No products in the cart.


We Need Your Help With the Film “Good Guys With Guns”

by Nancy

We need your help in several ways to get this critical documentary film made. As a public service, this documentary is funded by you and me, and our friends and relatives with our donations. If you believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment, and you’re alarmed, as I am, about the current calls for solutions to mass shootings that have already been proven not to work, please consider donating to this project. We need to get the word out!

Students and teachers been killed and injured in their own schools. This has to stop! Now the lefty, well funded gun-control crowd is using our children and grandchildren to advocate for stricter gun-control laws, including an “assault weapons” ban! The “student-led” marches all over the country are actually organized, coached, and funded by the huge national liberal, gun-control activist groups. The indoctrinated students are not told that the “solutions” they are presented with simply won’t work. New gun-control laws will have no effect on criminals and the seriously mentally ill.

We also need your ideas on how to stop school shootings, and mass shootings in general. Some samples are included in this Progress Report. We would like your input as well. The more of us working on solutions, the better. What do you think? This is your opportunity to have your ideas considered.

Please comment with your suggestions on this article or send your ideas here. Thank you!

What do I think? Whether it is a school, or church, or anywhere else, most mass shootings happen in gun-free-zones and are over in less that 5 minutes. The police just can’t get there that quickly. Gun-free-zones are an invitation to the deranged and should be eliminated. Then, the “good guys and/or gals” with guns (teachers, parishioners) need to already be at the location, trained, armed, and ready to stop the threat immediately.

We have a natural right, a God-given right to self defense. It’s way past time to be allowed to defend ourselves and those under our protection.

Please donate at least the cost of a latte, a dinner out, or whatever you can afford. This documentary will be important, not only to us but also our children and grandchildren. We need to solve this now, and hopefully that will solve it for our family in the future as well.

Following is the current progress report for the film, GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS – How the Second Amendment Can Stop Mass Shootings.


Progress Report

20 March 2018

Dear GOOD-GUY Associate,

We have been very busy lining up a cast for the production of GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS – How the Second Amendment Can Stop Mass Shootings.  I am thus happy to announce that we now have great interviews lined up as follows:














Unfortunately we do not yet have the budget to conduct these interviews. Given this, please let us know that you really want to make this film by watching the trailer and donating what you can.

If you would like to read the narration Script or see the Budget for the movie, they are both available at the official site at

*     *     *

GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS explores mass-shooting at schools, churches and public places and seeks solutions.  Statistical data tells us that 70% of the time it takes the police about 11 minutes to get to shootings, but they are over in about 5 minutes.  Then, predictably the same “gun-control” lobby comes out and advocates yet more regulations, more limits on arms, more “gun-free zones” and other infringements of the Second Amendment.

GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS explores the reasons the Founding Fathers did not want infringements on the arms and why they gave WE THE PEOPLE a means of protecting ourselves, not just through the “individual right to keep and bear arms,” but through “good guys with guns” — what they called “well regulated Militia.”  Inspired by the works of Edwin Vieira, Jr., author of Thirteen Words, The Sword and Sovereignty and By Tyranny Out of Necessity, the documentary is a Matrix Production in association with OATH KEEPERS.

*     *     *

Unless the American public better understands how and why mass shootings occur, we will never be able to eliminate these atrocities.

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=””]
After political and economic Marxism failed, Marxism was translated into social terms and “the long march through the cultural institutions” began. The movie industry and academia were prime targets because both cater to the youth. Today, cultural Marxism — also know as “political correctness” — infects all levels of Western Civilization.

Having listened to many of the ideas floating around on conservative talk-radio, network TV and in public discussions, here is a compilation of steps we propose to solving the problem.  Please note these steps are not necessarily what OATH KEEPERS officially proposes, they are simply what we propose to discuss in the film.

1)  People with criminal records for violent crimes should not be allowed to buy or own fire arms.

2)  People with adjudicated psychiatric histories or who use psychiatric drugs should not be allowed to buy or own fire arms.

3)  Children should not be allowed to buy or own fire arms.  “Children” should be defined as anyone younger than the age eligible for Military duty.

4)  Anyone, not 1 – 3, who buys or owns a so-called “weapon suitable for war” should be trained in how to safely and effectively use such weapon.

5)  All “gun-free zones” should be abolished because they technically infringe the Second Amendment and facilitate potential mass murder.  Should people who insist on gun-free zones – whether private or public — be prosecuted for violating the highest law in the land?

6)  There should be no restrictions on any citizen, other than 1 – 4 above, to “keep and bear arms,” open or conceal carry as stipulated in the Second Amendment.

7)  Any congressman who has originated or voted for any “law” that infringes the Second Amendment should be voted out of office.  What about prosecuted?  See MOLON LABE and MIDNIGHT RIDE at or on DVD at

8)  Any judge who does not uphold the Second Amendment, as required by the Constitution and his oath of office, should be removed from the bench.  What about prosecuted?

9)  Doors on all classrooms and lavatories at public schools should be bullet-proof, have peep holes and be able to be locked.  Also, the walls between class rooms, lavatories and hallways should be bullet-proof.

10)  Every class room should have a weapon locked into a cabinet, similar to a fire extinguisher or fire ax.  The cabinet combination should be known by certain seniors and all teachers and administrative personnel.  Ideally they should all be trained.

11)  Volunteer teachers and administrative personnel in schools should conceal-carry arms and be trained.  That they exist should be promulgated but exactly who is on security duty at any given time should be kept secret so a would-be assailant will never know who will counter him or her.

12)  Reinstate worship in the schools on a volunteer basis.  Right now the kids are getting their “religion” from Hollywood movies, thus is it any wonder the public schools now look like movie sets?  See CULTURAL MARXISM and MAINSTREAM at or on DVD at

13)  Any public school that has a mass shooting resulting in any deaths should be forced to refund all property taxes for that year. Citizens should demand and have an expectation that the government they pay for delivers services in safety.  If any of the government’s public schools cannot deliver education in a save and secure environment, then those public schools should be shut down permanently.

14)  Until and unless these points are put in place, no child should be expected or forced to attend any public school.  Public schools, as currently managed by local, state and federal governments, are literally “chambers of death” —  not places of enlightenment.  Kids who refuse to risk their lives on the “gun-free” campuses of the government school system should opt out and attend private schools or engage in homeschooling.

If you let me know which of these points you feel have merit, and/or propose additional points, we can build them into the movie.  This will give you a direct influence on the solution to the mass-shooting problem facing the nation. I can be reached at

*   *   *

But you may ask: Do movies like this really make any difference?  Consider this:

o  We have produced 8 documentaries since FIAT EMPIRE was released in 2005 — four of the movies in association with OATH KEEPERS.  These documentaries have been screened by literally millions of people and we know this because we have been monitoring the Google and YouTube statistics over the years.

o  If you look at ORIGINAL INTENT, our second film, you will see much of Trump’s presidential platform.  We discussed “free” trade, NAFTA and loss of the manufacturing base well before it was popular and before the “general public” even knew who to blame.

o  In SPOILER we discussed the “flat wages” and the Establishment “DemoPublican” Party — what’s become known as, “the swamp” — well before these issues were anywhere near public awareness.

o  In FIAT EMPIRE – which won a Telly Award — you will see much of Ron Paul’s presidential platform as it relates to the Federal Reserve System.  We released FIAT EMPIRE prior to Dr. Paul’s run and we discussed “fiat currency” and the “gold standard” before the public was even aware the Fed is a private bank.  In FIAT EMPIRE we also warned of a bubble and predicted a crash, which came three years later in 2008.

The point is, the issues and remedies we have addressed in the movies — movies you have helped make possible – are leading the curve by at least 3 years.  Like the other movies, GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS will percolate into the public domain and WE THE PEOPLE will eventually assimilate its Constitutional principles and vote-in the leaders that will effectuate it. I know some of you may feel this is overly-optimistic, but SPOILER, explains how change happens with a review of Eric Hoffer’s philosophical work on mass movements.

*   *   *

So there is a very good chance this movie, GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS — How the Second Amendment Can Stop Mass Shootings will have an effect on Society for the better.  These films ARE making a difference. Verify my claim by watching the past productions and see if they don’t match up to many of the improvements we see happening right now.

All of our movies are public service projects and the evidence shows that we ARE making a difference.

All of the past 8 productions are up for free at or you can get them on higher-quality DVD at

The Mainstream Media — as we discussed in our previous production of MAINSTREAM  — has become corrupted and now works to indoctrinate WE THE PEOPLE into an acceptance of an anti-Second Amendment culture and the Globalist Agenda.  Help stop this.  Go to and donate whatever you can even if it’s $100, $50 or $25.  Producer and Production Associate screen credits will be granted as acknowledgement for your donations.  Also there is still a prominent Producer, Executive Producer and Associate Producer screen credit available in the MAIN titles of the film.  See the donation page for details.

Thank you for reading this and contributing what you can.  A “free state” and “a more perfect union” are made possible by men and women who care.  Thus, if even 10% of the thousands of you reading this now show they care by donating, we will get the interviews completed and finish the documentary.  Its release may help stop these horrific mass shootings.  Isn’t it worth a try?





P.S.  Please forward this Progress Report to your family, friends and associates.  The more people who know about this production, the faster it will get done.  Thank you.










  1. Colin Greenwood, in the study “Firearms Control”, 1972: “No matter how one approaches the figures, one is forced to the rather startling conclusion that the use of firearms in crime was very much less when there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, convicted criminal or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm without restriction. Half a century of strict controls on pistols has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of this weapon in crime than ever before.”

    There is a reason why those who serve within our government are FORBIDDEN any type of authority over the people and their weapons – type, how many, etc – none of that is LAWFULLY under governmental power. Shows how far we have gone that pretty much everyone here accepts and wants those who serve within our government to have some sort of authority over our weapons.


    That, and this attitude that has come about over decades is the problem.

    KEEPING the Oath is the single most needed thing in our country today. That one thing will drain the swamp, remove those “bad” judges, senators, reps, cops, “military brass”, stop these unlawful wars, etc.

    THAT IS THE ANSWER. Keep the Oath, just say “NO” to unlawful orders, policies (yes, policies), etc.

    We cannot raise our own choice of food, drink real milk, etc. We pay yearly rent to those who serve within our governments yet they are only allowed to tax us on the original purchase. Those who serve within our governments UNLAWFULLY regulate and register our natural rights to fish, hunt, drive and travel though it is ONLY commercial vehicles that travel between the states (and that is questionable) that they have any authority over. We have our family members dying in forbidden wars (proof below), etc. Our property of all types is unlawfully regulated, controlled, etc. Read the US Constitution, go on, read it. Even the pocket one will tell you most of what I wrote here.

    We have political parties that SELECT who we are allowed to vote for, yet the framers warn us against political parties (factions they called them). That is NOT the constitutional way.

    The Oath was, I believe, another safeguard for this nation and our constitutional republic, making each person personally responsible for what they do while serving within our government be it as civil or military positions; elected, hired, contracted, etc. Yet, I know of no one in the last 50 – 60 years that has KEPT THAT OATH. Not one person, yeah, me too, but I do it religiously now and though it costs me, it is worth the cost and much less a cost then what those who created this country paid.

    US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11: “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”.

    The congress has the duty to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal when they are needed to enforce the US Constitution, the laws, or defend the people and the nation. This is using private citizens in their own privately owned crafts to defend the USA and her people, this is using the Militia.

    Clause 12 specifies that there shall be no military beyond that of two years. The Militia of each state is charged with our nations defense here within the USA until and unless the congress has declared war and a military is raised:

    “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.

    * The money that the congress has illegally spent beyond the lawfully allowed time of two years for the support of a “standing military” was/and still is a misappropriation of funds (misappropriation n. the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one’s own use or other unauthorized purpose, particularly by a public official…), a felony, a crime against the American people.

    “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to PREVENT THE ESTABLISMENT OF A STANDING ARMY, the bane of liberty….” Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, floor debate over the 2nd Amendment, I Annals of Congress (cannot get any more “standing” then what we have today, can we?)

    James Madison, Federalist 45: “The powers delegated by the proposed constitution of the federal government, ARE FEW AND DEFINED. Those which are to remain in the state governments, ARE NUMEROUS AND INDEFINITE. The former (federal government) will be exercised principally on external objects, a war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the state.”

    James Wilson: “I leave it to every gentleman to say whether the enumerated powers are not as accurately and MINUTELY DEFINED, as can be well done on the same subject, in the same language…nor does it, in any degree, go beyond the particular enumeration; for, when it is said that Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper, those words are LIMITED AND DEFINED by the following, “for carrying into execution the foregoing powers”, it is saying no more than that the powers we have already particularly given (enumerated), shall be effectually carried into execution.”

    George Washington stated in his farewell address, Sept. 17, 1796: “And of fatal tendency … to put, in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party – often a small but artful and enterprising minority. … They are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

    John Smilie warned: “Congress may give us a select militia which will, in fact, be a standing army — or Congress, afraid of a general militia, may say there shall be no militia at all. When a select militia is formed; the people in general may be disarmed.” <– that is the National Guard

    James Madison: “… large and permanent military establishments … are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”

    Tench Coxe, Delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. 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.”

    Tench Coxe, ‘Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’, in the Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, on the Second Amendment where he asserts that it's the people with arms, who serve as the ultimate check on government: “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”. <– key words "must be occasionally raised to defend"

    An editorial on Gage's proclamation stressed that an armed populace must keep government in check: “The opposing an arbitrary measure, or resisting an illegal force, is no more rebellion than to refuse obedience to a highway-man who demands your purse, or to fight a wild beast, that came to devour you. It is morally lawful, in all limited governments, to resist that force that wants political power, from the petty constable to the king…. They are rebels who arm against the constitution, not they who defend it by arms.” "A Freeman," PA. EVENING POST, June 27, 1775, at 2. [Vol. 7:2]

    Daniel Webster: “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? … A free government with an uncontrolled power of military conscription is the most ridiculous and abominable contradiction and nonsense that ever entered into the heads of men”.

    Samuel Adams, using sarcasm to make a point on May 15, 1764 (Understand that all that he lists is PROTECTED from those who serve within our governments – state and federal – by the US Constitution): “But if our Trade may be taxed why not our Lands? Why not the Produce of our Lands and every thing we possess or make use of? This we apprehend annihilates our Charter Right to govern and tax ourselves… are we not reduced from the Character of free Subjects to the miserable State of tributary slaves?”

    George Washington: ““I think the Parliament of Great Britain hath no more Right to put their hands into my Pocket, without my consent, than I have to put my hands into your’s, for money…”

    Thomas Jefferson to Lord North 1775: “That this privilege of giving or of withholding our monies, is an important barrier against the undue exertion of prerogative, which if left altogether without control, may be exercised to our great oppression; and all history shews how efficacious is its intercession from redress of grievances, and re-establishment of rights, and how improvident it would be to part with so powerful a mediator.”

    Emer de Vattel’s Law of Nations: “The constitution and laws of a state are the basis of the public tranquillity, the firmest support of political authority, and a security for the liberty of the citizens. But this constitution is a vain phantom, and the best laws are useless, if they be not religiously observed: the nation ought then to watch very attentively, in order to render them equally respected by those who govern, and by the people destined to obey. To attack the constitution of the state, and to violate its laws, is a capital crime against society; and if those guilty of it are invested with authority, they add to this crime a perfidious abuse of the power with which they are entrusted. The nation ought constantly to repress them with its utmost vigor and vigilance, as the importance of the case requires.”

    Patrick Henry, American colonial revolutionary: “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”

    George Washington: “However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

    John Adams: “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”

    James Madison: "It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But why is this desirable?"
    "Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of."

    St. George Tucker: “The Federal Government is the creature of the States. It is not a party to the Constitution, but the result of it – the creation of that agreement which was made by the States as parties. It is a mere agent, entrusted with limited powers for certain objects; which powers and objects are enumerated in the Constitution. Shall the agent be permitted to judge of the extent of his own powers, without reference to his constituent?” (Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court, in his edition of 'Blackstone's Commentaries On The Law' (1803))

    Alexander Hamilton: "We are attempting, by this Constitution, to abolish factions, and to unite all parties for the general welfare." (Debates in the Convention of the State of New York on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Tuesday, June 25, 1788. In: Henry Cabot Lodge, ed., The Works of Alexander Hamilton (Federal Edition), Vol. 2, New York, 1904, p. 57.)

    George Washington: “It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. “

    John Quincy Adams: “America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom.”

    James Madison: “With respect to the words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

    Daniel Webster: “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “The care of every man's soul belongs to himself. But what if he neglect the care of it? Well what if he neglect the care of his health or his estate, which would more nearly relate to the state. Will the magistrate make a law that he not be poor or sick? Laws provide against injury from others; but not from ourselves. God himself will not save men against their wills.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered”.

    Thomas Jefferson: “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “The government created by this compact (the Constitution) was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party (the people of each state) has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”

    James Madison, Federalist 39: "Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." (It was established)

    James Madison: “The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature … the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.”

    George Washington: “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”

    James Madison: "In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

    James Madison: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied: and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

    J. Reuben Clark: “God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run not to individuals, that is, to government officials, no matter how great or how small they may be. Under His plan our allegiance and the only allegiance we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God himself set up. So runs the oath of office of those who participate in government. A certain loyalty we do owe to the office which a man holds, but even here we owe just by reason of our citizenship, no loyalty to the man himself. In other countries it is to the individual that allegiance runs. This principle of allegiance to the Constitution is basic to our freedom. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this “land of liberty” from other countries”.

    Keeping the Oath, That is what it will take.

    1. Cal, Many times when I read your comments I feel quite embolden, and I want to be able to grab a bull horn, fly to DC and stand on the steps on congress, supreme court and WH. Unfortunately I do not have your memory and power of unoffensive persuasion to do that. Wish I did, but I don’t. I would like to nominate you to stand in my stead and speak those words to our public servants. I would be honored to stand beside you while you speak.
      Our country is going down and unless drastic measures are taken I really have no hope for peaceful resolution to the growing onslaught to this countries predicament
      sincerely, CB

  2. I’m rolling with Cal on this one, in fact, I have a t-shirt that says “What part of Shall not be Infringed do you not Understand?”

    So I ask you Mr. Jaeger, What part of shall not be infringed gives you such pause? Even more to the point, Where are the qualifiers you have outlined, placed in the 2nd Amendment?

    If a person is so dangerous that they may use a gun for violence, then the person should be taken out of society, not the tools.

  3. My comments on these items:
    1) People with criminal records for violent crimes should not be allowed to buy or own fire arms. Who decides who is in the criminal records for violent crimes? The very state whose agenda is to disarm the public. It’s too easy for the state to “frame” a person as violent and use aggressive anticonstitutional public prosecutors and leftist judges who are being paid perks for convictions to take your guns under this premise. Freedom has a cost and some risk. Laws and rules don’t prevent crime.

    2) People with adjudicated psychiatric histories or who use psychiatric drugs should not be allowed to buy or own fire arms.
    A casual visit to a doctor can put you on this list without your knowledge or consent. Let’s not be blind here, doctors are produced by big pharma run med schools whose agenda is to make every healthy person a patient. Any doctor could prescribe a psycho drug without your knowledge. And there is a question on a form the Dr fills out asking if you own guns. There is plenty of evidence of this system being abused. Freedom has a cost and some risk.

    3) Children should not be allowed to buy or own fire arms. “Children” should be defined as anyone younger than the age eligible for Military duty.
    Children need to be disciplined. After the 1960’s explosion of childrens rights against their parents and Dr Spock don’t spank your kids agenda, we see a decline in the behavior of youth. Many here owned or fired guns as early as one could hold one. I recall shooting my mother’s Browning 22 cal when I could barely hold it up. I owned a 22 cal before puberty. Still have it. Never shot anyone with it.

    4) Anyone, not 1 – 3, who buys or owns a so-called “weapon suitable for war” should be trained in how to safely and effectively use such weapon.
    That’s pure arrogance. Those guns aren’t any different than other semi-auto guns. Insert magazine, charge, point, pull trigger. Repeat if necessary.

    The 2nd Amen (dment) is pure and simple with no room for variences. It’s pretty evident how it’s been gradually set aside and now under an all out assault.

    1. WGP,

      I agree with you. What does James Jaeger miss about the phrase “Shall Not Be Infringed”? James Jaeger has done some good videos, but if that list is indicative of his real thinking, he has gone off the rails.

      Shorty Dawkins

      1. I agree Shorty, good points WGP. Well thought out and articulated, let us hope Mr. Jaeger takes them to heart.
        In fact, if this list is not revised, I will not be contributing any further. I do not want my name associated with such a list.

        David E. Burden

Comments are closed.