Got 99 Problems – Owning an Assault Rifle Isn’t One

As it has been presented, the Obama Administration has indicated that he is ready for serious gun reform. He has pledged to put his “full weight” behind a legislative package for containing gun violence offered by Senator Dianne Feinstein. The bill aims to “stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devises.” It will ban 120 specifically named weapons, including handguns and shotguns, and strengthen the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004.

Now I am against violence of any form, but I don’t see why an assault rifle should be the focus of his political venom- guns do not kill people, people do. To focus on the tool misses the problem.

I have owned several SKS since 1990. If you don’t know what an SKS, see the image in this post of me on the book cover of my last book. No it is not a prop is is real and one of several. I like it because it fires the 7.62 x 39 (AK47/SKS) slug. Now for most this is an assult rifle, for me it’s just a rifle.

Some ask why I want or need an assault rifle like an SKS? My answer is based on two things: the second amendment and prospects of Tyranny. The second amendment says “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” (keyword being regulated not maintained). There was no standing militia in the colonies. In fact they did not get together until 1774 (the Coercive Acts) when the British implemented gun control measures via an import ban on firearms and gunpowder;” the 1774-75 confiscations of firearms and gunpowder; and the use of violence to effectuate the confiscations. History is complete with examples of gun control and the results. Whether in Turkey where in 1911 when1 .5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were exterminated between 1915 and 1917, or even in modern times when in 1964, Guatemala established gun control allowing the government to kill 100,000 Mayan Indians between - From 1964 to 1981. I won’t even mention Nazi Germany, who killed 13 million weaponless Jews, gypsies, and homosexuals after established gun control in 1938.

The aforementioned represents Tyranny which refers to the arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power and/or the despotic abuse of authority or oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler. Fact is, according to the FBI homicide data, hammers, clubs and knives are responsible for more homicides than rifles In fact; the FBI concluded that rifles of all types are the least-used guns when crimes are committed. Not to mention that  most firearm murders (about11,400), are gang related, how many would you guess had legally purchased or registered weapons?

Now many would suggest that tyranny on behalf of the US government with it’s first black President is outrageous: maybe or maybe not but looking at the facts sughgest that anything is possible. Take the National Weather Service, who like the Department of Homeland Security in securing large quantities of ammo. Back in March,Homeland Security purchased 450 million rounds of .40-caliber hollow point bullets that are designed to expand upon entry and cause maximum organ damage. The NWS ordered 46,000 rounds of hollow point bullets and I don’t think they are for predicting tornadoes. Then there was the solicitation posted by the the Social Security Administration for for contractors to supply 174,000 rounds of “.357 Sig 125 grain bonded jacketed hollow point pistol ammunition.”

The point is technology, if there is tyranny, then what good is a handgun against weaponized drones, Tanks and body armor? None. But I can rest assured that the 7.62 of the SKS can go through all and that makes me comfortable for I have 99 problems – owning an assault rifle isn’t one of them. For the fact of the matter is, when only the military and police have guns, it is called a police state.

Watch Out: Government Can assassinate a US Citizen Anytime they Want

I am thoroughly convinced that the American people do not know or understand the constitution and could care less if their unalienable rights are trampled on, for most of us accept without question whatever the government does or states. And don’t let it be implemented by a half white half black president – the first African American to serve in such a capacity in our nation’s history.

To be honest, I could care a rat’s azz about the death of anyone who formulates murder against any US citizen, in particular if it is one Anwar al-Awlaki. But I have reservations concerning the logic that would proffer such an outcome as being accepted in the annals of legal jurisprudence.

The Obama administration put into place a legal standard albeit it untested, that allows for the singular approval from the Executive branch of the federal government, without proof to allow the federal government to target individual American citizens for assassination. Did I say the executive branch singularly and without proof? All one has to do is be seen as being an enemy combatant or organizer against the US government. I wanted to write about this last week but I did not, hoping, maybe even anticipating that the Obama Administration would release, make available to the public the presupposed legal guidance his team of legal advisors developed to approve such targeted assignations. I expected such because after all, it was he who stated his administration would be the most transparent ever. However the Obama Administration has refused to release or make public its finding for this action that makes it ok and constitutionally legal to assassinate American citizens of speculation and allegation alone without due process.

This too means that the President, if he decides can make the decision to kill anyone, even me, without due process if they perceive my words as action as being as being a threat to US (their executive branch) interest. Meaning if they perceive my words to be an enemy to what they propose from a policy perspective, they can send a drone to my little residence in the world, without the authority of congress or a judicial body and kill me and my family with no questions asked.

Due process is the basic concept that laws and legal proceedings must be fair. Our constitution guarantees that the government cannot take away a person's basic rights to 'life, liberty or property, without due process of law. It originates in the Fifth Amendment and says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." It is even mentioned again in the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868.The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the deprivation of liberty or property without due process of law. A claim that is cognizable only if there is a recognized liberty or property interest at stake.

I didn’t support the Bush Administration’s position on this subject nor do the Obama administration acknowledged continuance of this Bush-era policy authorizing the killing of US citizens abroad. Also I find it difficult for either administration as they saw it, to define the entire world as being a battlefield. My fear and questions pertains to the designation of either picking up arms against this country or being described as “hostile” and/or displaying “hostilities” to the US government mean?

>The reason we have the second amendment is for average folk to be able to organize and fight against the rise of a tyrant or coterie of tyrants who may happen to rise into a power of leadership in our government. Moreover, there is no definition of what hostile is with respect to the abrogation of one’s constitutional rights. Could one be hostile for writing a vehement opinion against the government, elected official? Could a radio caller or host be held to the same standard?

A president should not be able singularly to order a targeted “hit” on any US citizen regardless of location. I also think that his legal advisors and the Attorney General should explain the basis in law for such a policy that violates individual constitutional rights. After all it was President Obama who stated on his campaign website: “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” Instead he has dramatically increased governmental secrecy.

All I can say is watch your back because it is evident that the present administration is no different from the last and will invoked unconstitutional executive secrecy to do whatever it desires. He has ignored his campaign promise to protect government whistleblowers, and instead has persecuted and prosecuted more government whistleblowers than ever in US History. I just hope the government doesn’t consider me hostile and target me if they see fit one day while I am teaching class or driving down the street with my family.

From 1159 to 1214

Sounded like Mogadishu
Round and pop and clip after clip
In the air
My neighbors
I smiled out here in the country
Toasted my second tomato juice
To me this NEW year
We can take care of ourselves
All manner and sizes
Explode into the night
So I raised my smile too
Let 32 out in 5 seconds
Into the wind