I almost didn't go to church that evening. It was a hot August day and I had already worked 9 hours out in the brutal heat, doing construction. It wasn't going to be a traditional service but a work night where they prepared the building for the coming school season. I went anyway.
After several hours of work I asked my cousin if he could give me a ride home because my wife and 11mo old daughter had left earlier. He told me he could. We were both talking and carrying tools to his truck, probably talking about the upcoming deer season. Although the church was only a few miles from Detroit, it was relatively rare to have any violence from the city come up that far. That was the last thing on our minds.
As we loaded into his little Ford Ranger, five squad cars carrying two officers a peice, pulled up and blocked us in. What happened next was a blur. Officers, all yelling with weapons already drawn came rushing towards our vehicle. There was so much shouting and coomotion I couldn't really make out the commands they were shouting. One was telling me to "Roll down your window!!" and the other was saying "Let me see your hands!!" I decided to go with keeping my hands held high so they could at least see I had nothing dangerous in them.
Everyone talks about your life flashing before your eyes in a moment like that but for me all it did was flash to the little life that had just started. I was going to be shot for who knows what and my little girl would have been fatherless at less then one year old.
The officer finally, quickly opened my door and told me to unbuckle my seat belt. If there was ever a time I was intently listening it was then. He kept asking me, "Do you have guns in the car?!" To which I replied, "I don't know!" This seemed to only infuriate him but the truth was I wasn't sure. It wasn't my vehicle and my cousin was a gun collector.
I was yanked from the truck and slammed up against the hood. I remember wanting to fight at that point. I had absolutely no idea what was going on and I had done nothing wrong. All the pistols pointed at me and a inner trust that although the officers were in the wrong here they were good men and would shortly figure out there were no laws being broken here, kept me from reacting. My cousin was getting it a little rougher then I because it was his vehicle. They were not being gentle I can promise you that.
After several minutes I was cuffed and thrown, not gently placed in a squad car where I sat for about 20 minutes.
I was confident at this point I wasn't going to be shot but was still in shock of what had just transpired.By this time my uncle, the Pastor of the church came out with several other men to speak with the police and told them we had been working in the building for the last three hours and we couldn't have been involved in anything.
At this point the officers told us that a neighbor had called and reported two grown men, one white and one black man carrying assault weapons through the alley way. We explained to the officers that we had walked out with long tools that were possibly incorrectly identified as weapons but we had no firearms of any kind, and clearly neither of us were black.
I remember thinking, "when I find out who called they are going to need the police." How could you mistake a tool for a weapon and then throw the token black guy in there to make it more believable? I was still shaking from the adrenaline and fear but now I was getting angry.
In the after math I started to get a little mouthy with the police. How could you pull up like that and come out with weapons drawn? What was the point of roughing us up and holding us for 30 minutes without letting us know what was going on? The officers graciously apologized and told us they were trying to keep everyone, themselves included safe. I wasn't pleased with the answers because I was the one the weapons were pointed at but in fairness I could tell they were genuinely apologetic. They got into their squad cars and left.
Now the rest of the story.
About five minutes after the officers left, my youngest cousin who was about 14-15 and the size of a grown man stepped out of one of the church buildings with is black friend that was as big or bigger. They were holding two BB guns and one looked identical to an M-16 assault weapon. If you were a boy growing up in the late 80s and early 90s you wanted that BB gun. They had went into the building to get a squirrel that had moved in and was doing damage to the building. The neighbors had been right in what they witnessed...
There was no way of knowing the firearms the boys were carrying were not the real deal. The hadn't just thrown the "token black guy" into the mix to make the situation more inflammatory because there in front of me was a very large black young man who just happened to be from a wonderful black home in inner city Detroit. The cops reacted to this information correctly. They rolled up in force ready to possibly exchange fire with two armed suspects carrying "assault weapons." There adrenaline level was at 100 the second they showed up and rightfully so. So how did this not end in two men shot?
The outcome of that evening laid in the hands of two men that literally had no business being involved, myself and my cousin who was giving me a ride home. We were just a couple of young dads looking to get home after a long day.
First is we obeyed the cops. We were innocent and had done nothing wrong. If there was ever a time to be belligerent it was then. Yet we took the false accusation and temporary discomfort in stride. If I had done nothing wrong what did I have to fear. I know this is the point that some blacks would say it was because we were white, that we got off and didn't get shot. Remember the eye witness account. The officers thought one of us was black and there was no way of knowing we weren't until they were right on top of the vehicle.
Second we didn't resist arrest. I can tell you I was as compliant as I could possibly be. I made no threatening movements and even though extremely angry kept it respectful. I got my chance to say my piece but once the inflammatory situation was under control.
If two cops are required to hold you down you are resisting arrest, its really that simple. I have never been an officer but I have detained people over seas. When someone is compliant they will lay down on their stomach, kneel with their hands on their heads or whatever you ask. When they are not compliant they will fight. If two armed men have to hold you down then you are resisting and all bets are off as to what happens next.
Try to put yourself in the position of an officer of the law. You are wrestling with a man that is possibly bigger and stronger then you so back up arrives. You are trying to hold his arm down to get him cuffed but in muggy sweaty Louisiana your hand slips and you lose control of his arm. How do you know he isn't going for the gun he is illegally carrying in his pocket? How do you know if the next thing you will feel is a slug ripping through you? Are you willing to take the chance? The truth is you can't answer that unless you are there so maybe refrain from bombastic, Monday morning quarterbacking on social media. Our peace officers are put in lose, lose situations everyday with attorneys and someone with a camera looking to bring them down, that is of course until they need them. Then at that point watch the critics complain about how long it took for an officer to show up and assist. It amazes me that anyone would want to protect and serve anymore.
I am not implying that following these to points will stop all shootings because the truth is there are bad cops out there and some that could make a legitimate mistake. Remember my story. All the information that was witnessed and passed to the officers was correct. I can guarantee however, these two points will solve most of the "unnecessary shootings." I am genuinely sorry for those that will face racist or corrupt officers in the future. It is unfair and unjust. With that being said we have to stop the extremist mentality that all cops fit that bill.
Stop focusing on the outliers. Yes there are bad cops. There are bad priests. There are bad mechanics. There are bad moms and dads. There are bad politicians. There are bad whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians and mixed races. There are bad...fill in the blank. This world is full of bad people but to automatically assume in any of these situations that any one side is wrong because cops are bad or blacks are thugs is foolishness and ignorant.
I think it is very possible that the situation in Louisiana was a justifiable shooting where the shooting in Minnesota could possibly be racism, although it appears that it was a minority that was the shooter. However, blacks and whites aren't the only ones that can be racist so that is still very much on the table. It appears as of now it was, at a minimum bad policing and tragic. Can we not wait for all the facts before we demonize any one party?
I am ready to march for officer safety and against police brutality alike. I would gladly march with blacks for reform in the judicial system that targets them unfairly as Sen Rand Paul has pointed out many times over the last year and I would march for stricter penalties for those that attack peace officers. It doesn't have to be one or the other it can be both.
Steve
Friday, July 8, 2016
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
In Defense Of The Second Amendment
What do the shootings in San Bernardino (Work Place), Newton (School), Aurora (Theater) and Orlando (Night Club) all have in common? I am guessing that many will answer with the usual suspects, homegrown terrorism, radical Islam, there were no "good guys with guns" present or the crazy, wild eyed, privileged, white youth. Although the above suspects played a part in several or all of these shootings, the greatest common denominator was the weapon of choice. The guilty party is the Armalite Rifle built in the .223 caliber or better known as an AR-15. A military looking rifle that can handle high capacity magazines (Usually 30 rounds) and is beloved by combat soldiers that carried the military's version (M4) of this weapon overseas.
Before we get to deep into this debate let's dispel some of the lies and half truths that are used by both sides. First, the "AR" in AR-15 does not mean assault rifle. It stands for Armalite Rifle. Second, it is not a fully automatic weapon. Its is a semi-automatic weapon, which means it fires every time you pull the trigger. It does not shoot multiple rounds when the trigger is pulled. Third, it will not give you temporary PTSD or bruises when firing as was recently reported by New York Daily News reporter Gersh Kuntzman. Fourth, the AR-15 is a killing machine. It was designed for combat and all related endeavors. It is was not made for hunting. It was not made for casual shooting. That doesn't mean it can not be used for those purposes but that was not the intent for the design. Fifth, and most important is that my support for this weapon and the 2nd Amendment does not mean I am calloused to the pain and suffering of the victims of mass shootings or that I am indifferent to those still fighting to recover from their physical and emotional wounds.
As soon as news started breaking of the barbarous shooting in Orlando, liberal and even some conservative media outlets launched attacks on the AR-15 and the 2nd Amendment. Surprisingly homegrown terrorism was quickly swept under the rug. We were told not to jump to conclusions about the shooters ethnicity and motive even after it was reported the shooter was of Middle Eastern decent, had pledged devotion to the leader of ISIS and was yelling "allah akbar" during the shooting. The DC talking heads and politicians attacked the "evil weapon" and the 2nd Amendment.
Having spent the better part of the last four years working towards a degree in legal studies, I have had my fair share of Constitutional Law classes. To be honest they are my favorite but also the most frustrating as I see the government shredding this document. The public is being twisted into believing the fallacy that more restrictions and government control will keep us safe. We have traded our liberty for personal safety. I think Benjamin Franklin said it best when he stated, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." It is astounding to watch this once great country allow fear of evil to dictate our actions even if those fears destroy the Constitution.
I am now old enough to remember the efforts used by the left in the late 80's and early 90's as they sought more gun control. Back in those times the liberal agenda was to attack all guns. This meant handguns, hunting rifles, shotguns and of course assault rifles. The goal then was to remove firearms from this countries DNA. This agenda under the Clinton Administration achieved passage of the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994. This ten year Ban was allowed to expire in 2004 under the Bush Administration. Why did the liberals finally settle their hatred for firearms on assault weapons? The answer is simple, money.
Billions of dollars are spent by sportsman and sportswomen around the country every year. As state and federal budgets get tighter, easy revenue is a harder to part with. Sportsman's firearms were saved, because states and the federal government needed that money. At this point the lefts angst turned towards assault weapons. In the last 7 years gun owners have endured the Obama Administration and the narrative has changed. President Obama and Vice-President Biden have both declared they, "don't want your hunting rifle or recreational firearms." They want to take assault weapons off the streets. It sounds noble and responsible.
I am sure there are well intention-ed people that are truly wondering why anyone would need an assault weapon and why can't gun enthusiasts and the NRA be happy with keeping hunting and recreational firearms? The answer is because the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to own them.
The Constitution is a document that has very few if any equals around the world. It is a guide that sets limits to how our government treats its citizens. The first ten amendments, The Bill of Rights, protect us from an over reaching government. I don't think any constitutional scholar would argue this. The 1st Amendment protects are freedom of religion, speech and of the press. Freedom from whom? A government that would look to control those freedoms. The 4th Amendment protects us against unconstitutional searches and seizures. Whom is doing the searching and seizing? The government. The 5th Amendment demands that due process be in place during prosecution. Whom must provide the due process? The government. All of the amendments making up our Bill of Rights are guidelines, outlining how we are to be treated by our government, well all except the 2nd Amendment which is about being able to go hunting or recreational shooting if you believe the narrative of the day.
The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution 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."
Try to put your preconceived ideas of this amendment aside for a minute, whether pro or con. Try and take yourself back to 1787 when the Constitution was written in Philadelphia. The Constitutional Convention was opened on May 25th 1787 and ended on September 17th, 1787. Imagine you are at that convention with the founding fathers. You have just seen this nation go through a brutal war for independence with an enemy that was far superior to you in weaponry and training. Many of the men that had signed the Declaration of Independence were killed or lost their fortunes. Those that were still alive had cheated the death of a traitor, all for freedom and independence.
It was summer and Philadelphia is hot and humid, especially in the apparel of that time. After maybe weeks of discussion and intense arguing the 1st Amendment has been written and most are satisfied with its wording. It is now time to begin discussion on the 2nd Amendment. James Madison is at the desk ready to write. The other founding fathers are delighted in the 1st Amendment and humbled by the gravity of what was just written and how it would steer our new nation forward. Out of the crowd John Adams a man who would become our second president breaks the silence and says, "Gentleman before we move much further in this gravely important undertaking I would like to present an idea for the 2nd Amendment. I want to make sure that my grandfathers musket can be handed down to my son for the purpose of hunting and recreational shooting."
He was immediately tarred and feathered.
Obviously I am being facetious but this is exactly how we are told the 2nd Amendment is to be interpreted today. Hunting was a necessity of that day and it is doubtful that very many citizens shot for recreational purposes. The idea that a hunting rifle would need protected would have been laughed out of the building. I can just see Alexander Hamilton now. "I second that motion. I want my firearms to be handed down to my children as well. Wow... the 2nd Amendment was easy now lets write eight more amendments that protect citizens from the government." Can you imagine this?
The founding fathers put the 2nd Amendment in there as a protection from our government. We the people have the right to bear arms because we are the guardians of our Republic. Not the military that can be controlled by the government but revolutionary power of citizens that enables us to fight for our freedoms and our Constitution. Abraham Lincoln says it this way, "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it."
Anyone that tells you there is no constitutional right to own an AR-15 fundamentally misunderstands the Constitution and the intent for which it was written. There are good people that believe this and it is our duty to educate all that will hear. Any government that tries to take your right to own an AR-15 is corrupted and should be overthrown, peaceably if possible but with bloodshed if necessary.
Some may say that is extreme but let me close with something I witnessed first hand. During my second deployment to Iraq in 2007 I witnessed the 2nd Amendment at work in a Muslim country (yes there are many great Muslims) no less. We were instructed that when we raided a home to allow the house hold to maintain an AK-47 (which is more powerful then an AR-15 and can be fully automatic) and a high capacity magazine with ammunition. Why would our government that was locked in a bloody insurgency where the enemy didn't wear a uniform, allow these weapons to be in the hands of citizens? The people in charge at the time understood the right of citizens to protect themselves and their families and they should at least be armed with something comparable to their attackers.
This was the 2nd Amendment at work in another country. Military leaders will tell you the surge of US troops into the area in 2007 was what calmed the region down during that insurgency and that certainly helped. Those of us that were there would tell you it was the decision to bring in the local citizens to combat the uprising that swung the tide in our favor. Local farmers armed with AK-47s manning checkpoints and outposts in their communities to protect their families and what they held dear. This was only possible because we didn't disarm them and take their assault weapons.
This is not to say there weren't those who abused this and put our lives at risk but there will always be the people that seek to do evil on the innocent, like those in Orlando, Sandy Hook, Aurora and San Bernardino. For all those that drink responsibly there will always be someone who drinks and drives and kills innocent people. It is tragic, disgusting and heart breaking but we don't line up to turn over car keys to prevent drunk driving, especially when driving is a privilege and not a right. Why then would we allow our government to take away a right that was so important to the founding fathers that they put it #2? Do not let the emotions of these awful tragedies weaken your resolve to stand with the 2nd Amendment. It is the amendment that gives teeth to all the others. Without it we have no Constitution.
Thanks For Reading
Steve
Before we get to deep into this debate let's dispel some of the lies and half truths that are used by both sides. First, the "AR" in AR-15 does not mean assault rifle. It stands for Armalite Rifle. Second, it is not a fully automatic weapon. Its is a semi-automatic weapon, which means it fires every time you pull the trigger. It does not shoot multiple rounds when the trigger is pulled. Third, it will not give you temporary PTSD or bruises when firing as was recently reported by New York Daily News reporter Gersh Kuntzman. Fourth, the AR-15 is a killing machine. It was designed for combat and all related endeavors. It is was not made for hunting. It was not made for casual shooting. That doesn't mean it can not be used for those purposes but that was not the intent for the design. Fifth, and most important is that my support for this weapon and the 2nd Amendment does not mean I am calloused to the pain and suffering of the victims of mass shootings or that I am indifferent to those still fighting to recover from their physical and emotional wounds.
As soon as news started breaking of the barbarous shooting in Orlando, liberal and even some conservative media outlets launched attacks on the AR-15 and the 2nd Amendment. Surprisingly homegrown terrorism was quickly swept under the rug. We were told not to jump to conclusions about the shooters ethnicity and motive even after it was reported the shooter was of Middle Eastern decent, had pledged devotion to the leader of ISIS and was yelling "allah akbar" during the shooting. The DC talking heads and politicians attacked the "evil weapon" and the 2nd Amendment.
Having spent the better part of the last four years working towards a degree in legal studies, I have had my fair share of Constitutional Law classes. To be honest they are my favorite but also the most frustrating as I see the government shredding this document. The public is being twisted into believing the fallacy that more restrictions and government control will keep us safe. We have traded our liberty for personal safety. I think Benjamin Franklin said it best when he stated, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." It is astounding to watch this once great country allow fear of evil to dictate our actions even if those fears destroy the Constitution.
I am now old enough to remember the efforts used by the left in the late 80's and early 90's as they sought more gun control. Back in those times the liberal agenda was to attack all guns. This meant handguns, hunting rifles, shotguns and of course assault rifles. The goal then was to remove firearms from this countries DNA. This agenda under the Clinton Administration achieved passage of the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994. This ten year Ban was allowed to expire in 2004 under the Bush Administration. Why did the liberals finally settle their hatred for firearms on assault weapons? The answer is simple, money.
Billions of dollars are spent by sportsman and sportswomen around the country every year. As state and federal budgets get tighter, easy revenue is a harder to part with. Sportsman's firearms were saved, because states and the federal government needed that money. At this point the lefts angst turned towards assault weapons. In the last 7 years gun owners have endured the Obama Administration and the narrative has changed. President Obama and Vice-President Biden have both declared they, "don't want your hunting rifle or recreational firearms." They want to take assault weapons off the streets. It sounds noble and responsible.
I am sure there are well intention-ed people that are truly wondering why anyone would need an assault weapon and why can't gun enthusiasts and the NRA be happy with keeping hunting and recreational firearms? The answer is because the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to own them.
The Constitution is a document that has very few if any equals around the world. It is a guide that sets limits to how our government treats its citizens. The first ten amendments, The Bill of Rights, protect us from an over reaching government. I don't think any constitutional scholar would argue this. The 1st Amendment protects are freedom of religion, speech and of the press. Freedom from whom? A government that would look to control those freedoms. The 4th Amendment protects us against unconstitutional searches and seizures. Whom is doing the searching and seizing? The government. The 5th Amendment demands that due process be in place during prosecution. Whom must provide the due process? The government. All of the amendments making up our Bill of Rights are guidelines, outlining how we are to be treated by our government, well all except the 2nd Amendment which is about being able to go hunting or recreational shooting if you believe the narrative of the day.
The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution 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."
Try to put your preconceived ideas of this amendment aside for a minute, whether pro or con. Try and take yourself back to 1787 when the Constitution was written in Philadelphia. The Constitutional Convention was opened on May 25th 1787 and ended on September 17th, 1787. Imagine you are at that convention with the founding fathers. You have just seen this nation go through a brutal war for independence with an enemy that was far superior to you in weaponry and training. Many of the men that had signed the Declaration of Independence were killed or lost their fortunes. Those that were still alive had cheated the death of a traitor, all for freedom and independence.
It was summer and Philadelphia is hot and humid, especially in the apparel of that time. After maybe weeks of discussion and intense arguing the 1st Amendment has been written and most are satisfied with its wording. It is now time to begin discussion on the 2nd Amendment. James Madison is at the desk ready to write. The other founding fathers are delighted in the 1st Amendment and humbled by the gravity of what was just written and how it would steer our new nation forward. Out of the crowd John Adams a man who would become our second president breaks the silence and says, "Gentleman before we move much further in this gravely important undertaking I would like to present an idea for the 2nd Amendment. I want to make sure that my grandfathers musket can be handed down to my son for the purpose of hunting and recreational shooting."
He was immediately tarred and feathered.
Obviously I am being facetious but this is exactly how we are told the 2nd Amendment is to be interpreted today. Hunting was a necessity of that day and it is doubtful that very many citizens shot for recreational purposes. The idea that a hunting rifle would need protected would have been laughed out of the building. I can just see Alexander Hamilton now. "I second that motion. I want my firearms to be handed down to my children as well. Wow... the 2nd Amendment was easy now lets write eight more amendments that protect citizens from the government." Can you imagine this?
The founding fathers put the 2nd Amendment in there as a protection from our government. We the people have the right to bear arms because we are the guardians of our Republic. Not the military that can be controlled by the government but revolutionary power of citizens that enables us to fight for our freedoms and our Constitution. Abraham Lincoln says it this way, "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it."
Anyone that tells you there is no constitutional right to own an AR-15 fundamentally misunderstands the Constitution and the intent for which it was written. There are good people that believe this and it is our duty to educate all that will hear. Any government that tries to take your right to own an AR-15 is corrupted and should be overthrown, peaceably if possible but with bloodshed if necessary.
Some may say that is extreme but let me close with something I witnessed first hand. During my second deployment to Iraq in 2007 I witnessed the 2nd Amendment at work in a Muslim country (yes there are many great Muslims) no less. We were instructed that when we raided a home to allow the house hold to maintain an AK-47 (which is more powerful then an AR-15 and can be fully automatic) and a high capacity magazine with ammunition. Why would our government that was locked in a bloody insurgency where the enemy didn't wear a uniform, allow these weapons to be in the hands of citizens? The people in charge at the time understood the right of citizens to protect themselves and their families and they should at least be armed with something comparable to their attackers.
This was the 2nd Amendment at work in another country. Military leaders will tell you the surge of US troops into the area in 2007 was what calmed the region down during that insurgency and that certainly helped. Those of us that were there would tell you it was the decision to bring in the local citizens to combat the uprising that swung the tide in our favor. Local farmers armed with AK-47s manning checkpoints and outposts in their communities to protect their families and what they held dear. This was only possible because we didn't disarm them and take their assault weapons.
This is not to say there weren't those who abused this and put our lives at risk but there will always be the people that seek to do evil on the innocent, like those in Orlando, Sandy Hook, Aurora and San Bernardino. For all those that drink responsibly there will always be someone who drinks and drives and kills innocent people. It is tragic, disgusting and heart breaking but we don't line up to turn over car keys to prevent drunk driving, especially when driving is a privilege and not a right. Why then would we allow our government to take away a right that was so important to the founding fathers that they put it #2? Do not let the emotions of these awful tragedies weaken your resolve to stand with the 2nd Amendment. It is the amendment that gives teeth to all the others. Without it we have no Constitution.
Thanks For Reading
Steve
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)