An Approaching Darkness

I attended the Moccasin Creek Minutemen Meeting tonight on the 2nd Amendment. Sheriffs Donnie Harrison (Wake County), Jerry Jones (Franklin County) and Carey Winders (Wayne County) gave opening comments and then answered questions. I appreciate their appearance at this meeting. All three sheriffs guaranteed that they would not take our guns away. Unless the government passed a law mandating their confiscation. But since the government would never do this (in their opinion), we can consider our firearms to be secure under the second amendment.

Let’s review what has transpired in our country. The right to private property has been infringed. New London, CT land owners and GM bondholders saw their property redistributed. J.P. Morgan took possession of people’s private financial accounts at M.F. Global. Was the law followed? According to the president and courts, nothing was done illegally in these cases.

The government now has the authority to force people to buy a product. In this case, the product is health care insurance. Does the government have the authority to mandate how you spend your money? According to the Supreme Court, it does have this authority as a “tax”. Really?

We consistently see a two tiered justice system in our country. Tonight, I was fine to see Sheriff Harrison carry a pistol into a restaurant that serves alcohol in violation of state law. Since I am a law abiding citizen, I left my Glock in my car. Enforcement of immigration and voter laws has become arbitrary in the eyes of the federal government. But this is the point that the sheriffs missed. Laws are selectively enforced when you have rule of men instead of rule of law (see upcoming video). Once this line is crossed, laws are passed to make the innocent into criminals.

Our sheriffs need to read and understand this passage from Atlas Shrugged:

“Did you really think we want those laws observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them to be broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.” -Ayn Rand

I wrote about this concept of making people criminals in an earlier post:

The basic tenet of a dictatorial government is simple: it treats its citizens as criminals in order to control them. This means our “rights”  and Liberty are mere whims that we think we possess. People that know me, think that I am headstrong. What they mistake for being headstrong is actually passion. Passion for Liberty and my natural rights under God. I refuse to fly because I refuse to surrender my security under the pretext of being a criminal in the eyes of our government.

Our sheriffs cannot visualize a future where the enemy is domestic: I can. Will Congress pass legislation infringing on the 2nd amendment? I hope not but I have to ask this question: why is everyone buying firearms and ammunition? Or I should say why is every sentient person buying firearms and ammunition? I will be posting video of the entire meeting and I guarantee that you will not feel more secure after watching them.

David DeGerolamo

Related Articles:

 

Firearm Confiscation by Law Enforcement in a Nutshell

 

Moccasin Creek Minutemen Meeting on the 2nd Amendment – Part 1

Moccasin Creek Minutemen Meeting on the 2nd Amendment – Part 2

 

 

 

      
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Editorial and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to An Approaching Darkness

  1. Rich S. says:

    I am sorry that I was unable to attend, but it sounds like our “Sheriff” -- (Harrison) -- is a Quisling for the Marxist Pretender-In-Chief?

    I hope I am wrong in my interpretation of your post.

    • David says:

      I believe Sheriff Harrison is a good man. I don’t think he understands what the government in Washington is capable of doing to the people. I know that it took me several years of research just to get a grasp of our founding principles and history that has not been distorted. I can only pray that if unjust laws are passed, our law enforcement officials will do the right thing. But then I think of the injustice that is already upon us. We should never forget Nancy Pelosi’s comment that we must pass legislation in order to know what is in the legislation. That was the tipping point in our country showing us the lust for power that we now face and that Sheriff Harrison does not understand.

      • tmedlin says:

        As much as some might like to see our sheriffs be able to quote chapter and verse from the Federalist Papers and continue the debates between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson -- I don’t think they will ever be able to squeeze those studies in, between keeping the gangs under control, dealing with the illegals, while handcuffed by the Feds, dealing with the drunks on the road, dealing with corruption, dealing with domestic disputes that turn deadly and on and on. Just not going to happen. Perhaps we could elect someone as Sheriff that COULD do that…I don’t know, or see,anyone willing to step up and run that could do it. If you find someone, point him out and let’s get him on the ballot.
        OR, maybe WE can reach out to the sheriff’s department and try to educate THEM on what we think is important…Oh, I think we did that, last night :)

  2. Rich S says:

    I truly hope you’re right David. I hope that the Sheriff will “see the light” as some other Sheriff’s who have openly declared their declaration to defy the Feds.

    The injustices heaped upon us are staggering. Every new piece of legislation or regulation slowly erodes our own personal freedoms. As we all know, it is the boiled frog syndrome. I wrote an email to some folks about Obama’s press conference, and in my haste to blast it out I think I minimized his actions. I wrote “nothing TOO dramatic here”. But it IS dramatic.

    I just hope as you do that our LEO’s will open their eyes.

  3. tmedlin says:

    I agree, that none of them said exactly what we would have liked to have heard, which is “we will never, EVER, take away your guns under any circumstances -- regardless of the law”. Anyone who thought that’s what they would hear, is naive.
    I felt differently, than you, when I left. I felt like we still have time. I felt Donnie was right when he chastised US, for voting in people who pass the bullshit legislation, that they are required to enforce and we are required to abide by. Our problem is not the sheriffs -- our problem sits in the General Assembly, the Governors office, the Capitol in DC, and the White House (oh, and yes in the courthouses). It would be nice to think that the sheriff’s will “save” us. They can’t. We have to save ourselves, and unfortunately, that DOES mean we have to get back out and get in the faces of our elected representatives. If we stop fighting at the ballot box, we will surely be fighting in the streets.
    Once the smoke clears in the streets, then we will be governed by tyrants, or we go back to square one, and have to elect/form NEW governments…
    So….my takeaway from last night, is that we STILL have to fight on two fronts -- 1) with preparedness and all that comes with that, and 2) start pounding our currently elected officials and start identifying suitable replacements for those that need to go -- and make sure that WE have more people voting than the other side does.
    Or maybe move to Idaho….nah….

    • David says:

      I agree that the sheriffs cannot save us -- which is the point of this post. As for the people voting for our vain and aspiring men, who now realize that votes can be bought and Liberty sold (out).

      The problem now becomes what will experienced patriots do and how will sheriffs (and law enforcement) react?

  4. Dave says:

    I attended the meet with Sheriff Harrison last night and some amazing insights became apparent.
    The historic novel Les Miserables by Victor Hugo written in 1852 perfectly illustrates the current
    state of affairs. If you replace Jean Valjean with everyman USA and Sheriff Harrison with Inspector Javert you will have a current version of Hugo’s classic work.
    During the meeting I noted there were several members of the MSM and lesser known alternative media present and taking notes. Sheriff Harrison had to be extremely careful how he worded his statements and the questions posed to him weren’t exactly clear and straight forward. So it is understandable we did not hear what we came hoping to hear. In a follow up reply to me the Sheriff stated unequivocally, ” If it’s unconstitutional, I will not enforce it.”
    My concern now is not whether Sheriff Harrison will keep his oath of office because he will. He is an honorable man and professional officer who will not try to enforce unconstitutional laws.
    What concerns me is how did certain members of leftist media outlets even know about this meet?
    It was mainly advertised within the conservative community. We almost never hear about their meetings. Are they that much better organized than we are?

  5. I too attended the meeting, and was a bit unsettled by what I heard. I thought the place was going to come apart when Sheriff Harrison’s lawyer (whoever he was) said that our natural rights could be infringed “for a compelling governmental purpose, that’s the law!” That did NOT please the crowd, no way.

    I came to the meeting expecting the sheriffs to say, “We won’t follow unconstitutional laws.” I was disappointed. I think Sheriff Jones (Franklin) came closest to saying that. It sounded to me like Sheriff Harrison (who I think is a good man and a good sheriff) was saying, “If they pass a law in Congress requiring me to confiscate guns, that is what I will do, but don’t worry, they’ll never pass a law like that.” Not exactly re-assuring.

    I couldn’t hear the questions well, being out on the patio, but it sounded like one guy asked, what if confiscation was approved by the Supreme Court. That was about the time that the Sheriff’s lawyer said that SCOTUS was “the su-preme ar-biter” (actually said it that way) “of what is Constitutional, and it’s been that way since Marbury vs. Madison, you can look it up.” Well, Mr. Lawyer, most of the patriots there, I’d wager, know that case well, and SCOTUS did NOT make itself the ONLY arbiter of what is Constitutional. The “supreme arbiter” claim is arguable, and that’s the way liberals take it, but SCOTUS has no reign over fundamental rights.

    I do think the Sheriffs (and other leaders at the meeting) were surprised at the enormous turnout. I think it scared them a little bit. I hope so.

    Sheriff Harrison chastised us for not being involved with the state Legislature, which is probably a fair criticism for most people there. The media has gulled many Americans into thinking that the “main event” is the Federal Congress, which isn’t how the Founders saw it. North Carolina has many gun laws that are undesirable for patriots, and even laws that conflict with Federal laws (e.g., machine guns are banned as ‘weapons of mass destruction’, with law enforcement arguing over exceptions because the law is vague and contradictory).

    I went away feeling good about the strength of my fellow patriots’ resolve. That alone might be enough to sway the Sheriffs when the time of testing comes. But I did not come away with much, if any, confidence in the Sheriffs’ desire to disobey Federal laws to confiscate firearms.

  6. Pingback: Firearm Confiscation by Law Enforcement in a Nutshell | askmarion

Leave a Reply