News - Category 'Right To Bear Arms'

April 17, 2013: A Day of American Pride in Our Freedom

22 Apr : 19:48 Category: Right To Bear Arms

President Obama, who, exploiting former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the Newtown Shooting families that he had the American People pay for as lobbyists to go to Washington D.C. to speak to Senators and Congresspersons apparently on behalf of the White House (one Newtown mother and father even replaced President Obama in his weekly radio address), then, after all this sensationalism fails, decides to register an emotional response to the Senate Vote on Gun Control...

“All in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington. But this effort is not over.”

And that my friends is why this is a Day of American Pride in Our Freedom!

The day of April 17th, 2 days before capturing the naturalized citizen Dzhokhar Tsarnaev who is suspected of carrying out the Boston Marathon Bombing of April 15, 2013 in the severly gun restricted State of Massachusetts (see, Obama, our illustrious POTUS with the Leastus in affection for the United States of America decides to shame the United States Senate for actually voting according to their constituency and not his whims, and

Apparently President Obama didn't get the memo: Sir, you no longer have a super majority and can no longer force bills through Congress that the American People do not want or support, you can no longer ignore the limits placed on the national government by the Constitution, your whims are no longer the people's command.

The reality is that the Senate, for the first time in a very long time, did what the American people want in voting down gun control legislation and causing a lack of any schedule for the final bill to be brought to a vote, essentially tabled without any amendments surviving, making the effort to violate the limits imposed on the National Government by the Law of the Land via the 2nd Amendment a struggle that hopefully will result in the bill never being brought to the Senate floor.

To understand, what I just described is a Senate that actually upheld the Constitution, whether it knew it or not, that we should be celebrating in the streets that by the Grace of God, or the natural breakdown of collectivism with egos as strong as Obama's running about, “gun control legislation,” the mere idea of which is a direct statement of “infringement of the 2nd Amendment,” failed! For the first time in a very long time the Pomp and Circumstance engine of Politics did wind down that Freedom could reign! It may be short lived, however, that's up to us.

You see there's this little known bill, Obamacare, that appears to be up for repeal right now. I say this because the argument by those who want gun control, such as Alan Colmes when he appeared versus Conservative Democrat Tammy Bruce, to the best of my recollection said “that most Americans wanted what was in this legislation” which, if I am not mistaken means, “Obamacare should be repealed since most Americans don't want Obamacare.”

Funny thing about Mr. Colmes and the Liberal noise machine of dress flapping over a subway vent like Marilyn Monroe, is that they don't ever care about majorities when the People disagree with them, and will only cite the polls taken the day after the crisis they can't let go to waste to justify something that weeks or months later a more sober America has said “no” to.

Then of course they defer (misdirect) the cause of the failure, blaming the NRA, you know, that organization that was formed by white gun owners who trained and protected freed slaves (see

And to all those Leftist naysayers, lost in the belief Our Founders were uncaring slave owners in their wanting to undermine the entire idea just posed, I submit James Madison from Federalist 42, in part, and please note his use of the word “brethren”:

“The regulation of foreign commerce, having fallen within several views which have been taken of this subject, has been too fully discussed to need additional proofs here of its being properly submitted to the federal administration. It were doubtless to be wished, that the power of prohibiting the importation of slaves had not been postponed until the year 1808, or rather that it had been suffered to have immediate operation. But it is not difficult to account, either for this restriction on the general government, or for the manner in which the whole clause is expressed. It ought to be considered as a great point gained in favor of humanity, that a period of twenty years may terminate forever, within these States, a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided the barbarism of modern policy; that within that period, it will receive a considerable discouragement from the federal government, and may be totally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continue the unnatural traffic, in the prohibitory example which has been given by so great a majority of the Union. Happy would it be for the unfortunate Africans, if an equal prospect lay before them of being redeemed from the oppressions of their European brethren!” (Emphasis mine,, explaining Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.)

To any who may have been concerned, I've been dealing with some health issues that I will not get into detail here. Nothing life-threatening but enough to make it difficult to update this site all that frequently. I'll do my best to keep things going, but know that ChangingWind.Org may be quite busy for some days or weeks and then I'll need another absence, but rest assured I am not about to turn up daisies any time soon.

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman

P.S. Anyone interested in contributing to ChangingWind.Org in our effort to provide some perspectives and solutions in our promotion of Freedom and Conservative Principles by our Faith in Jesus Christ, please see if there is anything in our bookstore that you may want to have or get as a gift for a friend or family, or even Barack Obama (I'd recommend Blood Barons), we'd greatly appreciate that, and I promise not to make this appeal to you all that often,

printer friendly create pdf of this news item

The Dorner Identity

12 Feb : 19:31 Category: Right To Bear Arms

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,

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.” -- 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,

Toddy Littman

printer friendly create pdf of this news item