet we continue to believe that they know best.  We continue to allow them to control us.  And this, more than anything else, threatens our liberty.

The video below is a great six minute coverage of all of the concepts from the article...with great graphics in living color.  Enjoy.

Can you handle the truth?

"History is written by victors." 

~ Winston Churchill

Too many of us believe that the history we have been taught in school or through other outlets of our culture is a collection of facts.  We think of it as more science than art.  Sure, there may be facts we haven't uncovered yet, just as there may be unknown sub-atomic elements that science has not discovered, but when we do, it will just be another addition to the table of known facts we already have.

This may be stated a little too strongly, but I don't think it is too far from true.  This belief, however, is very naive and does not take simple human prejudices into account.  It only takes a very simple thought exercise to realize how this works in practicality.   Think for example of how the people of Japan may think of the dropping of the atomic bomb compared to how Americans view it.  Or how the people of the southern states may have viewed the war between the states as compared to those from the north.  Even now as you think of these examples, you can't help but think that you know the truth about these events.  But do you?  Could it possibly be that you may be a victim of your own prejudices?

And what of Churchill's assertion that victors are the ones who write the history?  Do you find it hard to believe that in the former Soviet Union, or perhaps Mao's China, the official history of those countries and the greatness of their leaders might have been a bit...skewed?  I remember in the cold war years of my childhood the jokes on television where a stereotypical Russian character would say of some wonderful, obviously American invention, "We had it first.  Russia invented that." This was a comedic acknowledgement that in the USSR, people were propagandized that Mother Russia was the most wonderful, advanced nation on earth.  I recently heard the story of how, in an attempt to further show their supremacy over the West, Soviet leaders allowed the movie The Grapes of Wrath to be shown in theaters.  They sought to show their people how bad things were in American in this depiction of Depression-era migrant workers.  The plan backfired, however, when Russian audiences were amazed that even poor Americans had automobiles.

But what about in America?  Are we immune to such biases and purposeful manipulations?  Well, almost from the beginning of our country, people have, let's say sought to direct the narrative to their own benefit.  Our second president, John Adams complained bitterly after his retirement that the Republican supporters of Thomas Jefferson were guilty of spreading a revisionist account of the founding and elevating Jefferson's role above that of himself.  Joseph J. Ellis, in his book Founding Brothers relates that,

"Despite his brave posturings of nonchalance and indifference, Adams was, in fact, obsessed with Jefferson's growing reputation as one of the major figures of the age.  As Adams remembered it, Jefferson had played a decidedly minor role in the Continental Congress.  While he, John Adams, was delivering fiery speeches that eventually moved their reluctant colleagues to make the decisive break with England, Jefferson lingered in the background like a shy schoolboy... Now, however, because of the annual celebration on July 4, the symbolic significance of the Declaration of Independence was looming larger in the public memory, blotting out the messier, but more historically correct version of the story, transforming Jefferson from a secondary character to a star player in the drama."   

We know, for example, that Abraham Lincoln used iron-fisted tactics to suppress any dissenting opinions in the press of the time.  We know that our government used Hollywood and the press as full blown propaganda ministries to support the correct public perception of the World Wars and Korea.  And the examples go on and on.

Why does it matter?  Well, history should indeed be a collection of facts.  But when, through either bias or cynical, deliberate manipulation, the truth of the facts are distorted, they can be used to garner support for everything from ill-conceived domestic policies to immoral and illegal wars.  The truth matters and we cannot leave the telling of the truth to politicians and bureaucrats.

The truth matters and we cannot leave the telling of the truth to politicians and bureaucrats.

In 1850, Frederic Bastiat wrote,  "This is the way an opinion gains acceptance in France. Fifty ignoramuses repeat in chorus some absurd libel that has been thought up by an even bigger ignoramus; and, if only it happens to coincide to some slight degree with prevailing attitudes and passions, it becomes a self-evident truth."  This is as true today in America, with our 24/7 news cycles and social media, as it was in Bastiat's time...maybe more so.

We must be willing to challenge our long-held and inherited beliefs about history.  We need to face the possibility that what we have always known might not be the whole truth, but only what the victors want us to know.  In this modern age, though, the truth is out there to be discovered and acted upon.  You just have to care enough to find it.  But, as Jeff Riggenbach of the Mises Institute says, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. The horse has to want a drink. The American electorate has to want the truth about American history. Too many Americans don't want the truth...any truth. What they want is mythology that will confirm their prejudices."

What about you?  Can you handle the truth?

Myths You Probably Believe

"It ain't what people know that causes trouble...it's what they know that ain't so."

It is an interesting phenomenon to me how people can hold so tightly, fiercely even, to beliefs for which they have no basis for belief to which they can point, other than they have just always believed them, or it's what they have been told, or in many cases, they just want to believe them.  Wanting something to be true, however, does not make it true.  Being told they are true also does not make them true...and when it comes to truth, unfortunately, there is no safety in numbers.  Just because "everybody knows" something to be true, also does not automatically make it so.  It has been proven over and over that "the masses" can easily be fooled.

Belief in some myths are harmless and even a little bit fun.  Believing in Bigfoot or a nocturnal, molar-collecting sprite is harmless.  But particularly disturbing to me are the myths people cling to about government...many of which I have believed myself in the past.  These myths are troubling because they are created and perpetuated by the very government system that are the topics of the myths.  The very people who wish to wield power and control over our lives have, through government controlled schools, a sycophantic press, and bold face lies spread falsehoods about their own effectiveness, good intentions and indispensability, all in an effort to create a compliant citizenry who will never question their power or actions.

My path to recovering the truth, I am a recovering Neo-Con, began with simply being open to question my own beliefs and through reading history.  I began to see that much of what I thought I knew was, in fact, distortions at best and in many cases, complete fabrications.  I saw that it is not a matter of party, Republican or Democrat, since they were just two sides of the same coin.  Both parties, on the whole, are populated by statist, central-planning power mongers.  It was not even a matter of Right and Left, for many things I once believed as a rightist neo-con, I now reject.  It is, rather, a matter of truth and fact vs. myth and lies.  It is a struggle between liberty and tyranny.

In the video below from a 1977 lecture, Milton Friedman lays out five widely believed, and never-the-less false myths about government.  Are you open to truth?  Can you get past your own closely held myths and truly consider the logic and history of his arguments?  Friedman says early in the video that "Somebody once wrote...a myth is like an air mattress.  There's nothing in it, but it's wonderfully comfortable, and deflation causes an uncomfortable jolt."  Get ready for a needed jolt concerning these five Myths That Conceal Reality:

1. The Robber Baron Myth
2. The Great Depression Myth
3. The Demand for Government Service Myth 
4. The Free Lunch Myth
5. The Robin Hood Myth.

What is Patriotism?

"The highest patriotism is not a blind acceptance of official policy, but a love of one's country deep enough to call her to a higher plain."

George McGovern

I do not believe the definition of patriotism is the unquestioning loyalty and submission to government.  In fact, this may be the opposite of patriotism.  The founding generation were loyal to the people of the colonies and risked their lives to oppose an unjust and tyrannical government structure.  Power truly does corrupt as Lord Acton rightly stated, and the patriotism of the colonists rebelled against corruption of the imperial power that had ruled the affairs of men for hundreds of years.

“The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

James Madison; Federalist No. 47

The founders understood the true nature of patriotism.  They risked their lives, treasure and sacred honor in service to it.  But this patriotism did not seek to replace one ruling class with another.  They saw government only as a necessary evil, as James Madison said, "if men were angels, no government would be necessary."  They purposefully designed a limited and decentralized structure of government to avoid the the tyranny that too much power can bring.  They knew that the people who would seek office themselves would not be angels.  Indeed, Thomas Jefferson stated that,  "The way to have a safe government is not to trust it all to one, but to divide it among the many, distributing to every one exactly the function he is competent to [perform best]. Let the national government be entrusted with the defense of the nation, and its foreign and federal relations; the State governments with civil rights, laws, police and administration of what concerns the State generally; the counties with local concerns of the counties, and each ward [township] direct the interests within itself. It is by dividing and subdividing these republics, from the great national one down through all of its subordinates, until it ends in the administration of every man's farm by himself; by placing under every one what his own eye may superintend, that all will be done for the best."

"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism."

George Washington

Many who seek power, though, often attempt to pervert patriotism by arousing strong emotional allegiances to a cause for which they claim leadership.  This can be a movement such as Communism with their call for "Workers of the World, Unite," or nationalism that calls every citizen to rally to the flag.  Nationalistic fervor has undoubtedly caused more death and destruction than any other force in the history of man, especially in the 20th century where millions of patriotic soldiers marched under the flags of Nazi Germany, The Soviet Union, Red China, Fascist Italy, or Imperial Japan...all killing and dying to prop up corrupt and evil central rulers and regimes while being told it was for the Father Land, Mother Land, their country or their honor.  Patriotism, when corrupted to such causes can be a powerful source of evil.  

Even in the United States of America, government often seeks to control us with appeals to patriotism.  We are to march unquestioning to war because the President declares it is in our national interest to do so.  We have been told that fighting in the frozen mountains of Korea or the rain soaked jungles of Viet Nam were somehow protecting our freedom and American way of life here at home.  If you question this logic or the motives of the government, you are labeled a traitor, a radical, or worse.  We are not to question the actions of our wise leaders, and they can just claim national security concerns to avoid any uncomfortable queries.

Even in politics, the parties seek to wrap themselves in the flag through their rhetoric, photo-ops, and sound-bites hoping to prove that they are more patriotic in their policies and power grabs than the other guys.  Seldom do they appeal to the foundational principals of freedom, truth or justice, but instead attempt to whip up populist passions with partisan attacks that only seek to consolidate and solidify their own power base.  Sadly, far too many of our fellow citizens fall for this tactic believing that only a Republican...or a Democrat...or even an Independent can be a "true American."  The citizen feels better in their self-righteous alignment with the right party, but their blind faith only further enslaves them to a ruling class who cynically manipulates them for its own purposes. 

"The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse." 

James Madison  

No, I do not pledge allegiance to a flag as a symbol of nationalism, a corrupt system of bureaucratic inefficiency and waste, or a centralized ruling elite...my allegiance is to the true principles of liberty on which our country was founded and to my countrymen.  I believe that patriotism...true patriotism...protects and defends its fellow citizens from threats from enemies, foreign and domestic.  It should be based not on slogans, symbols or propaganda, but on principles and deep, abiding truth.  It does not elevate any one person, or group above all others, but sees all men as created equal.  And, above all, knowing of the ever present danger of corruption, it is ever suspicious of power and vigilant against abuses.  Patriotism stands against power when that power stands against the welfare of the people.

Our government, as any other government in the world, is not made up of angels.  It has become corrupt and abusive.  We have failed to protect our liberty against the usurpers and do-gooders alike.  It is time to revive our true patriotism to set this right by demanding a return to our founding principles of limited and decentralized government.  Only then can our future be secured and freedom be assured.  Do not be swayed by false appeals to patriotism which props up the establishment ruling elite, but stand firm on the true principles.  This is my definition of patriotism.

"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.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

The Declaration of Independence

You're not exempt from the math

This is a very simple and unemotional explanation on why Obamacare sucks.  Dave Ramsey does a great job explaining that regardless of how people may want there to be some kind of magic that will allow this monstrosity of a law to work as we were promised it would...you can't escape the simple math of the situation.

Govt Shutdown - Report from Out Here: Day 11

DAY 11:

Okay...I've skipped some days.  But during days 5 - 10 I was going about my business, living my life, working my job...not feeling any real effects at all form the so-called government shutdown.

But then today, I see the real results...how society is beginning to break down.  Criminals are running the streets.  Look at this article and be afraid...be very afraid.

Govt Shutdown - Report from Out Here: Day 3

DAY 3:

Looking out my windows, it is a little more overcast and dreary today than yesterday...not sure if this is an effect of the shutdown or not.

But, water continues to flow from my faucets, I have electricity, and my phone and internet services still work.  This is curious to me.  Why, I thought that without the Federal Government, all infrastructure just falls apart.  I thought the local water, power and telecom companies were just a front for Federal workers who busily went about making sure that all the important features of modern life were maintained...and yet three days into a Federal Government shut down there is no apparent impact on these vital services.

What I have heard about is government agents putting up barricades around federal landmarks, such as the WWII Monument.  These are monuments that many people visit every day without the need for government tour guides or  any interaction with government at all.  But, even during a horrible shutdown, the Feds do seem to have the ability to send agents to bar 80 and 90 year old WWII veterans from visiting their monument.  They also seem to have the ability to place barricades around Mount Vernon, which is privately owned and operated.

This is pretty pathetic, if you ask me.  This is a blatant attempt to use our monuments as a very visible sign of the effects of a government shut down.  One of the first things they bring up in every discussion of possible shutdowns over the last few years is the closing of national parks and monuments.  They want you to know that poor little school children may not be able to visit their favorite park.  Now remember, this is almost all they have...Parks and the fact that Federal workers may not get paid...except of course the big mean officers barring access to monuments.  What else are we seeing?  What other catastrophes have befallen us?

Once again I call on the States to take up this issue also.  Find for me in the Constitution...anywhere...the clause giving the Federal government the power to run tourist attractions.  In the last more than 100 years, the Federal government has confiscated millions and millions of acres of land within the boundaries of many States for the purposes of establishing parks.  They have no legal right to do this under the narrowly enumerated powers given them by the federation of States through the Constitution.  Don't get me wrong, I think many of these parks are beautiful and amazing places, but they should not be under Federal control.  Most, if not all States run and maintain their own parks.  They could also maintain the Federal parks instead of sending their money off to Washington to have sent back for this purpose after a large portion is skimmed off-the-top for bureaucratic overhead and graft.

So...Day 3 and no real noticeable effect for the VAST MAJORITY of the population..."curiouser and curiouser."

Related post:
Why Feed the Pig?

Govt Shutdown - Report from Out Here

DAY 1:
Well, the government shut down and I looked around my neighborhood...drove through the area...Traffic lights were still working...businesses still operating...People were going about their lives as if nothing has changed. How can this be? I thought if we had a government shut down, it was the end of the world as we know it. I'll have to wait a few days...maybe weeks...and check again. I'm sure the world will have come to a crashing halt by then.

DAY 2:
Beginning of day two of the shutdown...or "Slimdown" as some are beginning to call it. Still, the lights are on...the Internet is operational (thank you Al Gore, LOL)...and life, for the VAST MAJORITY of us, continues as normal...Hmmm.

I propose that we insist that this continues for at least one month. That way, we can see the real effect of less government in our lives. At the end of that month, I suggest that we could discontinue most of what we have done without during the experimental period...permanently. And, I think, that is what government fears most and why they are so shrill in their predictions of doom...they fear you...we the people will realize that we *CAN* do with much less of them.

May I also suggest that this is the time for the State legislatures to stand up to their responsibilities.  In our Federal system, the States are *NOT* subjects of the central government in Washington...but rather sovereign entities who have entered a pact with other states to form a federation to their mutual benefits. Each State should look after the welfare of their own citizens and businesses with jealous zeal, not allowing anyone to cause them harm or limit their freedom...even the Federal government.  If the shenanigans in D.C. can truly have such a huge impact on the economy of the entire country, I stand with James Madison who declared in the Virginia Resolutions that the States "are duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil."

It is time for the States to reverse the usurpation of their sovereign powers and insist that we return to the principles of the United States Constitution which is the bedrock document on which all other Federal law rests.  If roads need built in a State...the state should not send their money to the Federal government and beg to have it returned to build the road.  Likewise, if a State's people are in need, it is for that State to see to these needs...not to allow their own treasure to be used to control them so that some central politburo can decide how best to meet the needs.

The Federal government is rotten to the core...hopelessly corrupt.  It is time for the States to stand to their feet, reclaim their power, interpose and place the checks on the Federal government that the Constitution intends.

Obama Scandals: More of the Same?

With all of the scandals swirling around the Obama administration, I keep hearing apologists appeal to the fact that others have done it before.  "JFK, Nixon, Clinton all used the the IRS against their enemies,"  they say.  "Bush started the gun walking into Mexico first," is their cry. "It was the Patriot Act under George W. Bush that began all the surveillance of communications in the first place," they rightly point out.

"Yes," I say, "and that is exactly my point!"

To me, it doesn't matter which power grabbing statist abuses his power, and therefore tramples our rights.  The point is that THEY ALL DO IT! And, I would add, they all get progressively (pun intended) worse.  If President X gets away with such-and-so...President Y sees this as precedent which allows him to expand on the issue.  Then, President Z sees that there is no real resistance to this recently fabricated power and doubles-down.

This trend has continued, with very little interruption for the last 100 years or so.  It has gone on so long that the typical, government-educated citizen believes that it is normal...proper...inevitable.  A country, once heroically and uniquely founded on the principles of individual responsibility and a limited-power, republican government, now largely believes that nothing can be accomplished in this modern world without big government.

The fact that abuse and corruption have been done in the past does not excuse or legalize it.  The Constitution is very clear on the limits of power for the central government.  It is not the Constitution or the Bill of Rights that are  failing us.  Our founding documents are based on timeless principles of human nature and the nature of power.  These principles are true, regardless of the technology of the day. It is The People who have failed to insist on maintaining their rights and the rights of their fellow citizens. Too many are perfectly happy to allow "other people's" rights to be trampled when they don't agree with those people. For a recent example, consider gun rights. But these people are too ignorant...or brainwashed...or invested in their own dogma to understand that if the government can trample "other people's" rights, they can just as easily trample yours.

You cannot have a centralized, all-powerful, all-encompassing state without this kind of abuse.  Absolute power corrupts, absolutely! This is what we get when we look to government to solve all of our problems and provide for all our needs. When we turn our heads and ignore corruption and abuse, so long as we can suckle at the teat of mother government, we get the Nanny-State Overlords we must now endure. The founders knew this...even though they never foresaw cell-phones, e-mail or nuclear weapons.

“The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”~ James Madison; Federalist 47.

This is why I believe the best government ever devised was the limited, decentralized form the founders gave us.  It is our only hope to avoid the erosion and eventual elimination of all of our rights.  And the only hope for the restoration of this form of government is for The People to wake from their 100-year slumber and insist that their government be run according to the law of the land, the Constitution.  We must truly hold those in office accountable for violations of their oaths to uphold this law.  And...we must be willing grow-up and stand on our own two feet without the constant aid of good ole' Uncle Sugar.

Informed Mistrust

Thanks to my friend Rich for sharing the video below.

I do not trust centralized power, and in this sentiment, I stand with the Founding Fathers who strove to define a small, limited and decentralized form of government for the United States of America.

The gun control issue is about far more than guns.  It is about whether a small group of hypocritical, ruling-elite totalitarians in Washington can nullify our basic rights at their own whim.  It is about whether we are a nation of laws, based on the bedrock of a Constitution, or are to be ruled by the "tyranny of the majority," swayed by every wind of populist frenzy which would see every "good crisis," real or manufactured, as a reason to usurp our rights.

The participation of legal gun owners in crime has been characterized, from the FBI crime statistics, as statistically insignificant.  Gun bans will make no one safer since criminals, by their nature, do not obey laws.  But, if these usurpers can in effect nullify our 10th Amendment rights, they can also nullify our 1st Amendment rights or any other they choose.

Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it:

The Nazis confiscated guns from the Jews.  The Soviets and the Red Chinese confiscated guns.

John Adams effectually nullified the 1st Amendment through the Sedition Act, imprisoning many.  Lincoln imprisoned tens of thousands of people for the crime of publicly disagreeing with him with no due process...you were probably never told about that.  FDR imprisoned thousands of AMERICAN CITIZENS of Japanese decent in internment camps.

No, I do not trust centralized power.  If you do, you ignore the whole of human history, and you do it at your peril and the peril of your posterity.  There are many, many examples of centralized power gone bad...and I would say none of it turning out well.  We have only lasted this long, because of the work of the founders, through the Constitution, and many others who fought to uphold it.  We are at a dangerous time, I fear...a time when too many are willing to "give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety."

So no, I do not trust them when they tell us that they don't want to take our guns.  I know from history, past and recent, that they do.

Traitors to Posterity?

Somebody should have read this to Nancy Pelosi when she was in such a hurry to pass Obamacare that she said, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.” 

This comes from the John DeWitt Essay I of the Anti-Federalist Papers:

"But it ought to undergo a candid and strict examination. It is the duty of every one in the Commonwealth to communicate his sentiments to his neighbour, divested of passion, and equally so of prejudices. If they are honest and he is a real friend to his country, he will do it and embrace every opportunity to do it. If thoroughly looked into before it is adopted, the people will be more apt to approve of it in practice, and every man is a TRAITOR to himself and his posterity, who shall ratify it with his signature, without first endeavouring to understand it. -- We are but yet in infancy; and we had better proceed slow than too fast. -- It is much easier to dispense powers, then recall them."

What's the Truth About Crime?

Benjamin Disraeli is said to have observed that, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."  Politicians are are experts at lying and using selected statistics to further their own, power-grubbing agendas.  This has never been more evident than with the newest round of anti-gun pontifications that has followed the Sandy Hook shooting.  While EVERYONE believes that this was a horrendous incident and that we need to protect our children from such crimes, the politicians seem to ignore the truth and bend and distort the statistics to further a political agenda, rather than solve a problem.

Amidst The Noise has done a very thought provoking video where they begin to delve into the real crime stats and ask some important questions.  Take the time to watch and then begin to ask yourself, what are the true motivations of these liars...these pretenders...our elected officials.

Newtown Shooting

The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown, CT is a horrific, unimaginable evil.  I cannot imagine the grief and utter despair of the families who lost their young children. I can also not fathom the depth of psychosis that would lead anyone to commit such a heinous act. My prayers go out to all those who were affected by this tragedy.

In times such as these, emotions across the nation run high as we collectively grieve for the victims and their families. We want to know how this could happen...why would someone ever want to harm the most precious and innocent among us...our children. We want to feel safe...that this could never happen to us, or any of those we love. We are angry, and righteously so. We want someone to blame for letting it happen. We want assurance that steps are being taken to prevent a recurrence. We feel helpless and afraid.

We must look for real, workable solutions and not, as is done too many times in our society, simply actions that soothe our emotions and assuage our fears.

This is all understandable.  It's a natural reaction to such an unfathomable and terrible event.  But in our grief...in our anger, we must be careful not to let emotions rule.  Already the media talking heads with their anti-gun agendas are calling for stricter gun laws.  This appeals to our fears and insecurities.  After all, if no one had guns, this couldn't have happened...right?  Well, solutions based on fear and insecurity are seldom wise, and usually don't achieve the desired goals.  We must look for real, workable solutions and not, as is done too many times in our society, simply actions that soothe our emotions and assuage our fears.

First of all, lets look at some hard realities:

No one can ever make you completely safe.

This is indeed a hard truth.  We want to feel safe in our homes, schools, shopping malls, etc.  But life is fragile and easily disrupted or destroyed.  This can be through accidents, natural disasters, disease or malevolent actions by others.

While it is certainly logical to try to reduce risk in life, safety comes with trade-offs.  You must make judgments everyday, in every part of life on what you are willing to give up to feel safer.   You can choose to race around in a sports car that you really enjoy...or safely obey every speed limit and traffic law in boxy soccer mom car with the highest safety ratings, and lowest fun ratings...or not drive at all because the Center for Disease Control (CDC) identifies motor vehicle injuries as a "leading cause of death for people age 5-34"...higher than suicide, homicide and cancers.  The vast majority of us fall between Speed Racer and Soccer Mom.  We wear a seat belt and drive reasonably safely, but most of us bend the traffic laws and try to drive something we like.

Guns don't kill people.

I know...this is a controversial one, especially in the wake of the Newtown tragedy.  But, it's more than a NRA cliche...it happens to be true.  A gun is a tool...like many other tools we have in our world.  Guns can be used for sport...for defense...or offensively...just like cars.  On the CDC's National Vital Statistics report (December 23, 2009), in a List of 113 selected causes of death, firearms related deaths do not appear until #100-Accidental Discharge of Firearms...under #1-Samonela,  #96-Motor Vehicle Accidents, and #99-Accidental Falls.  Others include: #105-Suicide by Firearm, #106-Suicide by other means, #107-Homicide by firearm, #108-Homicide by other instrument, and #113-Complications of Medical Care.

So are firearms dangerous?  Absolutely.  When used carelessly or with malicious intent, they are deadly like many other tools of mankind.  Keep it in perspective, though.  If a criminal, terrorist, or psychotic wants to inflict mass causalities they can do it without a gun.  Just a few examples are:

• September 11, 2001 - Of course everyone remembers when more than 3000 people were killed by terrorists who crashed planes into the World Trade Center twin-towers, the Pentagon, and a Pennsylvania field.
• April 19, 1995 - Oklahoma City Bombing.  Domestic terrorists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, along with other accomplices killed 168 people and injured 680 others with a truckload of fertilizer chemicals.
• March 25, 1990 - Happy Land fire. Unemployed Cuban refugee Julio González killed 87 people at the Happy Land social club with a plastic container of gasoline and two matches.

Recently, a knife wielding man in China injured 20 elementary school children. The UK Daily Mail reports that "There were six similar attacks in just seven months in 2010 that killed nearly 20 people and wounded more than 50." Knives are also tools that can be used to kill or injure.  In these cases, they injured many in one spree.

So what do we do?  

Surely it's not all hopeless.  We certainly don't have to just lay down and accept that we're all just helpless prey for psychopaths and criminals.  Wouldn't gun laws help to reduce the risk of such tragedies happening again?  I believe the answer is a resounding NO.

"During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower."

No laws will eliminate guns.  That genie is already out of the bottle.  There are millions and millions of guns in this country.  Stricter laws may get guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, but will not make them impossible to obtain.  Criminals of all types will still have them...there will be a thriving black market for guns brought in from outside the country.  I heard former US Representative J. D. Hayworth say just this morning on the radio (and I'm paraphrasing): If stricter gun laws are passed in this country, of course the law abiding will follow the law.  But those with no compunction, no compulsion to follow the law...the lawless...will not.  How is it that we would be helping the law abiding citizens by abridging their rights to defend themselves against the lawless?  The result of stricter gun laws would be a citizenry that is defenseless against criminals, and there would still be many other methods for psychotics to use to commit mass mayhem.

It may feel good to think that a law can eliminate something you feel is bad for society, but tell me how that worked for the prohibition of alcohol...or illegal drugs.  If strict handgun laws worked to reduce crimes committed with a firearm, you would expect the cities and areas with the strictest laws would have the lowest crime...right.  In fact, the opposite is true.  Cities like Chicago, Baltimore, Washington  D. C. have, or have had some of the strictest gun control laws in the country.  They have also been the areas with the highest violent crime rates.  In fact, the Just Facts web site noted that, "During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower."

I hear you saying, "If stricter gun laws won't work, then where right back where we started...helpless, right?" Of course not.  That attitude is only a result of years and decades of being trained that the Federal government is the only source of solutions.  In fact, the government has very few real solutions.  No, the solutions lie with our local communities...with our States.  Since we cannot hope to get all guns off the streets...since we know criminals will continue to have guns...since we know that we can never be completely protected, not even by the police or government, we have to take matters into our own hands...not as individuals for schools and public places, but as communities, school districts, cities, counties and States.

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. ~ Amendment X, United States Constitution

I once heard the president of the National Rifle Association (NRA) say that when people ask him why he felt someone needed to be able to have firearms for personal protection, since that's why we have a police force, he would ask them if they should be allowed to have a fire extinguisher in their homes.  Most people say of course you should be allowed to have a fire extinguisher.  Why, he would ask, isn't that why we have fire departments?

The point is, when a violent crime is being perpetrated against individuals, families, group, or school children, the police cannot respond quickly enough to avert or reduce loss of life.  Just as a fire extinguisher in a home or public building cannot prevent a fire, but can help eliminate or contain it to save lives and property, so also a gun in the hands of a law abiding and trained private citizen at the scene of a violent crime can be used to end or contain a shooting incident.  The Just Facts web site notes that, "Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year." That is almost a million incidents a year where the criminal would have came out on top and many lives would have been taken if these citizens would have been prevented, by law, from defending themselves.

"Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year."

Policemen cannot be everywhere...just as firemen can't.  Policemen usually don't prevent violent crime, they show up after it's over to pick up the pieces...just like firemen with a fire.  We, as a society, feel no compunction against teaching citizens, from children to senior citizens, how to prevent and survive fires.  In fact, we feel compelled to do so.  We should likewise feel compelled to train our citizens to defend themselves and others from violent crime...to build a new local militia, of sorts, of trained and certified citizens who would be able to react to violent crimes quickly, because they would be everywhere throughout the community... legally armed and at the ready.  I'm not saying that we should create some kind of armed para-police organization, but simply citizens living their lives who could confront crime if it happens to them or those around them.

Over the past several years, with stories such as the Newtown shooting or deadly crimes in my local area, I have become more and more determined to to carry my legally procured and registered handgun with me as often as possible.  I pray that I will never have to use my guns in self defense, but I have decided that if such a crime would happen when I'm around, I will be able to act to save my own life, my family or other complete strangers.  I feel it is my duty as a husband, father, and member of society.    I know that there are many out there, like myself,  who have been willing to purchase the weapons and ammunition, to get training, and submit to background checks to become licensed to carry legally.  If more training were available, many like myself, would be willing to get it at their own cost.

But, what about the schools?

Schools are places with a special designation as "No Gun Zones."  The laws passed to create this designation were meant to protect our students and prevent gun violence on our campuses.  As we have seen from Columbine, to Virginia Tech, to Sandy Hook Elementary, these laws have no power to prevent a person, or group of persons from entering campus and killing students and faculty.  In fact, since everyone knows that no guns are allowed on campus, there is no one to defend against attack.  The laws have, as so many other such well-intentioned  pieces of legislation, had the opposite effect...they have made the schools targets.

While I don't think it is necessarily a good idea to just allow people to randomly wander onto school property with firearms.  We should take real steps that none-the-less help defend our children.  I propose the removal of the Gun Free Zone restrictions and allow facility and staff, once properly screened and trained, to carry hand guns on school grounds.  This should be a voluntary program and require both background and psychological screening.  These screenings should be periodic.  Training should also include gun safety, weapons retention, escalation of force doctrine,  as well as marksmanship and defensive shooting.  They should be taught concealment techniques so that no one, students or other staff members, ever even know they have a weapon.

Training and screening should be done by independent, non-governmental agencies to avoid political agendas.  Identities and numbers of teachers in each school who participate in the program should be kept private to the school district.  Some schools within a district may have high participation...some may have none. But, if the public doesn't know which school is which, this alone will be a deterrent to would be assailants who will not want to risk going into an area where there may be armed defenders.

Would this have kept the mentally unstable 20 year old from coming to Sandy Hook Elementary with guns?  Likely no.  Could it have stopped him before he took so many lives...could it have saved 20 children?  Very likely.  Only having armed personnel in place will stop a determined  murderer.  Waiting for police response is too little too late.  By the time the police show up, the damage is done and the assailant has escaped or committed suicide.

I believe this approach, along with other systems of lock-downs, security cameras, alarm and notification systems, and training of the children is the only hope to provide any real level of protection for our schools.

We must insist that our elected officials stop using such tragedies to further their own political agendas.  They must find effective and realistic solutions.  Gun laws do not work...it is proven in our cities...it is proven by the fact that Gun Free Zones don't work.  We must take the emotions out of the calculation and implement real-world, viable solutions.  Let's all take a breath, settle down and set about making schools truly safer.