"The Right Of The People To Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed."

The Second Amendment reads:
"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."

       According to the Oxford Dictionary, the word "infringe" means:
"Act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on."

Four boxes keep us FREE:

The soap box,  The ballot box,  The jury box,  The cartridge box.

Click Picture To Start Video

Click n Email This Page ( ) To Family And Friends
Who Do and Who Do NOT
Understand The Wisdom Of The 2nd Amendment.

Ammo YET ?

See New Word ... Ineptocracy ... Status of USA

See Chart of GunOwnerShip WorldWide

Must See ... 8 min video  (Must Share)

How to Get FFL From Home. We Guarantee this Guide Will Get Approved for an FFL from Home!

It’s Time To Talk

About Ex Post Facto Laws

& Resistance To Tyranny

"No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant Letters of Marque and

Reprisal; coin money; emit Bills of Credit; make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender

in payment of debts; pass any Bill of Attainder; ex post facto law, or law impairing the

obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility."



America, it's time to talk about ex post facto laws. Why has the time come to talk about such

things and understand it? States, municipalities, and Congress are moving toward passing

laws and ordinances against gun ownership that could move into ex post facto laws. For

example; in the town of Deerfield, Illinois, the Board of Trustees passed an ordinance that

banned certain "assault-type" weapons, large magazines that hold over 10 rounds, and

semi-automatic pistols capable of holding over 10 rounds, requiring residents to turn in those

firearms to government or face a fine of $250 to $1,000 per day per gun.

Residents have 60 days to sell their weapons, transfer ownership to someone outside the

town, turn in their weapons and accessories to police or pay the fines.


Naturally, the ordinance exempts law enforcement officers and retired law enforcement

officers, military members or any members of the National Guard or reserves in any State,

and any agent or employee of the State of Illinois, the United States or of any other State.

Simply put, only agents of government and law enforcement are "allowed" to have these types

of weapons in Deerfield.


The Chief of Police is "authorized" to confiscate such weapons upon violation of the



To get a full understanding of ex post facto law, Publius Huldah has an excellent piece

covering it on her website. An ex post facto law "RETROACTIVELY criminalizes conduct

that was not criminal when it was done." The example Ms. Publius uses is barbecuing.

Say you barbecued outside last Sunday. That was lawful when you did it. Next month,

Congress makes a pretended law which purports to retroactively criminalize barbecuing

outdoors. So, now, what you did is a crime (for which you are subject to criminal

prosecution); even though when you did it, it wasn't a crime. That is an ex post facto law.

How does this apply to what the village of Deerfield, Illinois, has done? According to Article

1, Section 9, paragraph 3 of the Constitution for the United States of America, "No Bill of

Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed." While this pertains to Congress, there is a

provision against States passing ex post facto laws.


Article I, Section 10, paragraph 1 of the Constitution for the United States of America states,

"No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant Letters of Marque and

Reprisal; coin money; emit Bills of Credit; make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender

in payment of debts; pass any Bill of Attainder; ex post facto law, or law impairing the

obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility."


Would it be safe to say that if a State or Congress cannot pass any ex post facto law that a

town, municipality, village or city could not do so?


The "ordinance," which is nothing but a "town law," criminalizes the possession of certain

"banned assault-type" weapons, including large magazines holding over 10 rounds and

semi-automatic firearms holding over 10 rounds in violation of the Second Amendment of the

Constitution for the United States of America. Additionally, failure to surrender those types

of weapons results in a daily fine, interpreted as "punishment" for failing to follow their

ordinance. This ordinance criminalizes an activity that was previously not criminal – having

"assault-type" weapons, large magazines and semi-automatic pistols holding over 10 rounds

and exacts punishment should one fail to surrender such firearms and accessories. The fine is

such that at the $250 per day "punishment" levied in one month amounts to $7,500; in one

year, the amount is $91,250. Who can afford those fines in order to keep their weapons?

And, remember, the fine is levied per weapon and accessory.


Alexander Hamilton, writing in Federalist Paper No. 84, 4th paragraph, stated, "The creation

of crimes after the commission of the fact, or, in other words, the subjecting of men to

punishment for things which, when they were done, were breaches of no law, and the practice

of arbitrary imprisonment's, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable

instruments of tyranny."


There is no way the founding fathers would think of allowing towns to infringe upon

God-given unalienable rights if States and the federal government are prohibited from doing



So, while Deerfield, Illinois, has not implemented imprisonment as a punishment, the fine

exacted for the violations against the village ordinance is punishment. What would happen

should someone not be able to pay their fine? Imprisonment? How would they know who

has or does not have these types of weapons and accessories? Do they know already? What

would happen should someone refuse to follow this unconstitutional ordinance then need to

petition the city for a permit for a business license, to improve their home, or other business

involving the city?


Clearly, when these individuals purchased these weapons, it was not unlawful. Now, it is

unlawful to possess these types of weapons and fail to follow the means of disposal of said

weapons. This is an ex post facto law enacted by a "village" in a republic where it is against

the Constitution to enact such laws.


These types of infringements are happening all over the republic, including legislation

introduced into Congress banning certain types of weapons. While weapons already in

possession by citizens are not affected by some legislation, including that introduced into

Congress, this is "testing the waters" to see how American citizens will respond to the

infringement upon their God-given unalienable rights to keep and bear arms. The

"grandfathered" weapons will more than likely attempt to be removed later should these

initial efforts succeed.


Most Americans know the Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement officers are under no

obligation to "protect" the public, meaning the officers at the high school in Parkland, Florida,

were, per the Supreme Court, under no obligation to "protect" the students from harm once

being called to the scene. In another ruling, the Supreme Court indicated law enforcement

can "shoot first, ask questions later." So, with the anti-constitutionalists moving to rid the

republic of firearms and weapons that make it easier to defend and protect oneself, who is

going to protect the people and their property if police are under no obligation to do so?

Criminals obey no laws. These draconian measures create a playground for criminals, which

increase the likelihood of more mass shootings, not less. And, with police under no

obligation to "protect" the citizens and citizens denied their God-given unalienable right to

protect themselves and their property, mass shootings and other crimes will skyrocket

because criminals will not relinquish their firearms and weapons nor follow any law. All the

weapons being in the hands of "government" does nothing when it takes minutes for law

enforcement to respond and does nothing to "protect" the people when under no obligation to

do so. However, government does have the authority to use their weapons and force to

impose the will of the government upon the people. It is the quintessential definition of

tyranny and despotism.


These "children," the cult of Hogg, and the George Soros minions are calling for ex post facto

laws, against the Constitution, to solve a perceived problem. While these Second

Amendment illiterate trolls call for gun bans and confiscation (ex post facto laws), essentially

removing the right of the people to defend themselves because of "mass shootings," they

lobby for firearms and weapons to be in the hands of law enforcement officers, which has

killed more individuals than all the mass shootings, and governments, which summarily

killed 252 million people worldwide in the 20th century alone. Remember, these Parkland,

Florida Hogg cultists gave law enforcement a "pass" for failing to protect them as well as the

FBI, a federal government law enforcement agency.


It matters not what happens in Australia, Great Britain, Germany, Sweden or any other

foreign nation. Their decisions, laws, and actions have zero to do with the United States. So

what if these nations banned and confiscated guns? It doesn't matter to this republic. So

what if the United Nations wants nations to disarm all the nations' citizenry? It doesn't matter

to this republic. But, those in this republic seeking to disarm the US citizenry always cite the

UN and other nations on what the US should be doing. Again, IT DOESN'T MATTER

WHAT THESE OTHER NATIONS DO!!!! Our law rests in the Constitution for the United

States of America, which declares ex post fact laws forbidden and recognizes and protects the

God-given unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms without any government



So, people in towns, villages, municipalities, and cities that have or are trying to enact such

unconstitutional ex post fact laws have a choice – comply, resist or leave. Those who cannot

leave either comply or resist. It is a choice that will have to be made. And, there is no

cop-out of "we don't have a choice." It may not be one that is liked, but it is a choice.

It won't be long before many of us in this republic will be making that choice since more and

more States, towns and counties will seek to infringe upon the Second Amendment.

Congress is working at it as well. Unfortunately, citizens may have to choose between

"yellow snow" and "red snow." There won't be a middle ground. Now is the time to put this

to rest by standing up in resistance. If not, prepare to kneel in enslavement and submission.

No longer can citizens rely solely on the NRA or the GOA to engage in this fight. It is going

to take all citizens in support of the God-given individual unalienable right to keep and bear

arms to quell this squall.

See historical weird looking guns.

Today I swung my front door wide open and placed my Remington 870 shotgun right in the doorway.  I gave it 6 shells; I even placed it in a wheelchair to help it get around.

I then left it alone and went about my business.  While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the neighbor boy across the street mowed the yard, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign right in front of our house.

After about an hour, I checked on the gun. It was still sitting there in the wheelchair, right where I had left it. It hadn't rolled itself outside. It certainly hadn't killed anyone, even with the numerous opportunities it had been presented to do so. In fact, it hadn't even loaded itself.   You can imagine my surprise, with all the media hype about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people. 

Either the media is wrong and it's the misuse of guns by PEOPLE that kills people,
or I'm in possession of the laziest gun in the world.

Well, I'm off to check on my spoons.  I hear they're making people fat.


Wrong House

Who Killed How Many People ???


Read all the way to the bottom.

   Very Interesting Facts About Gun Control:

There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms.  That is not disputed.

What is never shown, though, is a breakdown of those deaths to put them in perspective;
as compared to other causes of death.

•    65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
•    15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified

•    17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons

•    3% are accidental discharge deaths


So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually but drops to 5,100.

Still too many?  Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?

•    480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
•    344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
•    333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
•    119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington DC (a 54% increase over prior years)


So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.  Maybe it's gangs and the lack of the historic family unit with a father and a mother.

This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation or about 75 per state.

That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others.  
For example, California had 1,169. Alabama had 1. 

Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far?  California of course but understand, it is not the tool (guns) driving this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states.

So if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault; all are done by criminals to victims and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. 

That's why they are criminals. 


But what of other deaths?   Remember total gun deaths is 30,000/year (really only 5,100).

•   40,000+ die from a drug overdose – THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT !
•   36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
•   34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities (exceeding gun deaths even if you  include suicide)


Now it gets good

•    200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical malpractice.
•    You are safer in Chicago than you are in a hospital !
•    710,000 people die per year from heart disease.  Time to stop the cheeseburgers !


So what is the point?

  If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease would save twice the lives annually of all gun related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.).

A 10% reduction in malpractice would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides. 

Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

  So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? 

It's pretty simple. Taking away guns gives control to governments.   This is not conspiracy theory; this is a historical fact. Why is it impossible for the government to spill over into dictatorship? 

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become  corrupt and seek to rule as the British did. 

They too tried to disarm the populace of the colonies because it is not difficult to understand; a disarmed populace is a controlled populace. 

Thus, the Second Amendment was proudly and boldly included in the Constitution. 

It must be preserved at all costs.

cheap ammo