Still here

I know I have been quite for a long time, but I'm still here and still thinking about what is going on.  The problem has become that most of what is happening gets rehashed by so many people that I have not known what to write about or how to say it when I have thought about writting, so..... I decided to get back into by bringing back something that I had a little fun with a couple of years ago, Grandpa and Jim.  I'm not a historian and I'm not going to take years to do research so there are plenty of holes in what I've written, I know that, it's really meant to just continue a story, not to be a history lesson you will be tested on later.  I hope you enjoy it and who knows, maybe I'll write more about Grandpa and Jim, maybe I'll write more about other things.

Grandpa and Jim

The Beginning of a Nation

            It had been a few days since Jim had received the scrapbook from Grandpa but even though Jim had been born on New Year’s Eve 2026 New Years since then had not been days of celebration.  The Unification itself had occurred on the 2^nd of January 2027, since then New Years as the Americas knew it was not celebrated; the Committee, not wanting to offend any of the citizens from the other former Nations had abolished all celebrations.  There were many questions in the beginning about how many days a year would contain and when it would start because of all of the changes the calendar had taken over history. In the end, the European calendar was adopted starting over at year one, 1 AU, since this was the calendar that was the most widely used throughout the world.

            Jim had spent every available moment after Educational Training looking over the scrapbook Grandpa had given him.  In particular, the Pocketbook version of the US Constitution.  This pocketbook contained what was titled as the Declaration of Independence, Grandpa had not mentioned this part but he did say that if Jim read this book he would get an understanding of how the United States of America, the country whose flag was also in the book, was formed and what it meant.  From what Jim had read it seemed that this Declaration was written some 11 years before the actual Constitution thing that Grandpa had mentioned was written.  Jim read both of these but he didn't really understand what they meant so he had been waiting for Educational Training to end today to talk to Grandpa.

            Grandpa was sitting, as usual, in one of his old fashioned outfits.  Since the Unification there had been talk off and on about the Committee prescribing what everyone should wear but nothing had been done so far since the different races that made up the Unified Nations could not come to an agreement about what should be worn, some races wanted to go with robes, some with suits and ties and there were some that really didn’t care, as long as there were multiple choices.  The Committee wanted one uniform style with various colors to delineate worth in the working class.  But as of yet no ruling had been passed so today Grandpa was sitting wearing his blue jeans, boots and a thick denim shirt, some days he would even wear a hat that was turned up on the sides and down on the front and back, but that was just for going outside.  During the warm months Grandpa still liked to wear short pants, button up short sleeve shirts and flip flops.  Personally Jim thought Grandpa was confused as to who he was or what he was, but that was his Grandpa and that was OK.  On the other hand those attending Educational Training did have uniforms to wear so Jim went to his room to change before he started his talk with Grandpa, he also wanted to grab the pocketbook.  After Grandpas warning Jim had taken great pains to hide the scrap book and all its contents, being 12 he thought his sock drawer was the perfect location.

            After Jim had changed and retrieved the pocketbook version of the Constitution he went to the main room of their living quarters.  Their quarters were rather bland since the Committee prescribed how each housing unit would look.  There were a couple of chairs and tables, Grandpa had complained more than once that there were no couches, whatever they were, evidently you could actually lay down on these.  The Committee wanted the room to only be used for sitting and viewing the Committee controlled audio visual programs they received on the wall mounted large tablet.  Grandpa didn't trust the tablet, he said there had been talk of activating the embedded camera for Committee purposes but so far there was no evidence of that.  The only time the camera was activated, to their knowledge, was when the tablet was being used for communication.  The walls also contained a few digital pictures that could be changed, unfortunately they would only display Committee approved images, and too often this would be slogans the Committee was trying out.  You could get it to display the weather which made no sense to Jim, people these days hardly ever had to actually go outside since all work and education centers were located in the same buildings as the workers living quarters.  The lighting and temperature of the quarters was also controlled by the Committee, something else Grandpa grumbled about.  He was always saying the light wasn't bright enough for his old eyes and the temperature was either too hot or too cold for his old bones.  Grandpa seemed to grumble a lot, except when he and Jim were talking privately, Grandpa seemed to like talking to Jim.

Grandpa acted as if he had been waiting for Jim, in fact he almost acted like he was disappointed Jim had not talked to him earlier then today.

“I was wondering when you would come back to me with some questions.”

“Well, I, ummmm…. I wasn't sure what to ask so I read through some of the stuff again” Jim said hesitantly.

“Good.” Said Grandpa with a smile, “That was one of the biggest mistakes people made, not being well informed before they asked questions, the other big one was to not even try to get informed.”

            Jim started feeling better, he started feeling like he had been right to read the pocketbook again, even though it really didn't make complete sense to him, in fact he really did not understand very much of it.  He had gotten the impression that the people that wrote the section called the Declaration of Independence were upset about how things were going with someone called the King of Great Britain, whoever that was and wherever that was.  That was one of the questions Jim wanted to ask Grandpa about.

“For starters” Jim started, “I was wanting to ask you about the Declaration of Independence.  You didn't say anything about that being in the pocketbook so I wasn't sure what it was all about.”

Grandpa looked at Jim with a curious expression, “what do you think it’s about?”

“From what I read it seems like a list of complaints about the King of Great Britain.  What I don’t know is what is a King, where is Great Britain and why were the people that wrote it mad at him?”

“That is a question that will take a lot more than simple one word answers to explain.  I’m not a historian but I can tell you what I know.  There will be holes in my telling but I do have other information hidden away that I will give to you later to learn from.  For now I will try to make it as simple as I can.”  Grandpa stared off for a few seconds collecting his thoughts.  “Remember I told you about Jamestown being founded in 1607, 420 BU to you?  Well that was the first of what were called the British Colonies, well the first successful one.  There had been attempts before, attempts from all different races.  There were many questions about who was the first to actually discover what was called the Americas and how it got its name.  Most accounts give credit to a man by the name of Christopher Columbus in the year 1492 or 535 BU.  Columbus was from a Nation that later became the Nation of Spain, this is now known as District 44-321 of the Unified State of Europe.  Maybe I should back up a little and define Nation, State, County and City.”

“Before Unification all of what you know as Unified States were individual Countries, Countries that had their own laws and cultures.  Places like the Unified State of Europe was actually a land mass called Europe with many separate and individual Countries.  America was separated into North, Central and South America.  Where we live was once a part of North America.  Originally, starting with Jamestown and then later with a group called the Pilgrims, the Country later to be named the United States of America began.  The Pilgrims crossed the Atlantic Ocean in big ships and landed north of here in an area that was later named Massachusetts.  Massachusetts later became one of the original Colonies and then a State.  In those days State was another name for Country.  The original spot they landed in was called Plymouth which later became a Town, or City, in the State of Massachusetts.  Communities of people were called any of a number of names, City if very large, Town if moderately large and then something like a Village or Community if small.  All of these were essentially the same in respect to a group of people that had banded together with similar ideas or beliefs.  Sometimes it was a bonding for business reasons, sometimes agricultural and even at times just because of a belief in how to live.  Groups of Cities or Towns would be called Counties, generally lumped together by either geographical reasons or even lifestyle reasons.  Sometimes the reasons could not be determined.  Counties were then lumped together to form States, in early terms this was the same as a Country.  States were generally grouped together by cultural similarities.”

“Hold up Grandpa, you are going way too fast for me.” Jim protested.  “What has all of this have to do with someone called a King and a place called Great Britain?”

“OK, OK.  Great Britain was one of the most powerful Nations of the time, even though it was one of the smallest.  It was located in the Southwest portion of what you know as the Unified State of Europe, those Islands out there.  Great Britain controlled many other Nations and the head of Great Britain was called King.  In the case of the Americans anger it was King George.”

“Why were they so powerful if they were do small?” Jim asked.

“The Kings of Britain were smart and sometimes brutal, which at the time was the only way to increase your lands.  The idea was that the Country with the best trained and best armed Soldiers would occupy another country, forcefully if necessary.  Once that other Country was occupied it was under the rule of the occupiers.  Great Britain was not the only Nation that increased their lands this way, it was the way of the times.  Understand?”

“I understand what you are saying, I just don’t understand why it was allowed.” Jim replied.

“Well it was allowed as you say only because the only ones with power were the Kings because of the Armies and the Armies did the Kings bidding.  Thankfully times changed but unfortunately attitudes didn't.  Where past Kings used Armies and force to take over other Countries now they used slick talk and dirty tricks, in other words, politics.  Are you with me now?”  Grandpa asked.

“I think so.” Jim stuttered. “So where do the Americas, or rather the United States of America, come in?”

“Very good, you’re catching on” replied Grandpa.  “For countries that were not populated by what were considered to be civilized, Kings or other rulers that went by different titles, would send large groups of people to settle the areas and start towns.  As for the Americas the first successful settlement was here, only it was called Jamestown.  They came here to spread Gods word and to make the King rich off whatever natural resources were in the area, sometimes even gold.  The Pilgrims were a group that left Great Britain to find religious freedom”

“Hold it” said Jim, “God?? Who is that and what is religious freedom?”

“I keep forgetting that the Committee has banned the teaching of religious beliefs, beliefs in a creator.  God is a being that many believed in as being the creator of the world, the being that created man and all the creatures.  Belief in God was called faith, sometimes that was all we had, faith.  There were many different ways of practicing this belief in a spiritual being and in the case of the Pilgrims their way was not accepted in Great Britain at the time.  Unfortunately religion has always been a sticky point when it came to freedom, in fact it very often was the focal point of many wars throughout the history of the world.  That proved to be true here in the Americas as well.  After we get through how things got to where they are now maybe we will take on God, I’m not real good on the subject but I, and your parents, are believers. Can you put that on hold for now?”

“Sure” Jim stammered.

“OK Grandpa, let’s see if I understand this so far.  The King of this small Island Great Britain sent some people over here to where we now live to start a new…… City?”

“Well more of a Settlement, but not bad so far, go on” urged Grandpa.

“OK, that was 420 years before the world became unified, right?”

“Right.”

“I take it that then the, what did you call them, Pilgrims?”

“Yes”

“The Pilgrims came over and set up shop north of here.  Am I right so far?”

“You are right, just don’t know if I would call it setting up shop though” Grandpa laughed.

“OK, well that doesn't seem like very many people to get upset with a powerful King, not to mention this Declaration was written in what 1776?  What would that be, uh, 251 BU, right?”

“Very good, you have figured out part of it.”

“Well” Jim continued, “there’s about 170 years there that you haven’t filled in.”

“Easy Son” said Grandpa with a grin, “I’m getting there.  Over the next 170 years, as you put it, the Americas grew into 13 distinct Colonies, later to become 13 individual States.  There are a couple of maps in the scrap book that show all of this from the first settlements until today.  Each of these Colonies had different, shall we say personalities, different beliefs on how to live, how to treat others and how they wanted to be treated.  Each of them had to literally fight for their survival.  In some cases the fight was with what were considered to be uncivilized people, the Native Americans, sometimes the fight was with weather and nature.  They did not have all the modern technologies we now have, they used fire to cook by and light their way.  They either grew their food in the ground or hunted for it, sometimes with primitive weapons like knives and bows, the things you can see only in museums today.  They lived in homes that were at times no more than branches from trees covered with mud and grass.  Every day of their lives they were fighting in some way to survive.  Depending on where they lived they had differing ideas and different hardships to deal with.  When you fight that hard to survive and to create a place to live and raise families you develop a very independent attitude.  They also developed a belief that they were just as good as the King, again because of those beliefs they had in God their creator, they believed that every individual had certain rights simply because of being born, not because of laws.  Because of this the Colonies did not always see eye to eye with each other on how things should be done.  The individual Colonies had developed their own personalities.  They did however agree that they did not like having a King some 3000 miles across the Atlantic Ocean writing the laws for them and telling them to pay taxes to him just for the pleasure of being allowed to live over here, at least the majority of them did.”

“Taxes???” Jim asked.

“Sorry.  Taxes were money, credits in today’s terms, that was given to someone that didn't earn it.  In this case it was paid to the King of Great Britain.  Taxes were then used to pay for Armies and luxuries as the King saw fit.  In the case of the American Colonies they were paying the King so he could pay for wars that America had no concern with, and other things of course.  If you remember what you read in the Declaration of Independence you will see what I’m talking about, and many other things the Colonies were not happy about.  The Colonies felt as if they did not have the same say in how things were to be run by the King as the Colonies that were on the Great Britain side of the Atlantic, one term they used was taxation without representation.”

“I think I’m understanding what I read now, although there were many words that I still don’t understand.”  Jim stated thoughtfully.

“Language has changed over time.  For example State and Country meant the same thing at one time, later people believed a State to be part of a Country.  There are other words and ways of talking that just fell by the wayside, I guess most of it was mainly due to people becoming lazy in how they talked.”

“I think I understand that, now what about the Declaration?”

“Alright, alright.  You now know that over a period of somewhere around 170 or so years 13 Colonies under the control of the British”………

“British????? That’s the second time you have used that term.” Jim remarked with a quizzical look.

“Opps, British were what the people of Great Britain were called.  Anyhow, they 13 Colonies decided they would be better off if they were in control of their own destinies.  That was when they called together some of the wisest and most influential men from the various Colonies and wrote the Declaration of Independence.  The Declaration spelled out their grievances with the King and declared their independence, this document formed the United States of America.  No longer were the Colonies called Colonies, they were now individual States that came together, united, under a common cause.”

Jim looked at Grandpa for a minute or so and then asked “and the King just let them do this?”

“Oh no” replied Grandpa, “just like anything worth having sometimes you have to fight for what you want.  The new States of America fought a long bloody battle to claim their independence, and they won.”

            Jim thought about all of this for a few minutes.  It was a lot of information to absorb but he thought he was starting to get the idea.  Those men had created a home here and they wanted to have the say in how it was run.  “So where does the Constitution come in with all of this?”

            Grandpa grinned, “I think we better call it quits for tonight Jim, later we will go into the Constitution.  For now go back and read the Declaration of Independence and look at the maps I talked about.  As I said before I have other information you can look at but for now it’s just important for you to start understanding how the United States of America came to be and why.  There were many different battles that occurred before all of this happened, there were different Kings that owned portions of the Americas both before and after the United States were formed.  And there were many other reasons for the United States developing as it did.  For now we will stick to the basics.  Give it a couple of days and let this sink in, then we will continue.”

Steve Avery 7-15-13

Guns, Laws and the Government

            I have thought about writing on the subject of guns for quite a while now but I wasn't sure of exactly what I wanted to say, rather I wasn't sure of how to say what I wanted.  Just for full disclosure let me state that I am currently a member of the NRA.  The NRA likes to tout the 2^nd Amendment as being all the authorization a person needs to lawfully carry a gun, sorry, not true.  The 2^nd Amendment, and in fact Amendments 1 through 8, have been misconstrued as being the rights of all the People in these United States.  This fallacy has been perpetuated by what is called the Incorporation Doctrine, a doctrine that could ultimately give the Federal Government all the power they could ever desire over the citizens of these United States.

I purposely left out the 9^th and 10^th Amendments since the 9^th states that all powers not stated in the Constitution and not given to the States remains in the hands of the People and the 10^th states the same only for the States, in other words these back up the preamble to the Bill of Rights.  Speaking of the preamble to the Bill of Rights, most do not even know it exists, it plainly states that the Bill of Rights are further restrictions on the Federal Government, they are not rights of the People. 

Every State has a Constitution, these individual Constitutions are the ones that need to be studied and defended or fought.  Several States prohibit the private ownership of guns, as is their right.  If you live in a State that prohibits the ownership of guns then you have two choices, fight the State legislation to have the Constitution legally amended, or move to another State.  Vote with your feet.

Recently we have had several tragedies involving guns within the borders of these United States.  No person of conscience believes these shootings should have happened, and they are right.  Where they are wrong is the belief that Government regulations or even Law Enforcement could have prevented them.  I do not have the answer for what would have prevented them but I do believe that advertising that guns were not allowed was a contributing factor, like painting a target on someone’s back.

            The morning talk shows are competing for air time with ways to prevent these types of tragedies in the future.  What no one seems to be willing to say is that tragedies of this nature are going to happen, no matter what the Government or the anti gun activists do.  Those that do not like guns are going to do whatever is possible to get guns out of the hands of the average person; this will not stop the crimes.  You can take all the guns out of the law abiding citizens’ hands and those that want to commit a crime using a gun will still be able to obtain one.

The Government can increase regulations making it harder for the law abiding citizen to purchase a gun, but it will not stop the criminals, if anything, it may increase the violent crimes committed on the law abiding citizen.  These measures will also turn many citizens, citizens that have never knowingly broke a law in their life, into criminals because they will hide guns or even openly oppose Government officials when they come to try and take the guns.

            Ted Nugent likes to say that an armed citizenry is a polite citizenry.  There is a lot of truth in this statement.  If there were no signs advertising no gun zones, if there were no laws that created financial burdens and mounds of red tape for the ownership of guns and if there were not the stigma of gun ownership that the anti-gun activists are creating, criminals would not know who is armed and who is not.  Criminals are opportunists that prey on the weakest and easiest targets; this means those they believe to be unarmed and unwilling to fight back.  The Aurora shooting is one of the best examples of this, even in the mans supposed deranged thinking he chose a theater that was posted as a gun free zone over ones that were closer to his home that were not posted.

            The morning talk shows are also awash with experts spouting off about how the Sandy Hook shooting would not have occurred if the Mother had locked up the guns, especially knowing her son had some mental problems.  Again, if the guns were locked in a safe or not it really would not have mattered.  If some one is determined enough they will find the guns, even if it means finding out the combination of the safe, after all, this man did kill his Mother before he went to Sandy Hook.  People that want to commit crimes will figure out how to commit crimes, they instinctively know things that the average person would not even think of. 

I heard one so called expert say that if you are going to have a gun for protection then it should be on your person and be the only one that is not under lock and key.  Well there are a few problems with thinking this way, are you going to sleep with it strapped to your waist?  Have you ever had children wander around the house in the middle of the night?  In rural areas guns are used to protect both family and livestock from both two and four legged criminals.  For a gun to be a useful tool it must be ready to perform the task it was designed for.  The best defense for this is to become educated, educate your family and be cognizant of who is in your home and where your unlocked guns are, just as you keep track of where you car is and the keys for it.

            If you want to outlaw guns because they are so dangerous then you might as well outlaw anything with a point, anything that can be used as a club and all motorized vehicles.  The only sure fire way to ensure your own safety from others is to never interact with another person, live in a rubber room and only eat things that have been tested and sterilized to the point that there is no taste at all.  In other words no one can ensure you are going to be 100% safe; that is life.  The Government can not protect you from all things that may hurt or harm you, all they can do is create regulations that make life hard and turn otherwise law abiding people into criminals. 

            There is some question as to just what the real motive of the Government is.  Do they not employ body guards that carry guns?  So exactly why do they want to take the guns from the average citizen?  There is historical evidence that Governments that take the guns also take the freedoms of the people, is that what you want?  Not me.

            I know this is an unpopular stance on this topic but it is a stance that has to be defended.  I am just as sickened by all the tragedies that have occurred recently, but I am trying to be realistic about all of it.  Life is not fair, it never has been.  There are no guarantees in life and there never has been.  Laws are for honest people not for those that want to commit crimes such as these.

Steve Avery

1/13/2013

Debate Frustrations

            Sitting here watching the second Presidential debate for the 2012 election, actually the November 2011 election, is really disappointing.  So far all I’ve heard, both in this debate and the first debate, is the same rhetoric coming from different angles.  At the moment they are talking about tax cuts, lowering the taxes on all incomes but keeping some deductions, making the upper income, over $250,000, pay more.  In reality they are both way off the mark, neither of their plans are going to grow the economy.  Let’s look at deductions, why do we have them?

            Has anyone ever thought about the fact that because they may decide to get married and have children and send them to public schools they are getting their children’s education paid for by those that decided not to have children and they are getting to keep more of their money simply because they decided to get married?  Let’s look at the mortgage deduction, you decide to buy a house and now all of a sudden you get to keep more of your income?  Why should anyone get to deduct a mortgage?  Is this saying that the person that does not take out a mortgage to buy a home but instead decides to work hard and save to buy a home outright should be penalized?  So the truth is the IRS and the Federal Government wants you to stay in debt, they encourage you to not pay off your home because you will lose that mortgage deduction, you will actually have less disposable income if you are fiscally responsible and do not go into debt.  That is a form of slavery.

            On the subject of the economy let’s look at the issues about education, specifically college education.  Both of the candidates are touting maintaining Pell Grants and other Government sponsored loan programs to promote college education.  How much Federal money goes to Colleges?  I honestly do not know the answer to that but I’ll bet it would be an interesting trail to follow.  Who provides the money that is paid out in these Government grant programs, it is not the Federal Government, it is the tax payer, you and me and anyone else that is out here working and paying taxes, college education or not.  It is interesting that during that conversation the President stated that he wanted to increase manufacturing jobs, last time I checked most of the jobs in manufacturing do not require a college education, at least not to perform the job.  I am not knocking a college education, what I am knocking is the total disregard for the fact that more jobs in this country do not require a college education, we can put more people back to work by the Government getting out of the way.  Most of the regulations in this country, both at Federal and State levels are not to ensure safe operations or fair trade; they are to get in the way of growth.

            Another thing that I keep hearing in the debates is the issue of the bail out the auto industry.  The President keeps hammering Governor Romney about wanting to allow the auto industry to go into bankruptcy.  The President states that the Governor plan would have lost millions of jobs, but no one wants to connect the dots and look at what the President has said about the energy industry in these United States, specifically the coal industry.  The President has stated in plain words that you can start a coal fired plant but we will bankrupt you.  How many jobs will that kill?  How many coal miners that know only one way of life, how many truck drivers that haul the coal will no longer have a job, how many companies that load the coal on barges and move them up rivers from the mines to the coal fired electrical generation plants will lose their jobs?  It’s not about maintaining jobs, it’s about who is politically connected, the auto unions, and it’s about personal agendas.

            Immigration is another favorite subject in these debates.  Neither candidate will come right out and state that the problem is not with immigration, it is with illegal immigration.  Once again most of this problem has been caused by Government intervention.  The immigration laws are so convoluted that it takes a entire team of lawyers to figure out all the paperwork that needs to be filled out and the hoops that have to be jumped through in order to enter this country legally.  The Constitution is fairly straight forward about the Federal Governments role in immigration; the Federal Government will make the laws for naturalization, not immigration.  The Federal Government is not following their own laws, look up the Federal Naturalization Laws; once you do you will wonder why we have so many bi-lingual signs in these United States.  Immigration and the protection of borders should be a State issue until the flow of illegal immigrants is deemed to be an invasion; at that point the Federal Government should step in to protect the States.  Immigration and alien worker programs are good for these United States, as long as they all enter legally.  Some of the best workers you will find in these United States are workers that are coming across our Southern borders to try and better their lives.  The problem is that our Federal Government wants to turn a blind eye to persons crossing our border illegally, just because they are good workers and they are trying to better themselves.  If I was to rob a bank to better myself I would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, regardless of what type of worker I was or how many people I was supporting.  The law is the law, breaking a law no matter the reason is wrong, why are we willing to turn a blind eye to people that are illegally trespassing into our States, not to mention the fact the our Federal Government will sue a State because they are trying to enforce the law.

            Both candidates are being very evasive about the assault weapons issue.  This is really a simple issue, it is not the weapons, it is what is done with them by a small portion of the population.  Speeding and reckless driving is against the law, we have not made it against the law to sell performance engines or parts, we have enforce the laws on speeding and reckless driving, the same should be true with assault weapons, it can be cool to shoot an assault weapon, you use it illegally you will be punished to the full extent of the law.

            The issue of shipping jobs overseas came up and all I kept hearing was that we need to either hold Chinas feet to the fire for manipulating their currency or we need to promote high wage, high education jobs.  Not all Americans are suited to go to College.  As for the China issue, it is their currency; they can do what they want with it.  If America would worry about America and stop trying to make everyone else like us or make everyone else play by our rules we would be better off.

            Whoever becomes the next President of these United States needs to work at getting out of the way.  He needs to pull that archaic document called the Constitution of the United States and read it then steer the Federal Government back to that document.  One of the first things the next President should do is to have a meeting with all the Governors of the States and reiterate that the States are sovereign and that it is up to them to have or not have all the entitlement programs, the programs that are not authorized by the Constitution.  Unfortunately that is not going to happen, we are going to be faced with the same type of Presidency that we have seen for the last several decades, more Government intervention, more regulation, more spending, more taxes and more importantly, less freedom for the citizens.  This is not a Republican or Democrat issue, this is a power issue, both sides want the power and both sides will abuse the power.

           

Steve Avery

10/16/2012

Sovereignty

            In a recent essay about the Supreme Court rulings on Healthcare and the Arizona Immigration law I used the terms sovereignty and citizen together.  Just a few days ago I received a call from my middle son who is with a Sheriffs Department in the south.  He was telling me about an arrest he had made and the subsequent court date.  He had arrested an individual on drug charges, this individual claimed to be a sovereign citizen therefore the law did not apply to him.  It was an interesting conversation and the research I did later on Sovereign Citizenship was even more interesting, it was also frightening.  Frightening in the sense that I in no way want to have what I have written to be misunderstood to be an endorsement of Sovereign Citizenship.

            The Sovereign Citizenship website mentions that the group believes themselves to be free from all laws.  They have no identification, no drivers license, no social security number, no registrations, nothing.  When they drive they claim they are not driving, they are traveling and there are no laws that prevent them from traveling.  There is even a handbook they will send you to show you how to live a Sovereign Citizen lifestyle.  The website claims they do not advocate violence nut in recent history some of the more horrific violent acts, especially towards Law Enforcement, have been committed by Sovereign Citizens.  Terry Nichols was a Sovereign Citizen as were the Father and Son in Arkansas recently that shot down 2 Police Officers performing a simply traffic stop.  When I went on to obtain more information about these people I came across an article on the FBI website talking about Sovereign Citizens and the domestic threat they pose, not all mind you, but like other groups the extreme faction; sound like any other group that seems to be in the news a lot.  At the end of the FBI article there was a paragraph about the signs to look for in identifying Sovereign Citizens, this was the part that prompted me to write this.  The FBI mentioned a few things in particular, speaking of the Bible and quoting the Constitution.  These happen to be the same types of things that are typically quoted by Tea Party groups, Independents and Libertarians that desire a return to the Constitution.  In short Sovereign Citizenship is not the type of Citizen Sovereignty that I am talking about when I mentioned it in my essay or anytime I mention the 9^th Amendment, nor is it the type that any true Patriot of the United States and the Constitution of the United States are talking about.

            Citizen Sovereignty as it applies to the Constitution means that the Citizens are the first step of chain when it comes to the Governments of both the States and the United States.  Citizens created the States and the States created the Union that we call the United States.  Citizens are the ones that are responsible for electing the officials that will represent them at both the State level and the Federal level.  If there were no citizens there would be no Government, I know that is an obvious statement but it is true, it also means that the Citizens are the pool from which the Politicians come, so if the Politicians are a problem then it is the fault of the Citizenry.  I can not and will not take credit for that thought, George Carlin, the late great comedian that told it like it was, had a skit using that thought and he was right, 100% right.  In Carlins’ skit he asks where all the good people are, are the Politicians we keep sending to Washington, and to our State Legislatures, the best we have?  I don’t believe so but until more of the People understand what the 9^th Amendment was written for and stop being afraid to stand up we are going to continue to get the same type of Politicians we currently have.  The Tea Party and others that feel as I do believe in having a Government, just not an out of control Government.  The Nation is too large to not have a Government; there would be utter chaos without one.  In truth I believe our Nation is too large for the Government we currently have and we are going to see utter chaos regardless.

            The Government we have currently seems to believe themselves to be more like the British Monarchy of old, the same Monarchy our founding generation fought against, and the same Monarchy our founding generation gave up their lives and their fortunes to free us from.  When this Nation earned its freedom from the British Monarchy it was because the Nation was made up of independent minded people that believed in personal responsibility.  Today our Government does not believe any of us to be responsible enough to make our own decisions; we are not smart enough to think for ourselves.  The Sovereign Citizenship group would tell you to just ignore the Government, ignore their laws and ignore their regulations.  A Sovereign Citizen in accordance with the 9^th Amendment will tell you to learn about your Government at all levels and to get involved, even if it only means getting to know your Politicians and voting with knowledge not because of popularity.  We have been led to believe only those with money can be elected to public office, maybe it’s time to disprove that myth, maybe it’s time for Citizen Statesmen again.

           

Steve Avery

7/29/2012

A Month To Be Remembered

             The month of June in the year of our Lord 2012 will be a month to be remembered when it comes to the Supreme Court of the United States, or as is the popular way of saying it these days, the SCOTUS.  SCOTUS sounds more like a grunge band then the Supreme Court of the Nation; then again at this point with the recent rulings I believe I would rather take the rulings of a grunge band then to take the rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States.

            Recently the much discussed and controversial Arizona law SB 1070, finally came before the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court surprisingly upheld a majority of the law but they did vote against Arizona in 3 parts that took most of the bite out of the law.  Specifically they voted against the warrant less arrests of individuals that were in the country illegally and suspected of committing a crime and the section that made it separate State crime for illegal immigrants to work in the State.  The Supreme Court argued that these sections violated the Constitutional power of the Congress to establish a uniform of Naturalization (Article II, Section VIII, Number 4).  This is only one of the problems associated with the Supreme Courts ruling, as I have stated before there is a big difference between Naturalization and Immigration, they are two different things, just look up the definitions of each, I would think Judges that are smart enough to be appointed to the Supreme Court would already know this without having to reference Webster’s Dictionary or some High School Graduates blog.

            Immigration to put it simply is the act of moving from one place to another.  When said immigration is done with the permission of the final location we call it illegal immigration.  If someone immigrated from the public road in front of my house onto my property without permission it is called trespassing.  Trespassing and illegal immigration are one and the same, therefore someone that has entered Arizona, or any other State in the Union, illegally has committed a crime and should be arrested.  As in most cases of trespassing if the crime is simply that they were in a place they had no right to be in they should have their day in court, receive a fine and then they should be returned to the place they are allowed to be in legally, in the case of Arizona we are talking about back across the border into Mexico.

            Naturalization can only occur after legal immigration into the States of the Union has occurred.  Naturalization is the process of becoming an American citizen.  Part of this process includes a residency requirement which would lead one to believe that would mean a certain amount of time legally living in one of the States within the United States.  Currently each State, as far as I know, have their own laws of residency before you can consider yourself to be a citizen of that State, since the United States are made up of the individual States then it would lead me to believe that you would have to first meet the residency laws of the State you have chosen to live in before you can meet the requirements for Naturalization to be a citizen of these United States.

            The residency statement leads me to my final dissention with the ruling of the Supreme Court.  On Tuesday, July 17, 1787 the Continental Congress voted down what was referred to as a negative of State laws.  A negative of State laws would have put all the power of legislating laws into the hands of the Central Government.  Two Clauses in the Constitution of the United States reflect the final rulings of the day, Article II, Section VIII, Number 18 gave the power of law making to Congress only as far as the execution of the enumerated powers of Article II, Section VIII.  Article VI, Section 2 was specifically voted on that day.  This Article which is now referred to as the Supremacy Clause simply states that the Constitution and the laws of the United States made in pursuance thereof, to include Treaties made under the Authority of the United States will be the Supreme Law of the land.  I have made this argument before, this does not mean Congress can make any law it wants and call it the Supreme law of the land, it has to be a law supported by one of the enumerated powers, not preambles or introductory statements, only in accordance with the enumerated powers of Article II, Section VIII.

            All this being said, the Supreme Court; and the Department of Justice for bringing suit against Arizona were wrong.  While I have argued that possibly illegal immigration could be an argument for the Federal Government not protecting the States from invasion, the States making their own immigration law in no way oversteps the bounds of their Sovereignty nor does it interfere with any enumerated Constitutional power.

            The Supreme Court then finally released its ruling on Health Care Affordability Act.  In short they determined that it was Constitutional and that it was not a mandate but a tax.  By calling it a tax in a sense they backpedaled on their argument that they could enforce the Act by claiming that the purchasing of Health Insurance fell under the commerce clause, once again a very misused and misinterpreted enumerated power.  By calling it a tax they are placing within the 16^th Amendment, no apportionment, no census and no enumeration, in other words Congress can run amok.  The real problem with this ruling is the beast that it has unleashed.  With the belief that Case Law takes precedence over Constitutional Law the Supreme Court of the United States has just set precedence.  It will take little to no effort now for any Congress with an agenda, and the backing of limitless corporate dollars, to write a law that will require the People of the United States to purchase a particular product or service or be taxed for not doing so.

            Whether or not the right President or Congress is elected the precedence has been set.  The Supreme Court of the United States will overrule any State law they desire.  State sovereignty has been nullified in the eyes of the Central Government.  The Supreme Court has also set the precedence for the Federal Government to rule over how we may spend our hard earned income; they will decide what is best for you, so once again sovereignty has been nullified; only in this case it is personal sovereignty.  It actually pains me to write this but, welcome to the United Socialist States of America.  There are limited options open to the States and to the People.  The States can nullify Federal Laws that are not in accordance with the enumerated powers of the Constitution of the United States.  Of course this action will cause more law suits to be brought against the States by the Department of Justice.  The other is for the States to secede from the Union.  This was tried in the 1860’s, it was the correct action then and it could be the correct action now for the same reason, the Federal Government is in violation of the Contract it has between themselves and the States, it’s called the Constitution of the United States.

Steve Avery

7/1/2012

Drones, Cameras and Regulations

            One of the hot topics on the radar currently is the use of drones within the boundaries of the United States.  The use by Law Enforcement is just the next step from helicopters and fixed wing aircraft surveillance.  Law Enforcement agencies have been using airborne surveillance for decades, checking on illegal crops, following suspects, monitoring traffic and so on.  Drones will be doing the same thing with the only difference being the pilot will be sitting at a console on the ground instead of in the pilots’ seat.  Yes there are the possibilities of the Law Enforcement misusing drones, but then again these are the people that we have elected or hired to carry guns and keep us safe, being normal people themselves there will always be the chance of the misuse of their powers, it’s a chance we have chosen to take.  Use of drones by non-Law Enforcement agencies, well that is horse of a completely different color.  Unfortunately it is the same color our politicians like to wear.

            Use of drones or any type of enhanced surveillance by the FDA, EPA or any other non-law enforcement alphabet agency is just one more step to the nanny state our politicians are trying to create.  Increased regulations, increased monitoring, and decreased personal choices are all stepping stones toward total control of our personal lives.  I for one do not want the loss of my choices, do you?  What intrigues me is that the ones that you typically find pushing for increased regulations and increased Government, the ones that benefit the most, are also the ones that will cry the loudest when their choices, rights, etc… are impeded upon.  The real question is not about the use of the drones, it’s about regulations and their enforcement, it’s about what the Government is doing and what they have the power to do.

            The use of drones has been argued to be against the Constitution, really, just where in the Constitution does it say that?  If you answered the 4^th Amendment you guessed wrong.  The 4^th Amendment could actually be construed to support the use of drones.  The 4^th Amendment prevents the Federal Government from passing any laws that would infringe on “the right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures”.  Being secure is a far cry from privacy.  Being secure could be used to justify Law Enforcement use of drones over our homes looking for the bad guys that threaten our security.  The right to privacy scam has been used to argue against red light cameras and security cameras in public places; exactly what privacy or security is being violated if you are in a public place?  OK, you can’t run the red light without getting caught and having to pay a fine, it’s not as easy to pick a pocket or assault someone on the sidewalk if there are cameras around, but I’m still not seeing a right to privacy issue or a 4^th Amendment issue.  Of course the alternative would be to hire more Police Officers to sit at every red light taking down tag numbers of those running red lights and to put on every city sidewalk to watch us, but that would just turn the argument into one about jack booted thugs and the Police State we would be living in.

            Just to be clear on my stance about drones, public cameras and our supposed right to privacy, I’m not a fan of drones and cameras on every corner.  I do think it is an invasion of privacy, even the small amount of privacy we have when we are out in public.  What I don’t agree with is that it is a Constitutional problem.  I do believe our Federal Government is grossly abusing their power with the regulations and the use of drones to enforce those regulations.  I would like to feel safe and secure in and around my own home, I would like to believe that I’m not being watched by unseen eyes every time I walk into my yard, not for illegal or nefarious reasons, it’s simply a matter of personal choice.  Personal choice is being taken away from the American People with every new regulation and law that is written, only the American People can change that, if they want to.  I am really starting to wonder if the People do not want to take personal responsibility, the People, in general, like the Government making choices for them.  I’m not sure if it’s because of a loss of individuality or if it’s because they believe the Government has the power to push personal agendas on everyone else.  Americans seem to really like pushing beliefs on others whether those others want that belief or not.

Steve Avery

6/11/2012

When To Pull Up Stakes

            Pulling up stakes can mean it’s time to move or it’s time to change what you are doing.  At one time in the history of the United States if you loved being an American but were unhappy with the political environment you were in you could pull up stakes and move to another City, County or even a different State and that environment would change.  If you were unhappy with the political environment of the United States as a whole there was a time you could pull up stakes and move to a different country, at one point in history you could even find some undiscovered or uninhabited land and start a new country, not anymore.  In fact in both of the previous cases there is no where else to go.

            The political environment of the United States today is such that no matter what City, County or State you go to you are still there.  You are still in the same political environment.  In the brief life span this Nation has enjoyed we have gone from being 13 Colonies under British rule to 13 sovereign States with their own Constitutions uniting together for the purpose of defense to 50 States that have given away their sovereignty to a central Government that is usurping more power and control daily.  There is no where to go within the United States to change you political environment.  Sure there are States that are making noise about regaining their sovereignty, some have even passed a law or two to nullify some of the more freedom damaging laws the Federal Government has passed.  None so far have come right out and reclaimed their sovereignty.  The political environment in the world is just as bad or even worse in many cases.  With all the problems we do have in the United States it is still one of the freest places in the world to live, it’s just not as free as it should be or as many believe it to be.

           

Due to the current political environment across our Nation I now have to wonder how long it will be before people start to pull up stakes in the sense of changing what they are doing.  Exactly what you can do when you pull up stakes will depend on your financial status and whether or not you are an employer, employee or self employed.  The reason I mentioned financial status first is because this is the area that could have the largest effect on the Nation as a whole.  With our ever growing National debt and our Governments resistance to balance the budget the talk seems to always go to increasing the taxes on the “rich”.  The “rich” are those that, according to the White House, make more then $250,000 a year and do not pay their fair share of taxes.  These are the scum that find all the loopholes in the tax code that allow them to pay a lower percentage of their income than their secretaries.  These are the bloodsuckers that only earned their fortunes on the backs of those less fortunate than them.  These are the people that should feel blessed to pay more, they should feel fortunate to be able to give more of their blood money so that it may be given to those unfortunates that they stood on to earn it, those unfortunates deserve it.  Well, at least those are the things that those with socialist ideals will tell you to justify the taxing of the “rich”.  What they won’t tell you is that the loopholes they speak of are the ones that they wrote into the tax code to help themselves and their “rich” friends.  They won’t tell you exactly what percentage of what appears to be income of these “rich” individuals is put back into what ever business they started in order to keep the business going, grow the business and hire more employees.  They also will not tell you that much of the income of the “rich” comes from investments, investments that are available to anyone that is willing to either do a little research or to find someone they can trust to do the investing for them.  They also will not tell you that any tax increase on the “rich” will more then likely be passed on to either the employees or to the consumer, they are businessmen, they did not get the title of being “rich” by giving away their product or service.  They also will not tell you that without the “rich” many, if not all, of the products and services we now enjoy will not be there, they are the ones that took the chance, invested their money and applied their mind to provide these products and services for us.  Sure they benefit from their profits but we benefit from them, just look at your cell phone and try to create one from scratch.  The last thing they won’t tell you, in fact they will not even think of this themselves since they would not want to admit it, is that many of those that are benefiting from the “social” programs provided for by the Federal Government and funded by the taxpaying portion of the population contribute nothing to the welfare of the Nation.  They do not provide a service or create a product and they are not gainfully employed, if they were they would not need the “social” programs.  So exactly who is obtaining their income on the backs of others, the “rich” that have earned it or the “social” program recipients?

            With those thoughts now floating around in your head start thinking about the consequences of the “rich” deciding they have had enough.  Start thinking about the employers and employees that may not be rich but they are tired of working 40 hour plus work weeks and in many cases more then one job while others are benefiting from their labor more then they are.  Our Government is giving the impression that they will take care of you, don’t worry, quit your job and we will take care of you.  This is a great plan until the local business owner goes to his factory and finds he has no employees left, they have all gone on the Government dole.  Now the local business owner goes belly up, no problem, that’s just one more factory that was belching pollution into the air out of business, just one more of those filthy “rich” that has gone down with the ship.  Oh yea, one more deserted building that will be a blight on the landscape.  We still have all those other “rich” that have earned their money from investments to fall back on.  We will have them only as long as they let us.  How long would it take before they figured out they could be a whole lot happier if they were to turn all their investments into a yacht filled with precious metals that could not be touched by the Government?  How long would it be before they just liquidated their assets and disappeared in the fog they would leave behind?  If this was to happen there would be no assets for the Government to redistribute, there would be no “social” money being paid out, and there would be a very large portion of our population that would have no idea of how to survive without the Government telling them exactly what to do.  Of course there will always be those that refuse to quit, refuse to believe anything is happening or refuse to accept Government assistance.

            Unfortunately it seems that the Federal Government does not believe the cash cow will ever dry up.  They are giving lip service to making changes that will reduce our debt while in the same session they are passing another budget with a huge deficit or passing laws that will create more deficit spending.  Anytime you see the word deficit you can negate any thing that has been said about reducing the debt, at best the only reduction to the debt is a possible reduction to the speed at which the debt continues to grow.  There are different plans floating around Congress and being touted by groups such as the Tea Party, but for any of them to work there has to be a majority of the Nation on board with them.   Just as a thought let me give you a 4 step plan;

1- All States reclaim their sovereignty.

2- Abolish the tax code completely.

3- The States will determine what type of revenue generating system they want for their State.

4- The States will pay an equally apportioned amount to the Federal Government to provide for the common defense of the Nation and for the necessary functions of the Federal Government required to negotiate trade agreements with Foreign Nations.  The Federal Government will also retain the role of arbiter between the States.

Here are some of the benefits of this type of plan:

1- The citizens will have increased control over the taxation of their hard earned income.

2- Increased control over the States spending.

3- Prevent the taxes from someone in FL from being spent on a bike path in NC.

4- States will retain the means to control Federal spending by either approving or withholding funds.

A plan of this nature puts the Constitution back in the drivers’ seat at the Federal level and States Constitutions back in control at the State level.  It allows the States to have their own personalities, it allows the State and its citizens to determine what is best for them, and it does not allow an individual State to dictate how the entire Nation will act.  This plan could, and should, apply to all functions the Federal Government has taken that are not authorized by the Constitution.  Does this plan have problems, sure it does, one I’m not an economist or accountant which means I am probably looking at this in a very simplistic way, which may be the way it should be looked at.  Secondly, it will end a lot of Government “social” programs.  Social programs are considered sacred to many Politicians, not so much because they actually believe in them but more because they are a source of voters, power and money for them.  If they really believed in what they were touting they would be out in the streets handing out box lunches and working in soup kitchens, not flying around on Government expense accounts and going to expensive campaign dinners.  It would be a major task to get the support necessary for a plan such as this, but it’s a plan.

            Lastly we need to think about where this is headed.  For over 100 years now the Government has been usurping power and in truth turning every tax paying citizen into a tax slave.  They have done this with little resistance, they have done it gradually so that we don’t remember how it used to be; we believe it has always been this way.  We are going to allow them to continue this gradual change until we find ourselves all employed by the Government after they Nationalize all industries, just look what they are trying to do to the health industry and the oil companies now, look at what they tried to do with cap and trade and what they did to the auto industry a few years ago.  Nationalization is the only way they will be able to ensure they have the income necessary to grow the Government and grow the programs they are trying to put into place.

Steve Avery

4/24/12