The Second Amendment is a right, not a privilege. For more than four decades I have been an activist focusing on Second Amendment rights and sometimes it has been an uphill battle. Former NRA President Charlton Heston was fond of saying that the Second Amendment was the keystone in the arch of the Constitution and is what protects all the others.

We, in the NRA, believe that and equate the tenets of that amendment to freedom. History affirms that belief. While not to quote bumper sticker slogans, some hold true, such as “Freemen own guns, slaves don’t.” We also point out that gun control in America was based on racism.

The Dred Scott decision stated that the court could not consider Mr. Scott to be a citizen because that would also give him the right to keep and bear arms. That decision declared that slavery was not unconstitutional.

After the Civil War, many state governments in the south made legal possession of a gun available only to the white citizens. In several states, like New York, in order to get a permit to own or carry a handgun, the applicant must show “proper cause.”

This is a term that is difficult to define when it comes to determining whether a permit is granted. The proper interpretation should be that a person has proper cause to own and carry a handgun if they are not prohibited by being a felon, mental incompetent, a juvenile or a person of poor character.

The last condition is also rather broad and difficult to define, but perhaps the town drunk or a person with a history of irresponsible decisions and actions should be disqualified as those with the other disabilities.

The Second Amendment has a long history of being controversial. Court cases have been contradictory as to whether it is a collective right (militia clause) or an individual right (right of the people). Two years ago the Supreme Court affirmed that like the other amendments in the Bill or Rights, it is an individual right. This was called the Heller Decision and focused on a law in Washington DC that, for all practical purposes, banned the possession of a working firearm and a definite ban on handguns.

The Court overturned that ban and anti-gun politicians and anti-gun activists said the ruling applied only to the District. This brought up a case in Chicago that had a ban similar to DC. Chicago refused to abide by the decision and caused a court action called the McDonald case. This was decided by the protections of the 14th Amendment under due process clause which means that all states have to abide by the ruling. New York was one of six states that didn’t have a right to keep and bear arms in their constitution.

This decision opens a legal door for citizens of those states that didn’t recognize the Second Amendment was a right and treated it as a privilege to be granted by a bureaucrat. The lawsuits are already being filed in Illinois and New York regarding the right to possess firearms by honest, law-abiding citizens. It may take years to bring a definite ruling, because the court also held that the right can be subjected to “reasonable restrictions.”

There is controversy regarding the definition of “reasonable” and this will be the lawyers’ delight as they make money arguing the cases in court. We cannot argue against the “reasonable” definitions of the First Amendment restrictions such as the freedom of speech does not allow people to yell “fire” in a crowded theater, to commit perjury, libel or slander or incite people to violence. However it seems lately that being politically incorrect in speaking (or writing) can have very negative consequences.

We know that the right to keep and bear arms does not make a person immune from charges of menacing, reckless endangerment or various types of intimidation using a gun. Those are reasonable restrictions. However there is nothing reasonable about laws that restrict a person’s right to self-defense by not allowing them to have an effective means of protection.

The courts will have many decisions to make in the near future. We hope they make the right ones, especially in New York.

As everyone knows, I did not vote for candidate BO. Frankly, I didn’t think that a first term US Senator without executive experience was ready for the most difficult job in the world.

How can any serious voter say that BO was more qualified than McCain? What were these people smoking or drinking? How “drunk with change” can someone be?

On election night, I accepted the results and moved on. Democracy is about winning and losing elections but always accepting the will of the voters.

Like many, I was pleased to see the election of a black man and the post-racial administration that we were promised. I was wrong and wrong big time.

We were promised a post-racial presidency but race relations are worse than ever! Why hasn’t our first black president improved relations? Because he does not have the guts to stand up and tell his supporters to stop playing the race card …. or tell them that you can disagree with BO without being a racist!

Sadly, Pres BO has turned out to be a huge failure for black America too. Why isn’t he calling on black men to be responsible fathers? Or black gangs in Chicago to stop killing each other?

I guess that he is too busy looking for those isolated placards at tea party meetings. (By the way, did candidate BO ever complain about “the Bush insults” heard at his rallies?)

What a disappointment for those of us who saw “hope” in having a black president! Professor VD Hanson nailed it:

“The more the president appeals to his base in racial terms, the more his appointees identify themselves as members of a particular tribe, and the more political issues are framed by racial divisions, so all the more such racial obsession creates a backlash among the racially diverse American people.

America has largely moved beyond race.

Tragically, our president and a host of his supportive special interests have not.”

Welcome to BO’s “not post racial” world!

Electronics have evolved to be an important part of our lives and we have adjusted to the technology and advantages of television, and computers. One of the most noticeable of the evolution is the cell phone. Almost everyone we know has one, especially the young people. How often have we seen them, and often adults, walking with a cell phone or a Bluetooth (I don’t know how it got that name) in their ear?

They have a feature called texting that seems to be very popular and has been badly abused. So badly that it has been called a hazard while driving. Young people have piled up their cars and caused death and mayhem because of the distraction of texting. What could be so important that they had to text while weaving in and out of traffic? It has been outlawed and for a good reason.

As someone who still remembers the rotary phone dial, this is a real upgrade in communication. People are able to keep tabs on family and to immediately take advantage of relaying information in business very quickly. The cell phone has virtually made the corner pay phone obsolete.

These phones allow people to take pictures, store addresses and hook up to the Internet. It is not only a communication device, but actually a miniature computer that is easy and convenient to use at practically any time. The communication companies allow access virtually everywhere. Only the most remote of locations are off limits to this electronic miracle.

Now, the communication network includes a feature called On Star that is part of most new automobiles. For a price one can sit in their car and with just their voice, dial a phone number and speak to almost anyone in the world. They also can get directions if they are lost because the feature includes a GPS whereby somebody, somewhere knows exactly where you are and where you are going.

If you have an accident, you can radio for help and the police can zero in on your location and bring help. Some people just have a GPS that tells them how to get to any location and even tells them the best route and gives traffic updates. This is truly a marvelous application of technology involving the communication satellites.

The downside is that with this technology and sophistication involved, if a person has a GPS or cell phone, somebody, somewhere knows exactly where you are at any time. For most, this isn’t a big problem, but some think this infringes on their privacy. They may be right. This technology can be a double edged sword.

The camera feature in most cell phones has aided police in solving crimes because a citizen with the phone was able to record an incident and having the photo, or even, because of the ability to make a movie of an event, gave them enough information and proof that a crime was committed and who did it.

Electronics are great and very useful for communications. The TV has pretty much replaced newspapers and their circulation has dropped nationwide. One of the major news magazines went out of business because of the Internet. Even movie theatres have had big competition because of computers and the use of the DVD where people can watch a favorite flick in their own home using the TV.

Entertainment is a big part of the average American’s life and convenience is a huge motivator. So when you ask the average male what electronic device is the most valuable, some who are still computer illiterate, (and some who are not) will probably reply: “The remote.”

Big miracles can come in small packages.

Sorry…..but there is nothing racist about the tea party! From day 1, some Dems have branded the Tea Party movement as racist.

Calling you a racist is what the left does when they can’t debate the facts……it is a cheap and easy way to attack and avoid a mature discussion.

I have personal experience with the “racist” accusation. I have been called a racist because I believe in legal immigration!

Why talk about the failed stimulus? Or the senseless lawsuit against Arizona that most Dems don’t want to touch in their campaigns for re-election? Or the national security implications of a bomb going off on the border? Why talk about issues like the budget deficit?

Why not shut down the debate by calling people “racist”?

I think that Pres BO should stand up and shut down all of these accusations of racism. He should remind the Dems that people can disagree with a black president and not be racist! It’s time for the post-racial president to act post-racial.

We are waiting!

This is the middle of July and the lead story in the daily news is that there is no state budget in place. The downstate politicians are scheming and shouting to maintain the status quo, but there isn’t enough money in the pot to keep playing the game the way they are used to playing it.

For decades it has been a spend and tax and then a borrow and tax budget, but they never cut programs or reduced debt. The politicians were on the big giveaway (to unions and other special interests) as long as they could get the money from the taxpayers.

Their reckless spending that had been focused on the philosophy of: “will it get me reelected?” perhaps has finally come to a halt. If the taxpayers are truly fed up with the corruption and incompetence and are digging their heels in the dirt to object to any tax increases, the incumbents are finally going to be in trouble.

The downstate Democrats can still be smug because their constituents are dumb enough to vote for them just because they are Democrats. There are also a few districts upstate that will vote to retain Republicans because of the equation of “stupid voters elect bad politicians.” It is hard to argue with that formula and the incumbents do their best to keep that equation in place.

“Yep, we gotta vote for good old John. He brings back the money from Albany. Why, he got us enough to buy a new bell and siren for the fire hall.” That is how the “member’s items,” which is sometimes called pork, works for incumbents to buy votes with money taken from the taxpayers’ pockets. Now, the taxpayers are finally feeling a big pinch in their pockets and standard of living.

If the property taxes are getting too high, the property owners should look to the state legislators as the ones to blame. The state’s county executives have to work to balance a budget where more than eighty per cent of the money they have to raise is to pay for unfunded mandates. That is a tough hurtle to jump.

Many people believe that the state is run by the special interests and government unions and that is a hard argument to refute. The gutless wonders who cave in to their demands (and generosity) are at fault for the dismal financial affairs of the state.

If the budget is to be balanced, the politicians have to make tough decisions on cuts. If they vote for any tax increases, they should be ousted. While they don’t get a paycheck while the budget is in limbo, it is nothing more than an inconvenience since they get it in a lump sum when the budget is passed. They still get their daily expense check which is a standard amount and is more than they need to spend for the day in Albany.

No legislator is going hungry. If there was any real penalty for not passing a budget, the law should make it like a fine. No budget today? OK. No pay for today. Just showing up and sitting in their seat in the chambers while the three men in a room call all the shots is not giving the taxpayers any return on their investment. The taxpayers should be calling the district offices every day to protest this “charitable” practice.

Most politicians don’t see the light until they feel the heat. The big problem is that those at the top of the political food chain are untouchable. It will be a cold day in Hell if those in Shelly Silver’s district decide to vote for the other guy. It is said by many political experts that he wields more power and influence than the governor. Ascension to select committees depends on seniority and kowtowing to the “leadership.” Talent takes a distant third to the process.

We do have some good legislators and we have to make sure they stay in office for next year, but the rest of those who rose to their heights by “playing the game,” should be given the opportunity to try to make a living in the private sector. If they are as good and talented as they claim to be during the campaign, they shouldn’t have a problem being successful in the private sector. Let’s give them the chance.