By: Toddy Littman
Yeah, I wish his name had been “Jason Dorn,” but, hey, close enough right?
So let’s see, we have a former Los Angeles Police Officer who essentially claims he’s a whistle blower, and that is why he lost his job, and that the system of things, the bureaucracy and governmental structure, punished the snitch. (“Manifesto” here, http://wap.myfoxla.com/w/main/story/84473837/)
Is it true? I have no idea but, I will say, if he is a whistle blower that the higher echelons of government have passed laws to assure protecting whistle blowers, however these laws may be meaningless if the corruption of government has affected those well above the position of former LAPD Officer Christopher Dorner. An officer believing this will become a menace to those they blame and shortly thereafter they will be a menace to the society as a whole – much like what has happened thus far in Officer Dorner’s case.
The immediate question to me, in light of closeness of the border with Mexico: What is the value of a former military intelligence officer with current LAPD training to a Mexican Drug Cartel?
Further, how this value would be enhanced by an Officer Dorner (if the Liberals get their way) having a copy of records of all registered gun owners in the Los Angeles area, all of those who own bullets including the date and amount of ammo of their last purchase, as well as the records of those who’ve been rejected in applying for a firearm permit (potential gang recruits) and why they were rejected (potential blackmail/extortion information).
While the debate continues over how much farther the government can violate the limits imposed on it by the 2nd Amendment…
“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.” — http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
…it remains obvious to this advocate for Individual Liberty as guaranteed by the terms of Our Written Constitution establishing the Government of the United States, that Officer Dorner is the very poster child for why Our Founders ratified the 2nd Amendment restatement of an existing limit on the national government.
Please note that Christopher Dorner is a diehard Liberal, as he illustrates from this excerpt:
“If you had a well regulated AWB [Assault Weapons Ban], this would not happen. The time is now to reinstitute a ban that will save lives. Why does any sportsman need a 30 round magazine for hunting? Why does anyone need a suppressor? Why does anyone need a AR15 rifle? This is the same small arms weapons system utilized in eradicating Al Qaeda, Taliban, and every enemy combatant since the Vietnam war. Don’t give me that crap that its not a select fire or full auto rifle like the DoD uses. That’s b******t because troops who carry the M-4/M-16 weapon system for combat ops outside the wire rarely utilize the select fire function when in contact with enemy combatants. The use of select fire probably isn’t even 1% in combat. So in essence, the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle is the same as the M-4/M-16. These do not need to be purchased as easily as walking to your local Walmart or striking the enter key on your keyboard to “add to cart”. All the firearms utilized in my activities are registered to me and were legally purchased at gun stores and private party transfers. All concealable weapons (pistols) were also legally register in my name at police stations or FFL’s. Unfortunately, are you aware that I obtained class III weapons (suppressors) without a background check thru NICS or DROS completely LEGALLY several times? I was able to use a trust account that I created on quicken will maker and a $10 notary charge at a mailbox etc. to obtain them legally. Granted, I am not a felon, nor have a DV misdemeanor conviction or active TRO against me on a NCIC file. I can buy any firearm I want, but should I be able to purchase these class III weapons (SBR’s, and suppressors) without a background check and just a $10 notary signature on a quicken will maker program? The answer is NO. I’m not even a resident of the state i purchased them in. Lock n Load just wanted money so they allow you to purchase class III weapons with just a notarized trust, military ID. Shame on you, Lock n Load. NFA and ATF need new laws and policies that do not allow loopholes such as this. In the end, I hope that you will realize that the small arms I utilize should not be accessed with the ease that I obtained them. Who in there right mind needs a f*****g silencer!!! who needs a freaking SBR AR15? No one. No more Virginia Tech, Columbine HS, Wisconsin temple, Aurora theatre, Portland malls, Tucson rally, Newtown Sandy Hook. Whether by executive order or thru a bi-partisan congress an assault weapons ban needs to be re-instituted. Period!!!
“Mia Farrow said it best. ‘Gun control is no longer debatable, it’s not a conversation, its a moral mandate.’
“Sen. Feinstein, you are doing the right thing in leading the re-institution of a national AWB. Never again should any public official state that their prayers and thoughts are with the family. That has become cliche’ and meaningless. Its time for action. Let this be your legacy that you bestow to America. Do not be swayed by obstacles, antagaonist, and naysayers. Remember the innocent children at Austin, Kent, Stockton, Fullerton, San Diego, Iowa City, Jonesboro, Columbine, Nickel Mines, Blacksburg, Springfield, Red Lake, Chardon, Aurora, and Newtown. Make sure this never happens again!!!” — Ibid
Contrast the above quote to Officer Dorner’s actions as he, who having been fired from the Los Angeles Police Department then takes up arms to kill those who he blames. And, in a perfect reversal of his purpose, appears to result in showing either, as Mr. Dorner suggests, that he is rightfully retaliating against a corrupt system, or, that Mr. Dorner is rebelling against a proper government.
In the first case, if the system is so corrupt that a person who was once clothed with the authority of being a police officer has taken up arms to fix it, the people should be taking notice, making sure to look into the police department that fired this man. We should be ascertaining if there is any merit to his claim that he is trying to reclaim his name and is required to kill to stop the corruption and change the LAPD policy. Officer Dorner may soon get killed in a firefight and then his story will be what we’re told by those who killed him and not the story that exists in who he was before the first person he murdered, or we might hear how racist the Los Angeles Police Department continues to be and how this is proven by their killing Christopher Dorner.
The second case would be that Officer Dorner is rebelling against a proper government and is, by his training and experience irrespective of employment, a police officer who is in rebellion against the Will of the People.
In both instances it is clear Christopher Dorner is dangerous, and, contrary to his desire for an Assault Weapons Ban, Officer Dorner’s actions unequivocally justify my having an “assault rifle,” especially if that term embraces more than the “window dressing” that gun manufacturers put on many hunting rifles to market them to those who maybe wish they had been able to serve their country but weren’t for myriad reasons.
To be clear: Christopher Dorner makes the case for why I have a right to a military grade weapon, that these should be available for every American at Walmart and/or as easily as pressing my enter key. His former Military and LAPD training would include that Officer Dorner would have makeshift armor that will aid him in killing me if he found me a threat, that he’d be trained to dodge a bullet, and have other tactical advantages, and, if Mr. Dorner had his way, he’d be able to look up in a database where certain weapons and ammo are located amongst the citizens – treating me, and any gun owner, as a “weapons cache” after he decided to be a domestic terrorist and weapon of mass destruction.
A 7-round clip, the new “New York Standard,” will be of no force and affect against Officer Dorner. I, and many other legal gun owning Americans, no matter how well trained, would likely miss 5 shots of 6 trying to deal with a trespassing Officer Dorner trying to take from me, whether at home, on a roadside, or during rush hour.
So, to get 7 bullets into 1 Christopher Dorner most would need more than a 30-round clip, especially if they need more than 7 bullets to end him being a threat, and that’s after penetrating his armor. I’d also need a gun rifled properly to do so with the ammo I’d need to accomplish this task: a genuine, not just styled, military assault weapon.
The language of the 2nd Amendment is clear and Justice Scalia got it wrong in saying the 2nd Amendment “conferred a right.” It is the Officer Dorners of the world (his manifesto suggesting there are many more like him, too, amongst the LAPD) that make it clear we can’t let Justices in the Supreme Court be making rulings that turn on their head the limits placed on government, mistakenly construed as a right granted by the Constitution — the U.S. Supreme Court interpreting the existence of a fiction because reality is not going to expand the National Government’s trespass on our rights.
To me, we need banners and posters with photos of Christopher Dorner in uniform saying below or to the right of the photo, something like this, “Christopher Dorner, Why Americans need the 2nd Amendment.”
I mean, if the government and media can exploit a group of school children to push for a breach to the limits imposed on government by the 2nd Amendment, then there is every reason to exploit an ex-military intelligence officer and former LAPD officer whose actions alone prove conclusively one of the many reasons Americans have an inviolable right to bear arms pursuant to the 2nd Amendment. Inviolable because of the prohibition of government “infringement,” proving necessary and true to the Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness even in the 21st Century – self-defense from all forms of oppression, of slavery and/or threat to life and limb is most reasonable at all times for every single person. To think it is not is to take on a naïveté that assumes we all think alike. That day may come but hasn’t yet, thus the reality is confused with the dream. Freedom will not be dispatched so easily, and to arrive at a purported consensus without having done so by Freedom is to negate the legitimacy of the cause, effect, and result of all consequences therefrom, an inexcusable abuse of America and our republican form of government.
Thank you for reading,