On April 19th 1775 in the wee-dawn hours 80+ men trekked from various towns and gathered upon a sheep field to face down one of the most formidable military machines since Rome. The causes for such an action were many but they boiled down to a simple 'taxation without representation' and (more importantly) the confiscation of arms from the citizenry.
On April 6th 2016 just a few hundred yards from that blood stained sheep field the citizens of Lexington voted to deny the right to bear arms within the town's limits. They voted to become sheep themselves.
In a stunning display of misinformation, outright lies, procedural ridiculousness and personal 'feelings' about 'guns', the aging and former City Council Member Robert Rotberg decided to leave a parting gift to posterity and petition the town to ban any weapon that fires more than two bullets.. Yes, Lexington, you get to keep your muskets in case British Regulars show up again.
However that petition was tabled at a previous meeting and Rotberg decided to re-word it. Originally it would have been a bylaw change but the 4/6 meeting had the motion changed to a non-binding resolution. The details (as is revealed in the videos below) was to ".. initiate a town-wide discussion about assault weapons and gun violence that would lead to fully considered proposals.."
In other words, the town would talk about banning guns before they eventually decide to do so.
Gee, thanks Bob..
The only fly in that Vaseline jar is the 'discussion' will be moderated by The League of Women Voters' who are historically on record as supporting anti-2nd Amend. Legislation. How the LWV got involved in this nightmare is any one's guess.. I suggest you ask Bob.
http://rabidrepublicanblog.com/2016/04/07/lexington-decides-on-a-discussion/
As the evening unfolded the 'pro' and 'con' statements from the citizenry was equally proportioned in numbers but diametrically opposed in facts. One woman was put off by the amount of security, metal detectors, searches, etc and noted that she had never seen such a display before at a town meeting. She posited that such a discussion and topic precipitated this and is one of the reasons to support the resolution.
I guess even discussing guns is reason to ban them. In fact, as I will point out throughout this piece, many of the 'pro' resolution people based many of their concerns on feelings alone despite the many 'con' people who pointed out our Constitution, Council Members inability to clarify what an 'assault' weapon is or even the difference between a 'semi-automatic' and a 'fully automatic'. Then, there is the old adage, ".. What part of '..shall not be infringed..' do you NOT understand?" Many in the audience began laughing when Ole' Bob was asked about a particular weapon that could fire 600-900 rounds per minute and could not answer but assured us we could look it up on the internet.
I didn't have to.. Its the Gatling gun under the nose of the A-10 Warthog but I have a hard time imagining gun owners of Lexington fitting an A-10 in their garages.
Bob assured us that his 'bullet' points and 'internet' findings were from reputable sites but he gave no indication as to where he found them. I was waiting for some one to suggest we not use the word 'bullet' because it might be micro-aggressive. Ole' Bobby flashed a great 'stat' on the overhead how between 2009 and 2014 over 300,000 people were killed in the US by guns and between 2014 and 2016 another 200,000 were killed by guns.
Folks, these are genocide statistics and if any of this were remotely true we would have UN trucks roaming our streets. Don't worry, the Lexington City Council will 'discuss' that one soon I am sure..
In the book "The Way Things Ought To Be" Rush Limbaugh reveals the same statistical shenanigans trumpeted by homeless Advocates. They were famous for using numbers like 1/2 a million homeless people die each year on American streets. A patently absurd claim since such a number would essentially end homelessness forever by simple attrition. Another slide posted by Rotberg showed the United States and areas of colored dots. These dots represented gun killings in 2016. The country was festooned with red. Again Rotberg was unable to give any credibility to his 'evidence'.
I can.
MRC Video commentator Bill Whittle posts his great, educational segments on his famous 'Firewall'. Yes, The United States is number one in gun ownership, over 90 per 100 people are gun owners. But the #1 murder rate (by guns) at 90 per 100,000 people is.... Socialist controlled Honduras. The US does not even come in the top 100. With just 4.7 murders (by guns) per 100,000 people The US comes in at 111 out of over 200+ nations. In fact, the nations that DO round out the top 100 are Socialist States with stringent gun control laws.
The 4.7 number is artificially inflated because of countless cities like Baltimore, Detroit, DC, Cleveland, Pittsburgh and more that have adopted the same nonsense Lexington is about to and experience rampant gun related crime and violence.. Except Plano Texas. Plano Texas residents boast as having more weapons in every home (per capita) than most of the United States writ-large. Their murder rate (by guns) is 0.4 per in a city wide population of over 270,000.
It would be interesting to see how many gun related violent (per capita) crimes were committed in Lexington with a population of just over 33,000. In the videos at the end of this piece a Lexington police officer was asked that very question. In the last 5 years only one (1) crime was committed with a gun and only 3 (suspected) suicides.
What is frightening about this resolution is the eventual 'confiscation'. It does not address actual violence or crime itself but personal property. At the 8:41 part of video 2 Bob claims that Lexington is ".. the center of the Universe.." and other towns will take up similar resolutions. The Council goes on to add that they can only be concerned with Lexington in so far as to crime in other communities with similar laws. So, disarming the citizens of Lexington is a Lexington issue and they have no say what goes on in other towns.
It is now open hunting season in the town of Lexington because gun free Chicago and DC are just such perfect examples of reducing crime by banning guns.
Not once did Bob Rotberg or any one in the 'pro' aisle 'discuss' how they would go about enforcing this ban. Liberals are always hazy about details. Details tend to get in the way of 'feel-good' dogma.
Only one citizen stood and spoke about this. The Police Chief is on record of saying he would 'stand down' on weighing in on this resolution but gave no details as to whether or not he would 'enforce' the resolution. Another citizen quoted Justice Sutor by stating that we restrict certain aspects of free speech to protect citizens and that the 2nd Amendment falls under those same restrictions.
Well, I am sorry, but Justice Sutor is wrong! What part of ".. shall not be infringed do you NOT understand?"
Then came the 'procedural' aspects of this fiasco.
In the rules section there is a part about "calling the question".
" Town meeting members may, after a period of time, decide that they've heard enough debate and 'call the question'. If a town meeting member makes this motion, we will immediately take a vote to see if a majority of members agree..."
Well, you can guess, at the final 10 minutes of video 2 below some random 'member' did just that. Every one took up their American Idol clickers and voted. The final tally was 84-80 to suspend debate. A simple majority.
There is only one problem with such a 'procedure'. It defies and abrogates Constitutional Law of the 2/3 clause. Majorities only count if there is a 2/3's or more vote. Close votes such as this one demand that the meeting stay in session because the vote is essentially split. But, poor old Bob and the other aging 'members' had to get home to watch Matlock and take their Geritol before bedtime so screw it!
Considering that only a few hundred people were there deciding this important issue claiming they 'represent' a population of 33,000 it wasn't even an act of 'Democracy'. It certainly did not even consider Constitution.
No, It was an act of Elitism, Oligarchs. A small group of self righteous individuals deciding what is best for the rest of us.
So, with a second simple majority vote the town members of Lexington Mass, birthplace of our Revolution for Independence voted by simple Oligarch majority to 'discuss' the eventual banning and confiscation of guns within the city limits.
We have come full circle and our history is complete.
.... And That Is The Diatribe....
Here is the complete video archive of the meeting
Of the Great Citizens of Lexington and Beyond
ReplyDeleteLet it be known that our Rights, Part of the First, A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Article I. All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.
Along with all of us being free and equal, we have certain natural, essential, and unalienable Rights that belong to each individual, they do not belong to a body politic or government but each and every citizen who is subject to the jurisdiction thereof. This extends not only to the enjoyment of our individual lives and liberties but also defending our lives and liberties, not only possessing our property but also protecting our property.
Article X. Each individual of the society has a right to be protected by it in the enjoyment of his life, liberty and property, according to standing laws. He is obliged, consequently, to contribute his share to the expense of this protection; to give his personal service, or an equivalent, when necessary...
Each individual has obligations, these obligations again do not belong to a body politic or government but each and every citizen who is subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
The Bill of Rights (the Second Amendment) was added to the United States Constitution because of a group called the anti-federalist to protect their State and individual Rights, and this is why we have the Second Amendment, "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."
Bill of Rights Massachusetts 1780 (John Adams)
Article XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.
The Supreme Court agreed, “We therefore believe that the most likely reading of all four of these pre-Second Amendment state constitutional provisions (Bill of Rights) is that they secured an individual right to bear arms for defensive purposes.” D.C v. Heller.
From the time this was written our Militia system has become more complex dividing in to several branches, from our National Guard to our local police departments. If the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution were to be perverted and subverted, there would be inevitable consequences to all levels.
I encourage all to read and understand the full context of our highest laws as Natural Law or as some may say, common sense of it all. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is not there to fight some tyrannical government or only there to fight invasions as some have argued but to replace and prevent a tyrannical government. It is an important part of our form of government that prevents a body politic or government control of our Rights, our certain natural, essential, and unalienable Rights that belongs to each individual. It may not be perfect but as our founders have argued, “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” Therefore, any and all acts to infringe on Second Amendment to the United States Constitution or the Bill of Rights of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are acts of Treason, local police departments on up are obligated by their Oath of Office to act accordingly to the laws they have sworn to uphold. As are the citizen who are subject to the jurisdiction thereof are obligated by Bill of Rights of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to voice their opposition to their Rights being subverted and perverted.