Tag Archives: founding documents

How soon they forget

Posted on by

A Senator from the great State of Georgia is vacating the Senate seat he currently occupies, he is resigning from the Senate. Some would say that he is vacating his seat, nothing could be further from the truth. The Senate seat he is vacating belongs to the State of Georgia, not to him or any other person. Those that say he is resigning from his Senate seat are the same ones that say America is a democracy, wrong on both counts. It is not his seat and America is no democracy.

Now the Governor of Georgia is going to name a temporary replacement, I say temporary because next November a special election will be held to fill that seat. Even then it will still be temporary because whoever wins that special election will have to run again in 2022. It has been reported(if the news media can be trusted anymore)that the Governor has made his choice and his choice has not made the GOP happy.

Here are some of their reasons.

Concerns were raised pointing to her never running for elected office before and may not be “seasoned” enough to receive the nod.

I might point this out to the GOP and the President. When candidate Trump was running in the primaries he had no political experience outside of making donations to politicians. He had never ran for elected office before announcing he was entering the republican primaries, in other words he was not “seasoned”. He positioned himself as a “political outsider”. He won the primaries and became the nominee. Why? The voters finally had a choice in something other than a “seasoned” politician. When it came to the presidential election of 2016 he won that also with no real political experience. The voters were willing to take a chance. Why? The status quo was not working. So, lay off.

She is not an original backer of President Trump and the 2016 campaign.

You have got to be kidding me, you think that this is a reason. There are many Trump supporters, that are Trump supporters now that were not then. They came to support him in spite of his lack of “seasoning”. Got a news flash for you, there are many now not supporting of the president that did support him in 2016.

She lacks conservative credentials.

Please tell me what conservative credentials President Trump brought to the primaries or the presidential election. For that matter, I would like to see the conservative credentials on the republicans in the Senate or even the House. Some, I fear would be sadly lacking in those “conservative credentials”.

It could lead to a messy electoral fight.

Where do I start with this one. Tell me what electoral fight is not messy. I think what was really meant here was if the wrong person is appointed it will lead to a messy primary next year. If that is the case then if the right person was appointed he would not face a primary challenge.

The Governor of the State of Georgia is the one that must name the temporary replacement, it is his responsibility or duty, however you wish to call it. This rests directly on the Governor’s shoulders. It does not rest with the President and most certainly not with a Representative from the State of Florida. The Governor will pick whomever he picks on his judgement and for his reasons.

In closing I would just say that you would better serve by acting your age and not your shoe size. Twitter wars are just a little infantile, juvenile at best.

What if? Part 2

Posted on by

Some talking-heads and pundits on the right are spending a lot of time, energy and ink discussing the possibility of a civil war happening in America and what would be the cause or causes. They seem to think there would be two triggering events. This post will cover the second cause they addressed. It will be based around and about the second amendment.

The major topic today is the banning of so-called assault weapons(ARs, AKs and their variants). Unlike the assault weapons ban of 1994 which grandfathered those firearms already in possession, the new ban would also include those already in possession. The schemes run the entire gambit from a mandatory buy-back to licensing and registration and each democrat candidate in the primaries has a plan.

The lawful gun owners are not the problem. The lawful gun owners in the States that have enacted the most onerous gun control laws have not violently descended on their State Capitols. I have heard of no lawful gun owners resorting to violence when a fellow lawful gun owner has fallen a victim to a red flag law.

As a matter of fact, the lawful gun owners have not caused a problem at the State or Federal level, save for a few misguided individuals in some sort of attempt to make a statement or show support for the Second Amendment. We too have some idiots.

Here is the reason I do not think the lawful gun owners will be the instigators of a civil war. You only have to read this in the Declaration of Independence.
… Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light or transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. …
It would appear that the lawful gun owners are the descendants of some very wise men. The lawful gun owners wait for the next election and hope and pray that wiser choices are made in electing those that would govern.

I again believe the talking-heads and pundits spouting off about a civil war coming about by the right have it exactly backwards.

What if gun control does not become a reality for the left?

If you have read part one you know where I am headed.

If a civil war were break out it would be because the President is not impeached and gun control, the most onerous gun control, measures are not put into law. In that instance the pundits and talking-heads could be correct it would be about impeachment and the Second Amendment?

The end of this post is by no means the end of this series, how ever the title will change.

What if? Part 1

Posted on by

Some talking-heads and pundits on the right are spending a lot of time, energy and ink discussing the possibility of a civil war happening in America and what would be the cause or causes. They seem to think there would be two triggering events. One of the reasons would be the impeachment of the president. I suppose by impeachment they mean a guilty finding and removal from office.

The democrats and their allies in the media have been beating the impeachment drum for a considerable length of time. Some have been beating this drum since election night 2016. The democrat leadership would not venture into these waters until public opinion showed support for impeachment. According to the polls the pendulum swung in favor of impeachment. We now have an impeachment inquiry in the House. A word about polls and polling data. I fail to understand why politicians from either party still trust and rely on polls, given that most all polls had the democrat nominee handily winning the 2016 presidential election. Yet they still site poll results.

The democrats in Congress have pretty much painted themselves into a corner over impeachment of the President. Even if they at some point conclude that they have made a poor choice there is no way they can not bring the articles of impeachment and still manage to save face. They have already crossed the Rubicon on this.

At this point most on the right think and indeed believe that there is no way the Senate will vote to remove the President. You will notice that I said most on the right. I personally do not place that much confidence or trust in the republicans in the Senate. More than one of them wanted to be President and some may be harboring a grudge, after all some unkind words were exchanged during the republican primaries and since. Jealousy and revenge have driven many to extremes.

There is also this to note. The democrat leadership in the House did not go forward until the polls had shown that the pendulum had swung in favor of impeachment. Why the wait? Some democrats believe they already have enough evidence to have the vote. The word ironclad came up the other day, the House would not proceed until there was an ironclad case. So I pulled out Webster’s and looked up the word ironclad, having no obvious weakness. I think they now wait for enough republican support in the Senate to remove the President, there may also be one or two democrat hold-outs.

Let’s say the House charges and the Senate convicts. The President is removed. Will this trigger the civil war predicted by the talking-heads and pundits? Think about it. How often and how many times have the republicans in Congress(House and Senate)disappointed the voters? A provision in the Constitution would have been followed. I do not think this would trigger a civil war, however some isolated violence could possibly break out. It would however guarantee one thing, there would never be another republican elected to a national office, which would lead to total democrat control which would lead to a socialist state.

What if the talking-heads and pundits from the first paragraph have it exactly backwards? Would the President not being impeached lead to civil war, started by the left.

Let’s say that the House, for whatever reason, does not introduce and vote on the articles of impeachment. Many if not most on the left fully expect the House to follow through on impeachment. They will at the very minimum be severely ticked off if the democrat controlled House fails them. How will they react?

The House could charge and the Senate could acquit. Again the leftists will be mightily ticked. How will the leftists react?

It was not the right that were rioting, burning and breaking things. From what I have seen the right, with very few exceptions, has been remarkably restrained for years. The left not so much.

At any rate I am glad I am not in a planning and operations section in any government agency. They should be already deep in the planning of a response.

By choice or force?

Posted on by

The leftists are going all out with their plan to disarm the peaceful law-abiding citizens of this Republic. Quite sure by now everyone, not living under a rock, has seen the clip of the 2020 presidential hopeful saying “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15, your AK-47”. Some in his political party have tried to distance themselves from his statement. I do have to wonder if it is the message they are against or the delivery. Did he say openly what most leftists talk/dream about privately? They might not be able to get the toothpaste back in the tube.

When he used the word “We” he meant the government. So what he actually said was, “Hell yes, the government is going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.

The following comes from the Patrick Henry speech “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” 23March1775.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.

The following excerpt comes from The Declaration of Arms also known as the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, 06July1775
The inhabitants of Boston being confined within that town by the General, their Governor, and having, in order to procure their dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants, having deposited their arms with their own magistrates, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects. They accordingly delivered up their arms, but in open violation of honor, in defiance of the obligation of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the Governor ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the inhabitants in the town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire to leave their most valuable effects behind.

There is something to note from the excerpt above The word arms is used twice, the word muskets is nowhere to be found.

The citizens of Boston trusted that the General, their Governor, would honor his word(treaty). They were sadly mistaken. Once disarmed they had no means to resist what was coming.

They could have, I suppose, asked or even begged for the return of their arms so they could defend themselves or at least force the General, their Governor, to honor his word. Do you think that a population that had been disarmed would be rearmed?

What happened in Boston that day in April 1775 was perhaps the first recorded example of a voluntary buy-back scheme. The price the government would pay for the voluntary surrender of arms by the citizens was the freedom to depart Boston and with them take the remainder of their possessions.

They traded one thing to gain another and wound up with neither and nothing. Seems like Benjamin Franklin had a quote on that matter. He had another, “Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you”.

There was a quote attributed to Edmond Burke, “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it”(the word doomed is sometimes used in place of destined). There is another old adage that fits, “History is a guide post not a hitching post”. History is chock full of examples of what has happened in countries where and when the population, the peaceful law-abiding population, is disarmed. Roundups and exterminations.

It was once said that one man with a gun can control one hundred without guns. If that is true then you just have to do simple math to figure out where this leads, if one can control one hundred, than ten can control a thousand, one hundred can control ten thousand and so on.

The gun control debate is just a part of the overall control issue. Gun control is not about the elimination of arms, it is about controlling who is armed.

Some in government and some wanting to be in government are more than willing to use the force of government to disarm the peaceful law-abiding citizens. Some politicians, the various gun control groups and their allies in the media tell us how much safer we will be if we disarm.

There are only two ways that an armed civilian population can be disarmed.
Choice.
Force.

Can peaceful law-abiding citizens(civilians)trust the government if only the government is armed.

History says no.

Lies of the left

Posted on by

Have you noticed how many leftists refer to the United States as a Democracy. I am going to point this out once again, not all leftists are democrats. The United States was founded as a Republic. The US has been called a Democracy so often that many believe that to be true. There is an old adage that goes something like this; Repeating a lie does not make it the truth. It has also been said that if you repeat a lie often enough people will take it for the truth.

When Benjamin Franklin was asked; What do we have? He responded; A Republic. He also added these few words as a part of that answer; If you can keep it. He answer seemed to imply that it would take some “work” to keep this a Republic and not let it become a Democracy.

At some point along the way the “ball” got dropped. The Pledge of Allegiance, is it still recited in school? The word Republic is in the pledge, the word Democracy is not. I thought I would include this video by Red Skelton.

And one by Johnny Wright.

Have we lost it? Is this Republic now on the verge of becoming a Democracy?

How far will they go? Part one

Posted on by

For this part of this post I will use some parts of some historical speeches and yes I am going to cherry pick.
June 5th 1788, a speech by Patrick Henry…There are many on the other side, who, possibly may have been persuaded of the necessity of these measures, which I conceive to be dangerous to your liberty. Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force: Whenever you give up that force you are inevitably ruined… The Honorable Gentleman who presides, told us, that to prevent abuses in our Government, we will assemble in Convention, recall our delegated powers and punish our servants for abusing the trust reposed in them. Oh, Sir, we should have fine times indeed, if to punish tyrants, if it were only sufficient to assemble the people. Your arms wherewith you could defend yourselves are gone; and have no longer an aristocratical; no longer democratical spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution in any nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all? You read of a riot act in a country which is called one of the freest in the world, where a few neighbors cannot assemble without the risk of being shot by a hired soldiery, the engines of despotism. We may see such an act in America….

June 7th 1788 another speech by Patrick Henry… That Government is no more than a choice among evils, is acknowledged by the most intelligent among mankind, and has been a standing maxim for ages… It is on a supposition that our American Governors shall be honest, that all good qualities of this Government is founded: But its defective, and imperfect construction, puts it in their power to perpetrate the worst of mischiefs, should they be bad men: And, Sir, would not all the world, from the Eastern to the Western hemisphere, blame our distracted folly in resting our rights upon the contingency of our rulers being good or bad. Shew me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty? I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt….

It was not all that long ago that California Congress critter and another gentleman got into an “exchange” over a gun confiscation scheme. The congress critter implied that the people would simply obey the law, and the gentleman said there would be a civil war. I know you have heard seen or read about this, but again bear with me. The congress critter said it would be a short-lived war the U.S. has nukes. Things went wild around the internet over the implied use of nukes on Second Amendment supporters. I think the congress critters implication was that we would obey willingly or force would be used to bring us into compliance. Words have meaning and those were the words of a petty tyrant. The two things I took from the congress critters statement was:
1. The government under democrat control would contemplate or attempt a gun grabbing scheme, one like a voluntary buy-back program. Which is not meant to be voluntary by any means, you would participate(comply)or else.
2. The or else, is the use of government force and the infliction of penalties to make one wish they had “voluntarily” complied.

More recently there was yet another California congress critter that said he would like to limit speech, but the First Amendment prevented him from doing that. What he said is troubling to say the least, but I do admire his honesty. At least he did say that the Constitution did prevent him from doing this, However, I doubt seriously he would have the same mind-set about anything he could do to infringe on the Second Amendment, which is also a part of the Constitution. Again the words of a petty tyrant.

Which brings me to ask these questions. Is there a swearing-in ceremony for congress critters? If there is a swearing-in ceremony, do they swear(affirm)to protect and uphold the entire Constitution? Perhaps they only swear(affirm)to defend and uphold only the parts of the Constitution they, their party, their donors and their base supports. Perhaps they do not give a tinker’s damn about the Constitution and only mouth the words, you know with their fingers crossed.

this goes for women too, would not want to appear sexist

So why is it that this Republic is inching closer and closer to socialism? Hint, it aint changing demographics.

It was once said that if socialism/communism were ever to come to this land it would come by way of the ballot box. In this recent election how many socialists were running for office? How many socialists were elected? How many socialists were re-elected? Don’t get me wrong I do read and laugh my tail off when the memes are posted poking fun at the young woman, the self-declared democratic socialist, from New York who was elected to congress. But here is a news flash, she is going to congress where she and those like her will be legislating for the next two years, legislating over the entire country. In two more years will she and those like her be voted out of office? Will she and those like her be re-elected? Will even more like them be elected in 2020? Think about this, we will be and are paying socialists from the national treasury(tax dollars)to legislate over a free country.

The circus during and surrounding the Supreme Court Justice confirmation showed just how many clowns there are in congress. So now we are going to be governed by clowns as well as socialists. If Patrick Henry could see what our government has become, I believe he would say “I told you so”.

Not all leftists are in the democrat(socialist)party there is likely more than a handful or two in the republican party. It was once said that there is not a dimes worth of difference between a democrat and a republican when it comes to politicians. Think about this it makes news when a politician changes party affiliation and the party gaining welcomes them with open arms. If a republican switches to democrat does he/she abandon the principles they once stood for or said they stood for? The same goes for a democrat switching to a republican. Is it just a uni-party when it comes to politicians? It seems that assimilation is not a problem for a politician.

Without a doubt the democrats that will control the House of Representatives come Noon on the 3rd of January will continue to push their anti-gun agenda. They will seek to continue their push for their so-called “common sense” gun control measures. As I see it, there is with a high degree of probability that they will attach their schemes to “must pass” legislation, like funding bills. How many so-called republicans will join them, you know in a bi-partisan fashion?

I do have suspicions of any government that would want the citizenry disarmed. I also have suspicions of any government that would seek to limit(curtail)if not outright take away any of our Constitutional Rights.

So to answer the question, How far will they go? The leftists will go as far as they can possibly get away with, inching ever closer to socialism.

To answer the question, Why is this Republic inching closer to socialism. Oddly enough the answer lies in the 60’s and 70’s, possibly even before. The 60’s and 70’s did provide us with some great music. Even the protest songs of that by-gone era were and still are better than the noise they try to pass off as music these days. Still listen to and enjoy the music.

But like most things, there are two sides. The same goes for the music of the 60’s Hello Viet Nam, written by Tom T. Hall and performed by Johnny Wright. This song has some truth in the lyrics.

America has trouble to be stopped
We must stop Communism in that land
Or freedom will start slipping through our hands.

I hope and pray someday the world will learn
That fires we don’t put out will bigger burn
We must save freedom now, at any cost
Or someday, our own freedom will be lost.

I have nothing but the highest respect for all who served in Viet Nam, for each and every one of you I am forever grateful.

Back to the lyrics of Hello Viet Nam. Communism was not stopped in that land. Freedom is slipping through our hands. The world did not learn. The fires are burning bigger. Freedom was not saved. Someday our freedoms might be lost.

Back to the congress critter wanting to limit speech. Actually congress does not have to legislate laws to silence the opposition to the leftists, that messy business can be handled by the tech giants and the current gambit of social media platforms.

Back to the “exchange” concerning a civil war for just a moment. No on second thought I will save this for the next part.

DEO VINDICE

If…

Posted on by

criminals(men and women)will not obey the Law and Word of God, then what could ever possibly make anybody think that they will obey the law and word of mankind? God already said “Thou shall not murder. Another mass shooting(murder)and more calls and demands for gun-control.

The left as well as those who favor gun-control push what they call “common sense” measures. The problem is that those measures will only apply to law-abiding citizens, they will not apply to the criminal element in our midst.

Look at it this way, when permits to carry are denied to law-abiding citizens they simply do not carry. The criminal has no intention of applying for a carry permit, in fact the criminal will carry and would carry no matter what the law says or does. The only thing accomplished here is that a person who could have been “allowed” to have in possession a means to prevent himself from being a victim was instead “allowed” to be come a victim.

It is one thing to have the means and capability to defend oneself or another and choose to not exercise that option. It is quite another when one is denied the means to defend oneself or another leaving them no option.

At this point I am going to have to admit ignorance, I am at least partially ignorant of the laws particular to California as to where a person can carry or can not carry. As a matter of fact on that point I do not know all of the laws of the other 48 states or D.C. either. At this point in time there is no need for me to know the gun laws in or of the other 49 states or D.C. as there is no chance in the foreseeable future of me venturing out of the state of Florida, so I shall remain blissfully ignorant. Even if I were to leave the state of Florida there are some states I would avoid like the plague based on what little I do know of your gun laws.

What I do know are the gun laws that pertain to Florida as well as the Federal Laws. I know where I can carry and where I can not carry. When I do have to visit a place where I can not carry I conduct my business and depart. If a business I visit has a no gun policy, I simply turn and walk away never to revisit. He/she made their choice and I made mine. My point here is that I follow the law, and this is exactly what the criminal element counts on. They count on us to follow the law.

I would venture to say that the vast majority of these mass shootings(murders)are conducted in the shooters(murderers)home state, home town, nearby town or at the very least a state the murderer is very familiar with. If the murderer is in his/her home state then it is very likely that he/or she knows the laws for that state or at least some of them. The same is true if the murderer is in a state they are familiar with. Operating in familiar territory has advantages, for instance these mass murderers want “big numbers”. They will not achieve “big numbers” if they choose a target in which the intended victims have a means to fight back. There is a reason why these mass murders never happen at or are even attempted at a “cop shop”. They want a “soft” target they do not want a “hard” target, they do not even want a target of unknown softness or hardness. They will pass up hard, possibly hard, possibly soft just to focus on a “known soft” target.

The murderers use the law to their benefit(advantage)in racking up numbers. It is not the tool(gun)that gives them the advantage, what gives them the advantage is the lack of opposition.

Now is a good time to bring up few points.

First, the criminal element does not give one hoot about the Second Amendment. As a matter of fact they see the Second Amendment as a hinderance to their criminal enterprise. An armed populace is the last thing they want and what they fear most.

Second, the criminal element is probably and most likely among the gun-control cult. The more restrictions that can and will be placed on the law-abiding public means that there are fewer obstructions for the criminal element to overcome. The criminal element is probably the loudest voice in the gun-control cult.

Third, the common sense gun control measures they push benefit the criminal element while they only effect and burden the law-abiding citizens.

Fourth, the ones bank-rolling this cult do so with armed, heavily armed, security at their side or at least very near. You can bet that what restrictions they want placed on the public will not apply to them.

I do have to wonder about the motivation of any government at any level that would start legislating away the rights and liberties of the population. They promise more security if you give up a little liberty. A quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin goes something like this, “Any society that will give up a little liberty for little security will deserve neither and lose both”. But even with the promise of increased security they have admitted that nothing can stop all of these mass murders. Yet their favorite mantra is “We just did not go far enough”.

Let us look at some of their common sense measures.
A national registry of firearms. Historically speaking this had led to disaster for the population registering their personal firearms. Registration leads to confiscation, even if only of political opponents. It would be difficult to confiscate firearms unless one were to know where they were and who had them.
Universal background checks. Each time you buy a firearm from a FFL you must do the paperwork and pass a background check.
Close the gun show loophole. One can not close what does not exist. If you want a background check done on all firearm sales, including private(between individuals)just say it.
A ban on the AR and AK platforms, which will morph into a ban on all semi-automatic rifles, which will morph into a ban on a semi-automatic anything, which will morph into a ban on their next “demon” until we are left with nothing but sticks and rocks.
A gun violence tax. A per bullet tax. A gun buy-back. A background check to by ammunition. Limits on magazine capacity. Bans on bump-fire stocks. The list just goes on and on.

Please note that none of the above will affect the criminals in the least.

In the past they claimed they did not want to stop us from hunting, sport shooting or target practicing, well that was pretty generous of them considering. But it was not all that long ago they said they thought it was time to repeal the Second Amendment.

We now wait to see what laws are shoved down the throats of law-abiding gun owners in the states now in control and those that will be in the control of the anti-gun left.

We are living in interesting times.

DEO VINDICE

Sacred cows of the left

Posted on by

It would appear that the left has more concern for their “sacred cows” than for this Republic. The left’s sacred cows are based on opinion rather than fact.

I may as well dispense with this now. The left will claim that the right has a sacred cow as well, the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is based on fact not opinion, that fact is spelled out in the Constitution.

There is one more thing to dispense with. Opinions change, Facts do not. It is a fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, the rising and setting of the sun is based on fact not opinion.

Speaking of opinions. I for one am just about tired of opinion polls, sick and tired of hearing what percentage of Americans support or believe in whatever. Opinions change based on new information or when hidden facts come to light. Pollsters are paid, their polls are skewered to get the answer desired. If you ask 100 gun haters about guns you will get a typical gun hater response. Polls are also wrong, every poll taken with the exception of one had HRC handily winning the last presidential election.

When I hear talking-heads on the right spouting the results of the latest poll I just shake my head. When I hear a leftist talking-head spouting the results of the latest poll, well that is to be expected. Both of them, left and right, only spout the poll numbers that further promotes what they are trying to “sell”.

It is sad indeed that this Republic appears to no longer lives under “the Rule of Law” and lives under the “Rule of Opinion”.

The left is in a tizzy over the newest Supreme Court nominee, some of their present “sacred cows” may be dispensed with and some of their future “sacred cows” may never come to light. So let us examine some of those “sacred cows”, and while I am at that I will point out the dangers of being governed(ruled)by opinion.

Abortion. Abortion(the legalized murder of children in the womb)comes to this Republic courtesy of the opinion of the majority of 9 Supreme Court Justices. The left is scared that the newest nominee mat take this “sacred cow” to slaughter rather than continuing to slaughter(legalized murder)children in the womb.

Congress passed no law legalizing the murder of children in the womb and certainly no president signed it into law. It is very doubtful that legalized murder would have ever became law if not for opinion.

I find it a little more than ironic that those who support abortion and perform abortions were themselves in fact born. They art the product of live birth, but in true leftist fashion they seek to deny or provide an avenue for the denial of others what they themselves have, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The left uses the equal protections clause when it suits their needs or agenda. They claim that it is the woman’s body and therefore her choice, but the unborn has no choice. The unborn is in essence deprived of life and liberty without due process of Law.

Same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage comes to us courtesy of the opinion of the majority of the Supreme Court Justices.

Congress passed no law legalizing same-sex marriage and again no president signed it into law. There is no address of marriage in the entire Constitution, yet same-sex marriage is now a constitutional right. The left used the equal protections clause.

The only historical document that addresses marriage is the Holy Bible, described by God as being between a man and a woman.

Those that profess to support same-sex marriages are the product of marriage as described by God.

I could go on with examples of opinion trumping law but you get the picture.

As said above the left is in a tizzy over the Supreme Court nominee over the way he may vote on issues that effect their “sacred cows”. The fact is no one knows exactly how he will render his opinion. The left can not take that risk, they want a Justice who will hold the same opinion as the leftists and render his opinions as a leftist. They fear a Constitutionalist.

DEO VINDICE.

Now they try this

Posted on by

The gun control cult will try anything to get us to relinquish our rights as owners of firearms. They now go to the church and try to shame Christians. They use the same old tactics and spread the same lies(drivel)but now some in their cult are doing it from the Church.

Came upon a post in the WordPress reader this morning, not one that I follow and have never seen it before but the title grabbed me so I read it, glad I did. The post is entitled Guns as Idolatry posted on the 28th. I did not link to it and I will sure as heck not re-blog this one. In this case paraphrasing his words would not do so his is word for word. His words are his words my words are my words. We need to know where these people(hide)are and what they do. This individual claims to be a Youth Pastor, and in his words has been one all of his life. Personally I would not let my children anywhere near this man. He put it out there I am obliged to respond.

I will admit when I saw the title I had my suspicions of where this post would lead, just by the title. Even with that suspicion I did read the whole post through, which is something this man will not do when or if he comes across this post being my response. He will stop as soon as he realizes I am on the opposite side.

Well here it is.

(His words)I have to admit, I grew up loving all types of guns. I was the typical full-blooded American boy. I could turn anything into a gun. Give me a stick, it’s a gun. Give me a pile of Lego’s and guess what I would always create . . . a gun! And then Star Wars came out and I wanted to be Han Solo with a laser gun strapped to my waist. Every young boy is fascinated with guns. But this is the realm of fantasy, whether it is imitating a cowboy, a sci-fi space pirate, a gangster or a cop. My teen years were even more influenced by the way of the gun to solve problems through the cinematic influences of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson, Clint Eastwood and Bruce Willis. There are no aliens, terminators, Nazi’s, Russian’s, or bad guys that a good gun with an all-American superhero could not stop.

He referenced a “good gun”. So I think his point was it was “fantasy” to believe a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun, not sure because of the wording he used. It is not fantasy that good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns. It is however under reported. It is under reported because the MSM has become the propaganda arm of the leftist gun control cult. If they believe it to be fantasy, why do they always call the cops, the cops are the good guys and they bring guns, sometimes they bring their friends with their guns. So stop living in a fantasy world by calling the cops every time a bad guy comes into someone’s life. By the way the vast majority of Civilians are also good guys, they also have friends, I have heard no complaints when a good guy “civilian” stops a bad guy when he/she comes into someone’s life.

(His words)Unfortunately our country is in a moral quandary with the fact that we are seeing more and more actual gun violence playing out in real-life America. It is getting to the point where it seems like every week we are introduced to another news story of someone taking out their grievances by using guns on innocent victims. Whenever this happens it seems like a majority of Americans are broken by the cycle of violence that we seem to find ourselves in. And yet there seems to be a small but powerful segment of America that digs their heals in and praises the 2nd Amendment despite all the gun violence we are experiencing as a nation. Now I have no problem if someone chooses to own a gun for the purposes of hunting or home protection. But what I am witnessing is that the gun has become a form of idolatry within our country. When the “right” to own certain types of weaponry trumps the lives of innocent victims, I have a problem with that, especially with those who claim to be apart of the community of Christians.

Here he “comes out” to reveal what I suspected from the start. In true leftist fashion he is blaming the gun not and not the person. The violence you blame on the Second Amendment would be much greater without the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment was not written so we could hunt. Just for your education the Second Amendment was written because of the following and it comes to us straight out of the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms July 6, 1775. One of the Founding Documents of this country you claim as being in a quandary.

The inhabitants of Boston being confined within that town by the general their governor, and having, in order to procure the dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants having deposited their arms with their own magistrate, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects. They accordingly delivered up their arms, but in open violation of honour, in defiance of the obligations of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the governor ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire, to leave their most valuable effects behind.

That, Sir, is why we have the Second Amendment. It was not deer, rabbits or squirrels that confined those people to that town. Nor was it the aforementioned animals that denied them their most valuable effects. Now as to idolatry, I have yet to pray before anything but the Lord, never have never will. You seem to think a person can not own a firearm and still worship the Lord.

(His words)I will be straight up, I have never owned a weapon. I can’t justify it theologically, nor do I feel that I would want to bear the responsibility to own one. With kids in my home and working as a pastor, I see that owning a weapon would be hypocritical to what I believe. First of all, I am not a hunter. I have no problem with those who choose to do so, but this born-and-raised suburbanite could not find the will to kill any of God’s creation. I couldn’t do it. I will leave that task up to people who have a stomach for that type of thing.

He has never owned a weapon, if he had he would know that guns do three things; 1 they work 2 they don’t work 3 they rust. He we go with the leftist drivel, he could not justify owning one. Why is it that the left always want justification for owning a firearm. How about this for justification, because I want to, not mention what happened in Boston in 1775. He thought he would be a or seen as a hypocrite if he owned one being a pastor and having children around. He also points that he is not a hunter but has no problem with those that do. Here we go again with the hunting thing. Being a born and raised suburbanite he could not muster the will to kill any of God’s creation, didn’t have the stomach. More on this as the post unfolds.

(His words)Have I ever shot weapons for sport? Absolutely! I have been to gun ranges. I have shot clay pigeons. And I actually enjoy the sport of paintball in that you can actually play games against each other without death and carnage occurring. I grew up on video games with digital guns (especially Goldeneye!), and I loved movies with lots of guns, superheroes and villains.

Here he brings up weapons for sport been to the range and has shot clay pigeons, interjecting the sports shooting thing the left is famous for. He fails to mention if he had a range safety course, safe handling of firearms. So he enjoys the sport of paintball, pointing out that you can actually play games against each other without actually causing death and carnage, pretend death and carnage. He grew up on video games with digital guns and loved movies with lots of guns, superheroes and villains. I would point out that maybe we should have never made a game of killing. This goes back to the responsibility issue, one is not held responsible for what they do in a game, you can make all the mistakes you want and just say “oops”. No punishment no penalty.

(His words)But there is a difference between fantasy and reality. Our country has a huge obsession with weapons and we fail to see the benefit to having a conversation about how we can best protect the greater good of people and still respect responsible gun owners. We desperately need to have this conversation. Instead, we see the NRA, backed by some of its supporters, constantly raising the warning that the government is coming to take you guns away and destroy the 2nd amendment. This simply is fear-mongering at its worst. And what is the purpose of such fear mongering? To sell more weapons. The NRA played this card all throughout the Obama administration. Any suggestion to talk about gun violence and gun safety was always met with cries that they are coming for your guns! Now that our own kids who are victims of gun violence are speaking up they are being called out as terrorists and liberals.

Wow. We have been trying to talk to them, we have talked to them until we are blue in the face. They are the ones who refuse to talk, they only make demands. In true leftist fashion attacks the NRA. Accusing them of fear mongering. As for them coming for our guns and trying to destroy the Second Amendment, maybe he missed the op-ed written by a former Justice of the Supreme Court when he offered his opinion that it was time to repeal the Second Amendment. Maybe he missed the interview where the “queen of confiscation” said if she could have gotten enough votes in the Senate it would have been “Turn then in Mr. and Mrs. America, turn all of them in”, I believe she mention the number 51. Not to mention many in his cult have come right out and said the same thing. I might point this out to the gentleman that the kids are not the victims of guns or gun violence(as you call it)they are instead the victims of other kids, violent kids. Was it an adult or one of those precious children that was shouting “Burn Her, Burn Her” at the NRA representative, Dana Loesch during the town-hall? Just who is it that resorts to name calling when they loser or begin to lose a debate? As to the obsession with guns he alluded to I will get to who is obsessed and with what later in this post.

(His words)I have heard tired and lazy arguments to blame everything else other than the easy access we have created within our culture to be able to get any type of weapon you want. It’s video games! It’s the entertainment industry! It’s medications! It’s mental health! It’s the breakdown of the family! It’s because we took God out of the schools (which actually is HORRIBLE theology of God’s omnipresence)! We want to blame everything else other than the fact that we have ridiculously easy access to weaponry that is designed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time.

So he grows tired of the same argument we put forward as possible causes. He really proves how little he knows about guns. We can not just have anything we want, somethings are totally prohibited and something require a special tax and approval just to possess making them out of reach for the average citizen. Of course he blame the easy access to firearms, yet above he admitted to never owning a firearm, therefore he has no direct knowledge of it being either easy or difficult. Again just regurgitating what he has been feed, which is a line of crap.

(His words)So, being that I have never gone through the process of actually owning any type of weapon, I propose the following if it is not already law:
1.Buying a gun should have a process that is similar to getting a driver’s license. One should have to get a license to own a weapon. I understand that this is the case but there are still loopholes in which people can buy weapons without going through this process. Recently a news story showed an underage boy trying to buy cigarettes, alcohol and pornography at a local convenient store and got denied in all three instances. But then they took him down to a gun show where within minutes he walked away with a high-powered weapon. He was a 13 year old.
2.Which brings me to my second point, the age of owning a gun needs to go up to 21. Now that we better understand the brain development of teens, and their ability to be impulsive without thinking thorough the consequences of their actions, we should not be providing them with weapons that kill. Give them time to develop and grow. They need to earn the responsibility to own a weapon.
3.When a teenager causes a death that was influenced by being under the influence of alcohol the parents are held responsible if the alcohol came from their home. I am tired of mindless parents of school shooters having no clue that their kid was into said violence. This is not responsible gun ownership or parenting. They need to start bearing the responsibility for the actions of their child/teen. Having high-powered weaponry easily available to their kids is the height of irresponsibility. We hear a lot about “law-abiding” gun owners but let’s talk about RESPONSIBLE gun owners instead. If your kids uses your guns to shoot up a bunch of innocents then you lost your responsibility to own guns and you should be held accountable for the consequences.
4.There needs to be a national gun registry. We need to be able to track where weapons have come from and hold those people responsible. The government already knows what vehicles I own and apparently anyone can pull up a CarFax to know the history of my cars. Why can’t this be done within the context of weapons?
5.The CDC needs to be able to study gun violence. Why would we not want this? And the bigger question is why would the NRA prevent this from happening? The more we know, the better equipped we will be to tackle this plague of gun violence within our country.
6.One should have to have a certain amount of recorded training in order to own a weapon. My teens have to go through 50 hours of driving experience with a licensed adult in order to qualify to take their driving test! Why can’t we require this type of training before one can own a gun?
7.I am tired of our politicians being owned by special-interest lobbies, in this case, the NRA. The NRA bears some of the responsibility for where we have found ourselves because they stoke the flames of fear that people are trying to eradicate the 2nd Amendment and do all they can to prevent legitimate research that would help us know more about when, where and why gun violence is happening. We need to vote out politicians who accept money from the NRA and ignore the voices of those who voted them in. I have not found one quote in which someone wants to eradicate the 2nd amendment. I want gun owners to be responsible and not cave in to the constant fear-mongering of the NRA. Is it just me, or is it not so obvious that this constant fear-mongering helps to sell more guns which benefits the gun manufacturers? Someone is becoming ridiculously rich off all this fear mongering. Why do people cave into this so easily? Is it just plain ignorance, gullibility, or naivety? There is no doubt in my mind that we have experienced a “dumbing-down” in America. Have we just become that stupid that we do not see when we are being played?

Well, looky here he never has been through the process of buying firearm, yet above he said it was ridiculously easy. He aint even sure if what he suggests is a law or not, Lordy.
Point 1. Truth is it is far easier to get a driver’s license than to get approved to purchase a fire arm, in some of the leftist states they will allow anybody a to get a driver’s license even if they are in this country illegally. Are you sure you want to lower the standards? Besides a drivers license is a privilege while owning a firearm is a right. So if he suggests having a license to exercise rights, would he be okay with getting a license to exercise his First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh or Eighth? Thirdly he mentions the mythical loophole the left say exists, for the umpteenth time there is no loophole. Fourthly, Good God, man, crimes were committed was anybody arrested. There was at the least conspiracy in his news story, conspiracy to corrupt a minor. Was the fellow who sold the gun to the 13-year-old arrested? Did this even happen, come on? News reporters do not have the right to commit crimes to prove a point or get a story. I do hope that if this real you had the common sense to report this to law-enforcement. There should be at least three people sitting in jail right now because of this, the two(at least two)people(you did say they)who were corrupting the minor and the one who sold him the gun(I say sold because based on experience there is nothing available at a gun show for free). He accuses the NRA of fear mongering. What does that say about his first point, fear mongering?
Point 2. Did the brain development of teens slow down over time, their brains developed just fine a few years back. Just how, pray tell does one earn responsibility? Did he mean right? Besides if the age limit was raised to 21 you next would demand 25.
Point 3. His third point is going to cause a boom in the construction industry. Never once did he mention punishing the child for his crime. He qualified the drunken kid excuse with statement if the alcohol came from their home. He knows full well that there is no way to prove when much less where the child got snockered. He further claims that he is tired of mindless parents of school shooters having no clue that their kid was into said violence, saying this was not responsible gun ownership or parenting. They need to start bearing the responsibility for the actions of their child/teen. He went on claiming the height of irresponsibility was having high-powered weaponry easily available to their kids. He is also tired of the talk about law-abiding gun owners, he wants to talk about RESPONSIBLE gun owners. He then says, if your kids uses guns to shoot up a bunch of innocents then you just lost your responsibility to own guns and you should be held accountable for the consequences. Wow, where to start? I will just say for now that he wants the parent and the gun to be responsible. He fails to hold the child/teen/kid accountable. Perhaps he does not understand that law-abiding gun owners are responsible gun owners. Once again he uses the word responsibility where I think he meant to use the word right. So if his kid were to kill someone while he/she was driving and texting he would lose his responsibility(right)to own a car and a cell phone. Better build more prisons.
Point 4. His fourth point is that we need a national gun registry, because he has to register his cars and apparently anyone can pull up a Carfax on his car and know the history of it and he wants to know why this can not be applied in the context of guns. I could point that historically speaking gun registries have spelled disaster, but instead I will use this. Would he be happy registering all of his effects with the government? Given the hacks on information, he might just be uncomfortable if some nefarious person would gain access to what he has, you know just in case they wanted it? Then they could just enter Stuff Fax. And again driving is a privilege owning a firearm is a right.
Point 5. he thinks we need a study by the CDC and he accuses the NRA of trying to prevent this. He wants this study because the more we know the better we can tackle this plague of gun violence. He might just not like the results when the results of that study comes out, provided they were to conduct an honest study and our side is proven right.
Point 6. Has he never heard of hunters safety courses? I might also mention the NRA has partnered with others to provide firearms training. Even with the training required to become a licensed driver children still die, far more children are lost to motor vehicle accident than to what he calls gun violence.
Point 7. His biggest beef is with the politicians who get financial support from the NRA. He wants all NRA backed politicians backed by the NRA voted out. He also claims the NRA bears some of the responsibility for where we have found our selves because they stoke the flames of fear. He says, He has not found one quote in which someone wants to eradicate the Second Amendment. He must have missed the op-ed by the former Justice and the interview with the “queen of confiscation”. He wants gun owners to be responsible and quit caving into the fear mongering of the NRA. He goes on by asking several questions that I feel he should ask himself. Especially the one, on just plain ignorance, gullibility and naivety. He then states, There is no doubt that America has experienced a dumbing-down. Then he asks, Have we become that stupid that we can not see that we are being played? I have a question in response, just who has been dumbed-down? By reading your post, the entire thing I would say that the answer to the last question, in your case is yes.

(His words)And finally, the most disappointing thing I believe in all of this is that the church is not the leading voice in wanting to stop this carnage. We as Christians need to speak up louder against gun violence. This is a BIG pro-life issue! It is the height of hypocrisy to act so sanctimonious about life in the womb but ignore lives affected by gun violence. If you believe that there is a real devil who is out to destroy God’s creation then you have to see that he is celebrating our idolatry to weapons and reveling about each loss of life. The Bible teaches that he has come to kill, steal and destroy. If you are defending the current state that we find ourselves in you can not claim to be following the way of Jesus. Jesus is the Prince of Peace who told his followers to turn the other cheek, pray for your enemies, and to bless those who curse you. He was the very one who took on all the violence directed at him on the cross and defeated all his enemies through love, self-sacrifice, non-violence and resurrection. We are encouraged to pray “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven”. We are supposed to be ushering in a new way of life as a community that is radically different from the status-quo, yet the modern-day American church has unfortunately become a mere reflection of our culture. We have allowed empire worship to trump Christ worship and we don’t see the difference between the two.

So he thinks the time is right for the churches to come out for gun control, being the leading voice. I guess he never heard of the table being overturned and the money-changers being driven from the Temple.

(His words)I have been a youth pastor all my life. I am grieved beyond words for the kind of country we have created for our kids. We have been in a perpetual war ever since 9/11, we are spending ridiculous amounts on our military while Flint, Michigan still doesn’t have clean water and Puerto Rico doesn’t have full power. I honestly believe that we have become more of a reflection of the Biblical state of Babylon than the mythical “Christian nation” that some still believe. It is time we stop hunkering down to protect our “rights” and begin to break out of our selfishness and lust for power, and start thinking about what is best for the next generation of kids growing up. It is time to take our eyes off of the idols we have created and focus back on our kids who are dying. It is easy to read the Bible and be horrified that the Israelites got to the point where they were literally sacrificing their children to the god Molech. But I fail to see the difference between that and where we are at right now. We have more innocent Americans who have been murdered by gun violence within our country than service people in the line of duty! That’s just crazy and should be a big wake-up call for our entire country but especially the Church!

Where did he find those statistics?

(His words)So if you are a Christian and a gun owner, I would encourage you to advocate for sensible gun laws and consider what is best for the greater good of humanity. Think about your own children, think about your local schools, think about your communities. Every mass shooting has the same response: “I never thought it would happen here!” Why do we have to defend our rights until the violence comes to our own communities? Let’s come together as the body of Christ and be the kingdom that we are called to be and shake off the dirt of the Empire that we are entangled in.

Just another social justice warrior.

(His words)Lord have mercy on this nation.

His last statement is the only thing I can agree with him on. I cut my answer short on the last three, this post has gotten long, real long. If you are still here at this point I really appreciate it and thank you. I did it this way because I felt this should be exposed, again sorry about the length. Bear with me just a bit more.

I am nowhere near done with this, he has given me much ammunition.

If you attend Church and I hope that you do, please pay attention to the message being “preached”. This man claims to be a Youth Pastor, he is preaching to the kids. I am quite sure that he is not the only one.

DEO VINDICE

The coming mid-terms

Posted on by

This seems to be one of the three or four things on the minds of most folks these days. I will get to the others later. November aint that far off some primaries have already been held with more upcoming.

Democrat talking heads are predicting a “blue wave”, while Republican talking heads are predicting a “red wave”. Must be political football season again, the blue and red teams are about to take to the field. According to the experts(ex-spurts)the home team(the party in control)generally suffers the most defeats in the mid-terms, referred to as the “mid-term curse”(more on this in a minute).

A few of the democrat “clowns” still want to impeach the President. For what I don’t know. I did not think that hating the sitting president was an impeachable offense. Their leadership wants them to knock off such talk as it might create a windfall for the republicans, as in guarantee a republican(red wave)victory. Basically the democrats have nothing to offer other than the same old same old.

It seems that some of the republicans are trying to throw(lose)the upcoming elections. The republicans hold the majority in the House as well as the Senate, even got the White House. But I do have to wonder what the republicans are up to. Why are they(some of them)doing the work of the minority party. It looks to me that some in the republican party are trying to intentionally lose(throw)the mid-terms with this push to force a discharge petition on amnesty. Now there may be some sort of genius behind this move but I doubt it. I think this is a move to piss of the voters so they sit this one out, ensuring a “blue wave”.

There are many in the republican establishment that still are never Trump(NT), and or anybody but Trump(ABT)and they want him gone(out of office). The question is, How far are they willing to achieve this goal? It was reported that 18 and possibly 19 republican representatives have signed onto this discharge petition. I have to wonder if there might be someone behind the scenes pulling the strings, perhaps a big money donor calling in his or her marker.

Back to the so-called experts. The pollsters(I believe all but one)had HRC handily winning the 2016 presidential election. Well they were wrong. Trump won the election much to the consternation of the experts. They thought the “fix” was in, there gal would win. Now we have the Russian collusion investigation going on entering the second year. There would have been no such investigation had HRC won. Why? I suppose they figured there was no way Trump could become president and if he did it would be because of some outside help or interference. They just could not accept that their candidate was flawed, horribly so.

From the moment President Trump announced he was in the run the establishment was against him(I believe they still are). How many times did they try to get him to drop out? He hung in. I believe there was a secret strategy meeting(most likely more)to find a way to do something about Trump. Not going to rehash that whole fiasco, you get the point.

The night of the election and Trump won it looked like the democrats, liberals, leftists, socialists, progressives(repeated myself)and the establishment were going to lose their minds. Some democrat clowns in congress were looking for reasons to impeach even before President Trump was inaugurated. Before the election how many of the left said Trump would never be president? It was if they had a crystal ball or something(insurance policy).

Now let us go back to these 18 and why they are doing, or attempting to do, the bidding of the left. It takes a lot of money to run for political(Constitutional)office a lot of donors and I do not mean the ones who contribute 20 or so dollars. I am talking about the big money supporters. There is no one who will invest that much financial support and not expect something in return. I have to wonder about these 18 and their motivation. Are they just looking for that last vote? That which they now attempt, is it what they believe to be right? It was not what they campaigned on, did they “evolve”? Are they just repaying donations? When it comes to political campaigns many millions are spent to make hundreds of thousands. Many holding Constitutional office are millionaires or multi-millionaires yet when it come re-election time they hold out their hands begging for contributions, they seem unwilling to risk their own personal fortunes. They end up owing somebody something. President Trump was the exception.

This coming November will be two years since the political establishment was shocked by the win of a “political nobody”. President Trump is still president despite the attempts by some in both parties to force him out or kick him out. In their attacks against the president they have been attacking those who voted him into office. They have been dragging this Republic through the mud for far too long. The investigation by the Special Counsel is entering its second year and the president has come through unscathed. Look at some of the actions to protect that investigation, some republicans have tried to introduce legislation to protect the Special Counsel from being fired by the President. If I am correct it is republican leadership that has stopped this legislation saying it is unnecessary. I believe that they have a different reason, even if the legislation is passed the president would have to either sign it into law or veto it. If he signed it into law then that would in effect be saying he has nothing to fear(no collusion), and they know it. I doubt that the president would veto this.

There were rumors that the investigation would take a break due to the upcoming elections. I believe that says more than just that, the investigation may be hinged to the mid-terms. If the republicans hold both the House and the Senate the investigation may just wrap up with no further findings. If the republicans lose the House but retain the Senate it may continue for a while or come to an end. It will definitely continue if the democrats take both the House and the Senate. One of the first orders for business for the democrats if they take both the House and the Senate will be to impeach the president. They may bring the president up on impeachment charges if they only win the House, if for no other reason that to please(quieten down) some of the noisier democrats.

So are the republicans intentionally trying to lose(throw)the upcoming elections? I will let you draw your own conclusions, I have my own. I point out that around four dozen republicans(House and Senate)are calling it quits. Some are facing a tough re-election(wonder why)or maybe they feel that they may just lose the primaries(remembering what happened in Virginia). These 18 appear to be trying to put the icing on the lose cake.

The republican establishment, including the big money supporters are still pretty well ticked off at us lowly voters for putting A President Donald Trump in the White House, instead of electing one out of their preferred stables. They may just still be ticked enough to throw the elections and subject us to the democrats for a while, you know just to teach us a lesson for departing the reservation.

DEO VINDICE