Will Congress ask Sotomayor my question?

July 8, 10:22 AMLA Gun Rights ExaminerJohn Longenecker

Previous Next

6 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the LA Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

 Several weeks ago, I suggested that one question be asked Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor whether she knows that police have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others. 

It is amazing how 90 million gun owners know more about this concept and its significance than officials seem to know. Judges pretty much know it by their rulings of same; Police know it. Some attorneys know, not all, and many officials are not aware of it. Does Sotomayor understand this fact that police have no mandate to protect you? The concept has a tremendous impact perhaps in how she is overturned so often; she’s missing something.

The main idea of Independence and asserting authority over officials is that the state can never keep any of its implied promises. This begins with the most fundamental, your personal safety, and it means one life-threatening truth: that all of their gun control, gun regulation, the abusive rhetoric and policies are crafted not to protect citizens in the least, but to make them by force of law more dependent on government to the exclusion of choices.

This formula is cloned in health care, fiscal management, funding, taxation and much more of the programs we know go against our better judgment. How Sotomayor answers this question and other follow-up questions from the electorate will reveal how she thinks of herself as the State and of you as the subjects of the State. I bet she believes that we have no such authority over our servants, who can continue to abuse us and find cover and shelter in the Supreme Court.

And isn’t this the trend in officials these days? They do not believe that we are the supreme authority over them, and they do not really believe that they are our servants.

Where tens of millions of non-gun owners feel the pressure of the State smothering their rights too, rights which might not have the feel of anything to do with guns, I hope her answer to this question will connect the dots on fundamental independence to all of their other rights. Here is how.

The State will never, ever, be able to take your place in being the first line of defense in time of violence. Disarming people grows crime. The State will never be able to take your place on a variety of issues, so that when it comes to gun rights – or independence from our own public servants – muted protests or education of the electorate attacked by gun control, signal ambitious officials how far they can really go in the non-gun programs. With so much momentum now in such confidence at how far officials can push the people, it all needs to be put back the way it was, and that begins with showing respect for who is the genuine authority in this country. Us.

This is why I call for the repeal of all gun laws. It is the optimal reset button. Who can carry, where they can carry and what they can carry is an ambiguous hodgepodge of more than 20,000 laws. It is a mess, which ambiguities work to the advantage of the State in selective enforcement. I say repeal all of them, and start over. Gun control and regulation works against the sovereign in all things, from education content to zero-tolerance to finance because it is a formula which can be cloned and adapted.

After all, you have to ask yourself why a government would even want to disarm its supreme authority when disarmament has never in human history turned into a safer populace. Something much worse always happened.

And it’s happening here.

________________________________________

The safest streets are safest when they respect the second amendment. See Safe Streets In The Nationwide Concealed Carry Of Handguns, available worldwide.