The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
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."
www.Dictionary.com informs
us that "infringe" means "to commit a breach or
infraction of; violate or transgress ... " and further refers
us to _Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law_: "to
encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another."
The latter specifically cites the Second Amendment as an example
of the word's usage.
The word "infringe" also carries a connotation of
sneaking up, of
gradually violating, or taking something away just a little bit
at a
time -- sort of like what's happened to the right to keep and
bear
arms.
I mention all of this so that you will understand, right from
the
beginning of this essay, why I insist that the entire structure
of
federal, state, and local weapons law is itself illegal, making
those
who have passed it and those who enforce it criminals. Never forget
that.
On second thought, don't worry -- I won't let you.
What we're actually here to consider is the case of a fellow
named
David Bacon who, according to his attorney, James Leuenberger,
was a
law abiding young man and an honorably discharged sailor who,
like so
many of us reading this -- and writing it, too -- was interested
in
guns.
David met a licensed dealer on the Oregon coast and agreed to
act
as the licensed dealer's agent at gun shows. David also met another
man, a former licensed dealer, who sold non-firearm supplies such
as
airguns, holsters, AR-15 upper receivers, and so on. David and
this
former licensed dealer worked together -- not as partners -- at
gun
shows.
Apparently, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,
and
Explosives began to take great interest in the former licensed
dealer,
based on a tip they had received somewhere that he had unregistered
machine guns. The BATFE decided to investigate the former licensed
dealer.
Now, I think, would be an appropriate time to remind you that
the
entire structure of federal, state, and local weapons law is itself
illegal, making those who have passed it and those who enforce
it
criminals.
The former licensed dealer and David both went to a gun show
in
Vancouver, Washington. The former licensed dealer unknowingly
sold a
pistol to a BATFE undercover agent named Zeisemer. It was David
who
actually handed the pistol to Agent Zeisemer at the conclusion
of the
sale. David and Zeisemer then talked. David gave Zeisemer a business
card.
A month and half later, the undercover agent Zeisemer called
David
and told him that he wanted to buy a particular pistol he had
seen at
the Vancouver show. David informed the agent that the pistol had
been
sold, but that he, David, had a similar pistol that he could sell
to
Zeisemer. Zeisemer came to Oregon to buy the pistol. David sold
it to
him.
The undercover agent Zeisemer reportedly drove a vehicle with
Washington license plates to the location of the firearms purchase,
although Zeisemer did not identify himself as a Washington resident.
The two mens' conversation was secretly recorded. David allegedly
made
statements that the government construes as admissions that David
knew
that Zeisemer resided in Washington and that David knew it was
illegal
for a person to purchase a pistol from a person from a different
state.
That sale was Count Number One.
Approximately two months later, David sold the undercover agent
Zeisemer four more firearms. All of the firearms sold by David
to
Agent Zeisemer were firearms that Washington residents can lawfully
own (no short rifles, no short shotguns, no machine guns, and
no
silencers).
Those sales were counts Three through Six -- and this is probably
another good time to remind you that under the Second Amendment,
the
entire structure of federal, state, and local weapons law is itself
illegal, making those who have passed it and those who enforce
it
criminals.
On July 24, 2005 David, this time acting as the licensed dealer's
agent, was working at a gun show in Seaside, Oregon, approximately
two
hours' drive west of Portland. David did not arrive at the show
until
11:00 A.M. However an individual who claimed to have bought a
firearm
from David later testified that he had purchased it from David
at 9:00
A.M.
That individual had lied.
He testified that he had filled out and given to David a form
required by Oregon law whenever a dealer purchases a firearm from
a
non-dealer. There was no such form to be found either at David's
home,
at the licensed dealer's place of business, or at the former licensed
dealer's home, when those locations were searched by government
agents
on September 1, 2005. David testified that he did not know that
he was
supposed to fill out such a form, because the licensed dealer
had
never told him about it. The fact there were no such forms --
either
completed or blank -- found during the searches corroborated David's
testimony.
More importantly, David was in the Portland area, two hours
away
from Seaside, at 9:00 A.M. when the illegal purchase was supposedly
made. David's cell phone records show him making local calls at
that
time, then no calls until 11:00 a.m. when he made a couple of
roaming
calls. David testified that his cell phone provider did not offer
local service for Seaside, and the government never contradicted
that
testimony.
Government agents did spend the night after David's testimony
looking for evidence to prove that he had lied. Instead, they
found a Starbuck's receipt showing the purchase of a cup of coffee
in Milwaukie, Oregon (that's how they spell Milwaukie in Oregon)
at 9:00 A.M. on July 24, 2005. The government provided David's
defense with that receipt for the first time _after_
David had testified. Properly, the government should have provided
it to the defense before his trial.
Although the Starbuck's receipt was admitted into evidence and
the
jury was informed that it was found by government agents when
they
searched David's home on September 1, 2005, the prosecution argued
that it -- and the government agents -- did not know whose receipt
it
was.
At this point, although David and David's brother both testified
that David, acting as the licensed dealer's agent, had sold David's
brother twelve firearms on July 24, 2005, and that the sale had
been
properly recorded on a BATFE Form 4473, the government argued
-- and
somehow convinced the jury -- that David had only sold his brother
eleven firearms, and that he had sold the lying witness the single
remaining firearm without properly filling out a Form 4473 for
that
sale.
David and David's brother both testified that after David sold
his
brother the twelve firearms at about 3:00 P.M., David's brother
had
then authorized David to sell the one firearm to the witness.
Since
David's brother is _not_ licensed dealer, that sale did not require
a
Form 4473. But because the jury was successfully convinced that
David
had made a "false" entry on a Form 4473, he was convicted
on Count
Two.
Now David is serving a fifteen-month prison sentence.
All of the relevant documents for David's case can be found
at <http://www.fights4rights.com/1/bacon.php>.
The Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation is able to accept money
for David's case and offer donors a charitable deduction. The
OFEF's web site is located at <http://www.oregonfirearms.net/ofef/index.html>.
And it is time once again to remind all of my readers that the
entire structure of federal, state, and local weapons law is itself
illegal, making those who have passed it and those who enforce
it
criminals.
What likely fate does David face? According to professional
firearms expert Len Savage, who has considerable experience with
the
BATFE, "after the conviction is terrible starting point.
[Being] late
getting out the word" -- and thereby enlisting the help of
others --
"cost the man his freedom," a note he says we should
all make to
ourselves.
Savage points out that if David was an "agent" for
the licensed dealer, the licensed dealer failed David in many
respects, including not explaining proper sales and purchase procedures.
David paid the consequences. Savage adds, "Sounds like he
was a 'point' man for deals at gunshows. Most likely for purchases
of underpriced firearms for the FFL ... "
This is a situation that the BATFE often exploits, Savage
explains. It is human nature to "network" and develop
contacts for
sales and purchases. That's simply a waiting game for the BATFE.
"There's always a core group of gunshow attendees. This is
how the
BATFE sting works ... I am most curious: did the BATFE offer him
a
deal of some sort? This particular action is usually used to 'lean'
on
the individual to roll on either the FFL holder or other gun show
patrons.
Savage says the BATFE likes this tactic because it intimidates
prospective attendees of gunshows. And once a person has been
convicted, he's "tainted" -- most people won't pay attention
to his
cries of foul. The bottom line is that this play is a win-win
for the
BATFE, which explains why they used it from border to border --
it
works.
A case like this can be retried, and even overturned -- at the
cost of original trial, times the cost of the original trial,
times
the cost of the original trial. That's the cost of overturning
a
conviction.
Our American civilization has reached an historical crossroads.
I remember vividly, as a kid, seeing evil, unfeeling, and inhumane
17th and 18th century English judges, in great movies like _Captain
Blood_ <http://tinyurl.com/2hg7vw
>, hanging prisoners, selling them into slavery, or transporting
them to penal colonies for minor infractions like stealing a loaf
of bread. I understood, even at that early age, that these arrogant,
bewigged monsters were a reason we had to have a revolution.
Later, I came to understand that it was the class differences
in
English society that had allowed one group of human beings to
look
down on another as something less than human as an excuse to use
them
like farm animals. I came to appreciate the classless ideal here
in
America.
But, despite our best efforts to the contrary, our once admirably
egalitarian civilization has now divided itself into classes,
not so
much on the basis of ancestry or wealth (although that's surely
a part
of it) but on the basis of mostly illegally-acquired political
power.
An example is the BATFE, whose terrible power is rooted in a structure
of federal, state, and local weapons laws that are themselves
illegal,
making those who have passed them and those who enforce them
criminals.
Similarly, on more than once occasion a lawyer has taken me
aside
to whisper "the truth about judges". Generally, according
to what I'm
told, judges begin as lawyers who are incompetent for one reason
or
another, embarrassments to their law firms, who get "kicked
upstairs",
out of the way, where the only harm they can do is to society
in
general.
There are no judge schools, at least that I know of, so these
rejected specimens, already ignorant of the highest law of the
land
and its history (law school doesn't teach Constitutional law so
much
as it teaches dodges to get around it), take their lead from vicious
prosecutors, or simply pull their increasingly totalitarian rulings
out of various bodily orifices that no decent individual like
to think
about.
Abetted by extralegal prosecutorial contrivances like _voir
dire_ (which syndicated columnist Vin Suprynowicz says is
medieval French for "jury tampering") to guarantee convictions,
and mindlessly toeing the current politically correct line, they
rise in the system -- the few mavericks and those with a glimmer
of integrity or intelligence are successively winnowed out --
until the very worst rise to the very top.
Increasingly these days, the average Productive Class American
has
about the same chance of receiving justice at the hands of authorities
bloated with taxpayers' wealth and drunk with power as a detainee
at
Guantanamo.
What can be done? Right now, if history is any guide, we are
at
the "Committees of Correspondence" stage in the course
of human
events, where stories like David Bacon's -- and the illegality
of the
BATFE -- can be circulated far and wide. The really good news
is that
we have much better facilities for that sort of thing than our
ancestors did. It can be accomplished in a few seconds "by
word of
mouse".
An excellent example is the handbill you'll find on the opening
page at http://www.jpfo.net (with a
link to a screen-sized printable version) which asks the question,
which criminal is more deadly, the commmon freelance thug, who
may deal drugs, commit armed robbery, rape, kidnapping, carjacking,
and so on -- all on a "retail" basis -- or agencies
like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives,
that falsely imprison gun owners, train their employees to commit
perjury in federal courts, enforce unconstitutional laws, and
mass-murder innocent men, women, and children. Today you can ask
all of these vital questions -- and spread the word -- in the
blink of an eye.
The even better news is that the Soviet Union and places like
Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria were able to wage their own revolutions
against collectivist tyranny and obtain liberty with hardly a
shot
fired.
May America be as fortunate.
=============================================================
Four-time Prometheus Award-winner L. Neil Smith has been writing
about guns and gun ownership for more than 30 years. He is the
author of 27 books, the most widely-published and prolific libertarian
novelist in the world, and is considered an expert on the ethics
of self-defense. His writings may be seen on the following sites:
The Webley Page: http://www.lneilsmith.net
The Libertarian Enterprise: http://www.ncc-1776.net
The Probability Broach: The Graphic Novel, Roswell,
Texas, and TimePeeper (August 2007): http://www.bigheadpress.com
LNS at Random (blog): http://www.bigheadpress.com/lneilsmith/
LNS at JPFO: http://www.jpfo.net/filegen-a-m/lneilsmith.htm
(
Find
other articles by L. Neil Smith)
