Wall Street, F.D.A, G.M.O., rBGH, Monsanto, Barack Obama, George Bush, Ben Bernanke, Dick Cheney, Henry Paulson, Bailout, Recession, Depression, Donald Rumsfeld, S.E.C., Federal Reserve

Restore the Republic

If I Were The XO Of the NRA

September 29, 2017 | 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Founders, Founding Documents, Militia

by Nicholas Testaccio

What would I do if I were in the position as the person directing the NRA?

Where would I start?

What goals would I set?

What confessions would I make to, not only the membership, but also the entire country?

Would I be bold enough, and brave enough to set the record straight on the organization I have the opportunity to direct?

Would I receive the backing of the board, and the Five Million members?

I am not in the position of Wayne LaPierre so I must go at this a different way knowing full well that people in his position are more likely to dismiss my thoughts, and just go on about the business of keeping the gun control issue on the table. My goal would be to wake the membership, and others of course, to the true nature of the Second Amendment.

My first task will be to remind the members of the NRA that Fifteen Years before the ratification of the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson penned what is considered the seminal document on the relationship between the People and the governments they form to “secure” their “unalienable Rights.” The document that recognizes our God given rights, and among those is the individual right to keep and bear arms.

My second task, and this should be the object of all so-called supporters, would be to read, and study these words until they sink in; “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.” 

For One-Hundred Fifty years prior to the Declaration, militia were organized, armed, and trained. They were generally Able-Bodied men between the ages of 17 to 45 bearing the arms that a regular soldier would carry, and maintaining the equipment, including artillery, that an army would employ in battle.

The militia was not voluntary. It was not comprised of individuals pretending to be soldiers, but rather organized by state statute compelling all to serve in a fashion, with duties, and armament prescribed. They trained much the same as our reserves do today, and performed the all-important tasks of protecting the Colony, and enforcing the law.

Most importantly, while a significant part of government, they were not obliged to obey commands they thought unlawful, and dangerous to liberty. Thank you Captain John Parker and your Minute Men for clarifying.

The Founders, those people who had first hand experience with the institution, explained it in this manner “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people.George Mason. “Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped.”- Alexander Hamilton. “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry.

At that point I would have to pose the question to not only the board, but also the entire membership as to whether they have done even a modicum of research on the body that the Founders declared to have the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions”? – See Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 15

Correcting the fallacy seems a daunting task based on years of misinformation, and indoctrination, but as we look out upon our current political landscape, what options do we have to change the course?

Those of us who understand the foundations laid in the Declaration of Independence “That *** Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” have both the right and the duty “to alter or to abolish” the institution when it runs afoul of our rule of law are often labeled as “conspiracy theorists”, or nuts. How do you overcome what appears to be a very potent form of mind control that has the general public questioning that, which is right, but abiding that, which is wrong?

So how do you turn a potential powerhouse such as the NRA into a true force for truth, and freedom?

To answer my own question, I’ll start with a letter to each and every member of the board of directors. I will also contact Wayne LaPierre, Pete Brownell, Chris Cox, and Dana Loesch.

Since I am no longer a member of the NRA, one reason being that I’ve seen them deliberately assist in the passing of anti-2nd amendment legislation, I’ll have to start my campaign to restructure the group by asking for the help of those who recognize that there is something really amiss in the organization.

The membership must speak up if they have not already completely succumbed to the propaganda both those who are anti-2nd, and those who claim to be pro-2nd have fostered for decades.

I might start with a letter of the following nature.

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am a former member of the NRA, an American Eagle plank holder, and a firm supporter of all Twenty-Seven words of the Second Amendment.

You can ask why I am a former member, but the fact that in the eyes of the men who authored both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution I understand “the whole people” to posses the power and authority “to execute the Laws of the Union” should suffice. However, if it is not clear then allow me to explain further.

My understanding of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the first Thirteen words of the Second, including “necessary”, is significantly different from yours. The law can only be understood in the way that “would be most likely to fulfill the intentions of those who framed the Constitution.” – See Ogden v. Saunders, 25 U.S. 213, 332.

I can abide no theories of later day jurists who seek to undermine our Fundamental Law to support their own political agenda by “build[ing] magnificent legal edifices on elliptical constitutional phrases —or even the white spaces between lines of constitutional text.” – Silveria v Lockyer, Ninth Circuit, Justice Alex Kozinski, dissenting. 

I certainly cannot be tolerant of those who ignore “the theory of our institutions of government, [and] the principles upon which they are supposed to rest” in order to profit from decades of lies, propaganda, and agenda’s that are destroying this nation.

I am distressed, to say the least, that an organization the size of the NRA does not have the wherewithal, the man-power, the intelligence, or honesty to support and abide the defined power of the People acting as the only constitutionally recognized authority “necessary to the security of a free State”. 

“[T]he whole people”, as noted by George Mason, is the backbone of freedom. It is the force that protects OUR juries from judicial error, and zealous prosecutors. It is the force that guarantees proper redress of grievance. It is the “bright line” for the proper use of force by “We the People”. 

The Founders of this nation who “pledged to each other [their] Lives, [] Fortunes, and [] sacred Honor” deserve more than rhetoric, compromise, and backroom deals. They deserve the truth to be passed from generation to generation in order to secure liberty.

The Second Amendment contains Twenty-Seven words, not just the last Fourteen. The men who authored those words understood that they were building the foundation for a nation of free and Sovereign People. They knew that while delegating limited authority to government, the true power must remain in the hands of the People. The only way for their posterity to remain free was the open exercise of all powers including the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union”. 

How can anyone with one scintilla of honesty ignore the principles upon which this nation is supposed to function and exist?

Regards,

Nicholas Testaccio

I’ve signed my name because I truly believe in the Second Amendment as the Founders intended. What they practiced, and utilized was considerably different from today’s interpretation. I say interpretation because with One Hundred Fifty years at its back, with state statutes to define its implementation, there is no way to see militia in the light it is portrayed today.

“The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them.”

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to *** prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams

“Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American *** the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” – Tenche Cox, PA Gazette, 1788

“The constitution ought to secure a genuine militia and guard against a select militia. *** all regulations tending to render this general militia useless and defenseless, by establishing select corps of militia, or distinct bodies of military men, not having permanent interests and attachments to the community ought to be avoided.” – Richard Henry Lee

The Founders had a clear picture of what the Militia was, and should never be. It should never be “select militia” such as National Guard. It should be nothing other than “the whole people” in service to their community and country. It should be a lawful Constitutional body “reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia.” – See Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 16

It is disturbing enough to see the law as it is clearly stated being dismantled by those who sit in positions of delegated authority, but it is downright disheartening to see those who should realize the significance of “A well regulated Militia” helping to diminish the power of the People with legal arguments that ignore the intended purpose of having arms in the hands of trained, Able-Bodied Men. To have those who pretend to be patriots and pro-2nd advocates find any excuse they can to deny the good People their proper role in Militia is beyond tolerable.

What the individual rights proponents fail to see is right in front of them. Walking into a court and expecting a corrupt judiciary to render honest constitutional decisions is outright madness. Accepting edicts such as “bright lines”, “compelling interests”, and not knowing the difference between a right and a privilege is tantamount to colluding with the enemies of freedom. 

There are opponents of an armed citizenry that control the legislatures, and the courts. For some reason, pro-2nd groups ignore this aspect of the fight. 

“The right of a member of the general public to carry a concealed firearm in public is not, and never has been, protected by the Second Amendment,” ***. “Therefore, because the Second Amendment does not protect in any degree the right to carry concealed firearms in public, any prohibition or restriction a state may choose to impose on concealed carry — including a requirement of ‘good cause,’ however defined — is necessarily allowed by the Amendment.” – See Peruta V California, Ninth Circuit

The Peruta decision rests heavily on what was written in the Heller decision. In Heller in a slim 5-4 decision, Justice Scalia wrote, “How far it is in the power of the legislature to regulate this right, we shall not undertake to say, as happily there has been very little occasion to discuss that subject by the courts.” – See District of Columbia v Heller (No. 07-290) 478 F. 3d370 

Regulate a right? For those who have little understanding of rights, and privileges, you cannot regulate a right, but you can regulate a privilege. I warned, just 15 minutes after the Heller decision was published that this would become poignant to those opposed to an armed citizenry. Regulate a right? Really?

We now have an entire population who cannot “bear Arms” as was practiced, and intended by incorporating Militia into the Constitution. In actuality, we have no lawful Militia in this nation “necessary to the security of a free State.” 

Militia is there to prevent mischief, corruption, and of course tyranny. It is there as a lawful authority to procure indictments, and arrest those who violate their oath to the Constitution.

It is not a last line of defense, but rather was intended as the first line to protect the interests of the good People from “A [government] whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant”.

Need I say more than I’ve decided to send this entire article to the NRA, and wait with bated breath for an honest reply? If any at all will come.

You must be logged in to post a comment.