top of page
Search

Pro-Gun Testimony HB22-1033

  • Ken deGraaf
  • Jan 22
  • 3 min read

My testimony for HB22-1033:

Constitutional Carry, 8 Feb 2022


This bill, presented by Ron Hanks, failed in a 5 to 8 vote. Susan Lontine(D), parroting Joe Biden stated “no right is absolute...I will be a 'no'”


Your Second Amendment Rights are the key to preserving all others, so if it is not absolute, none are. This seemingly innocuous quote should terrify you.


“Ma’dam Chair, I am Ken DeGraaf, a resident of ElPaso County and 27 year Air Force veteran. Because we’re condemned to either learn from history or relive it, I would like to speak from history. It is clear that our founders felt the right to keep and bear arms was essential for not only protecting our lives and property, but our Republic itself.


First, I’ll speak to the current web of laws:


As Alexis d’Tocqueville observed “After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the (government) then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.


The current conglomeration of laws is reminiscent of Stalin’s head of Secret police who directed, “show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.”


From the United States Bill of Rights, Amendment II, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”


“Shall not be infringed” seems pretty clear, as unrestricted arms are the means by which we remain a “FREE STATE.”


The Colorado Bill of Rights, Article II, section 3 addresses personal protection:“All persons have certain natural, ESSENTIAL, AND INALIENABLE RIGHTS among which may be reckoned the Right of enjoying and DEFENDING their lives and liberties; of acquiring, possessing and PROTECTING property; and of seeking and obtaining their SAFETY and happiness.”


For the individual to Defend, Protect, and ensure the Safety of their person and property is considered ESSENTIAL, and INALIENABLE.


It is troubling that our current legislation is a de-facto declaration that what our constitutions’ declare as inalienable rights, are not viewed as such by our legislators who are ostensibly sworn to secure them. continuing:Section 7 states: “the people shall be secure in their persons, papers, homes and effects, from unreasonable searches and seizures, and no warrant to search any place or seize any person or thing shall issue without describing the place to be searched, or the person or thing to be seized, as near as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation reduced to writing”


As a sovereign citizen of a sovereign state, there is no reason to be questioned by a Peace officer, charged with securing the Rights of all to intrude on my person or property without probable cause. Attested to by Section 13. “Right to bear arms. The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.”


As Samual Adams explained, “the Constitution should be never construed to authorize congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the united states, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

Why citizens need to be armed is perhaps best answered by George Mason in 1788 that “to disarm the people...was the best and most effectual way to enslave them,” whether that is by government or the criminal cartels as we see with our neighbors to the south.”

/////End testimony/////


For additional thought:


James Madison wrote in Federalist 46 that “the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition (of government) more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of” continuing to note that “the several kingdoms of Europe...are afraid to trust the people with arms.”


Samual Adams explained, “the Constitution should be never construed to authorize congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the united states, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

Comments


Thanks for submitting!

SignUp For Updates

bottom of page