Stand Your Moral High Ground

A few days ago, I received an e-mail from a former student; a Christian man, a patriot and a defender of freedom in the US Military. He wanted me to comment on an article he had just discovered in the Huffington Post written by Mr. Wallis of the Sojourners, entitled “Stand your Ground has no Moral Ground”. As a believer in our country’s moral high ground and the inalienable right to self- defense, my student seemed to be concerned. I understand why.

Huffington Post Article: Stand Your Ground Has No Moral Ground

To say the least I am once again disappointed that there are individuals who choose to be influenced by ignorant writing such as the aforementioned article, and that such poorly written fodder can find its way into the mainstream media and hailed by those who apparently cannot think or discern for themselves.

The truth is, that I could pull apart The Huffington Post’s piece from beginning to end; from its inaccuracies and ignorance of the Law, to the case facts and, more importantly to the word of God. As a Christian and a Patriot, my motivation herein is not to abase the man, but to abase the words. There is both life and death in words, causing us to easily condone or condemn, especially when it comes to our National morality.

The author is known as an “Evangelical Leftist” and is an advisor to President Obama. His argument simply follows the rhetoric of a clearly biased agenda, based on his politics. The thoughts and critique conveyed in his argument are certainly not faith based, nor are they Biblically based. This is nothing more than another attempt to pollute the thoughts of society with anti-gun dogma and irrelevant unverifiable information. We are two individuals offering opposing arguments; the difference is that his is based on opinion and mine is based on a fundamental right which is older than this country.

When citing the Bible one cannot interpret it to justify one’s own opinions through omission and selection. Sadly it has become common practice to take the Bible out of context. Mr. Wallis’s article is merely just another example of this. He claims that the two isolated cases of Zimmerman and Dunn “highlight a major Theological problem” with Stand Your Ground laws (SYG). Really? I find this statement both arrogant and ignorant aside from the fact that neither of these cases validates his hypothesis which calls for the repeal of SYG. Mainstream media have over-sensationalized these two cases, causing them to inaccurately represent SYG laws. The judges in both cases routinely educated the jury members on the law of the land, as per their mandate. That is extent of the involvement of SYG.

Mr. Wallis sites Romans Chapter 13 selectively to support his narrative. The Apostle Paul clearly states in Romans: 13 1-7 that the civil government exists to enforce good conduct among its citizenry. Furthermore, we must abide by the law of the land and be willing to “bear the sword” and reap the consequences {execution of wrath} thereof if we do not. “We must obey the law just as much to avoid the wrath, as we do for conscience sake.” No one can argue that the authorities set by God are intended for good, but Mr. Wallis would have us believe that our society is intended to be a candy coated, peaceful, co-existing environment where harshness and trials do not exist. This is idyllic to say the least and not based in Theology whatsoever. The basis of Theology is not “tip-toeing through the tulips” where the “common good” outweighs righteousness. To simply disabuse anyone of this illusion: the Bible plainly says;

“…the Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force…”-Matthew 11:12.

As TRUE Christians we are called to be aggressive in our faith, belief and practice thereof, every day and with everything we stand for. We are called to be true to our convictions, and to not conform to cultural mores. We are called to stand against the willingness to modify our convictions. We must not be influenced by the demands of “social change”. In fact, we should unequivocally become more vehement in protecting and upholding our moral and ethical high ground when it is threatened. Make no mistake; I am not endorsing violent behavior in the cities and the streets, but we must absolutely maintain our moral high ground when our belief system and our way of life are attacked. I do not agree with the manner in which Mr. Wallis portrays Christianity in this article. Suffice it to say, abundant Biblical references exist which support our obligation we have to God to preserve our bodies, life, and the lives of those who are threatened with harm. Readers do not be fooled with mild tempered faith; God requires Christians to be unwavering in our belief lest He spew us out of His mouth;

“So then because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth”-Revelation 3:16

According to Mr. Wallis,

“The Stand Your Ground laws are based on fear — fear that is often rooted in racism. Rather than promoting a vision of the common good and what our life together should look like, it justifies taking life and codifies fear.”

What was that Mr. Wallis?

First, it is true that Stand your Ground Law codifies fear, as it should. However, Mr. Wallis’s interpretation of that fear is incorrect. SYG empowers us by relinquishing fear from the individual and subsequently imposing it on the potential criminals. Why is that so controversial? Surely a deterrent such as the threat of death should be enough to discourage criminals from breaching the law or threatening the lives of others. With all acts of violence or aggravated criminal behavior, there is the very likely threat of death, whether it is that of the aggressor or of the defender. One is right and one is not. We must also acknowledge that the involved parties are on opposite ends of the moral spectrum, and almost always, aggressors have advantages over the victims; namely the element of surprise, different weapons, multiple cohorts, disregard for the law, and the key element of willingness to inflict harm -which when mixed with intoxicating substances, is a lethal combination.

Since the implementation of SYG in Florida, to use Wallis’s example State, the FBI statistics reflect a significant rise in justifiable homicides from 13.2 between 2001-2005 to 42 between 2006-2012.The numbers speak for themselves; the SYG law is indeed working. Aren’t justifiable homicides far better than unjustified?

The very laws that we are supposed to obey are those that declared these acts justified. The correlation is evident:

Justification by definition is the action of proving something to be right or reasonable: a defendable, righteous act of a person, or conduct morally right or virtuous. Then surely isn’t it infinitely better that those who are on the moral high ground be those that prevail? I would certainly not want it any other way. I would absolutely prefer that fewer people lose their lives, but I want to see criminals clearly understand the severity of their actions and choose to correct their course.

Stand your Ground “Rooted in Racism”?

How can the nature of SYG be rooted in racism when the very premise is to enable ALL individuals, regardless of race, the right to protect themselves and safeguard against harm? The two cases sourced for Wallis’s argument are neither relevant nor applicable here. To re-iterate, the SYG justification was never used by the Zimmerman or Dunn defense teams, and they were both tried and judged by a jury of their peers, represented by an attorney in a court of law according to their individual merit, and under the authority of Constitution of the United States.

The fact remains that murder has no moral ground whatsoever. But what we are talking about here is not murder, Mr. Wallis, it is self-defense. And if I or my family is threatened with imminent danger, bodily harm, or death, I can justifiably contend that I stand ready to defend myself and my family with deadly force. The race of the perpetrator is absolutely irrelevant. In the face of danger, I am no less colorblind than when I am not threatened. Surely Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. believed the same when he was willing to exercise deadly force when he and his family were threatened with harm. He was known to have an arsenal of weapons and he even applied for a concealed carry permit. As an individual exercising his Civil liberties in a place where he was “lawfully allowed to be”, was Dr. King different from you or me exercising ours?

“The problem is the systemic injustice inherent in Stand Your Ground laws: just feeling like you are being threatened can justify your response in “self-defense.””-Wallis

I don’t know about you, readers, but I believe that statement is a blatant insult to our criminal justice system. Are our Judges and Jury members and the constituents of the SYG States so inept and lacking in their discernment and reason to implement a law that allows justification of action through emotion? No! This is obviously not the core purpose of Stand Your Ground laws! Any individual of a moral high ground and basic IQ can discern this. The Reasonable Man Standard is exactly that; the Standard, and if we continue to distort the moral fiber of our society by allowing our religious leaders to corrupt our Biblical instructions to fit the mold of any agenda, we will continue to distort what is earnestly reasonable, making it more difficult to discern the righteous from the simply confused. The Stand your Ground Laws are, in essence, Civil Rights Laws: they protect and empower law abiding Citizens against the un-abiding ones, without regard to race or ethnicity. These Laws have essentially been in place for over 100 years. The forerunner of the Stand Your Ground Laws was Runyon v. State of Indiana in 1877 where it was found that;

“the tendency of the American mind seems to be very strongly against the enforcement of any rule which requires a person to flee when assailed , to avoid chastisement or even to save a human life…. therefore , the weight of modern authority…establishes the Doctrine that when a person, being without fault, and in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel force by force, and if, in reasonable exercise of his right of self -defense, his assailant is killed, he is justifiable.”

So, dear readers, trust discernment and reason, but above all trust God. If you want to communicate anything to the leaders of the land about SYG Laws, it should be to enforce them in all 50 States, there by re-enforcing our basic rights of self-defense and our obligation to protect what is ours. You can attack an opinion but you cannot attack a right!

For now, from a determined and devoted voice,

God Bless you and may God Bless America – Jonathan W Wallace II of Native Executive Security.

PRECISION, ACCURACY AND KNOWLEDGE – An experience with Jonathan Wallace II of Native Executive Security

As a firearms instructor, one would think that I benefit from the range time and that I practice as much as I teach. Wrong.

As all firearms instructors are aware, getting the trigger time necessary to maintain your very own discipline is very difficult due to teaching others to learn and maintain their own. On top of that, most of what I teach is handgun doctrine, causing my proficiency in other disciplines such as long range and tactical rifle, use of scope and the tactics thereof to sometimes fall short.
Now this goes against my instructor ethics, because I believe that as good instructors, we should never allow our practice time to be neglected and we should constantly look for opportunities to hone and define our skills. Also, we should never allow our egos to get in the way of continuing education; a vital tool to any good instructor.

-“Every time I teach a class, I discover I don’t know something”-Clint Smith

One can ALWAYS learn more, and one can ALWAYS benefit from shared knowledge and experience. It is truly a far better practice, which can only maximize and continually develop sound and articulate teaching methods.

Furthermore, as much as it is true to fact that practice makes perfect, it is also true that practice makes permanent .This is a simple way to say, you must learn the correct skills from the beginning in order to ensure that the practice and the permanence of your skills are correct.

So when it comes to brushing up on my own skills , refining my abilities and acquiring the know-how of the equipment in my field, rifles in particular, I seek out top training academies and institutions as well as quality firearms and ammunitions. One such place, which in my opinion ranks No.1, is Thunder Ranch in Lakeview Oregon under the leadership of the world-renowned Clint Smith, his wife Heidi, and their crack team of Instructors. This group goes well over and above the call for Instructors to teach the “Knowledge, Skills and Attitude”, raising the NRA adage to another level altogether.

So far in 2013 I have trained at Thunder Ranch twice, each stint giving me a better understanding of firearms dynamics and tactics, with strategies to implement them in real world situations; from survival defense to urban combat, from warfare methodology to just being a better sportsman/hunter, close range and long distance.

My recent visit to TR was for the Mid-Range Rifle course, where the purpose is to:

1. “Acquire and nurture marksmanship at known and unknown extended ranges”
2. To learn “techniques for application of applied marksmanship on flat and angled environments”
3. To get “exposure to use in precision and surgical applications”

Clint Smith is a great advocate of the Logic Effect, calling on all students NOT to overthink when applying any of the lessons learned at TR. People tend to get overwhelmed by the equipment they have to use, the distances they have to shoot, the environment, and the fellow shooters. The underlying focus, according to Clint, is the application of logic and not to let it become clouded by any of these elements.

What I love about TR is the precise and concise amount of time spent in the classroom vs. the length and quality of time spent applying the theory on the range. This knowledge can only be truly understood and applied when put into action. It can only be fully experienced by sending lead downrange. The course covers engaging targets from 100 to 900 yards, with target ranges in all shapes and sizes from 6 inches to 24 inches and everything in between. The emphasis in this course is placed on shooting across varying distances, as much as spotting and adapting for wind effects, developing and becoming efficient with your firing platform, learning and perfecting your natural point of aim, communicating clearly and directly with your spotting partner, and becoming proficient (the key training emphasis) in the use of your scope.

Until TR I had mostly used hunting optics, applying hold offs to determine shot placement at greater distances. But I had never taken shots at 900 yards! The introduction of The Data of Previous Engagement [ D.O.P.E] and the surgical precision you gain when applying DOPE to your scope is a rewarding and eye-opening experience. This course teaches you how to obtain optimum accuracy whether you use mil-dot or minutes of angle [MOA] and you will find, as I did, a distinct difference between your skills at the beginning of the course to your increased accuracy at the course’s end.

You will come to find out that there is nothing that surprises Clint; any equipment you bring to TR offers him the opportunity to prove his exceptional wealth of knowledge and expertise with Firearms and accessories. He will harness the best qualities of your firearm and guide you to best use what you have to be an accurate and first rate marksman.

It is common knowledge that good quality ammunition is vital to good marksmanship. Any long range course at TR will exemplify its necessity, highlighting the difference between good ammunition and lesser quality ammo. I was exposed to this first hand during my time there. At these great distances and with this caliber of training, it is so important to use the best ammunition you can, ensuring the accuracy and precision of each shot, as well as guaranteeing that the best rounds are used in your expensive rifle time and time again for hundreds of consecutive shots. For me and many other tactical instructors/students, the ammunition of choice is S.S.A: Silver State Armory ammunition- “FOR THE SERIOUS SHOOTER. WHEN THE FIRST SHOT MUST COUNT.”

For SSA, this is not just a common catch phrase- this is a lifestyle; a belief system deeply rooted in creating the best possible product for their clientele. Those who use SSA Ammunition understand the value in this phrase. It is without a doubt, Precision Ammunition. The company manufactures custom loads as well the bread and butter of the tactical ammo world such as the 5.56mm, the 7.62x51mm, and the round that put SSA on the map, the tactical 6.8mm along with many others. SSAs’ cartridges are loaded with a variety of the best-known and most reputable names in the bullet world, such as Sierra, Barnes and of course Nosler.

I was afforded a unique opportunity before going to train at Thunder Ranch earlier this September. I was invited to take a tour of the SSA facility in Packwood, Washington to see for myself how meticulously they craft their ammunition from start to finish. It was a sight to personally watch the transformation of a simple brass cup manifest into a tactical precision masterpiece. I was able to witness what many of us in the Firearms industry take for granted; to witness the in depth knowledge, skill and discipline it takes to form cartridges of the highest quality. My thanks and gratitude to GM Greg Hawley for the invite, and to the envy of my fellow TR Students, the opportunity to test 500 rounds of .308 168gr HPBT on the Mid- Range Thunder Ranch Course.

SSA has made a truly great product and it paired well with my FNAR 7.62x51mm Semi-Automatic Rifle. The FNAR is a descendant of the legendary BAR and it is endurance tested to 10,000 rounds for increased reliability and durability. The 7.62x51mm NATO (308 Win.) FNAR has a 16″ cold hammer-forged MIL-SPEC fluted barrel. It has a one-piece, receiver-mounted MIL-STD optical rail, along with three rails attached to the stock’s fore-end for customizing your accessories. The synthetic pistol grip tactical stock is fully adjustable for comb height and length of pull via interchangeable inserts and for cast on or cast off using interchangeable shims. I used a Zeiss 4.5-14×44 Scope with a hunting reticle, a great scope for my African hunting trips. But as far as optimizing my DOPE ability and long range precision it will soon be replaced by a Schmidt and Bender 5-25x56mil-dot. I had the honor of shooting Clint Smiths’ GA Precision 308 Thunder Ranch Edition with a Schmidt and Bender Scope…..WOW! As Clint said to me after I shot it; “It’ll put a smile on your face”.

It did!

All in all, I am fortunate to do what I love and learn every day from doing it. I cannot emphasize enough the value in practice- good practice, the correct way. To all of you who are looking for a place to fine tune your skills and learn under the tutelage of a great expert, Thunder Ranch in the beautiful SE Oregon Mountains is worth the trip. There is a satisfying feeling of accomplishment that comes with shooting out at 900 yards and hearing the sound of lead hitting steel. The camaraderie you build with fellow students and the networking opportunities that exist are invaluable, while the interaction you have with the polarizing figure that is Clint Smith is a remarkable experience.

Thank you to Clint, Heidi and the team. Your expertise and wealth of knowledge shared at TR is second to none. Thank you also to my fellow students for enhancing the experience.

To SSA and Greg Hawley, thank you again for inviting me to visit and allowing me to test your product. To the readers, if you want more PRECISION, ACCURACY AND KNOWLEDGE, take a course at Thunder Ranch. While you’re at it, order your Silver State Armory ammunition, tell Greg that Jonathan sent you, and enjoy becoming more proficient with your firearms.

For now, from a determined and devoted voice, God bless you and God Bless America -J. Wallace II

The Value of a Multi-State Carry Permit – The Utah Concealed Firearm Permit

I am certain that you have heard of at least one story of someone carrying a firearm across their state lines and having to prove to the Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) in a neighboring State that they have a valid reciprocal permit and/or are not aware of the correct method of transporting a firearm across state lines.

The truth is the majority of Law Enforcement Officers are not equipped with the entire United States’ firearms reciprocity list at that moment on the side of the road or immediately in their heads. Granted, several States are more lenient in that regard and others, not so much. However, the fact remains that as gun owners and defensive gun carriers we don’t want to be bothered with the hassle of figuring all that out with the LEO while travelling across States.

As much as it is a Constitutional right to own a firearm, it is our responsibility to be versed in the carry laws of our home State, as well as those States to and through which we plan to travel. The simple and practical solution is to apply for and acquire a multi- state permit that supplements your home State license/permit and allows you to carry your defensive firearm in many more States whenever you travel for work or recreation. This simply extends your right of carry, allowing you to feel and be safer at all times.

The State of Utah has a very successful non-resident Concealed Firearm Permit program, issuing approximately 1000 permits a week and growing each year.

The Utah CFP is regarded as the most sought after, valuable and cost-effective non-resident permit today. It is issued upon the completion of a 4 hour theory class given by a Certified Instructor from the Utah BCI: Bureau of Criminal Identification. There is no testing or live fire and anyone over 21 years with a good record can apply. Once you get your photo id permit it is valid for five (5) years, and only costs a mere $15 to renew; easily by mail or online. No need to take the class ever again!

I am Jonathan Wallace II and my company Native Executive Security is at the forefront of the Security Industry, Firearms Training and Executive Protection. It is our focus to help our clients and students better protect themselves. As a Certified NRA, NC Department of Justice, and Utah BCI Instructor I alone have taught at least 1000 new students in the last year, each of them enjoying the Utah CFP benefits today.

I teach many students, on the range and in the classroom, and in every class I reiterate the value of knowing the law and the necessity of a multi-state permit. You will no doubt get more than a permit out of this class. The class is divided into two sections: Firearms familiarity and firearms law. For some it is an introduction and for others a refresher. Either way the Utah Concealed Firearm Permit class as I teach it is very informative.

Just as we continually need to practice safely and accurately using our firearms, so must we all stay aware of the changing laws and regulations in our communities and our States.

Join me for a class and get your multi-state Utah Concealed Firearm Permit too!

-For now, from a determined and devoted voice, God bless you and may God truly Bless America.

Jonathan W Wallace II

The Constitutional Paladin – In defense of the past, for the future

As I contemplate the challenges facing Americans today and as I listen daily to interpretations thereof, both on the streets and in the media, I am continually stunned to realize how the foundations of this Nation are in jeopardy of nearing complete destruction. How have we come so far and not retained the wisdom to “hasten and retrace our steps, and to regain the road which alone leads us to peace, liberty and safety”? -Thomas Jefferson

The American spirit was conceived in defiance of the chains of oppression; born out of tyranny and anguish; a spirit of free, unyielding, faithful, resilient, diligent and bold men seeking to end Americas’ “patient sufferance” and secure her “safety and happiness”.

This spirit like a fire sweeping the nation, burned in the hearts of every patriot who refused to submit to the trampling of their God given inalienable rights, and who steered their own destiny through dignity.

The founding Fathers, knowing they had to give this spirit a structure that would enable it to endure the generations, embodied it in the frame of the Constitution.

Just as the human body encases the spirit, The United States Constitution gave the American spirit its body. The Bill of Rights further strengthened this body with the consciousness of right and wrong; the ability to feel and to have morals, values and virtue while knowing defeat and triumph, humility and glory.

American society today is generally treating the Constitution as if it is dead, conducting an autopsy and justifying the cause of death as “expired”!

One cannot swear an oath to something that is dead, and one certainly cannot conduct an autopsy on something that is alive. Furthermore, one cannot swear an oath to a set of principles that can be changed, impacted, defied or altered on a whim, or on the current wave of political and societal views.

The Constitution is not a simple nostalgic document; it is a body that carries in it the American spirit; the definition of what it means to be an American and the responsibility and privilege that go hand in hand with that definition. The Constitution, rigid in its existence, is very much alive. It outlines the very code which we, as Americans, should abide in order to continue to secure our free society and our fundamental liberties.

How can those who have chosen not to exercise their rights, as ordained in and protected by the Constitution and the accompanying Bill of Rights, call for dissolution of those very rights either collectively or individually, thus revoking that opportunity from those who do choose to exercise them? Simply, it is not their right to redefine, oppose, or worse yet, erase these very rights from the socio-political tapestry that binds this Nation as a whole. The partnership of principle that led to the solid constitutional body we possess in America is proof enough that what happens tomorrow depends on what “We the People” do today.

Should there be more than one position on what is a right? Should an opposing side, opinion, position or argument even be considered if it defers from the ONE right? This question pertains to our natural, God given rights as well as our defined rights in the foundational law of our land. Surely a believer in the divine providence of these United States knows the value herein.

The difference in opinion has brought has created a redefinition in the standards of freedom and liberty as we know it. Simply put, redefining our founding documents rewrites history. There is only one definition of liberty to an American; it is the definition of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln and the countless champions of the rights of mankind, along with the millions who have laid down their lives in seeking to protect that very definition. To redefine our rights and liberties is to blaspheme their sacrifices and the edificial documents which are so highly regarded the world over.

The current administration along with the liberal mass media have manipulated and controlled over half of us, and they think they have intimidated the other half into believing the “need” for change and the “outdated” nature of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The truth is, as long as we have the tried, tested, and proven application of the rights and liberties bound in the founding documents, along with our remembrance of those patriots who fought and died to guarantee those rights, we should never be intimidated, for we know our right to stand up and embody that same spirit, to recognize and act against that manipulation which seeks to nullify our Nations’ foundation at its core.

These documents were not written for one generation alone, but with securing “the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” in mind. Todays’ progressive society at large tends to believe that these foundations are inapplicable to progress, when in fact they are the Keystone to progress. They believe that they were written for a time of flint-locks, horse drawn carriages, and dirt roads. Do they then believe that these great men, these inventors, engineers, forward thinking, inspired and destiny driven men were ignorant? Or that they did not consider the future at all? These were the men that brought us revolutionary and world-altering inventions and exemplary authorship and government admired and replicated by nation after nation to this day. Could these men not think beyond a flint-lock?

Yes, I say, they could and they did; for to be destiny driven you must be forward thinking! The constitution was not created by chance or mere incident; each and every line was meticulously calculated in boldness, with confidence in its durability and longevity. This is not merely an opinion, it is fact, and history will defend it.

In a time when practicing tolerance is far more prevalent than practicing leadership we must look backward in order to move forward. We must convert retreat into advance. “This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off, or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism”- Martin Luther King, Jr.

This generation of Americans is so consumed by our individual rights that we have forgotten and turned away from what is truly right and the true definition of our God given rights. People have become so afraid of standing up against the evisceration of the Constitution, and “political correctness” in which we are forced to live, for fear of… being singled out by the IRS….for example! We live in a society where good is called evil and evil is called good. Progressives have created an acceptable environment for that which is NOT right or by definition A right, that they condemn anyone or anything that comes against it. This is an extreme perversion of the foundation of our predecessors.

In recent times it is increasingly difficult to turn on the radio or television and listen to the deceptive eloquence of our current politicians and law-makers that seem to hypnotize us; thus desensitizing us to the corruption and degradation going on around us… simply because of clever speech. The President can simply throw out a witty line in response to a concerned citizen and the petty liberal crowd goes wild.

In shaming and rebuking a politician, one must realize that the shame and rebuke must also fall on those who ALLOW themselves to be misguided. Society is stupefied by the recurring promises to “do the right thing” in the ongoing tirades against those who choose to practice “Americanism” in its truest form .That is ALL we hear, and ALL we see anymore.
Sadly, the era of the supremacy of political correctness appears to be reigning.

We have been told to set aside the moral and virtuous foundations of this Nation; the virtues which enabled Americas’ greatness to shine and which set an example for the world to follow. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people; it is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”- John Adams

Quite simply, it is time that “we the people” in order to return to a more perfect union, must be the paladins for the past and paladins of posterity, defenders of The Constitution.

-For now, from a determined and devoted voice, God bless you and may God truly Bless America.

Jonathan W Wallace II

Fighting for Your Lifetime

Indiana Senate Committee Hearing 2/20/2013 Re: Senate Bill No.555

On February 20, 2013 at the behest of Senator Tomes of Indiana, I offered my testimony in the Senate hearing of Bill No.555.I was simply asked to give my professional and personal opinion on the proposed bill and what I thought may be the outcome of said bill passing into law.

Essentially this bill offers Indiana residents {and non-residents alike} an alternative license to the already existing firearm license Indiana currently issues. With this new firearms reciprocity license one would have to comply with the minimum training curriculum put forth and renew their license every 4 years. The idea is to gain reciprocity with more states by having a two-tier licensing system. Even though Senator Hirschman’s’ proposal has good intentions, it will in fact jeopardize the historic and groundbreaking existence of Indiana’s’ lifetime permit and further infringe on the Americans’ 2nd Amendments’ rights. Why would we logically have two different licenses issued from the same State? Immediately upon reading Bill No. 555 I formulated my opinion: I cannot see its necessity.

As politics goes, even though I had drafted my thoughts into the following argument, a Q&A debate session took place instead; between me, and Chairman Steele and the panel cutting me short from completing my testimony. I would like to share it with you here.

Good morning Senators, Ladies and Gentleman.

Firstly, allow me to thank you for the opportunity to address the committee on a subject that is both professionally and personally important to me.

My name is Jonathan Wallace II: I am a Professional Firearms Instructor, a Certified Protection Specialist, Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification Instructor, North Carolina Department of Justice State Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor and Range Safety Officer, an Indiana Security Company owner and Private Investigator, husband and father of four.
I believe I represent the majority of Indiana gun owners and Instructors alike in my opposition to the passing of Senate Bill No.555.

In reading this bill, it is clear that it is not intended to be gun ban legislation; however my concerns lie in the CONTROL changes it proposes to the functional Indiana legislation already in place, as well as the underlying elements of infringement it conveys.

It appears that this bill comes to us as a result of the recent wave of change in firearms law that is plaguing the nations’ law makers. Is this in fact a necessary change, or is it simply an act of appeasement to those States who have already passed such legislation and are so evidently less friendly to the 2nd Amendment? Do we so desperately want our permit recognized by these particular states that we are willing to admit to the pundits, critics and naysayers that we have been wrong all along? I would like the recognition, but not at that cost. Indiana has never been on the wrong side of this debate. We are a constitutional state, following all of its’ outlines.

If passed, this bill would saddle Indiana citizens with unnecessary bureaucratic complications. The proposed bill introduces many more grey areas to the law that should essentially remain black and white. Is Indiana going to follow suite with these other states and convolute what should be simple?

Today, there are over 300 thousand Indiana Lifetime license holders. Each one of these individuals is a constituent, and by enacting such a bill these constituents would be immediately impacted. Does Bill No.555 put the Indiana Lifetime License in jeopardy? If legislation were to change, would these 300 thousand plus licenses be revoked OR over time become obsolete because of a two tier licensing system? The most obvious risk of offering an alternative of this sort would be the threat to the recognition of Indiana’s’ Lifetime License. I believe this could cause a breakdown of its validity because States may choose to ONLY recognize the Indiana Firearms Reciprocity license. If this breakdown happens, we will inevitably be back here in a few years debating the mere existence of the Indiana Lifetime License. This is what I am here today to oppose, before the event even occurs. If this bill causes the demise of the Indiana Lifetime License, a monumental achievement will be lost.

As far as the required training is concerned, it stands to reason that, I, as a professional Instructor, encourage Safety and Firearms competency training. I do. In fact I believe it is, has been and must remain the responsibility of the individual to seek out and undertake the proper training. It should NOT however, be mandated by the government. Enforcing training before an American can “bear an arm” is clearly an infraction on the 2nd Amendment. There should not be two sides to this; it is our right and was never written out with conditions of training. It is THIS infringement that troubles me; both with this Bill and the many States who require such training prior to issuance of a permit.

Undoubtedly, the enacting of this bill would only multiply my revenue as an Instructor and benefit my business greatly. Thousands of Indiana residents would now have to comply with several new laws to exercise their constitutional right. But my loyalty is NOT to revenue, money or business; my loyalty is to the Constitution, OUR loyalty is to the Constitution and that is to one end alone; to uphold and obey.

The bill proposes that all NRA Certified Instructors will automatically, without Indiana State-specific training, be able to conduct classes for the issuance of this new firearm reciprocity license. This means that a California Instructor with no Knowledge of Specific Indiana firearms laws etc. can immediately come here and teach Hoosiers to acquire this permit. I believe, if this is to work, a curriculum to create Certified Indiana Firearm Instructors must be outlined and implemented. There must be a standard to which all State Instructors are governed by.

I am confident that the majority of the Instructors who have years of experience under their belt would agree with me in questioning the prospect of being thrown into the same proverbial boat as the hundreds of new instructors who will surface with the passing of such a bill. The market will be inundated with inexperienced instructors who may or may not teach the correct ethical doctrine, which appears to be happening in epidemic proportions throughout the country. I am personally aware of numerous reports of price scalping on certificates, instructors signing and or stamping documents while not performing the necessary training for family, friends and or those willing to pay more. This goes on daily at an alarming rate. If the State of Indiana does choose to make this bill law, how will such a curriculum be enforced? How will the droves of new instructors be monitored and held accountable? What strategies will be implemented to follow through on such a large undertaking? I see this bill as a work in progress. If this bill has a chance of being passed, these questions must be answered and addressed.

I do not see the urgency in changing the status quo, bearing in mind the vast recognition already attached to the Indiana Lifetime License. There are 29 States where our License is already recognized. In my professional opinion Indiana residents would only gain 6 more states, if that, with the proposed Firearms Reciprocity license. Surely, if this is the only reason for legislation why then can’t they apply for a non-resident Utah or Florida permit for example, both of which have multi state reciprocity and are available to all Indiana residents over 21 with a good record. These two permits are issued upon the completion of a minimum training curriculum already tried and tested, and offered by many companies in Indiana. My company is one of the most recognized

In the Instruction of the Utah Training Curriculum. I can personally attest to thousands of Hoosiers who have taken these classes and acquired these permits. Therefore it is clear that this new reciprocity license would not benefit these Indiana residents at all.
It appears to me that this bill is an attempt to make the carrying of a firearm in Indiana a privilege when it is in fact a right.

It is my opinion that the citizens who carry an Indiana Lifetime License, past present and future, do so understanding its symbolism and its value. In and of itself, that little pink card of ours is a pledge to exercise our rights according to the 2nd Amendment in a legal, socially conscious manner. It is a pledge to remain a “proper” person as defined by statute; a law abiding citizen who is more concerned with the possible infringement on his rights than he is with reciprocity with other states. In Indiana we are held to a higher standard; we inspire righteousness with the issuance of our Lifetime License. To the Brady Group, yes, we do believe that Hoosiers are the same person over time; it is because of this expectation that accompanies this license that we are. We reaffirm that we will be law abiding citizens throughout our life by having this license and being willing to accept the consequences if we do not. It is a matter of remaining diligent in our background checks and being thorough before issuance. The issuance of a license without an expiration date only enhances the citizens’ conscience to remain law abiding and fulfill their obligations as Hoosiers. It is a responsibility they carry with pride. I am proud to have an Indiana Lifetime License and I have a deep respect for Indiana and its upholding of the Constitution in issuing these Licenses.

If however, Bill No.555 is passed and it becomes law, I intend to continue working to the best of my abilities and strengths to uphold the law and comply with the decisions of this governing body. As an instructor I will continue to teach and train citizens both ethically and responsibly on the competency and safe handling of firearms, their use in sport and self-defense, and the legal ramifications thereof.

I thank you for your time and consideration, God Bless you – Jonathan W Wallace II

Thank You

We would like to say thank you to the Kokomo Tea Party, Highsmith Guns, Fort Mill Gun Shop, and to ERG (Emergency Responce Gear) for the successful classes, and we look forward to continuing to work with you all in the future.

Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee appearance RE:Bill 555

On February 20th at 9:00am Jonathan Wallace II appeared before the Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee at the request of Senator Tomes to testify in opposition to bill 555 in regards to the Indiana firearms licensing system. Jonathan testified against this bill because of the threat this new bill poses to the Indiana lifetime handgun permit. Testimony forthcoming, look for it here.

Media or Marionettes? The propaganda in the current gun-control fiasco

Who is the media answerable to? Do they practice their profession based on a series of guidelines, a code if you will, that obliges them, as individuals and companies to meet certain moral, ethical, and veritable accountability standards?

The answer is simple. They should, but do not! They are answerable to the public; the people to whom they broadcast, for whom they write and to those masses who tune in to hear the truth. The truth itself has, however, sadly become subject to interpretation. When it comes to reporting there should be no grey areas. If the ice is cracked, don’t walk on it! Solid, founded journalism is all but dead. Today it’s all about entertainment, ratings, and self-indulgence. These anchors are not justified in holding themselves in such high regard. Also, the majority of the population has become naive in believing all its being fed.

All mass media essentially have two functions: to be the mouthpiece of the people and to provide information to the nation; at least that is how it was intended to be. The media are meant to keep those in power in check. As I see it, the trending change over the last 40 years or so is that they are being swung in the preferred direction of the elite, of those in power; just as marionettes in a puppet show manipulated by each limb to cater to the desires of those puppeteers who write the scripts and know the plots. They choose not to use their ability to fully divulge and disclose and debate. They themselves have attached the strings by which they are controlled.

There is a definite line between clear, objective investigative reporting of the news and the {almost commonplace} pushing of political policy. Fact: It is not the media’s job to push policy agenda. The mass media have put themselves on a metaphorical pedestal, pretentiously speaking as though they are the voice and conscience of America and Americans, bypassing their fundamental roles! Simultaneously, as all the information is presented, a platform for debate is supposed to be created. A platform where professional, studious, and expert knowledge on both sides of a matter is put forward and objectively mediated. Sadly many media institutions themselves are no longer objective and do not play the role of middle man as they ought to.

The media’s “job is only to hold up the mirror- to tell and show the public what has happened.”- Walter Cronkite

If a debate is undertaken by two experts, and supposed to be regulated by a non-partisan body, contending sides on a subject should be arguing, validating and justifying their opinions to the viewers, readers, listeners, i.e. the voters. Do you agree? Why then are the said experts in the field as it pertains to Guns, and the ownership thereof being hounded and put in a corner by non-experts who are uneducated in the field such as CNN s’ Piers Morgan, who blatantly and clearly sits on his throne of one sided policy agenda behaving like the pawn he is. Why is a rejected Brit, who has next to no knowledge of firearms, offering ignorant opinions on US ways of Life? And why are US corporations giving him the stage on which to do so? Furthermore, there is no equal face time for both sides on his show, or any leftist media report of any kind. The arrogance and ignorance with which he and the droves of reporters like him interrogate those who believe in the principles of our founding documents further exemplifies the bias with which the news is brought to the people. The clear distortion of the truth through the perversion of “freedom of the press” has created an evident rift between the true American patriots who choose to further investigate and seek the truth, and those who sit idly by and passively believe the watered down, half-truths and partial stories they are being indoctrinated with.

“I am all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let’s start with typewriters.”
-Frank Lloyd Wright

Attrition by definition is the “wearing down and/or weakening” of resistance… as a result of continuous pressure …”Sound familiar? Oppression over time almost guarantees submission. This is the framework for the current governments’ agenda, a cause they are filtering through the mass media. “And that’s the way it is!”- Walter Cronkite

A simple comparison between several States’ Gun carry laws plainly exemplifies this point. Many residents in overtly liberal states such as Illinois, California, Maryland, New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts … for instance, are astounded at the fact that an out-of state carry permit allowing a citizen to carry a loaded firearm in multiple states even exists i.e. Florida and Utah. They do not know how to react to the possibility of such a permit, even though they are pro 2nd Amendment. Clearly they have been subjected to oppression by attrition!

Mr. Obama, when announcing his 23 Executive Actions on Gun Control, collaborated with the extensive liberal media to play on the emotions of the American people by using Children props to further “weaken… {Our}…resistance” to the destruction of our Constitution. Is it not ironic how perfectly Obamas’ lethal policy agenda fits the chamber of the weapon that is the leftist media? I am angry at how fickle Obama is to demand legislation based on the wants of children. Children do no wrong in expressing their opinions, they are immature and inexperienced. But the notion of overturning the foundations of the country based on these expressions is absurd, albeit better than any advice Biden can offer!

I would like to remind the President, his cabinet and all elected officials along with any public servant who takes the all-encompassing oath to Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of The United States; that it is simply not a citation of tradition, or an oath to “The Party”, but an unequivocal promise that demands obedience to its entirety. It is abhorrent how Senator Feinstein believes that she is upholding her oath of office as she proudly shreds though the Amendments of this sacred document; how the President can make demands of the nations’ people to give up our rights and freedoms that were so courageously and painstakingly procured .It is the Act, the blood… not just the ink on the paper that symbolizes our freedom today, Mr. President. You cannot simply erase the sacred honor that embodies our Constitution by writing over it. You are bound by this Oath, it is your duty, your purpose, your obligation not to allow anyone foreign or domestic to come against any portion of The Constitution; failure to do so in any way is clearly NOT Preserving, Protecting or Defending the Foundations that have made this Nation awe-inspiring and the beacon that it is in this world. As the leader of the United States of America, you are not solely supposed to be a Statesman who holds a veto pen and panders to the desires of your constituents. Your ultimate duty is to one end alone, and by your declaration on January, 20th, 2013 as a citizen of these United States I expect you to fulfill this Oath of Office you hold.

Again, I must I express my complete agreement with The 2nd Amendment and the intention of our forefathers that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. It cannot be better put than in the words of George Washington;

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American peoples’ liberty teeth and keystone under Independence…from the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace ,security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable…the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference-they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”.

For now, from a determined and devoted voice, God bless you and truly, God bless America-
Jonathan W Wallace II

Protecting Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

The thoughts, opinions and analysis expressed herein are solely my own and from this essay I simply want to inspire thought and provoke motivation in every reader, to consider the outcome if the necessary course of action is again not taken in our present society.

First of all I want to begin by saying what happened at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut was and is a tragedy, one that we will never forget. My condolences and prayers go out to the families and everyone affected by this heart breaking event.

“I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost.”- Abraham Lincoln

This event brings a lot of questions to light, some old, some new. What I mean by old is the main stream media’s eternal argument for stricter gun laws. They seem to make the issue entirely about gun control, when the real question is simply “how can we better protect our children and our society as a whole?” Politicians using such a tragedy as a vehicle for pushing political agenda are not only lacking in common decency but way off the mark. We need to address the fact that evil exists and those who wish to harm the innocent will always attempt it; tighter gun control only prevents the innocent from better defending themselves. Consider the situation if there were no Constitution here, no 2nd Amendment to argue over. Surely we can all agree that we do not need the permission of bureaucrats to decide when, where, how and if we can defend our God given right to life.

What I mean by new is that we have to now develop and implement new and affective strategies to better protect our children and our schools. We must have this discussion and execution on a national scale. One may ask, “Why do we now have to consider new strategies for protecting our children at schools and out in public?” It is not solely because of the mass shootings, the Connecticut tragedy, or the multiple other violent events of late in many US cities, it is simply because our society at large has been progressively moving backward on the moral scale; we are witnessing the desensitizing of what it means to be humane. The truth is, in the America of today, “In God we trust” is no longer our credo, its’ just a stamp on a coin. Sadly, this is what we need to guard against now. We must ask ourselves whether or not we would rather face armed terror with a buzz in system and a monitor, or rather that armed terror faced armed justice? I believe we would find the answer to be a profound refusal of passive protection, but more one of readiness in the defense of our children, families and homes. The reason we dial “911” is after all to call those who carry guns to the scene! The American society is solely reactive, instead of being proactive. Why is that the case? The Government is the answer. The Government is deciding the practices and course of action and it is doing so incorrectly.

Albeit that our environment plays a part in our behaviors and our tolerances, the truth is, It all begins at home. “Nurture causes us to be more effective in nature”. Are we truly nurturing and cultivating the seeds of proactive lives in our children? Teaching them to defend and uphold the Judeo-Christian values this nation was founded and made great upon? Or are we engaging in a submissive upbringing where our children fear the repercussions of defending those values?

“All great change in America begins at the dinner table” –Ronald Reagan

We have become a society of the lame! Full of man created fears, and we are guilty of cowardice. We have committed treason against our own moral compass; we have sat idly by and allowed the disguise of progress and coexistence to corrupt the founding fiber of our nation. We are afraid of pointing out the immoral for fear of causing offence. I want you all to know no matter how obscene the case, Acceptance is compliance! And to turn your back on what you know to be right is truly UN American.

I am a father of four, and as a father I have to be a man that has a thought. A thought for my children’s future, it is my obligation and my responsibly to have my input on the wellbeing of my children. In doing so I want to inspire others to think. I do not want to come off as though my ideas are the best way to go about doing things, just that I have considered the alternative and I do not like it.

I am a trained security professional, and so I do believe my ideas are ideas that can be built upon, thought about and perhaps implemented. Is it not right that we safeguard our lives as we do our possessions?

For instance, we have thought about every conceivable way to secure our financial institutions and our means of financial stability i.e.; our businesses. Again this is a society break down by not having our priority’s straight. Since when did protecting our means of money become more important than protecting our family’s at home, in our schools and in the public arena of everyday life?

We have put armed guards in our banks and corporate buildings when our investments, monies and resources were preyed upon by armed predators. Surely, the very lives of our loved ones are that much more “valuable” and worthy of protection?

Furthermore, after 9-11-2001 we armed our pilots! Commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry firearms on board once they attended and completed a federal safety and proficiency program. Despite this program working very well, President Obama very discretely ended the program. Does this make sense at all? He’s clearly prioritizing anti-gun ideology over public safety. About 70% of the pilots at major American airlines have military backgrounds, so the only groups happy about this program coming to an end are anti-gun lobbyists and terrorist factions. Also, pilots cannot openly speak about this program ending because they would face criminal prosecution! Isn’t this very convenient for the Obama administration? We need policies in place that are enforced and solidified in stone, not in print that can simply be “deleted” on a whim or as the veto pen changes hands.

So what can be done?

A School Marshal System. We have witnessed the deterrent effect the air marshals have had on airline attacks since 9-11.They have been successful in detecting, deterring, and defeating obvious and non-obvious threats. The American air marshals are some of the most highly trained individuals in the safety and security field. They follow an extremely strict curriculum, with focus on handgun marksmanship, practice under duress, effective action in confined hostile situations, close quarters defensive measures, investigative techniques, terrorist behavior recognition, and emergency medical assistance. Attention must be paid to the high number of by standers in these tight areas, with discipline and efficacy. These marshals are also equipped with a thorough knowledge of Constitutional Law and civil liberties. Does this sound like something we could use in our schools?

The creation and implementation of a division of the Marshal System would be an invaluable step moving forward; a strategic move to combat violent crime on our school campuses.

I do understand the enormity of such an undertaking however. Many different training aspects and disciplines would have to be added to such a marshal curriculum over and above the Federal and State funding that will be necessary for its’ creation. These School Marshals would be more than security guards, and their presence would instill a feeling of safety in all students, teachers, and parents alike. They would have to undergo Youth-centered training, and the strictest psychological evaluations, being monitored by a possible collaborative division of the Department of Education and the Attorney General.

Such an endeavor would not be without struggle, but this is how great ideas are made reality; “The struggle is the glory”. All institutions are conceived only once they are necessary; such a system is necessary now. I only wish it was not a reactionary idea. Again, I am considering all elements of such an undertaking; along with it will come the creation of thousands of jobs, and in turn economic stimulation.

I am positive that all the fathers out there have ideas on how to protect our children and our schools; this is one of mine. I invite you to put some thought into this suggestion; albeit one that requires much collaboration and dedication. Bear in mind that the Washington time line coupled with the lethargic rate at which our elected representatives undertake groundbreaking decisions, this would take an eternity to implement. Make no mistake though, the lives of our children, teachers and loved ones are well worth it.

There is an alternate method to secure our school campuses, perhaps one that is less red-tape, less bureaucratic hardline and more feasible, practical and immediately empowering to each and every school board, teacher and parent: the choice to employ independent agents for their respective campuses. In order to create an arsenal of such agents we need a Government sanctioned program that would train and certify School Marshals. Just as security professionals and armed guards are trained and licensed by specific Governing bodies, concealed carry instructors (in some states) by the Department of Justice, and Private Investigators by a licensing authority, these Marshals are private citizens who offer their services to those willing to hire them. Once trained and certified these agents are fully independent school security professionals, eligible to work on any school campus nationwide. Of course, such a system would call on school boards, communities, and parents to come together, realizing the necessity and resolved in their decision to implement such a safeguard. Sadly, the “demand” for school security has already been created by the tragedies of late; now it befalls on someone to “supply” said security. Who will that someone be? Better it be trained, certified, capable, and focused individuals, properly vetted and monitored. This is a private sector resolution. One must also consider that tens of thousands of military personnel are heading home to the US in the coming months; surely a befitting job. Furthermore, this is not a resolution limited to those with prior security experience, but is open to those faculty members willing to undergo School Marshal training to further secure their students and themselves.

Such a system may be federally mandated or have an individual State exemption, allowing each State to decide whether or not to have private school Marshals licensed in their school districts.

I want you to know that all I have said here today neither limits nor confines my thoughts on the matter. There is so much more that needs to be addressed and pondered. I am curious to hear the current Governments’ resolution to the need to better secure our schools and cities all the while remembering Ronald Reagans’ words: “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.

Suffice it to say, I am saddened that the America I love and believe in has regressed in its moral direction, saddened that innocent lives are lost due to incompetence at the highest level, and saddened that the revolution against tyranny and oppression is no longer against a foreign enemy but domestic. I must express my complete agreement with the 2nd Amendment and the intention of our forefathers that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

It cannot be better put than in the words of Thomas Jefferson when he cited the 18th Century Criminologist Cesare Beccaria.

“ Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…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”

For now, from a determined and devoted voice,

God Bless you, and truly, God Bless America – Jonathan W Wallace II