Podcast appearances and mentions of peter carr

Episode 297- SCOTUS Win on Assault Firearms Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 15 Gun Lawyer — Episode 297 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Supreme Court, assault weapons, Second Amendment, gun rights, New Jersey, NRA, firearm laws, Heller decision, McDonald, Bruen, reparations, gun control, concealed carry, Thomas Jefferson, gun lawyer. SPEAKERS Speaker 3, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 1 Speaker 1 00:11 Lawyer, Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 And I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:22 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, my friends, I have to tell you, this is just one of the greatest moments in what I would have to say in our fight to destroy gun rights suppression. It is just a banner time right now. Absolutely, a crescendo at a moment here that I’m just so excited about. Truly, truly excited, no joke. The Supreme Court of the United States has granted certiorari, meaning accepted the case, so that it means there will be an opinion, a decision, a rule made by the Court finally on so-called “assault weapons”. (https://thereload.com/supreme-court-to-decide-constitutionality-of-ar-15-bans/) Evan Nappen 01:27 Yes, we’ve done it. We have finally gotten to where the U.S. Supreme Court is going to look at the impact of the Second Amendment on this issue. I can tell you that I’ve personally been battling and fighting in the state of New Jersey since it was first enacted in May of 1990. Looking back to those days, I remember just thinking, man, hopefully we’ll one day get the United States Supreme Court to deal with this issue. But back then there was no Heller decision. There was no Supreme Court decision that even said that the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right. We didn’t even have that back then. And when the anti-gun rights crowd embarked on this brand new approach, which it was at the time. Evan Nappen 02:38 To understand the history and where we are right now, why it just is so meaningful, you need to understand that the gun rights attack, the effort by our adversaries, to destroy our right to keep and bear arms, basically, in modern times, started after World War One. It was essentially imported here Page – 2 – of 15 from the U.K., from Great Britain. It had gotten its roots there, and it came across the pond like a cancer. It percolated to the point where by 1934 we ended up with the first National Firearms Act. Prior to ’34 but after World War One, you saw states passing state laws of what we commonly call gun control laws. And the gun control laws of those days first initiated through the ’20s, and we still have remnants of those laws still on the books, by the way, in New Jersey and other places. They were put forward by state legislatures and enacted, and those gun laws were mirrored and influenced and encouraged by what was taking place originally in Great Britain. Evan Nappen 04:22 These laws in America at that time period, and you may find this surprising, and it’s not meant to be bashing in any way of NRA. But they were even supported and promoted by the NRA at that time. The NRA had even put forward what were called the “model firearm laws”. They put model laws together that they wanted states to pass. The NRA saw its mission then in a naive, unfortunately, you know, very naive, as certain gun laws and such, that they would support. Now, since then, that’s not their position, and they’ve learned from this naive mistake. But it led to the 1934 Act, and we’ve suffered under that this entire time. It became the first national gun rights oppression law. Even at the time in the “American Rifleman”, you could read it, and they even praised it. They said, “Ah, and this is how they viewed it. You’ve got to understand, put yourself in the time. They said, “Ah, we’ve solved the gun problem in America.” We’ve passed this great national law, and now we’ve resolved it. We’ve solved it. We’ve addressed it. It’s done. And, of course, it was far from done. But for approximately 30 plus years, that was about it for our national laws on guns being passed. Evan Nappen 06:00 Then along comes the ’68 Gun Control Act, which built upon, to a certain degree, of course, built upon the NFA. We already had that national law and then the ’68 law. Then ’72 and then ’80s and ’90s, and etc. So that foundation got laid. And in between all this, what you mainly saw the fight as being, though, where the modern day focus, the modern day focus was handguns. I remember through the ’80s, before the invention, and that’s what it was, the invention of the “assault weapon” issue. It hadn’t been invented yet. Everything was, we only want to ban handguns. Handguns were the symbol of crime. Every news show on the major controlled networks, there weren’t any cables, you know. You just had ABC, NBC, and CBS, and you had their nightly news. And anytime they talked about crime, whether there was a gun involved or not, they always showed a handgun on the news screen anytime they talked about crime. So the propaganda was put there. Everything was about banning handguns, and the main gun rights oppression group of the day was known as Handgun Control. Handgun Control was a big group. You had players at the time like Pete Shields and others, and this is where the push was. Then along comes Josh Sugarman, who puts out his manifesto. Teddy Nappen 07:50 Closet hoplosexual. Evan Nappen 07:52 Right. His manifesto of the assault weapons and their accessories. And even in his manifesto, he writes that the American public will be fooled by this, because they don’t know the difference between machine guns and semi-autos. This lays the groundwork for this. And lo and behold, we have California Page – 3 – of 15 with Patrick Purdy and the massacre that occurred in that incident, and that’s all the blood they needed to dance in. Then the assault weapon laws became the biggest threat to our Second Amendment rights, and everything weirdly shifted, weirdly shifted, so that handguns, with the growth of concealed carry, which has been an amazing success for gun rights support. Handguns are not the big issue for banning, except for, of course, a modern day focus on Glocks, because they’re easily convertible, right? Except for that. You don’t see the push like you used to ban handguns. Evan Nappen 09:00 Of course, Heller took care of that as well. Saying you can’t. It’s unconstitutional to ban handguns, too. But the push on semi-automatic rifles under the contrived created term of “assault weapon”. They took the German of Sturmgewehr, which was the true original assault weapon, a medium power round in a long arm that’s designed for urban settings. It is select fire, both full auto and semi-auto. And causing this, creating this, and putting it with that scary “assault weapon” moniker to scare the public and sell it. And it was to their credit, to a certain degree successful. It was successful in a number of states that passed state laws, including New Jersey. They passed one of the one worst, most destructive, horrible gun laws that have ruined good people. We’ll talk more about that in a little bit. Evan Nappen 10:06 And even a federal law at one point through the 1994 bill that was a crime, which they call the Crime Bill, but I call the bill that was a crime. We had the first national assault weapon ban. That law sunset and went away in 10 years, which was 2004, and they’ve not been able to reenact another federal ban since. But that ban did end up living on, by the way, in the state of New Jersey, because New Jersey adopted the language of that to save New Jersey’s assault firearm ban from being declared unconstitutionally vague. Now that was started by a case that I did, State v. Merrill, where I had the law declared unconstitutional for vagueness because of the term “substantially identical”, which was undefined. What does “substantially identical” even mean? How can something be substantially and identical at the same time? It’s like saying almost exact. Nothing is almost exact. It’s either exact or it isn’t. And because of the vagueness of that term, it was found unconstitutional by Judge Michael Farron, Monmouth County. We knocked out the case. Evan Nappen 11:21 That case was then brought into federal court by the gun rights groups, and that’s where the Attorney General, in order to save it, adopted the 1994 federal crime bill standard that was feature specific. We still live by that today in New Jersey, as to what makes a compliant gun or not, as to the definition of “substantially identical”. The court said, well, now that you know the definition, it’s no longer vague, and therefore it’s constitutional, which is, of course, a judicial lie, a fallacy, a falsehood. Because what that means is that somehow in 1990 our legislators passed an unconstitutionally vague law that did not have definition and somehow knew that in 1994 the federal government would pass a law that defines the undefined law in New Jersey. That’s just ridiculousness squared. But nonetheless it is law, at least as it stands in New Jersey now. We saw other states and other counties constantly push on the so-called “assault weapon” ban, a focus being on the big bad AR-15. We’ve had fight after fight. Page – 4 – of 15 Page – 5 – of 15 Evan Nappen 12:35 And as our battle for Second Amendment rights continued through the courts, we got the trifecta. We got the Heller finding of what we all knew in our hearts was true, that the Second Amendment is an individual right. We got McDonald, which said this doesn’t just apply to the federal government, it applies to all states and localities. And then we got Bruen that laid out the test of constitutionality and gave us the requirement that carry permits must be issued, must be issued. With that buildup of having the trifecta, we’ve now gotten more cases from the Supreme Court that solidify this approach. And just now, in this moment in our lifetimes, the Supreme Court has finally accepted the challenge to the bans of so-called “assault weapons”. The name of the case. Teddy Nappen 13:36 Particularly those two cases. Evan Nappen 13:39 Yes, Viramontes v. Cook County, and Grant versus Higgins. Now, those cases, the Cook County case is the Illinois’ local county. It’s a local assault weapon ban ordinance, just an ordinance banning. And then the other case they took was in Connecticut, which is a statewide ban. Why do that? Well, what’s great is they’re going at anywhere and everything, whether it’s local or state. The challenge is across the board, as per McDonald. It’s incorporated both local and state. So we now have a certiorari grant combining two cases, and it isn’t just limited to Connecticut and this one local county in Illinois. Their decision will reach all localities, all states, and stand in the future with our win, that I am confident we will win, to stop future federal laws on this. Here’s the actual. Go ahead, Teddy. Teddy Nappen 14:52 I will point out that this is just something the we. I always keep an eye on, like all the arguments the Left always do. I always love the ad hominem attack, where they say. Well, this is just some Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), which is they are a party to both cases. (https://saf.org/supreme-court-grants-cert-in-saf-assault-weapons-cases/) They’re the ones that brought the cases. Second Amendment Foundation was joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition. They brought the Vermont. Evan Nappen 15:16 And second Amendment Foundation. Teddy Nappen 15:17 And Second Amendment Foundation, along with the Connecticut Citizens Defense League. They always try to say. Evan Nappen 15:21 Teddy, there are also individual plaintiffs that are very important, that have standing, that have gone this distance. So, this is actual people and organizations. Teddy Nappen 15:32 Yeah, astroturf. Page – 6 – of 15 Evan Nappen 15:32 Yeah, well, astroturf, that’s a joke. Teddy Nappen 15:36 Yeah, but that is. Evan Nappen 15:37 I mean. Yeah. Go ahead. Teddy Nappen 15:40 Just to take that in. Throughout history, just look at the cases throughout, like some of the major Supreme Court cases. I think it was, what was it, either.. I think it was like maybe Plessy versus there was one regular Supreme Court case where it was brought by the, the.. it was about segregation. It was the train companies, where they’re trying to make sure they didn’t have to make extra cars for separating blacks and whites. And it was brought, and they actually set it up to have the case, to get the individual arrested for the segregation. It’s not the first time you’ve had organizations, and that’s throughout all, like a vast majority of cases where you have other. Evan Nappen 16:22 Listen, Teddy. Astroturf? Rosa Parks was a setup. Rosa Parks at the back of the bus, racial segregation. What do you think? It was engineered to make the challenge! Yeah, so don’t give me that. You want to put the issues forward and get the issues decided. Good, good. They have actual plaintiffs. They have actual people that are suffering under these laws, and they have organizations that represent vast amounts of members. It’s fine. It’s real. The assault firearm bans are real, and in New Jersey, their impact has been one of absolute destructive power. But let me just tell you what the court, just to close this, so we know exactly what they’re going to decide. Here is the question presented that they have granted certiorari on. Here it is, ready? Whether the Second and 14th Amendments guarantee the right to possess the AR-15 platform and similar semi-automatic rifles. This is great! One of the criteria that the antis are going to use, is they’re going to say, well, it has to be arms that are commonly possessed. Well, the AR-15 is the most commonly possessed rifle in America. As a matter of fact, folks, there are more AR-15s than there are Ford F150 pickup trucks! Let that sink in. Teddy Nappen 18:08 That was the other argument I’ve been seeing from The Trace. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/06/assault-weapons-bans-supreme-court-2a/) They just did their whole, you know, boo hoo, whining, and crying. It was from Chip Brownlee. Guess the first thing they highlight? This is the fight for the dangerous and unusual AR-15. Like that’s the common use. That’s the spin that they’re going to use. They’re trying to lay the groundwork on, is that whole idea of. Evan Nappen 18:34 Well, you know why? They don’t have historical analogs under the Bruen test anymore, that can help them. Their analogs have had their legs cut off. The one they loved was about the Black Codes, where they banned blacks from Bowie knives and guns, or whatever. And Alito, just in the recent opinion, made it clear that’s a tainted relic. It can’t be taken seriously. So, forget it. That analog is out the Page – 7 – of 15 window. They just revealed, based on research by Stephen Halbrook, that the precedent claimed for carrying – as a matter of fact, this was even in Kuhns. One of the precedents relied upon by the court was a law that never was a law. It was simply something in some Frenchman’s book that talked about it. But the actual law was not how they’re citing it at all. Their analogs are fraught with fraud, fraught with being completely tossed in the garbage can, and they know it. When it comes to that Bruen test of history, text and tradition. In order for a law to be upheld and found not to be unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, the Government has the burden of showing the past analogs that there were other laws that were like that law that make this new law acceptable. And they don’t have that. They do not have it. So, they’re falling back, Teddy, to it’s not common use. Well, that’s falls flat on its face. They’re falling back on what? What’s the classic? Why don’t you tell us? What’s the classic when all else fails for them to cry about? Teddy Nappen 20:34 Blood In The Streets. That’s Blood In The Streets. They always cite two BITS. We have to consider the gun violence when considering this. All that goes right to Brown. Evan Nappen 20:43 Public policy. They always go back to the public policy arguments, public policy, and guess what? That doesn’t cut it! That doesn’t justify infringement of the Second Amendment. That argument is dead in the water. It’s not the test. It’s not a balancing test. Balancing tests aren’t allowed. Done, dead, gone. You can’t balance public policy. Can’t do it anymore. They know they’re going to be crushed, and I cannot wait for that day. I cannot wait till, at the latest, it’ll be next June. We’re going to have a decision that removes finally. I know it in my bones. Gets rid of, ends this travesty called the “assault weapon” ban. Let me tell you something. These laws have destroyed good people. These laws have created more harm than they claim the firearms themselves have created, especially in states like New Jersey. Evan Nappen 22:00 It isn’t just that an individual can’t have that gun or this gun. It’s the aggressive insanity of enforcement destroying people’s lives. If you get convicted of possession of an “assault firearm” in New Jersey, right? An AR-15 that has a bayonet mount on it and a pistol grip. You are now guilty of possession of an “assault firearm” because of a bayonet mount. You’re looking at 10 years in State Prison with a minimum mandatory three and a half years. No chance of parole. Three and a half years – minimum mandatory, folks. No way around it. No way. If you’re convicted of that, the judge has zero discretion. You can be Mother Teresa, and you’ll have to get three and a half years minimum mandatory in State Prison because you had a gun that had a bayonet mount and a pistol grip. You can only have one offending feature, and the pistol grip is one offending feature, right out of the box. And you had two because your other one was a bayonet mount. You know how important bayonet mounts are to crime. I mean, come on. What about all the drive-by bayonetings we have to take care of here, right? Folks, that’s how they.. Teddy Nappen 22:00 I think you also. Just looking at the future, because from the facts of where everything’s lined up, yeah, we’re going to win. And just seeing that right now, the way things lay out, I look to. Page – 8 – of 15 Evan Nappen 23:45 Well, we don’t want to be overconfident, but we. Teddy Nappen 23:48 I understand. Fine, cautiously optimistic. Evan Nappen 23:52 But I am cautiously optimistic. I am incredibly cautiously optimistic with an emphasis on optimistic. Teddy Nappen 23:59 I always look to what is left of their, what would be the next step, then on there on the gun right suppressionist? Because the only thing I could think of is they’re just going to try to put. Evan Nappen 24:09 Wait, wait, wait. Hold that thought for a minute. I just want to finish about the other destruction that has occurred. Like I said, it’s not just that you get arrested and you’re charged with assault firearm. Then you’re thrown in the Gulag, and they want to hold you until your trial. You’re going to spend at least a week, even if your lawyer can get you out before your trial. You have that fight. Then they use it as a licensing disqualifier. If you had an assault firearm, you’re banned from ever having guns again. It doesn’t matter. It’s an assault firearm. On top of that, they have made assault firearm possession not releasable under the Gulag. Remember, we’ve talked about this. It becomes a criteria where there’s a presumption for you to be held in jail. Presumption in favor all over this nonsense. So, you see it’s far-reaching, and what happens when someone inadvertently gets involved in this? Your life gets destroyed. You lose your career. You lose your family. You can lose your freedom. You lose your gun rights, and it’s devastating to people. And then there are those that are doing hard time because they are otherwise lawful possessors. It doesn’t matter. They’re doing the time, having their life destroyed, and having been turned into felons. Evan Nappen 25:40 So, let me just say this. After this decision is a tremendous win for our gun rights and for civil rights, because it’s in the same category as the First Amendment, folks. It’s in the same category as a fundamental right under the Bill of Rights. What I want to see after that decision is reparations to gun owners. That’s right. Reparations to gun owners. You know, they talk on the other side about reparations for slavery to generations later that were never slaves, and they want reparations. Here we will have reparations to individuals who are still alive and have suffered. To anybody that had to give up one of their guns that never should have had to. To those that went into the Gulag and suffered that never should have. To those who have done State Prison sentences that never should have. To those who have lost their gun rights, who have had their families, their lives, their freedom, and their fortunes, all destroyed. Reparations to them. Wait till after this decision comes down. Then we push for reparations. We don’t let it end. Oh, sure. Is that difficult? Will it be hard? Yeah, but it’s no more hard, and frankly, less, way less, of an ask than those asking for reparations for slavery, where we don’t even have the victims of that alive today. Page – 9 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 27:09 It’s also very easy to quantify, because you go into just the legal fees that were brought, the time in jail. Plenty of people have sued and won on those cases. So, it’s something you can actually determine, as opposed to generational racism. It’s ridiculous, as ridiculous sounds, but to this end, where someone who had their life destroyed because of the gun control that they have pushed over the years. Evan Nappen 27:39 That was utterly a violation of our fundamental rights and Second Amendment civil rights. It absolutely is going to lay groundwork for at least tremendous litigation, and really we should have eventually a federal reparations law requiring states to pay that ever had these laws. To compensate individuals who suffered under their tyranny. So, Teddy, you had something else to mention. I know you did. Teddy Nappen 27:39 Yes. So, the one thing I was looking at, whenever I always look to our opponents, because I try not to think of them as being stupid. Even though they are pretty retarded on a lot of different fronts, but they always keep pushing. And I remember this term for it, of what they were described. The Left and the Marxists are line steppers. They go with the idea of what can we get away with, what can we push for, because they always go for that. It’s always just progressivism for progressive sake. Cut to trans ideology. Cut to, you know, we’re going to take your children away and then transition them. Cut to any form of the Left in its insanity. Teddy Nappen 28:16 I always think what will be the next push, and I can see it right now. Repealing the Second Amendment will be the next step. Evan Nappen 28:16 100 percent. Teddy Nappen 28:36 Yes, that will. That’s the only. The only thing I can think of is what they did to Penny, what they did to all the other self-defense cases that we’ve had. Fine, you can have your firearms, but if you ever use them, we will drag you through the courts. We’ll make your life a living hell. We will make it so that people will want to murder you and come to your house and dox you. That’s the only thing at this point. That’s all they have. They are the party of violence, that is shown. You have doxing websites they run. That is the only two avenues I can see for that, and also suing the gun shops into oblivion, which we need to do something with the, I think, what is it, the PLCAA, where it’s the protection. Evan Nappen 29:59 Yeah, PLCAA. (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) Right. Teddy Nappen 30:02 We need to improve and expand PLCAA, and just say no. Stop wasting the state’s money. So, I don’t know what the test would be, but we need to. Page – 10 – of 15 Evan Nappen 30:12 Well, the fight will definitely change, and you know, the gun rights oppressors are not going to give up. But. Teddy Nappen 30:21 Of courses not. Evan Nappen 30:21 It will absolutely take away one of their actually most successful modern gun rights oppression tax. This will be one of. This will destroy what has actually been one of their areas of success, to be honest. They have succeeded in multiple states, and even at one point federally over this. This will destroy it, kill it, and they’re going to be knocked back on their heels very hard by it. And then we need to finish the job. Evan Nappen 31:00 Repeal Hughes Amendment. Evan Nappen 31:01 We need to go at reparations and make it so that when any of these governments decide to embark on rights violations, that down the road we make them pay. We just don’t kill the law. We just don’t knock it out, so that it no longer has effect. We have to make them pay for what they did to good people, and we do that through reparations. Teddy Nappen 31:29 We should also repeal the Hughes. Amendment. Evan Nappen 31:31 That’s going to build. Once you get this case, then, of course, the rest of NFA, any other hardware bands, all these things are going to be on the table. We will have even stronger, better case law to take it all out as the house of cards built by the gun rights oppressors collapses. Hey, and by the way, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot, and that is, of course, where we get our training. And I want to tell you that they are offering New Jersey concealed carry, so you can get your CCARE so you can get your carry permit out of Jersey. They have a new price for their CCARE. It’s incredible. It’s only $225! You can sign up at WeShoot and get their carry course, and it is great. You’ll get your PTC certification, and they really set the gold standard there at WeShoot. You’ll be able to get re-qualification, too. This is the training that police departments use. They’re also USCCA and NRA backed courses. It’s all combined. This is where you can reserve and get it done, so you can get your carry. Evan Nappen 33:03 Particularly now where we’re knocking out “sensitive places”, as we just did with the Wolford case, which actually impacts New Jersey “sensitive places”. We’re going to see more and more availability of where we can carry, and every carry permit holder is another vote for carry. Probably by now, we are well over 100,000 carry permits in New Jersey. You know, it used to be 600. Literally just 600 carry Page – 11 – of 15 permits. Not 600,000. Six hundred. And now we’re in the 100,000 or damn close, if not over it, of permit carriers. I just showed you how their oppression law was so successful before, and after Bruen, it’s dead. Evan Nappen 33:50 So, go to weshootusa.com. Check out We Shoot, and I know you’ll love WeShoot, too. They have great training, and not only can you get your New Jersey permit certification, your CCARE, but they also offer special training to get that for seniors, 65 or older. They have a special deal for seniors – only $185. You can get your training there. They also offer New York City non-resident carry. They are offering New York City non-resident carry. They have it at a fantastic new low price of $289, and you can get your New York City carry, which also covers New York State non-resident carry permit. They’ll do all the training, and this is really great. Anthony Zalo will be doing this course. It spans two days, and it covers firearm safety and storage, pistol ammunition basics, de-escalation techniques, federal and state law, live fire training. If you’re seeking even more certifications, they offer Maryland Wear and Carry Certification, as well as Washington, D.C. carry permits for just $150 each. On Tuesday, August 4, they will be holding their New York resident and non-resident carry courses. Evan Nappen 35:37 WeShoot also has Civilian Shoot House Training. This is really cool. Their Civilian Shoot House Training, so you can understand how to clear rooms, move with purpose, and make decisions under pressure. This is great for homeowners and parents and security team. Anybody who’s serious about protecting their home and community, check out WeShoot’s Civilian Shoot House Training. They have that scheduled out. You can sign up for Friday, July 31st for that Training. They also have adult CPR / AED and Stop the Bleed, so that you know how to treat wounds. They’re offering that training on Monday, July 20. And for new shooters, they have great training called “From Nervous to Bullseye”. If you’re entry level, you want basic training. Here’s what you can do. They’re also offering weekend classes, and you can “Hit Your Weekend Target” with their great instructors – Grant Gallagher, Tony Zollo, and Lance Hubeny. They’re all there. Sign up at WeShoot. They are a phenomenal resource. We’re talking here about WeShoot in Lakewood. They offer USCCA and Sig Sauer Academy – “Close Quarter Defense Fundamentals. I mean, can you believe this? Just fantastic training. Make sure you check out weshootusa.com. You’ll love the range, you’ll love the pro shop, and you’ll love the people. They are the best. Go to weshootusa.com today, and take a trip down to Lakewood. They are right there in Central Jersey, conveniently off the Parkway. You’ll be glad you did. Evan Nappen 37:40 Let me also shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law. It’s the bible of Jersey Gun Law, and you need to get your copy today. Go to EvanNappen.com and get a copy of New Jersey Gun Law. It’ll help keep you from being a GOFU. Hey, we are now celebrating, of course, the 250th Anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. This is a great moment in our history where that fantastic, earth shattering, world changing, humanity changing, document was signed and began the birth of our wonderful America, the greatest country on earth. I have nothing but reverence for our Founding Fathers and our Founding documents, and celebrate 100%. Page – 12 – of 15 Evan Nappen 38:48 Let me tell you about the author. Of course, the Committee of Five technically authored The Declaration, but the majority of the credit is given to, and I hope you know this, Thomas Jefferson. But let me tell you about how great Thomas Jefferson was. Not just because of his phenomenal presidency, his assertion of our national reputation against the Muslim pirates, the pirates of the day, standing up to them, and also the Louisiana Purchase, and so many amazing things under Jefferson. And, of course, the Declaration of Independence. But let me tell you something else about Thomas Jefferson. I want you to know, when it comes to firearms, Thomas Jefferson was one of us. He couldn’t be more one of us. Thomas Jefferson was one of the greatest gun owning founding fathers to live. Evan Nappen 40:04 And let me read you, especially on the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The man who wrote that and made us so where we are today, we can be proud and free. Listen to some quotes from Thomas Jefferson, specifically about guns. Here’s a great quote from Thomas Jefferson. “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” Yeah, he said that. No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. That’s from Thomas Jefferson in the Virginia Constitution draft of 1776. Here’s another phenomenal quote by Thomas Jefferson. “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.” Let that sink in, folks. He preferred dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery. He wrote that in a letter to James Madison in 1787 . Here’s another great quote from Thomas Jefferson. “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” That’s right. Enemies, foreign and domestic, my friends. You heard what Jefferson said. Evan Nappen 41:40 “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Pure common sense spoken by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book, quoting the 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria. Here’s another quote from Thomas Jefferson. “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” Let that one sink in, folks. Thomas Jefferson, in his letter to Peter Carr from August of 1785. Evan Nappen 42:27 “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; and they may exercise it by themselves, and that is their right and duty to be armed at all times. Let all those quotes from Thomas Jefferson sink in. Think about them as we celebrate the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and the man that was the chief engineer of that document and how that man viewed our Second Amendment rights. Page – 13 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 43:43 I will also say, like, I don’t know if you did. Did you ever get to go to Monticello? Did you and Mom get to go? Evan Nappen 44:09 Thanks for mentioning it. No, that is on my bucket list, and I’m going there. My wife went. You’ve gone. Teddy Nappen 44:18 No, I didn’t. I didn’t get to go. Evan Nappen 44:20 What? You didn’t either? Teddy Nappen 44:20 Nope. Just Mom. Evan Nappen 44:21 Teddy, you and I have got to go. Teddy Nappen 44:23 Just Mom got to go. That’s why. Evan Nappen 44:25 This is just wrong. I’ve got to go to Monticello. I’ve meaning to get there. And it’s bugging the hell out of me. Teddy Nappen 44:33 If you ever do go there, they have his pistols. His famed pistols that were, I think, gifted to him. (https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/firearms) Yeah, his famed twin pocket pistols that were gifts from, I believe it was a pair of Turkish pistols received from General Isaac Zane in place of a monetary bequest. Evan Nappen 45:07 Bequest. He gifted him these pistols. Teddy Nappen 45:11 Okay. Evan Nappen 45:12 Yeah. Teddy Nappen 45:14 It was also kind of interesting that Jefferson loved to go out and do competition shoots. He would do a lot of them, and he was a fairly good marksman. There were marks in his letters showing that he noted Page – 14 – of 15 in his accounts, I won a shooting in one of six, it was a muster with Captain Jacob Moon’s Albany County Militia Company. He lost two to six, but as he grew older, his limited exercise. He moved more to firearms and hunting over his horseback riding. He even had designs, and there was accounting of a double-barreled gun lock that he had drawn. So, there’s various other bits in his accounts. Evan Nappen 46:01 Like I said, he’s one of us, man. One hundred percent. Hey, this is wonderful, an incredibly important part of our heritage and our tradition. Jefferson stands tall. All the Founding Fathers were, of course, gun owners and knew the importance of arms, but Jefferson is special, without a doubt. Jefferson is special. Evan Nappen 46:32 And you know, Teddy, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU. This is a GOFU that every time in the practice of gun law, there’s something new. Some other GOFU that I’d not even heard about before, and it just blows me away. It constantly gets crazier and worse, and I want everyone to understand this GOFU, which is, of course, a Gun Owner Fuck Up. Where individuals are now experiencing expensive lessons, or have experienced expensive lessons that you can hopefully avoid for free by listening to Gun Lawyer. Evan Nappen 47:16 So, this week’s GOFU concerns the following. We have a couple, a husband and wife, that are not getting along well with one another, and okay, it happens, right? It happens. Well, it ends up where at some point there’s a fight, and like the old kind of comedy issue you’ve seen on TV, where often it’s the woman, it doesn’t have to be, but often is, throws the husband’s clothing or the belongings out the window to get out. That kind of a thing. Well, in this case, apparently his firearms were tossed out onto the lawn. I guess it sends a message as to throwing out things that the other party believes they care about. But whatever. I’m not going to get into the psychology of it. The bottom line is that this takes place. What happens? Well, it ends up where the police get involved. The police get involved because it falls under the so-called banner of domestic violence. Anytime there is domestic violence, police are called in over any claim of domestic violence, and it’s so broad. Remember, domestic violence could be anything, even harassment, which the essence of which is doing something to purposely annoy another. Now, I know none of you have ever purposely annoyed your spouse or your boyfriend or your girlfriend, but if you did, then you arguably committed domestic violence for harassment. Evan Nappen 48:57 Anyway, that can bring the police into your lives, and this is where you get to live the famous saying of Ronald Reagan. “We’re here from the Government, and we’re here to help.” And, of course, that was one of the best, most sarcastic things that Reagan ever said. Because we’re here from the Government and we’re here to help, is of course the exact opposite. And that’s what happened here. The Government gets involved, and both parties are questioned over various allegations. It doesn’t matter what. The bottom line is that the domestic violence forms are filled out where the issue is documented, and the wife is asked, do you want a restraining order? And she wisely says no. This is internal. They’re squabbling, or whatever. She doesn’t need a restraining order. The husband, who related his whole side of everything there too, is asked, “do you want a restraining order? And he wisely said no, as well. Page – 15 – of 15 Evan Nappen 50:11 So, now you have a couple that are trying. They’re going to do whatever, but they don’t want restraining orders. They don’t want the Government in their life. They’re not interested in that. But what happens? The Government files Red Flags, TERPOs, Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Orders on both of them. Neither of them wanted a restraining order. Neither one wanted it, but it didn’t matter. The Government now files to take away both of their gun rights. To take away their guns and put them on a list of extreme risk. This puts you on a database that could even arguably be accessed by TSA or others that you’re a danger. It has farther reaching collateral consequences than just taking guns and taking away your gun rights. Putting you into the court system now to have to individually fight TERPOs, because we’re from the Government and we’re here to help. That, my friends, is the GOFU. Keep it in mind at all times about being from the Government and there to help. Especially on the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Evan Nappen 51:37 This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Even Thomas Jefferson knew that. Speaker 3 51:50 Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gun.lawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E297 Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.Known as “America's Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it's no wonder he's become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets. Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It's Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News. As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists. He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America. Email Evan Your Comments and Questions  talkback@gun.lawyer Join Evan's InnerCircleHere's your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America.  Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL.  Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits.   Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

What. A. Night. JB Boxing Promotions promised the most competitive all-Irish card in years and it certainly delivered in Dublin's National Stadium. The Rocky Road was there for it all. We hear from a buzzing Podge Collins who scored the best KO of the night when he took out Michael Osborne to move his record to 4-0. Peter Carr beat Sean Murray in an all-Leinster cracker and the stage was set for the Irish title fight between Daniel O'Sullivan and Dean Walsh. We hear from both men after perhaps the greatest Irish title fight at the venue. Christina Desmond was one of four debutants to emerge victorious - the others being Davey Joyce, Sarah Murphy and Danny Fakoyede. We hear from the Cork boxer who was roared on by double Olympic champ Kellie Harrington. Next up we're in Kevin Cronin's dressing room after he finally got over the line at domestic level, defeating Cathal Crowley in a gripping Kerry-Cork clash. Cronin's His manager Mick Conlan joined us too, to celebrate his man's win but also question the merits of the decision against Walsh, who he also manages. Spike O'Sullivan returned after 19 months out to outpoint Mateusz Pawlowski - and we caught up with the Cork veteran. We then sat down to chew over the night itself with promoter Jay Byrne and Paul Ryan, who beat Edward Dononvan in the headliner. Both boxers will be given another opportunity to impress after putting themselves on the line - and you can hear from them at the end of the show. A busy show on a busy night - it's the Rocky Road to Dublin Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There's no doubt 2025 has been an action packed one for Irish boxing - the next big show is Jay Byrne Promotios ‘A New Dawn' on Friday 10th October at the National Stadium. Top of the bill is a battle of 2 pals Paul Ryan v Edward Donovan which promises to be a tremendous match. There's a huge Cork v Kerry derby when Cathal Crowley takes on Kevin Cronin. Daniel O'Sullivan will face Dean Walsh, Shaun Murray v Peter Carr. Podge Collins, Glen Lynch, Kelsey Leonard & John Carlenter plus many more will feature a stacked card wirh 17 fights.Joining Ian & AL on this episode is Glen Byrne, Cathal Crowley & Tina Desmond.JB Promotions Insta: https://tinyurl.com/5n7ccbz2Triller TV: https://tinyurl.com/4ekjmt45Keep up to date with us on social media?

In this episode, Abby interviews Andrew Tonkovich, writer, editor of the journals The Santa Monica Review and Citric Acid, and host of the KPFK radio program "Bibliocracy," about a new exhibition he mounted on the art and activism of friend and mentor Peter Carr. The show “Peter Carr: Artist for Survival” is at Cerritos College Art Gallery until December 14th. Together, they present the poem "What Am I After All" by Walt Whitman. Recitation begins at 40:34.What Am I After AllWalt WhitmanWhat am I after all but a child, pleas'd with the sound of my own name?Repeating it over and over;I stand apart to hear—it never tires me.To you your name also;Did you think there was nothing but two or threePronunciations in the sound of your name?

The Broomway has been dubbed the “deadliest footpath in Britain”, claiming more than a hundred lives. Helen Mark takes a cautious walk along this treacherous Essex seapath with Peter Carr and John Burroughs from the Foulness Island Heritage Centre. She'll hear how people can easily become disoriented on the vast mud flats and tragically caught out by the rapidly advancing tides of the Thames Estuary. Helen will also be joined by Thea Behrman, the director of the Estuary Festival, to reflect on how this meeting point of land and sea can provide creative inspiration through its bleak beauty. Presented by Helen Mark Produced by Robin Markwell

Irish kickboxer Peter Carr makes his second appearance on the podcast, where he bares his soul and gets a lot of things off his chest. Peter opens up to us in-depth about his weed addiction and how it ruined his life and destroyed his relationships with his loved ones, and how he's trying to rebuild himself and reconcile with the people he cares about. This is by far the most open, honest and heartbreaking episode we've ever done on this podcast so far, and we laud Peter for not being afraid to show his vulnerabilities. Some listeners may find this episode distressing, as topics include addiction, mental health and suicidal ideation. We hope yous find this episode educational, as Peter highlights the dark side of smoking joints, which has often been glorified by society and the mainstream media. We also hope this episode wakes people up and make them realise that sessoning and taking drugs isn't fun and games as people are making it out to be. You're not cool or hard smoking joints or sniffing patsy on the weekends. It's one of the worst things you can do to yourself, and it'll leave you in a deep, dark hole that you'll struggle to get out of. We hope Peter's story helps you come to this realisation, and if it can help one person, then that's enough for us. We normally don't do this, but please share this episode around to as many people as possible. The topics that we've discussed in this episode are very serious and need to be addressed and taken seriously, so any shares, words of ear, any way to spread this episode to more people would be greatly appreciated by us.

Many things make legends who they are. It seems the commonality is the ability to perform at a very high level over an extended period of time. Looking at Fischer Black, Peter Carr, Rick Rubin, George Box, Gilbert Strang, and John Nash it is interesting to see so many difference between them yet they have all had significant contributions to their area of expertise. Soft skills seem to play some part of this title of being a legend. There are many people who made one contribution but seem to have faded and forgotten.For quants it seems one must contribute academic ideas as well as have some sort of unique difference that helps others. Peter Carr's legacy seems to be amplified by his generosity of time and ability to teach. I would argue the success of making money contributes very little to being a quant. Investors and traders are very different than quants.Rick Rubin Interview (Joe Rogan):https://open.spotify.com/episode/5oDyN0CFjEwClqjZxJQf9OGilbert Strang Interview (Lex Fridman):https://youtu.be/lEZPfmGCEk0?si=G5K6HpS4LkftujChMIT Course - Gilbert Strang:https://youtu.be/ZK3O402wf1c?si=m8QWrXTeVWVi086GSecurity UnfilteredCyber Security can be a difficult field to not only understand but to also navigate....Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the show

In this episode, we're joined by Irish professional kickboxer, Peter Carr. Peter is fresh from competing in the European Games, in which he told us a story of his fight there. Overall, this episode was simply a yap between 3 youngfellas where we discussed topics such as fighting, friendship, dealing with internet trolls and more.

Being great afficionados of great thinkers who are impossible contradictions, we turn our attention to American founding father Thomas Jefferson: the man who penned the stirring words of the Declaration of Independence that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" ... and yet, in his lifetime, owned over 600 slaves including a (for lack of a better term) concubine, Sally Hemings (who also happened to be his deceased wife's half-sister...!!), manumitted only two of those slaves and none of them his own children by Sally until after his death according to his will, and made at best lackluster gestures toward the injustice of it all, not to mention its moral corruption of slaveholders. In this episode, we try to make sense of this "American sphinx" and especially his revisionist attitude toward Christianity, producing a variation on the faith with no power to set slaves free—or Jefferson himself. Notes: 1. Ellis, American Sphinx 2. Meacham, Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power 3. Jefferson, Writings (Library of America). See in particular the following: Notes on the State of Virginia, 1787 letter to Peter Carr, 1803 letter to Joseph Priestley, 1803 letter to Benjamin Rush, 1813 letter to John Adams, 1816 letter to Charles Thomson, 1819 and 1820 letters to William Short, 1822 letter to Benjamin Waterhouse, 1826 letter to James Heaton. 4. Locke, Second Treatise of Government and Letter concerning Toleration 5. Havel, “The Power of the Powerless” 6. Manseau, The Jefferson Bible Do you rejoice every other Tuesday to see a new Queen of the Sciences episode appear? Then consider supporting us on Patreon. You can start at just $2 a month; more gets you swag. Or just pay us a visit at sarahhinlickywilson.com and paulhinlicky.com!

Peter Carr was a quantitative finance legend. His impact on the industry will not be forgotten through both his research and his personal mentorship to many people including myself.His departure was shocking and unexpected. The short time that I knew Peter was insightful, comforting, and inspirational. Peter took an interest in those around him by giving of his time and expertise. He was a true leader and mentor.I am very grateful to have been able to interview him twice and interact with him through other events and email communication. He will be missed by the industry and especially myself as he was one of the biggest supporters of my YouTube channel.☕ Show Your Support and Buy Me a Coffee ☕https://ko-fi.com/fancyquantSupport the show (https://ko-fi.com/fancyquant)

Il nono episodio introduce importanti funzioni per descrivere una variabile aleatoria, come quella di ripartizione, quella di densità o quella di quantile.Parliamo anche di Valore a Rischio, e chiariamo la differenza tra scenario e previsione.[Episodio dedicato a Peter Carr. Ciao Peter.]

I released a quantitative finance masters ranking for 2022 and found the process very challenging. The goal is to provide transparency to students so they can see how the programs are structured, where they are placing students in the industry, and a view of program rigor. While I have a good grasp on what the industry is looking for and what it is like being a student is one of these programs, I wanted to get some feedback from a program director who understands both the academic side and the industry side.There is no better guest prepared to discuss these topics with than Peter Carr. He has been the head of quant research at Bloomberg, the global head of market modeling at Morgan Stanley, and is currently the department chair of NYU Tandon's Finance and Risk Engineering. He has also had a good impact on the quant industry with his long list of academic papers and contributions to textbooks.Peter Carr:https://engineering.nyu.edu/faculty/peter-carr☕ Show Your Support and Buy Me a Coffee ☕https://ko-fi.com/fancyquantSupport the show (https://ko-fi.com/fancyquant)

After conflict at the new job I have decided to take a break from the banking industry. I will be spending more time on generating content around quant finance and data science. The R video series will get new videos and I will try and add some more traditional finance videos around topics like options, stocks, and bonds. I also feel like no one really understands risk management so I might take that on as well. I need to get this channel off the ground financially so there may be some paid courses coming as well.Silencing your employees especially when they add value is not a good idea. When the next financial crisis occurs it will be no surprise when the quants say, "I have been warning the business but no one was listening."I also have some great guests coming to the podcast. Peter Carr has an episode on quant finance master rankings. I also have two other guests lined up who are from different areas of the industry.☕ Show Your Support and Buy Me a Coffee ☕https://ko-fi.com/fancyquantSupport the show (https://ko-fi.com/fancyquant)

Hockey and self-driving technology intersect when Pittsburgh Penguins data analysts Kat Wu and Nick Citrone sit down with Argo AI's VP of Autonomy, Peter Carr, along with host Alex Roy. Learn how technology and predictive analytics help NHL teams gain a competitive advantage.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For his last selection of a 2021 album, Trevor selects Lucy Dacus' June release titled, "Home Video."  Lucy Dacus has carved a name for herself with her unique songwriting and layered themes. Once a film school student prior to becoming a musician, Lucy has now released three studio albums as well as collaborated with Phoebe Bridgers and Julien Baker to form the supergroup "Boy Genius." This album see's the indie singer-songwriter drawing inspiration from her childhood as well as her teenage years. Many of the songs are inspired by actual diary entries that Lucy found herself re-reading on her first trip back to her hometown of Richmond Virginia. Dacus describes the experience as one in which she no longer recognized her former self, and wondered if her former self would approve of who she has become. This album is definitely raw and exposed like a heart on your sleeve. As Lucy describes in one track on this album, "it's embarrassing, the pulpy thing beating." While that may be the case, it's also relatable and perhaps a necessary checkpoint on the path of an young artist blossoming into a powerful force in the indie-pop genre.    ***Dont forget to check out our featured independent artist and album for this episode, Peter Carr of Wake the Watchman! You can find his music on all major music platforms. Here is a link to his Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/133EaClnGJfbGmcyYQDfac   ________________________________________________________________________________________________ HOW TO CONNECT WITH ALBUM DIVERS: *You can submit your questions or comments about this episode or anything else on your mind here via our text line at: (502) 792-8080 *Leave us an audio message here: https://www.speakpipe.com/AlbumDivers We promise to respond and may even feature your thoughts on a future episode.  *Follow us on Facebook and Instagram at Album Divers *Email us at Albumdiverspodcast@gmail.com *Please subscribe and review wherever you get your podcasts!

Retirees say they've had a gutsful. This is on the back of the Retirement Commissioner saying back in June, that there needs to be an urgent review into the retirement villages act. Research showed low satisfaction around village contracts. Associate Minister for housing Poto Williams says a review was warranted, but may take time. And now it's taking too much time, and the Retirement Village Residents Association has had enough. President Peter Carr joined Kate Hawkesby. LISTEN ABOVE  

It’s a Foodie Friday as Tracy chats with local food influencer Peter Carr of Peter Loves Restaurants. Tracy and Peter chat about the life of a food influencer, how they use social media to find new places to eat, and the benefits of restaurant technology. Thanks for downloading and listening to this episode of Forking […] The post Forking Around Town: Peter Carr of Peter Loves Restaurants appeared first on Radio Influence.

It's a Foodie Friday as Tracy chats with local food influencer Peter Carr of Peter Loves Restaurants. Tracy and Peter chat about the life of a food influencer, how they use social media to find new places to eat, and the benefits of restaurant technology. Thanks for downloading and listening to this episode of Forking […] The post Forking Around Town: Peter Carr of Peter Loves Restaurants appeared first on Radio Influence.

Part 2: A Side of Love and Compassion Rarely Taught in Christianity But it is All Over the Bible Most of Christianity has a one sided or false idea of the love, mercy, and compassion of God. It has been humanistic, far eastern guru mystified, and it lacks any truth or power. Sometimes love can appear to be harsh, unloving, offensive, unyielding, and downright mean. Sometimes it can be deadly! If you don't believe that then you haven't read the Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and the Book of Revelation. In them, you will find Jesus offending many people. In some cases, they were so offended that the hound dogs of religiosity made plans to murder Jesus. Sometimes, they picked up rocks to stone Him, and once they tried to kill Him by pushing Him off a cliff! Jesus threw family members out of a funeral being held for a little girl. He then raised the girl up from the dead. He had to get out the dead heads of religion before raising the little girl up from the dead! He made a whip to drive out all the greedy traders in the Temple courtyard! He began to beat them and turn over their tables! He was all sweet, right? No, Jesus was extremely angry in that case and ready to rumble! He raged violently against the evil He saw in the Temple! If He was some weak and sickly looking man like you see in many depictions of Him, He never would have gotten to the second table before being given a memorable beat down by the money changers and animal sellers! Jesus called religious leaders vipers, children of hell, whited sepulchers, and more harsh things! These were unlovely words, according to the humanistic love many preach and teach. Today, if you say things that don't even approach the intensity or harshness of Jesus' words, many Christians cringe and think you are unloving. They would have hated Jesus when He shifted gears and was tough and intense with His tongue or actions! When Peter tried to rebuke Him, He called Peter Satan! Was that super nice? No, it wasn't, but it was love in action. Did you know that? When most of Jesus' disciples got up and left because His words were too nasty for their religious sensibilities, He turned to the few left and asked them if they wanted to leave too. There was no compromise with Jesus! He loved people by telling them the truth, regardless of what people thought or whether they received it or not. Even when Jesus' own mother and brothers wanted to see Him because they thought He had lost His mind, He refused to see them and rebuked them for not following the Word! Sometimes family needs to be set straight according to the Word when they come knocking at your door with unbelief! None of the above was done in mousey tones of niceness. Some foolishly think that speaking the truth in love should be sweet at all the times. Wrong! It is stinking thinking! The book of Revelation chapters 2 and 3 reveals how love (Jesus) rebuked His churches when they were backsliding or dead! It is not all sugar and spice and everything nice. Read the chapters carefully and allow all the falsehoods you have learned about "love language" and "walking in love" to be flushed out of your system! When the Lord says, "I will fight against you with the sword of my mouth", and "I will kill your followers with death and cast you into a sickbed" that is not the sweet talk of humanistic love! I wonder if His face was smiling and relaxed when He said all that or if there was fire in His eyes and voice? That would have been the wrong time for laughter. There was nothing funny about what He told them! Was Jesus stern and unrelenting? Yes, but then He would call all the kids and lay hands on them and bless them! Tough, stern, AND lovable towards all that came to Him for healing and deliverance. He never turned away the humble that would come to receive! Those whom I [dearly and tenderly] love, I rebuke and discipline [showing them their faults and instructing them]; so be enthusiastic and repent [change your inner self—your old way of thinking, your sinful behavior—seek God's will]. (Revelation 3:19 Amplified Bible) Get your teaching straight. Tender love will rebuke, discipline, show people their faults, instruct people, and call on them to change their sinful behavior! We serve a mighty warrior King who is also Savior, Healer, and Provider. Jesus is the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Revelation 5:5) and we were put into the new creation IN CHRIST (2 Corinthians 5:17) when we surrendered our lives to the Lord Jesus and began living for Him. We are to be lions with Him, and not little weak lambs! To the world, they may consider us as lambs to the slaughter because of the apparently good and fun side to our compassion, but we are to be more than conquerors, real lions! (Romans 8:36, 37) We are not like the false "roaring" lion that is Satan (1 Peter 5:8), but we are of the conquering lions under the Lion of the tribe of Judah that has already overcome! The righteous are bold as a lion! (Proverbs 28:1NKJV) Don't mistake our Christian compassion for the hurting and oppressed as weakness or submission to the enemy. I warn you. If you are sensitive or sissified and the girly beta male type, you will seethe at my comments. You will hate them. They will take away your sleep until you repent and ask for God's help to get you out of your betahood (an original word) and start becoming a real man.  Do you know what I mean when I say betahood (my made-up word) or a girly-beta-male? Let me show you with two pictures that were published on Gab social. These explain it much better than I could. A strong and courageous man compared to a sissified beta male!   No, I do not agree with the lying part, but the point is knowing the difference between real men (minus the lying) and pathetic girly beta males. The bad thought occurs to me from time to time, “Maybe if I slap the crap out of this girly male, maybe “it” will wake up to manhood!" After they cry and roll up in a fetal position on the floor, then you can lay hands on them and cast the devil out of them IF they want help! Then, I would go and wash my hands! Over the years, I've prayed and laid hands on many people to receive healing that had infectious diseases. I've never washed my hands after doing that. I believed the greater One was in me as I prayed, and healing was coming through me. These beta dudes, yuk! Bring on the antibacterial soap! Again, let's settle it. Our compassion is never weak because it can also be like a mama elephant with her babies. Get too close and suddenly, she goes ballistic! Her compassion for her babies will cause her to squash you like a bug to protect her own whether it's a real or perceived threat. It makes no difference. It's clobbering time! It could make you a greasy spot on the ground after you are squashed by the 12-ton mama! The same can be said of a bear and her cubs! There are many mamas like that today. They are full of love and compassion for their offspring, but try and hurt their babies, and the fight to the death is on. Any threat will be met with extreme violence. It should be. As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on his faithful followers. (Psalms 103:13 NET) It's like a father protecting his wife and kids with every instrument available to him, even to the death of his enemies. At least that is how real men of Godly compassion and mercy will react to protect their loved ones, but as we have seen, not all males are real men. If you are a beta, squishy toy, pushover girly-male afraid of your own shadow, then you should not get married or have children unless you change drastically. Could you imagine the travesty of being a beta girly male that looks like the sissified “it” in the pictures above, and they reproduce? Just having sex with a woman and getting her pregnant with a child does not make you a man. Betahood submissiveness to the world, the devil, the baby butchering Demonrats, and to lying MSM, will make your kids three times the wuss that you are. That is truly bad! Boyish sissified males like that are not worthy to have children upon the earth. They will not contribute any good thing to the development of future manhood. They may be males by birth, but they are not real men. They're more worried about using the right pronouns, LGBTQrstuvwxyz garbage rights, BLM, CRT, self-hatred, toxic manhood, compliance, white rage, worship of the garden gnome Fauci, and living in their mama's basement rent free. I have nothing good to say about those evil creatures! These pseudo males are the weakling types that wouldn't say or do anything to the thug trying to feel up his wife on the train, airplane, or bus. Real manhood compassion will violently take out the thug quickly by whatever means necessary. No bones about it. No prayer needed at that point. Not much thinking necessary in that scenario. It would be time to act quickly and decisively, full auto, and no holds barred. The idea is to hurt the perpetrator so badly that he won't be able to get up off the floor! Some may be thinking it right now, “And you call yourself a Christian?” I don't care what you think, I know I am a follower of Jesus. I'm not your traditional Christian that tolerates evil pushed upon my family or children. It would be righteous, and it would be a good thing to defend my woman's honor, and to take a stand against those that would attempt to hurt my kids. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:21 NIV) That verse is immediately found before Romans 13:1, but many never quote it as it was intended, as part of the intro to Romans 13. Chapter or verse divisions were not a part of the original text! For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. (Romans 13:4) Don't be religious and refuse to see another side to this. We are to rule and reign in LIFE now over sin and death, not just in the afterlife! (Romans 5:17; 8:37) We are those in authority over the devil and demon power NOW! (Ephesians 6:12-17, Luke 10:17, Mark 16:17, 18)    It is not only government or police that can carry a sword or gun, in the same way that we are all commanded to overcome evil with good, whether we are government officials, police officers, military, or civilians! I want you to understand that the command to overcome evil with good is for all believers. It follows then that to carry a sword or weapon to overcome evil with good is not only allowed for all believers, but it is also commanded. This is not a stretch except for the religiously brainwashed mind. Carrying the sword (or weapon) is not in vain. People that practice evil should be afraid that we carry a weapon for the sake of good! Its purpose is to do what is right and good against evil. Sometimes a weapon is what stands between you and an evil outcome. So, to use a weapon against evil when evil wants to prevail over good would be proper, good, and righteous. What would compassion do? What would love do? What would mercy do? Compassion would cause a real man to kill an illegal immigrant perv caught raping his 5 y/o daughter! Remember that story in 2021? The man that beat that pervert to death is a national hero, a real treasure, and an awesome example. He should get a medal and his own parenting show! His main topic: "This is what a real man looks like!" You have not seen violence until you see what a real man would do to those attempting to hurt his kids. Never come to a real man's door attempting to force the Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson or other devil pharma death jabs on him or his family. Big and very permanent mistake for the fools that try that. Compassion in a real man would cause him to "dispatch" the vaccine of death totalitarians trying to force themselves on his family. Forcing a jab is tantamount to at least a rape, and at maximum it is committing murder. Frankly, in a scenario where we are forced to get a vaccine, guns may have to come out blazing. Civil war or a revolutionary war could happen in the US if we are forbidden to buy, sell, trade, or travel unless we are vaccinated and show our vaccine passports. That all sounds eerily familiar to the mark of the beast in Revelation 13:16-18, and most churches refuse to see any correlation with what is happening worldwide! Read it because it is coming eventually, and we see overwhelming evidence of its encroachment now. Demons in government in America are starting to push mandatory vaccines. What could happen? The government is playing with the firepower of the American people, and a bloody civil war could happen.I pray that NEVER happens! The truth is that totalitarian thugs will not be able to stop a force of 70 to 80 million strong that rises against them, or the six hundred and fifty million weapons in civilian hands! Totalitarians will wet their pants before their rage and surrender like the cowards they are. We the people will have spoken. We the people are Christians AND non-Christians that are willing to fight for our country and our Constitution. It would be a righteous battle if the necessity ever came for it. We are to control the government according to the Constitution. The government should never control the people. The Constitution is the main governing law of the land. Any law or “mandate” that violates our American constitutional rights should be rejected immediately. Masking, social distancing, the death jabs, vaccine passports, and the rest of the Covid garbage are of the devil and they violate our rights, both human and constitutional! It is mercy and compassion to fight for our constitutional freedoms, even if the day comes to fight to the death of our enemies. Note how I stated that. Never heard of that side of mercy and compassion? Probably not because the Scripture isn't really studied or taught much in most churches. All you hear in most churches are snippets of the Bible here and there, mostly out of context, severely watered down, or twisted to mean something foreign to the Bible! Did you know that when God slaughters or commands the slaughter of the enemies of his real and true people that God is demonstrating everlasting mercy and compassion? Ready to get any religious spirit left in you blown away? To Him Who smote Egypt in their firstborn, for His mercy and loving-kindness endure forever. (Psalms 136:10 AMP) The slaughter of all the Egyptian firstborn was an act of God's eternal or everlasting mercy and "loving" kindness! Was God having the firstborn slaughtered show His love? Man, that is hard to swallow if you look at this religiously and watered down by Sunday school at most churches! Yes, it showed to what extent God (who is love, the merciful God) was willing to go to deliver His people. Love allowed the slaughter of the firstborn to get freedom for His family. Let that sink in. Let it refresh and empower you today. That is the real true God that we serve! He will fight for us and with us to deadly force if necessary! What else did the God who is love and is merciful do as a demonstration of His eternal kindness? But shook off and overthrew Pharaoh and his host into the Red Sea, for His mercy and loving-kindness endure forever. (Psalms 136:15 AMP) God's love, mercy, and kindness caused Him to drown the enemies of His people in the Red Sea! Death by drowning the enemies of His people was a manifestation of love, mercy, kindness, and just good ole compassion! My God! More mercy? To Him Who smote great kings, for His mercy and loving-kindness endure forever; and slew famous kings, for His mercy and loving-kindness endure forever. (Psalms 136:17, 18 AMP) God smiting to the death famous and great kings because of His love, mercy, kindness, or to use another word, because of His wonderful compassion, is an awesome Word we need today. In your great kindness towards all true believers God, I ask you that our evil dictatorial governmental enemies would be slaughtered. May they be struck down with death and/or drowned in the sea. Lord fight against those who fight with us and may they be subjected to affliction or trouble from every side! (Psalms 35:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:6) That is a good prayer! I am praying according to the Scripture we quoted above and according to the 2 verses in parenthesis, so don't get offended. Have you ever prayed like that? If you don't pray that way, you should! Here is something else that should be understood. God also smote or slew the following kings mentioned by name: Sihon king of the Amorites, for His mercy and loving-kindness endure forever; and Og king of Bashan, for His mercy and loving-kindness endure forever. (Psalms 136:19, 20 AMP) The context is clear. God slew the kings Sihon and Og, but read the stories in the book of Numbers and note how God used His people to do the slaying. God often uses and backs His own people to fight a battle and kill their enemies. That is also a demonstration of God's love, mercy, kindness, and compassion as He gives His people the victory over the enemy. Diplomacy was applied first. When diplomacy failed, then the sword was unremittingly enforced. But Sihon would not allow Israel to pass through his border. Instead Sihon gathered all his people together and went out against Israel into the wilderness, and came to Jahaz, and he fought against Israel. (Numbers 21:23 AMP) Big mistake! And Israel smote the king of the Amorites with the edge of the sword and possessed his land from the river Arnon to the river Jabbok, as far as the Ammonites, for the boundary of the Ammonites was strong. (Numbers 21:24 AMP) Psalms 136:19 tells us it was God's love, mercy, and kindness that did it, and notice that God did it through the armed battalions of His people! Weep all you gutless Christians! Your misunderstanding of the love of God is profound. What about the slaying of King Og as an act of mercy, love, and kindness in Psalms 136:20? Then they turned and went up by the way of Bashan; and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he and all his people, to battle at Edrei. But the Lord said to Moses, Do not fear him, for I have delivered him and all his people and his land into your hand; and you shall do to him as you did to Sihon king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon. So the Israelites slew Og and his sons and all his people until there was not one left alive, And they possessed his land. (Numbers 21:31-35 AMP) Not one of Og and his people were left alive, and Psalms 136:20 calls this a love victory! It was a lovefest, a compassion event, a kindness "concert" to kill them all because God gave His people the strength and ability to destroy their enemies. Space will not allow me to also look at Samson, David, Gideon, and a bunch of others that were empowered by God's love and compassion to annihilate their enemies. Has God changed? Has He stopped giving His people power and dominion over their enemies in His love, mercy, kindness, and compassion? Of course not. I am the Lord. I do not change. (Malachi 3:6 ICB) God doesn't change, and neither does the Lord Jesus! Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. (Hebrews 13:8 NIV) Look at these verses to finish this section: Psalm 18:32-42 (NKJV): 32 It is God who arms me with strength, and makes my way perfect. 33 He makes my feet like the feet of deer, and sets me on my high places. 34 He teaches my hands to make war, so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze. 35 You have also given me the shield of Your salvation; Your right hand has held me up, Your gentleness has made me great. 36 You enlarged my path under me, So my feet did not slip. 37 I have pursued my enemies and overtaken them; Neither did I turn back again till they were destroyed. 38 I have wounded them, So that they could not rise; They have fallen under my feet. 39 For You have armed me with strength for the battle; You have subdued under me those who rose up against me. 40 You have also given me the necks of my enemies, So that I destroyed those who hated me. 41 They cried out, but there was none to save; Even to the Lord, but He did not answer them. 42 Then I beat them as fine as the dust before the wind; I cast them out like dirt in the streets. That, my brother and sister are right thoughts and correct attitudes. It is the right way to trust and believe God, and if you hook in Psalms 91, you have a perfect portrait! It worked for David against the lion, bear, Goliath, and all of David's enemies. David was a very important ancestor of Jesus. Jesus was called the seed or descendant of David, and the son of David! (John 7:42, Romans 1:3, 2 Timothy 2:8) If Jesus is my brother (Hebrews 2:11), then David is my great great, great, great, great, (and many more “greats”), my grandpa! I will emulate him as well! Psalm 144:1: Praise the LORD, who is my rock. He trains my hands for war and gives my fingers skill for battle. 2 Samuel 22:35: He trains my hands for war, so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze. Can you see that these are not isolated verses, but the clear teaching of Scripture? Psalm 44:6-7: I put no trust in my bow, my sword does not bring me victory; but you give us victory over our enemies, you put our adversaries to shame. Putting your trust in weapons is foolish at best. Weapons can fail, but God NEVER fails! Yet, that does not mean we don't own weapons and train, train, and then train some more. The victory comes from the Lord, and that is where we lay our trust.  Though I point these things out, don't think I am a violent person. I am far from it, and anybody that knows me knows I love peace and peaceful resolutions. Let me bring the truth of the matter out clearly once more. I am totally against violence. I believe in going low, keeping my mouth shut when necessary, and I am a firm believer in deescalation when confronted with someone expecting a fight. I am a peacemaker. I hate fights and I hate violence. Violence is the LAST thing on my map. If I have to fight, I have already failed at de-escalation, diplomacy, and communication. There has never been a greater truth than to harden yourself with training and learn to fight and defeat an enemy so that you never have to fight! It is a deterrent. So many years have passed since I first began training in martial arts. I still train, just to a lesser degree. In all those years, I only used my training a few times, and never because I instigated the violence. I did know how to stop the violence. Thank God! I never look for fights and I don't instigate violence. I have learned the "martial" art of talking my way out of potentially violent encounters. That has served me much better than my fists or a firearm. Just a note for those that may want to misinterpret my words in this article and push violent actions,  and use me as an excuse. Having to resort to violence is a terrible thing. Never forget it, but also let us never forget our responsibilities and our duty to stand firm for the truth. Patriotic Quotes from America's Godly Founding Fathers Let me give you some patriotic quotes from some of America's godly founding fathers. Take them to heart. They are extremely relevant today in the mess we are facing in America with totalitarian and dictatorial rulers and their cronies. Most of these quotes are in their original form so spelling differences will be noticed. Some words were spelled differently back then. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams That is important info for several reasons. Most of the founding fathers of America were deeply religious, and several of them were Christian ministers. Following, notice how these godly men refer to the use of weapons and what they thought concerning the right to bear arms as ratified in the Second Amendment. Note how they were vehemently against disarming the people as other countries had done.   "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book, quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1774-1776 "Thus the peaceable part of mankind will be continually overrun by the vile and abandoned, while they neglect the means of self-defense. The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves." Thomas Paine, "Thoughts on Defensive War" in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775 That entire article should be read. Thomas Paine hits the nail on the head against all pacifism as was practiced by the religious Quakers. He said that Satan and evil people were still on the loose on the planet and we must take up self-defense. I really like it when he says this: “I am thus far a Quaker, that I would gladly agree with all the world to lay aside the use of arms, and settle matters by negotiation; but unless the whole will, the matter ends, and I take up my musket and thank heaven he (God) has put it in my power.” Do you understand? We want peaceful relations, but when that fails, we have weapons to defend ourselves! Read the updated article here: https://selfeducatedamerican.com/2013/09/26/thoughts-on-defensive-war-by-thomas-paine  You can also read the original autograph, but you must scroll down to section XII where the essay is found. http://thomaspainefoundation.com/the-writings-of-thomas-paine-vol-i.html "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776 “This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy." Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778 “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun." Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778 I really enjoy reading the words of Thomas Jefferson. "Give about two of them every day to exercise; for health must not be sacrificed to learning. A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks. Never think of taking a book with you. The object of walking is to relax the mind. You should therefore not permit yourself even to think while you walk. But divert your attention by the objects surrounding you. Walking is the best possible exercise. Habituate yourself to walk very far. "Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785 See it here: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-08-02-0319) "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, son-in-law of John Adams, December 20, 1787 "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787 "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair." Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, December 26, 1787 This is exactly what is happening today with the Covid impositions and mandates. Government has betrayed the constituents. We are coming to the point where these usurpers, if they don't back down, we may have to rise and take up arms to defend ourselves. These are not my words, and truthfully, I hope it NEVER comes to that. I am telling you what our godly founding fathers thought about the betrayers in government that are drunk with power over the people. "To disarm the people... is the most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788 Do you see why the Democrat evil dictators want to disarm the public? They want to enslave the American people! Let us never give up our 650 million guns presently in the hands of the civilian population! "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of." James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788 "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed ― unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (The Federalist, No. 46 at 243- 244) "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation.... Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (The Federalist, No. 46) "It is not certain that with this aid alone [possession of arms], they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to posses the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will, and direct the national force; and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned, in spite of the legions which surround it." (The Federalist, No. 46) Federalist No. 46 was from January 29, 1788. Link: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0261 “A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. XVIII, January 25, 1788 Here is the link to this Federal Farmer essay thought to be written by Richard Henry Lee: https://leefamilyarchive.org/papers/essays/fedfarmer/18.html "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788 "If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens-This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army; the best possible security against it, if it should exist." Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 29, January 10, 1788 Go here to read Federalist No. 29: https://www.consource.org/document/the-federalist-no-29-1788-1-9/ "I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788 "The right of the people to keep and bear...arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country...." (James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 [June 8, 1789]) "What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789 "As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 Here it is: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-12-02-0144 "A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined." George Washington, First Annual Address, January 8, 1790 This next one will get you in the gut. It did me. “Our cause is just. Our union is perfect. Our internal resources are great, and, if necessary, foreign assistance is undoubtedly attainable. –We gratefully acknowledge, as signal instances of the Divine favour towards us, that his Providence would not permit us to be called into this severe controversy, until we were grown up to our present strength, had been previously exercised in warlike operation, and possessed of the means of defending ourselves. With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we most solemnly, before God and the world, declare, that, exerting the utmost energy of those powers, which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverence, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live slaves. In our own native land, in defence of the freedom that is our birthright, and which we ever enjoyed till the late violation of it – for the protection of our property, acquired solely by the honest industry of our fore-fathers and ourselves, against violence actually offered, we have taken up arms. We shall lay them down when hostilities shall cease on the part of the aggressors, and all danger of their being renewed shall be removed, and not before.” Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms. A declaration by the representatives of the united colonies of north America, now met in congress at Philadelphia, setting forth the causes and necessity of their taking up arms-July 6, 1775 Listen up all you tyrannical government players, from top to bottom! Those oppressive forces today against the citizens of the USA are found in you! You don't want these covid crap impositions, mandates, and forced vaccinations and passports to devolve into a 1776 style war of independence, do you? Do you have the stomach for it? Nobody with any gray matter between their ears wants war, but we may have to defend our freedoms if they come to forcibly take them away.  France is already at the point of a revolution. It's coming to Australia quickly and it's getting hot in other countries. Government officials, is that where you want for America? I certainly don't want it to go there, but there comes a time when there is no other choice but to fight for our Constitutional freedoms. The tipping point has already passed, and the population is agitated by the covid scamdemic, open borders, leaving Americans to be murdered in Afghanistan, abandoning over 85 billion dollars' worth of military equipment for our enemies, and the severe incompetence of all Demonrat and most Republican government politicians.     "The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824 "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833 Amen to all that! Let us pray that we can diplomatically, spiritually, judicially, and by our vote stop the tyranny being imposed by the Biden Administration. Civil disobedience and totally non-compliance need to run its full course before any other actions could even be considered as plausible. There is long way to go before civil disobedience turns into a civil war. We are far behind France and other countries in the protests. There is a lot of work to do, and we have to do it.     

45,000 New Zealanders live in retirement villages but they have less protection than tenants in the private rental market, according to a report by the Retirement Commissioner, Jane Wrightson. She's calling for an urgent government review saying the laws and regulations covering the growing sector are not fit for purpose. Among the issues identified in the Retirement Commission's report are contracts containing unfair terms, problems with the resale process, weekly fees charged after a resident vacates a unit, an overly complicated complaints system and confusing documentation. Kathryn speaks with Jane Wrightson and Peter Carr, President of the Retirement Village Residents Association.

Retirement village residents have overwhelmingly told the Retirement Commissioner they want a review of the laws governing the sector. The Commissioner Jane Wrightson is recommending the government urgently review the regulations, saying they risk becoming outdated and unable to protect consumers. The call comes after a review of submissions on her white paper released late last year proposing the move. Peter Carr is the president of the Retirement Villages Residents Association and says the rules are biased - favouring the operators - and in dire need of a shake up.

Our Retirement Commissioner Jane Wrightson says it's time for an urgent review into retirement village legislation.Wrightson says she doesn't believe the 20 year old framework strikes a fair balance between operator and consumer.The recommendations range from changing the resale process, to fixing an overly complicated complaints system.Peter Carr, the president of the Retirement Village Resident's Association, who represent the residents, told Kate Hawkesby at the stage of life many residents are at, the current processes are too much to handle.“We're talking about people in their early eighties, many of them single ladies, who have to, if they complain, go through a laborious process and at that stage of life, they don't want the pressure of involving, if necessary legal people for support which cost money."LISTEN ABOVE 

Retirement village residents have overwhelmingly told the Retirement Commissioner they want a review of the laws governing the sector. The Commissioner Jane Wrightson is recommending the government urgently review the regulations, saying they risk becoming outdated and unable to protect consumers. The call comes after a review of submissions on her white paper released late last year proposing the move. Peter Carr is the president of the Retirement Villages Residents Association and says the rules are biased - favouring the operators - and in dire need of a shake up.

45,000 New Zealanders live in retirement villages but they have less protection than tenants in the private rental market, according to a report by the Retirement Commissioner, Jane Wrightson. She's calling for an urgent government review saying the laws and regulations covering the growing sector are not fit for purpose. Among the issues identified in the Retirement Commission's report are contracts containing unfair terms, problems with the resale process, weekly fees charged after a resident vacates a unit, an overly complicated complaints system and confusing documentation. Kathryn speaks with Jane Wrightson and Peter Carr, President of the Retirement Village Residents Association.

Host: Dawn Berndt, DNP, RN, CRNI® – INS Clinical Education & Publications Manager Guests: • Nancy L. Moureau PhD, RN, CRNI®, CPUI, VA-BC • Dennis J. Ernst, MT(ASCP), NCPT(NCCT) • Peter J. Carr PhD, MMedSc, BSc, RN The use of vascular visualization technology is recommended to increase insertion success of the most appropriate vessel while reducing insertion-related complications, thereby promoting vessel health and preserving the patient's vasculature. In this episode of INS Infusion Room, leading experts Nancy Moureau, Dennis Ernst, and Peter Carr discuss the significance of vessel preservation, vascular visualization, and practice and educational goals that will improve patient outcomes.  Resources: INS Virtual Infusion Education Promoting Vessel Health and Preservation Through Vein Visualization June 29 & 30, 2021             Register here: https://www.learningcenter.ins1.org/2021JuneVirtual Moureau NL. The VHP model. In: Moureau NL, ed. Vessel Health and Preservation: The Right Approach for Vascular Access[Open Access]. Springer, Cham; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03149-7_1 Vessel Health and Preservation: The Right Approach for Vascular Access(available for Kindle through Amazon at no charge): https://amzn.to/37vTN8D

In this episode of INS Infusion Room, leading experts Nancy Moureau, Dennis Ernst, and Peter Carr discuss the significance of vessel preservation, vascular visualization, and practice and educational goals that will improve patient outcomes.

Clay Jenkinson is joined this week by author Joseph Ellis for a lively discussion about popular American conspiracy theories and gun rights in America. In 1785, Thomas Jefferson wrote to his fifteen-year-old nephew, Peter Carr, about what he considered the best form of exercise, "I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind." Jefferson also advocated for some gun regulation, barring "pistoling" from the University of Virginia campus. Read about Clay's upcoming online courses here: https://jeffersonhour.com/onlinecourse Find this episode, along with recommended reading, on the blog. Support the show by joining the 1776 Club or by donating to the Thomas Jefferson Hour, Inc. You can learn more about Clay's cultural tours and retreats at jeffersonhour.com/tours. Check out our new merch. You can find Clay's publications on our website, along with a list of his favorite books on Jefferson, Lewis and Clark, and other topics. Thomas Jefferson is interpreted by Clay S. Jenkinson.

Conversation with my good friend Peter Carr a long-time entrepreneur in the Angolan market.  Please listen in because you will leave the conversation knowing much more about the wonderful country of Angola.

Editor-in-Chief of Sporting Rifle, Peter Carr, comes back on the show to talk about his life, transitioning from skipper to gamekeeper to journalist, and now international conservationist. From the British countryside to the illegal wildlife trade, it's a ranging, intriguing conservation. Support the podcast: www.patreon.com/byronpace Podcast partner: www.modernhuntsman.com More info: www.byronpace.com

I'm excited to have Dr. Peter Carr as a guest on the podcast. We sit down and discuss his career coming from academia to transitioning into the new field of quantitative finance and how he ended back in academia. We discuss the competition for quant talent as well as how MBA programs are in a bad situation with application numbers plummeting and how finance has split into two parts. We also discuss the question that many students have which is, "what goes into the application review process?"Support the show (https://ko-fi.com/fancyquant)

How do self-driving cars recognize cyclists, pedestrians, and other vulnerable road users? How do they all interact on real-life city roads? Megan checks in with Argo AI's Peter Carr to learn how the autonomous technology actually works.  Find more at noparkingpodcast.com. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We had a great chat with Peter and covered his life evolution from school through the working world to where he is now. We discussed some of the sensitive issues revolving around big game hunting in Africa and how these are directly linked to the many ongoing conservation efforts there. We ask him about his game eating preferences and whether he can cook. Listen to the podcast to find out more!

It's Part One of the Vein of Contention episode of the ISAVE That Podcast! On Season 2, Episode 10, sponsored by Velano Vascular, Dr. Jack LeDonne leads a panel of experts in answering tough questions on PIV placement and more. Here's the plan:0:00-0:27 A word from Episode 10 sponsor Velano Vascular.0:40-3:43 Ramzy Nasrallah and Dr. LeDonne provide a quick intro to the episode and its genesis. Why are we here?3:44-4:29 Another message from Episode 10 sponsor Velano Vascular.4:30-41:21 We welcome our panel of experts into the conversation: Jocelyn Hill, MN, RN, CVAA(c), Jon Bell, RN, MSN, VA-BC™, Sheila Hale, RN, MSN, CRNI®, VA-BC™, Judy Thompson, MSNEd., RN, VA-BC™, Peter Carr, PhD, MMedSc, BSc, H Dip A&E Nurs, Dip HE Nurs, and Nicole Marsh, BN join to dissect the intricacies of this subject.45:22-46:46 Upcoming AVA network events.Support the show (https://www.avainfo.org/donations/donate.asp?id=12834)

Season 2, Episode 9 of the ISAVE That Podcast sponsored by Adhezion Biomedical features takes us into the heart of summer with a pair of informative conversations! Here's the plan:0:00-0:26 A word from Episode 9 sponsor Adhezion Biomedical.0:40-2:34 Eric and Ramzy provide a quick introduction to the episode – we can't believe it's already Episode 9 of the season!2:39-3:21 Another message from Episode 9 sponsor Adhezion Biomedical.3:30-17:15 A conversation with self-proclaimed "glue addict" Rebecca Stevens, RN, BSN, VA-BC™ about how she came to know tissue adhesive and how she uses it in her career.17:24-43:51 VHP Chapter 5: Peter Carr, PhD; MMedSc; BSc; H Dip A&E Nurs; Dip HE Nurs joins the show to discuss his involvement in Vessel Health and Preservation: The Right Approach for Vascular Access.44:00-45:38 Upcoming AVA network events.Support the show (https://www.avainfo.org/donations/donate.asp?id=12834)

@RealDonaldTrump facing more battles ahead as Dems outraged over #MuellerReport before its release #MAGAFirstNews with @PeterBoykin OUTRAGE BREWS OVER MUELLER REPORT BREWS BEFORE ITS RELEASE: Amid high anticipation, the Justice Department on Thursday is expected to release a redacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials, and Democrats have already cried foul ... Attorney General William Barr is set to hold a 9:30 a.m. ET news conference, accompanied by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversaw the Mueller investigation after the special counsel's appointment in May 2017. Neither Mueller nor other members of his team will attend, according to special counsel spokesman Peter Carr. Congressional Democrats have criticized the timing of the news conference, accusing Barr of trying to spin the report and conducting a media campaign on behalf of Trump before Congress and the public see it. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the panel was expected to receive a copy of the report between 11 a.m. and noon. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tweeted that Barr "has thrown out his credibility & the DOJ’s independence with his single-minded effort to protect @realDonaldTrump above all else. The American people deserve the truth, not a sanitized version of the Mueller Report approved by the Trump Admin." TRUMP SEEKS VINDICATION, BUT FIGHT OVER MUELLER REPORT ONLY BEGINNING: Although Attorney General Barr has already revealed that Mueller's report absolved the Trump team of illegally colluding with Russia, Democrats have signaled that the release will be just the beginning of a no-holds-barred showdown with the Trump administration over the extent of report redactions, as well as whether the president obstructed justice during the Russia investigation ... Trump’s legal team is preparing to issue a comprehensive rebuttal report on Thursday, to challenge any allegations of obstruction against the president, Fox News has learned. The lawyers originally laid out their rebuttal in response to written questions asked by Mueller’s team of the president last year, according to a source close to Trump's legal team. Karl Rove: Months of Democrats demanding redacted Mueller report ahead 60 PEOPLE CHARGED IN OPIOID STING: Federal authorities said Wednesday they have charged 60 people, including a doctor accused of trading drugs for sex and another of prescribing to his Facebook friends, for their roles in illegally prescribing and distributing millions of pills containing opioids and other drugs ... U.S. Attorney Benjamin Glassman of Cincinnati described the action, with 31 doctors facing charges, as the biggest known takedown yet of drug prescribers. Robert Duncan, U.S. attorney for eastern Kentucky, called the doctors involved "white-coated drug dealers." Authorities said the 60 includes 53 medical professionals tied to some 350,000 prescriptions and 32 million pills. The operation was conducted by the federal Appalachian Regional Prescription Opioid Strike Force, launched last year by the Trump administration. - The Associated Press NORTH KOREA TEST-FIRES TACTICAL WEAPON: North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un on Wednesday watched as his country test-fired a new tactical guided weapon, state-run media reported ... The Academy of Defense Science launched the weapon, The Associated Press reported, citing the Korean Central News Agency. The rogue regime’s leader reportedly spoke about the implication of the test-fire, saying that “the development of the weapon system serves as an event of very weighty significance in increasing the combat power of the People's Army." DEMS AVOIDING REP. OMAR? - It appears some Democrats may already perceive controversial freshman lawmaker Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., as potentially toxic to their careers ... At least two Democrats have reimbursed the campaign contributions made by Omar, who has been at the center of numerous controversies since she was sworn in last January. North Carolina’s 9th congressional district candidate Dan McCready refunded $2,000 to Omar in March after she donated to his campaign last November ahead of the 2018 midterms, WSOC reported Wednesday. A spokesman for McCready told the news station he'd refunded Omar’s contribution because “he believes there is no place for divisiveness in politics, and McCready did not feel it is appropriate to accept the donation.” A winner still has not been declared in the 9th congressional district race, which became ensnared in accusations of absentee ballot fraud after Election Day. Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., also rejected Omar’s $2,000 donation that was made March 27.

In this episode I talk to Dr.Peter Carr about social media and its impact on our personal freedom and democracy. The episode answers many questions including: If social media is being used for repression? Whether social media has led to a general state of apathy? What is social media's role in promoting radicalism?   Dr. Carr is a Lecturer in the Department of Managements Sciences, and the Program Director for 3 certificate programs at the University of Waterloo. His research interests focus on the use of technology in business and society and include technology entrepreneurship,  the use of social media to improve business operations, technology in third world development, and  the social impact of information technology.    To share your ideas & feedback, follow the facebook page for the podcast : Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/Something-About-Everything-252540085473157/?modal=admin_todo_tour

In this episode I talk to Dr.Peter Carr about social media and its impact on our personal freedom and democracy. The episode answers many questions including: If social media is being used for repression? Whether social media has led to a general state of apathy? What is social media's role in promoting radicalism?   Dr. Carr is a Lecturer in the Department of Managements Sciences, and the Program Director for 3 certificate programs at the University of Waterloo. His research interests focus on the use of technology in business and society and include technology entrepreneurship,  the use of social media to improve business operations, technology in third world development, and  the social impact of information technology.    To share your ideas & feedback, follow the facebook page for the podcast : Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/Something-About-Everything-252540085473157/?modal=admin_todo_tour

UPDATE: On the evening Friday January 18th, after production of this episode of Amicus had wrapped, special counsel spokesman Peter Carr issued the following statement: "BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate.” Ben Smith, editor-in-chief of Buzzfeed News says the publication stands by its reporting.Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent specializing in counterintelligence investigations and now a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Together, they unpack the counterintelligence angle of the Mueller probe.Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com.Podcast production by Sara Burningham.This episode is brought to you by the following advertisers: Simplisafe, start protecting your home today at simplisafe.com/AMICUS.The Great Courses Plus, for 50% off your first three months, go to thegreatcoursesplus.com/AMICUS. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

UPDATE: On the evening Friday January 18th, after production of this episode of Amicus had wrapped, special counsel spokesman Peter Carr issued the following statement: "BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate.” Ben Smith, editor-in-chief of Buzzfeed News says the publication stands by its reporting.Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent specializing in counterintelligence investigations and now a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Together, they unpack the counterintelligence angle of the Mueller probe.Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com.Podcast production by Sara Burningham.This episode is brought to you by the following advertisers: Simplisafe, start protecting your home today at simplisafe.com/AMICUS.The Great Courses Plus, for 50% off your first three months, go to thegreatcoursesplus.com/AMICUS. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

UPDATE: On the evening Friday January 18th, after production of this episode of Amicus had wrapped, special counsel spokesman Peter Carr issued the following statement: "BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate.” Ben Smith, editor-in-chief of Buzzfeed News says the publication stands by its reporting. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent specializing in counterintelligence investigations and now a senior lecturer at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Together, they unpack the counterintelligence angle of the Mueller probe. Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com. Podcast production by Sara Burningham. This episode is brought to you by the following advertisers: Simplisafe, start protecting your home today at simplisafe.com/AMICUS. The Great Courses Plus, for 50% off your first three months, go to thegreatcoursesplus.com/AMICUS. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

UPDATE: On the evening Friday January 18th, after production of this episode of Amicus had wrapped, special counsel spokesman Peter Carr issued the following statement: "BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate.” Ben Smith, editor-in-chief of Buzzfeed News says the publication stands by its reporting. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent specializing in counterintelligence investigations and now a senior lecturer at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs. Together, they unpack the counterintelligence angle of the Mueller probe. Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com. Podcast production by Sara Burningham. This episode is brought to you by the following advertisers: Simplisafe, start protecting your home today at simplisafe.com/AMICUS. The Great Courses Plus, for 50% off your first three months, go to thegreatcoursesplus.com/AMICUS. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jam packed with goodness we start this weeks show by speaking with Alex Stoddart, director of SACS, explaining exactly what you need to know about with regard to the new air gun licensing in Scotland. We announce the winners of last weeks competition, give you a chance win some Caldwell ear defenders, and take you to the Northern Shooting show for an informative debate between Firearms UK, the Scottish Association for Country Sports, Sporting Rifle editor Peter Carr, and Roger Lait - HFT Masters organiser. We cover everything from conservation to gun laws, section 81 of the Policing and Crimes bill, trophy hunting and the behavior of shooters. Lots to learn from. Thanks for listening.   Contact the show podcast@paceproductionsuk.com www.thepacebrothers.com  Download now on Itunes,Soundcloud,Youtube,TuneIn,Stitcher   Brought to you by Scottish Association for Country Sports - SACS