CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS JUST SAYING "NO" TO THE DESOLATION OF OBAMA-NATION.

I will not sign up for Obama-care.
I did not Vote for Obama-nation.
This is not the change I hoped for.

I have been under-employed for two years, and unemployed for a year before that.
I do not have any current hope of faith in finding a job in this economy.

Square Deal, New Deal, Great Society, Raw Deal, Big Con

In the 1900’s Teddy Roosevelt started to give us a Square Deal.

In the 1930’s his cousin Freddy Roosevelt gave us the New Deal.

In the 1960’s Teddy Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson gave us the Great Society.

In the 1990’s Billy Clinton gave us the Raw Deal.

Now, in the 2010’s Barry Obama is giving us the Big Con.

How's the Hope'y Change'y thingy going for you?

There are those who say the current cultural and economic circumstances are a result of the current President’s incompetence, and the running rampant of his unbridled minions.

I don’t think so.

I believe the current President is deliberately working to sabotage the economy and political culture of the United States of America. And the Progressives in BOTH political parties are supporting him in doing so from wherever they are employed; be it in elected, appointed or bureaucratic government office, or in the private sector.

Their basic tactics: overwhelm the system and their political opponents by:

-          SPENDING: by government and otherwise, and in so doing, create the ‘too big to fail’ idea, requiring that the government step in and insure the stability of these organizations.

o       I submit this is why there has not been a Federal Budget submitted in any of the years of the Obama Presidency. Were the Budget submitted, then critics would have a measuring stick to gauge the spending against. With the raft of Continuing Resolutions, that measuring stick is not usable.

-          TAXES: confiscate and redistribute all wealth. As the government is the source and arbitrator of wealth and value, it cannot allow anyone to collect any wealth, and instead must collect all of it, and then redistribute it according to what the government decides is needful.

o       This is an application to the extreme of Morton’s Fork. — “A person who lives in luxury and has clearly spent a lot of money must obviously have sufficient income to pay as tax. Alternatively, a person who lives frugally and shows no sign of being wealthy must have substantial savings and can therefore afford to pay it as tax.” Named after John Morton, Tax Collector for King Henry VII of England.

-          ENTITLEMENTS: create government programs to distribute money, to create dependency. Then tell the recipients that they are entitled to this money. Then whenever anyone suggests that this program be modified in any way to reduce or eliminate the funding and program, scream about how that person is heartless and wants to hurt the dependents. As well create a shadow level of dependents, in the bureaucracy, who skim off their share of the money laundered through the system, as it travels from the taxed producers to the recipient dependents.

o       Continue to create new mandates and entitlements until every aspect of the economy is permeated by government influence.

-          DEBT: Run the system so deeply into the debt that it cannot rationally meet its obligations in any feasible situation while maintaining the level of spending and entitlements.

This is done with the expectation that the capitalist system will collapse under this burden. The people will then clamor for the government to save them and provide for them. But this is based on a few false preconceptions:

False conception 1: Judeo-Christian values are obsolete and oppressive.

False conception 2: Free Market Capitalism is immoral and unethical and therefore should be destroyed.

False conception 3: When a business collapses, a conservative will go crying to the government for help and relief.

1: Judeo-Christian values are timeless and based in truth, and when lived and practiced, ennoble and elevate all men and women in equity and justice.

-          The problem is not the values: the problem is not living completely by them.

2: Free Market Capitalism is moral in its foundation, and is the best method for allowing all men and women to provide for themselves and their families, and have extra to save for emergencies, and use to help their neighbors.

-          The problem is not the system: the problem is the immorality of the few who abuse it.

3: Conservatives response to a business collapse is they get back to work and rebuild. Their only cry to the government is to get out of the way.

Moral men and women will practice that morality in their religion, in their economics, and in their personal interactions.

The problem is not the system, or the values, but in the men who refuse to abide them.

I believe the current President refuses to abide these, and is deliberately surrounding himself, and installing into the system, people of similar stripe and allying with those already in place to destroy the American Economy and political system, to replace it with some form of totalitarian regime, with themselves at its head.

Question is, can these potentially treasonous people be removed by anything short of force of arms?

Can we erect a gallows on the National Mall, and use it to put these treasonous Progressives on permanent display?

Can we get an adult in charge please?

First:

The current international goings on are being handled by the current presidency in the same way that the domestic stuff is:

He calls for his preferred deliberative body to agree with him. When they don’t agree with him, he goes around them pronouncing them useless, and expands his unconstitutional imperial power.

Second:

The president said things that have now backed him into a corner. So he must act in a way he does not want to.

Personally I think it is time some adults stood up and told this spoiled little boy to go sit in a corner while adults clean up the mess he has made.

Problem is he has surrounded himself with yes-men and juveniles of like minded ideology.

Third:

I hear people on some radio shows talking about this being the end of days. But I think they miss two points.

a) The two witnesses in Jerusalem, as in Revelation and Isaiah. They are not yet in place, or the world would know about it. In tangent, admittedly the battle of Megiddo is not happening yet, either. Until they show up the world is on at least a three and a half year plus clock.

b) The gospel preached to all nations. There are some nations now where it is illegal to preach anything but the gospel of Muhammad.

The fulfillment of this one may be accounted for in a historic manor or here and now. But this depends on the answer to two questions:

-Is priesthood authority necessary to perform the ordinances of salvation?

-Where is it/who has it?

This is structured thus:

Q1 – “no” –go to Protestants.

“Yes” feed forward to Q2.

Q2 – “Maintained in the church for the last near 2000 years” – go to catholic, or orthodox of whatever stripe.

“Lost by historic church, need restoration from heaven.” – go to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

God is not the author of confusion, therefore the myriad of churches claiming to be his one true church cannot be by God’s doing, but by man or the devil.

So fulfillment of ‘all nations’: if historic, then the requirements for many of the now Islamic nations was met by the church in the centuries before Islam rose to prominence.

If current fulfillment, then there are many nations that need to allow the gospel of Jesus Christ to be preached in their nations.

In short there are many years yet to go. The sky is not falling yet, but 'Noah is building that ark, so watch out for rain.'

Forth:

It appears to me that according to the current ideology in the government 100% employment will be when everyone receives a government check.

Just a thought, from recient news.

I have listened to the news from the Fort Hood Terror Attack trial with some amusement. Several ideas have come over the weeks.

What does it say about someone when that person refuses to let another define himself as the enemy of the first?
This comes from hearing about how the defendant was trying to present himself as a jihadist, and the courts martial would not allow it.

If this defendant is so anxious to die, oblidge him, as inconveniently as possible.
The story goes that General Pershing did that in the Philippines when he captured 50 jihadi insurgents, prepaired a mass grave, slaughtered a herd of pigs into the grave, had the subsequent ammunition soaked in the spilled blood, then shot 49 of the insurgents, buried them with the pigs, and let the last go. There was no jihadi trouble after that.
It appears that this defendant is anxious to be found guilty and executed,so as to claim martyr status.
Well then. I propose on finding him guilty, take the prisoner in full formal dress for the service he is on the rolls of, including all his ribbons, badges, medals, etc. Stand him up before Fort Hood in full assembly, and ritually strip every last item from the uniform down to and including the piping and buttons. This to remove from the prisoner all acolades from his time on the military rolls.
Then turn the prisoner over to the appropriate command to transport the prisoner to the approximate location of Osama's resting place. Secure a weighted vest to the prisoner. Secure to the prisoner 12 hogs. Shoot the hogs, and then slice them open. Take every weapon that the prisoner had on his person when he committed his act of terror, and soak them in the hogs entrails, and secure them to the prisoners person.
As the prisiner will be lonely, let him take a koran with to read.
In the appropriate location, dispatch the prisoner and the hogs to go stand vigil at Osama's grave.
Give the prisoner a long enough drop to yell as loud and long as he cares to, to let the dead know he is comming.

Not quite sequiter thoughts.

I recently heard a discussion about there being Three Levels of Law:

1. God – Natural Law
2. Family – Husband and Wife, Parent and child
3. Community – Neighborhood, Town, Nation

Other subsequent things I listened to discussed how a community is bound together by its Rites. It got me thinking about how Rites teach what a persons Rights are. The following is what assembled itself in my mind:

 - Rites of God – Natural Law:

1. Faith in the moral behavior of things. The assurance of past experience that things will do as they have done.

2. Repentance of own short comings

3. Forgiveness of others shortcomings

Rites of Revealed Religion – How to connect to God

1. Obedience to God’s revealed commandments(See Samuel to Saul, 1 Sam 5: 22)
2. Sacrifice of my will to do God’s will  (Matt 6: 10)
3. Baptism – Ritual Cleansing (No unclean thing can enter in the presence of God)
4. Confirmation (Acts 19: 1-6)
5. Sacrament of the Lords Supper – Weekly renewal of Baptismal Covenant
6. Ordination to Priesthood – power to Serve Others (Acts 6: 1-4, Rev 5: 10))
7. Endowment with Power – power to become “at one” with God (Matt 5: 48)
8. Marriage – Formation of Family by Covenant (Gen 2: 24; 1 Cor 6:16, 7:2)

- Rites of Family – Honor Father and Mother, Cleave unto Spouse

Dependence

1.      a. Birth

b. Adoption

2.      Nurture and instruction of growing children

Independence

3.      Moving out on own, provide for self

Interdependence

4.      Establish Household with Spouse

5.      Physical, Emotional, Intellectual, Spiritual Intimacy with Spouse. – Becoming “at one”

6.      Division of Labor as Equal Partners

- Rites of Community

1.      Sovereign Franchise – The Vote

2.      Serve on a Jury

3.      Serve on the Militia

4.      Take Turn in Public Office

5.      Own/Poses/Steward property 

This is not trying to be a comprehensively exhaustive list.

I see this order being turned inside out by the Progressive Ideology:

God and Natural Law becomes Government is god (Idolatry)

  “You didn’t build that.”(also the first and second laws of bureaucracy). . .

Family becomes Community (Love makes a ‘family’, not Covenants.)

  Gangs, Things are more important than people. . .

Community becomes Your Group (demographic division)

  ‘From each according to their means to each according to their needs.”

In all the U.S Government scandals and hubbub going on, I doubt there will ever be shown to be a specific trail of conspiracy in the current batch.

Rather what is going on is a Conspiracy of Ideology, which is becoming a holy war against the classical society. We have a big-government-bureaucracy full of like thinking people who are completely willing to ignore existing law, to do what they think should be done.

Many failed to change the system from the outside in the Sixties so they put on camouflage and went into the system and once they got into positions of power they are now seeking to effect the changes from within.

They ignore existing law. They only enforce such as they chose to. They reject classical morality and do note even instruct it.

I see that the Democrat Party is reliving the 1930's to 1940's. The Progressives there are doing all they can to insure that they remain in political power for another generation, with the opposition party reduced to impotence and destroyed into obscurity.

I see that the Republican Party is reliving the 1970's. The Progressives there are doing all they can to reduce the power and influence of the Conservatives and Constitutionalists. They are content to live in the obscurity of being the opposition party.
 

When the revolution started, they seized the telegraph office, the schools, and the presses.

That is where the counter revolution needs to be originated from.

Including, but not limited to Sunday Schools, Home Schooling, and Desktop Publishing.

Perception drives reality. Control Perception, and you control reality.

Control Perception by controlling Information.

Control Information by the Media, the Education and Communication Systems.

God controls Information by dispensing it to everyone, as they choose to receive.

He teaches correct principles, and allows us to choose for ourselves.

As we receive, abide and obey true principles, we perceive reality by those correct principles. Thus the rites, and rights.

some ideas about the basics about god

Listening to Michael Medved this afternoon, he had two notable guests talking about Religion vs Science.
Several of the points were, in summary, that science is coming to the conclusion that there must be some form of god, meaning that there is some organizing something that made the universe and set up the place to be favorable for life as we know it.

As I listened I was impressed by and reminded of a few points:
1) It takes as much and more faith to believe in the stances of not having some kind of god, than it does to believe in some kind of god.

2) 'Religion' is to 'realign' one's self in relationship to deity. The deity's given priesthood are to dispense the method of realignment in instruction and performances; the worshiper receives the instruction and participates in the performances. 'To get religion' was for a worshiper to feel a connection to 'god'

3) Through this connection, 'god' will define itself to the worshiper.

4) Many of the arguments against religion argue against a given 'church' (christian in particular, but others in general) as a historic organization, rather than against the teachings that organization.

5) Many of those who claim atheism appear to fall into one of two camps: those who do not want to have/exercise/believe in 'faith', however the given individual may define it; those who have not had or discount having the experience of the existence of god. In short they want 'God' to appear before them before they will believe and have faith in said deity.

-
Other points that occur:
Many reject organized religions because of the history, or present, of the given organization, and is so doing reject the teachings of that organization, without considering the teachings.

Many reject the teachings of the organizations, as corrupt, because they are not the teachings of the original organization, as the individual determines in his own research.

Many reject 'god' because they do not agree with the definition of 'god' given to them by others, and miss the better point that they can and should allow god to define itself to them, by getting religion individually.

There are many who might do better to wipe all the competing definitions of 'god' off the proverbial table and seek got for themselves and allow god to define itself to them.

The more biology examines the processed of cells, the more the principle of 'irreducible complexity' becomes apparent, and that the DNA molecule in its digital functioning cannot be the result of change in whatever guise it is presented: there must be some kind of designer.


Then there is the eagerness of adherents to witness and evangelize/proselytize their beliefs: on one hand presented wrong, this is annoying at the least; presented correctly, this leads a person to further seek for truth.
The next question is 'what is truth?'

seeking direction, and companionship

I have had the feeling to use this as a forum to start posting some of my writing. Or elsewhere. also to start posting a webcomic.
It can be done, I just need to figure out how others have done it, and find the best way of those solutions, and go my self.

"It's dangerous to go alone, here take one of these."

What is wanted? A companion who is well-mete for me, for whom I am well-mete. Anyone know where I should be looking for her?

Here is a recent post of mine: http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1931578-tywacomb-pges-0-4
So it begins.
Now I need to keep it going.

Two constants - Death and Taxes

"There are two constants in this world: Death, and Taxes. Taxes are worse, Death only happens once."

Quibblers would say that to some people Death can happen a few times, if a person is revived. That is beside the point of my thought.

To wit: A reading of the Judea-Christian Scriptures tells us that Death is a programmed part of God's plan for us.

Were it otherwise the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, as celebrated at Easter, was not necessary. The Death of Christ was part of the Atonement he wrought for us: without it he could not Resurrect and open that gate for the rest of us. Without resurrection, man could not be glorified and return to live in the presence of God, and fulfill the command 'be ye therefore perfect' as the end of the sermon on the mount.

Taxes, on the other hand, are at best a necessary tool of the governments that God allows man to set up: render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and so forth.

At worst, Taxes are an instrument of that rebellious one who seeks to use the treasures of the earth to reign with blood and horror for as long as he can.
By taxes he seeks to take from the prosperous and industrious and thereby dispirit them from producing more and increasing value.
He gives from the taxes to some so as to engender ill-placed gratitude and ultimately dependence and slavery.
He uses taxes as war plunder, to inflict punishment upon the looser of conflict, engendering further strife.
He uses taxes as a score card to judge who has the most value, engendering envy, covetousness and worse.

In the United States, it could be said that he has whispered to those in power to create a holiday for the collection of taxes, and place it on a fixed day in proximity to the day we celebrate the triumph of our Savior, is as much as a personal 'take that' and for any other rational reason that could be conjured.

--

As an aside, I see the rise in vampire and lycanthrope and similar fiction as a reaction to misunderstandings of the reason and nature of death, and the nature and destiny of the soul of man.

Those who seek to avoid death beyond the natural bounds God has set, by some accounts doing so by the selfish consumption of the life of others, as vampires do, or by other accounts to surrender their humanity and reduce themselves to the level of the beasts, effectively commit evil by feeding on the life of their fellows, or by willfully rejecting the status and stewardship God gave man in being a benevolent ruler over the whole of the earth. God made man to be better than that, and in so doing, death is part of the plan: put it off until your assigned tasks are done, and embrace it in due time when it justly comes.

I make no comment here about death by conflict, beyond that generally it is not part of God's plans.

Zombie fiction is also an outgrowth of this misunderstanding.
 As is the misuse of the word "resurrect" and its derivatives when the word "revive" and its derivatives should be used.
Resurrect - a permanent change of state, from death to immortality, as Jesus on the third day (Matt 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20) and 'many bodies of the saints' after the resurrection (Matt 27:52-53), and all in either the first or second resurrection.
Revive - a temporary change of state, from death to mortality, as Lazarus (John 11), the son of the woman of Nain (Luke 7:11-17), and the daughter of Jarius (Matt 9:23-2, etc.). Or all those who have had and reported 'near-death experiences.'

--

Summary: Death is better than Taxes.
Death is part of God's plan for His children - Man.

Taxes are a tool often misused by the enemies of god to subjugate men.

here's and idea for the next starwars that I doubt will happen

I have been sampling among other things the hubbub around the creation of Star Wars VII.

I have had an idea come to me that might solve a lot of the frustration:

DISNEY should have all subsequent Star Wars shows done in CG by/as The Clone Wars, shown on Cartoon Network, is done.

This solves many problems:

Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher will not need to go to a gym to get back into fighting trim, and will not need to learn how to jump about the way the Jedi are want to do.

They will not need to learn how to fight the way Jedi are want to do.

All the original actors can 'phone it in,' and allow the CG-double do all the heavy lifting in front of the camera. Mark Hamill already has a flourishing career doing this and could give tips to the rest.

A quality character drama (the rise and fall of Anakin Skywalker) and space opera (Rebels vs Empire) done as a CG show is a poke in the eye to those who insist that CG and Cartoons are a genera not a medium.

It is a poke in the eye to those living in the Animation Age Ghetto, particularly those who want to see Star Wars 'done right.'

The CG Star Wars already nods to, acknowledges and draws from the extensive pile of written material know as the Extended Universe. Further new stories could more easily draw therefrom as CG than Live Action can, for characters, for settings, and for fans favorites in these.

There are lots of plot points that can be explored in better detail by the CG shows than the live action movies have time to.

Episodes I, II, and III already gave us extensive CGI sets. Doing the whole thing CGI will have everything looking consistent. Without a jitter cam or lens flares.

With more people involved, perhaps we can get better dialog than appeared in Episodes II and III. George can tell a great story, but he can't do dialog for nothing.

As The Clone Wars proceeds, they are moving into a sixth season. According to the movies, the clone wars last three years, approximately.
As I see the time line the Clone Wars cartoon covered the first six months of the war, chronicling Anakin's elevation to Knight, and some subsequent adventurers and flirtations with the dark side.
The Clone Wars picks up with Asoka Tanno being assigned to Anakin as padawan, and covers the next two years. With the close of the fifth season, I suppose that they have about six months of the clone wars left to cover, before running into the wall of Episode III.

If the crew working on The Clone Wars wants to keep going after bumping into Episode III they have three choices of time frame and characters to explore:
A) jump over, around and past Episode III's events, and explore the first years of the empire.
B) take their own stab at the post Episode VI times, though that area is being explored by the EU.
C) jump to another time point completely, forward or back, and start telling those stories, again being respectful of the EU.

Just some ideas.

Two thoughts that struck me this week

Subject:  Women In Combat.

In much of the occidental media that I indulge, where the subject of women in combat is encountered, the usual reason NOT TO boils down to the instinctive drive of men to defend the woman. I.E. putting a co-ed combat platoon in the field in realistic conditions relative to a healthy moral society, the men will instinctively move to protect the woman, beyond normal means to protect their brothers-in-arms, at the peril of obtaining the objective.

The usual reason TO boils down to if she can do it, let her. I.E. the situation is going to happen one way or anther, and historically always has.

Fine. My conclusions, without belaboring the issues:

To the first: No co-ed fraternization in the front line or active units: i.e. segregate the combat units by sex. Of course this will lead to some wanting to further segregate the units by sexual orientation, but that goes beyond my current point. As a secondary point, require some kind of fertility control on one or both sexes while in theater.

To the second: Particularly in the elite units, there are physical restrictions on who can qualify to join. Political Correctness lasts a shorter time on the battlefield than well made plans, and is quicker to get people killed. Therefore do not reduce the physical qualifications for the special units: there are many men who would like to serve in those units who do not meet the physical qualifications. Time has shown that where the qualification are viewed as a benchmark to strive for, members of either sex will meet the benchmark if they work hard enough. E.g. female firefighters.

Summary: if they can do it, let them, but organize things rationally so that the combat effectiveness is not compromised. This is usually done by initial segregation, which segregation obtains until all are willing to accept the competence and qualification of all.

Subject: the morality of modern media

I recently graduated with a Media Arts and Animation degree, but find myself having trepidations about going to work in the available industries.

Video Games: I find myself turned off by the realistic combat and First-Person-Shooters and by the violence and moral vacuity portrayed by so many of the popular games, and do not want to work in an industry that promotes such moral vacuity. I am less bothered by a good ‘bug-hunt’ video game, but still recognize the latent hypocrisy there.

Further to that end, I rejected opportunities to work in the Gaming Industry that supports gambling, for the same basic reason.

Television and Movies: I have found that the writing quality and morality of the broadcast and film industries is increasingly lacking, and drifting father from the traditional morals of civilized society.

- Father no longer knows best, but is instead a buffoon whose only purposes are to donate sperm at the wish of the woman, and be the nominal income source, after whatever goodies and handouts the government and mother provides.

- Mother knows best, and puts up with the afore mentioned buffoon only as long he amuses her. She works away from the home, provides for herself and what ever offspring happen to reside under the same roof.

- so many of the current crop of shows delve into investigation of the deviant and psychologically sick, and to some extent show that the ‘hero’s’ are just as damaged as the villains.

- nobody preaches or lives traditional morality without some sneering and jeering by the peanut gallery. After all, it’s all relative, and you should choose for your self, unless the god-that-is-government has made a law that says otherwise.

And all problems are solved by the closing credits.

Maybe I am too puritanical, or too Christian, or too old fashioned, or just not politically correct, but I am sick of ‘good writing' being the only thing a given show has to promote it. Particularly when the writing is a continual exploration of depravity and evil.

Summary: If I am going to work in these industries, I want to do it among people who uphold and put forth morals similar to my own, and produce product of uplifting and obvious moral caliber.

‘‘Truth, Justice, and the American Way’? You will be fighting against every elected official in the land.’

No: just those indoctrinated by, and living according to evil, and moral relativism.

a couple of random thoughts

I was riding my bike home from my part-time under-employment, when the thought came: "Who is being groomed to succeed President Obama?"
This stems partly from a Sunday Dinner conversation some weeks back. In summary the last Vice President who could have been elected President was. That was President G.H.W.Bush, succeeding President Reagan. Since then, we had:
D.Quayle: vilified as an idiot and a joke by the media
Algore: has repeatedly proven his inadequacies
R. "Darth" Cheney: scared the political left silly
Joebiden: almost the joke that Quayle was, at least in his public speaking
Everyone of these Vice Presidents could use the Secret Service code name of 'Assassination Insurance.'

So who is being groomed in the wings? Or has this setup of passing the Presidential office from party to party been deliberately set up by the-powers-what-are-behind-the-scenes?

Maybe that is one more reason why Mitt Romney lost this time around: he is not a political hack and might have actually fixed some things.

- - -

I recently asked the question to myself: what one law could have been suggested to the Biden Meetings about guns that would actually be effective to stop mass shootings?
The lunatics who do these things are already in violation of numerous social and natural laws, so trying to put another in place to stop the criminal through control of weapon availability is not going to work.
I read Ann Coulter's latest article and the answer came to me: make it easier to commit lunatics to asylums: most of the mass shootings are committed by lunatics, who show some history of being such, but have been shuffled off onto someone else in society because it was not an option to have then committed and placed where they could avoid doing harm to others.

 - - -

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United 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."

What do I think it is for?
The Second Amendment protects the power of the people from the government. The Constitution is the People giving the Government authority, thus creating a constitutional republic. Those who want a 'more proactive constitution where it tells what the government will do for the people' want to change this, and they call it a democracy. I suggest finding out what Aristotle had to say is the difference between a 'republic' and a 'democracy.'

In short the second amendment protects the peoples right to take arms against Tyrants, and those who support them. It protects the peoples right to choose what form of government they will countenance.
Power to the people.

Thus the type of weapon it protects is that kind of arm that the militia will need to use to combat the armies of the tyrants.
Small arms: pistols, knives, other single hand weapons. . .
Long arms: rifles , bows, swords, other multi-hand weapons. . .
Crew served weapons: cannon, machine guns, catapults. . .

Do I need or want to keep a hand grenade in my house? No. Most rational people will not argue with regulation infernal devices, and keeping the military grade devices at the military arsenal.
The same argument for cannon, tanks, crew-served weapons, ICBM's or any of the other military class/grade weapons is valid: let them stay on the military reservation, and in the care of the military loyal to the people it is to defend, rather than the person giving the orders to attack and oppress the people.

To reiterate after venting and wandering across this field of ideas:
1) by natural law power flows from the people to the government.
2) the constitution limits what the government may do.
3) the militia is the first line of defense for the community against:
Tyrants: those who seek to enforce their will, in violation of natural law, upon my freedom, my society, my family, my neighbors, etc.
Predators: those who seek to enforce their unlawful will upon my person, and family.
Varmints: those who seek to enforce their unlawful will upon my property.


A militia was essentially a posse of local citizens organized for the protection of the community at large, usually comprised of every able-bodied adult male not in his gentrification. I.E, the boys not yet responsible enough to serve and the old men considered too old to mobilize quickly were excused.

As an aside, I once was taught in a history class that the Roman Legions (100 men) would have the oldest-ready-to-retire stand at the back lines, with the youngest-first-years mixed among them. That way, the youngest would be buttressed in their not panicking by the oldest Vets. and the old hands could show the know-it-all youngsters how its really done.

big gun issue?

Two thoughts about President Obama's grandstanding on his imperial gun actions:

If we should move immediately to save the lives of even one young child, then lets de-fund the abortion  industry.

If the administration is going to vigorously go after those involved in the illegal use and sale of weapons, is he going to go after Eric Holder and the Fast and Furious stuff?