An amusing world view

ah, the infamous what-if monkeys.

RANTING AGAINST THE NRA WITH DUE CAUSE!

Hello, my name is Don Hamrick. I am a political nobody with no enforceable rights in the eyes of the federal courts which, and under the strict interpration of the Rule of Law, that makes me slave to the U.S. Government. Any opposing arguments here?

The logic there is perfect. If bad guys bring guns into our national treasures and start shooting people, the good guys producing guns is an escalation.

See! Better that the bad guys kill a bunch of people then let the good guys "escalate" the violence by defending themselves.

Perfectly consistent.

I see the infamous merchant marine has found David's BLOG. I had an, er, opportunity to speak with him a few years back when I spoke at a SAF convention in VA. I'm glad it was a short conversation.

Am I on to something here?

Hello! It's me again, Don Hamrick

CATEGORY: WHEN IS IT THE RIGHT TIME TO FIGHT BACK?

Citing Robert J. Grey, Jr., Access to the Courts: Equal Justice for All, in Issues of Democracy: Access to the Courts - Equal Justice for All, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF SATE, BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL INFORMATON PROGRAMS, August 2004, 6-11:
(Available Online)

"A fundamental value in the American system of justice is that the stability of our society depends upon the ability of the people to readily obtain access to the courts, because the court
system is the mechanism recognized and accepted by all to peacefully resolve disputes. Denying access to the courts forces dispute resolution into other arenas and results in vigilantism and violence.
. . .

Equal Justice in Practice

When discussing the idea of access to the courts, mere access in the theoretical or legal sense is not enough; rather, it is the results that flow from the decisions made by the courts that give it meaning. For example, the value of "access" is evident when the courts decide that no one, especially those in positions of power, is above the law, or when access requires the right to counsel in cases where one's liberty is in jeopardy.

---------------

Vigilantism & Violence?

Citing Frederick Douglass. [1857] (1985). "THE SIGNIFICANCE OF EMANCIPATION IN THE WEST INDIES." Speech, Canandaigua, New York, August 3, 1857; collected in pamphlet by author. In THE FREDERICK DOUGLASS PAPERS. SERIES ONE: SPEECHES, DEBATES, AND INTERVIEWS. Volume 3: 1855-63. Edited by John W. Blassingame. New Haven: Yale University Press, p. 204:

"Let me give you a word of the philosophy of reform. The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims, have been born of earnest struggle. The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all-absorbing, and for the time being, putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it does nothing. If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters."

"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress. In the light of these ideas, Negroes will be hunted at the North, and held and flogged at the South so long as they submit to those devilish outrages, and make no resistance, either moral or physical. Men may not get all they pay for in this world; but they must certainly pay for all they get. If we ever get free from the oppressions and wrongs heaped upon us, we must pay for their removal. We must do this by labor, by suffering, by sacrifice, and if needs be, by our lives and the lives of others."

Frederick Douglass, 1857

MY COMMENTARY

If the U.S. Department of State knows that a continuous denial of justice through continuous denials of the Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial (i.e. no Second Amendment case at the U.S. Supreme Court from Miller in 1939 to Heller in 2007, that's 68 years of no Second Amendment jurisprudence) and a continuous denial of "access to the courts forces dispute resolution into other arenas and results in vigilantism and violence" then it begs the question is the U.S. Government becoming or has it already become a "belligerent" nation to its own people?

Now can that argument be sustained under the Law of Internal Armed Conflict even if we are at the infant stage of civil unrest? What do we make of the "vigilantism and violence" remark from the U.S. Department of State?

Dare I enter the world of conspiracy theorists to advance the suggestion that the U.S. is preparing for civil war? Oops! There's a movie plot for ya!

The merchant marine doesn't realize that every reader of this blog, except him, is breathing a sigh of relief that NRA isn't spending their money to support batshit-crazy pro-se litigatants who haven't yet won anything, instead of carefully planned cases. It does give me insight into what they have to ward off, and a sympathy for the employees who have to put up with this sort of thing.

"In June of 2002 I filed my first Second Amendment lawsuit. It was dismissed with prejudice."

"walk into the den of lions known as the corrupt federal courts"

"I am prepaing a new Second Amendment lawsuit for the U.S. District Court in DC in anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the Heller case. This time I am throwing every claim under the sun, including the kitchen sink."

Get a clue, man!

TO JIM & NAT

Answer this question:

Do we have the right to travel intrastate and interstate with our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms without the threat of being subject to arrest for possession of your own lawfully registerd handgun out-of-state?

That is the core issue of my lawsuit.

Or is it because I trashed the NRA that spurned you to cry like a baby by throwing insults at me?

The two of you, and everyone else, need to learn how to argue with logic instead of emotional rhetoric. Ya'll need to read Andrew Jay McClurg's law review article "The Rhetoric of Gun Control" available at SAF.ORG.

Ya'll need to get a grip on your emotions!

So, you started in 2002. Whoopity do. I've been corresponding with David and Clayton Cramer about legal strategies and fighting the antigunners since the early '90's. All you're likely to do is create MORE BAD PRECEDENT THAT WE HAVE TO OVERTURN.

James,

Again, another argument based on emotion: fear.

I have the individual right to defend my rights against government infringement and wrongdoing.

I have the Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial and the First Amendent right to petititon the government for redress of grievances over infringements and violations of my rights.

So why is it that I need permission and approval from you people to defend my rights?

You people who throw emotional insults as though it were a logical academic debate are only proving how ignorant you were to the issues of my case.

Explain to me why I need the annointing approval and blessing from the NRA to proceed in defense of my rights?

Don, shut up and go away please. This is a BLOG, not a FOURM.

Your posts are all tl;dr, you bold it to grab attention (ie: troll). Stop. Go away.

"Explain to me why I need the annointing approval and blessing from the NRA to proceed in defense of my rights?"

I'll grant you that the NRA sucks. Still, stop making stupid arguments. I wanted to go that route, take on the system, until I realized that, yes, I might set bad precedent that others would have to fight to clean up.

But I will give you that the NRA is worthless.

PAUL HENNING SAID: "Don, shut up and go away please."

So now I have no right to speak on my own behalf as a victim of government wrongdoing?

Kiss my ass you ignorant excuse of a human being! I will pursue justice in every venue I can find, from the federal courts to international human rights tribunals like the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with my human rights complaint, Petition No. P-1142-06 filed in 2006 which is still under investigation.

We are in a sad and deplorable State of the Union when an individual citizen cannot publicly speak of his own pursuit of equal justice under the law without getting insulted, humiliated, beaten up on blogs and told to shut up and go away.

I ask you where is freedom today? Do we really have "actual freedom" or the illusion of freedom?

Don,

Let me make an attempt at some constructive criticism. If you hope to get anywhere, you might want to look for ways of attracting supporters rather than creating people who automatically recoil upon seeing your name attached to a post. This thread of comments was quite clearly intended to be about a blog posting on the proposed change in rules to allow concealed carry in National Parks. If you'll look at what's actually here, you'll see one short (less than a dozen words) comment, followed immediately (and now extending to nearly a dozen screen pages on my browser) by "Hi, there! It's the Don Hamrick Show, starring me, Don Hamrick!" As if totally ruining the comment section for anyone who wanted to exchange thoughts on the actual topic weren't enough to alienate potential allies, you also indulged in the rather juvenile practice of putting large sections of your posts in capital letters and bold face type, making it look more the typical post advertising penis enlargement medications/devices or announcing that the recipient has just won the Irish Sweepstakes without the bother of ever having entered.

I'd suggest that before your next post you stop and ask yourself one simple question, not "did he fire five rounds or six?", but "Am I trying to gain real support to my cause, or am I just trying to vent my emotions, regardless of the cost to my public image and to the pro-Second Amendment efforts of others?"

Oh, not to get too far off topic here, but the original blog to which this thread was purportedly dedicated has been taken down. While it's possible some thoughtless person made some ill-advised posts that might have been construed as threatening or obscene, I'd suggest that it's much more likely that the original poster found himself totally over his head in thoughtful, rational refutations of his letter. I know that I'd like to consider my reply to have been of that sort.

Anyone have a screen-print or other archive?

I **HATE** that these people always try to trash their drivel when they get called out.

Idiots.

DD

Here's the Google Cache...

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:6-dcT19Uk3sJ:soullessletters.blogspot.com/

And if by chance I win my "human rights complaint" against the United States at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and/or eventually win my pursuit of equal justice under the law over the Second Amendment and equal rights under the law what you "idiots" say then?