The Federal Bureau of Narcotics

            The Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) was originally an agency of the United States Department of the Treasury.  The FBN was established by a congressional Act of June 14, 1930.  This act consolidated the functions and jurisdictions of the Federal Narcotics Control Board and the Narcotic Division.  Both of these agencies were brought into existence to take charge of law enforcement responsibilities that the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act, 1914 and the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act, 1922 (Also known as the Jones-Miller Act)

            The Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon appointed Harry J. Anslinger as the first Federal Bureau of Narcotics Commissioner.  Interestingly, Anslinger's wife, Martha Kind Denniston was the niece of Secretary Mellon. With Anslinger’s leadership, the Bureau aggressively lobbied Congress to pass harsher laws on drug usage, possession, and smuggling.  Also the Federal Bureau of Narcotics is directly responsible for criminalizing cannabis by lobbying Congress to pass the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.  The Bureau also strengthened the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914.  Although the Bureau gave some attention to cannabis their main objective was combating opium and heroin smuggling.  

"The first Federal law-enforcement administrator to recognize the signs of a national criminal syndication and sound the alarm was Harry J. Anslinger, Commissioner of the Bureau of Narcotics in the Treasury" (Ronald Reagan 1986)

            One of the bureau’s major victories in the fight against opium was the passing of the Opium Poppy Control Act of 1942.  To further the effect of this law, the FBN operated several offices overseas in France, Italy, Beirut, Thailand, and Turkey.  It was these offices that eventually brought down the French Connection from which a movie was based.  There were never more than 17 agents spread between these overseas offices.  Because they did not posses law enforcement powers in these foreign countries, those agents relied on local police to help them make arrests and not double cross them.

            When Anslinger retired in 1962, Henry Giordano was appointed to replace him as the FBN’s commissioner.  In 1968 Giordano successfully lobbied Congress to criminalize the possession of LSD (Lysergic acid diethylamide).  Giordano went on as the commissioner until the FBN was merged with the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control to form the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) in 1968.  The BNDD is the direct predecessor to the most recent federal drug agency, the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Why Gun Control is Dangerous

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

                                                                -Thomas Jefferson

                As of 2009 the population in the United States, according to JustFacts.com, was roughly 309 million people.  Based on production data from firearms manufacturers, there are around 300 million privately owned firearms.  100 million or so are handguns (pistols).  Firearms are grouped into three different types: rifles, pistols, and shotguns.  Both rifles and shotguns are categorized as long guns.  In the United States a person must be of the age 18 or above to purchase a long gun, 21 years+ for pistols.  For the past century, the progressive left has sought to infringe upon the 2^nd Amendment rights of every citizen in this country.  What part of “Shall not be infringed” is too hard to understand!?  Gun control in the United States is unconstitutional and dangerous for the country and her citizenry.

                Thomas Jefferson, in his book “Commonplace Book”, wrote calling gun control on example of “false utility”-a backwards and irrational position on crime prevention that will only serve to make the problem worse.  The other founding fathers would not be pleased with the federal government throwing the Bill of Rights and the Constitution out the window.  For that reason I believe that they would support the right for the citizens to possess “military grade” firearms.  

Before we go any further let’s take a look at the Assault Weapons ban of 1994.  In Section 3 ‘Definitions’, any semi-automatic rifle that is able to take a detachable magazine and that has:

·         A folding or telescoping stock (i.e. a but stock that collapses or lengthens depending on user preference)

·         A threaded barrel (i.e. a barrel with an extended tip with threads for screwing on a sound suppressor, flash-suppressor, or any other device to the front of the firearm.)

·         A pistol grip (again another feature for user comfort)

·         A forward grip (on a rifle proper shooting from dictates that the non-trigger hand is forward of the magazine for stability)

·         A barrel shroud

A gun with any of these features would be illegal to manufacture or sell in the United States.  The last item on the list is a barrel shroud.  This term has caused a lot of confusion for the media and others reading the bill.  According to Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), who wants to ban barrel shrouds but admitted that she did not know what it is, a barrel shroud is a “shoulder thing that goes up.”  A barrel shroud is actually a composite, metal, or plastic device that partially or completely encircles the barrel to prevent the shooter from sustaining burns from the barrel as it heats up.  The evidence shows that those who want this sort of ban, want shooting a firearm to be more dangerous for the user and other innocent people.  

The author of the Assault Weapons Ban, Senator Dianne Feinstein, wants to ban firearms based on cosmetic features.  Many people don’t want to be judged by how they look but are perfectly happy to forbid the sale and manufacture of these types of firearms.  Those who want to ban firearms disguise their intent by the careful use of smoke screens.  They twist the verbiage.  They cry “regulation” with the ultimate goal of disarming the citizens of the United States.

Gun control is dangerous because an armed citizenry is essential to maintaining a government that fears the citizens.  When governments no longer fear the citizens, tyranny rises up.  Any piece of legislation that infringes upon the rights of citizens in direct contradiction of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is void.  It is the duty of every government official at every level to stand in opposition to unconstitutional measures.  The oath of office binds the official to “Support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.”  When Congress, the Supreme Court, or the executive branch attempt to illegally infringe on the rights of the citizenry, they become a domestic enemy.  The founding fathers recognized that technology would advance, and they made provisions in the Constitution to legally amend it.  However those in power have tried and occasionally succeeded in illegally crafting legislation that infringes on guaranteed rights.  

Before Kristallnacht (the Night of Broken Glass) on Nov. 9-10, 1938, when the Nazis smashed and pillaged, and murdered hundreds of Jews, the Nazi party first imposed regulation on gun ownership. Soon after, they created a national gun registry so they knew who had guns, then they had Kristallnacht, and finally they exterminated over 11 million people.  To keep an event similar out of America, it is imperative that there are no unlawful infringements made on anyone’s rights.  The Nazi government did not fear resistance and look what happened. 

Lincoln Luncheon

me during my speech

    On March 8th,  the Maricopa County Republican Party held the annual Lincoln Luncheon at the El-Zaribah Shrine auditorium in the downtown Phoenix area. My attendance was made possible by Jean Mattox and Vera Anderson of the Deer Valley and Daisy Mountain Tea Parties, respectively.

    I was figuratively floating off the ground as I walked in because I was excited to other people who also have a keen interest in politics.  After my mother and I signed in, we perused the booths of prospective candidates, like gubernatorial candidate Senator Al Melvin, whom I sat with at the Western Conservative Conference, former Mesa Mayor and gubernatorial candidate Scott Smith, and candidate for Superintendent for Public Instruction Diane Douglas.  Also present were Attorney General Horne and the founder of the Center for Self Governance (C.S.G.), Mark Herr, who was the keynote speaker that afternoon.

   Mark Herr introduced the Center for Self Governance.  After showing the audience a short "I'm Mrs. Powel" video, he went on to discuss the success that the Center For Self Governance has had and how that could translate for Arizona's political environment.  Then another person who has also taken some Center for Self Governance classes and I were called up on stage to speak about our experiences with the Center for Self Governance classes to an audience of over 400 people.  Since I had forgotten the speech I was going to give, I just spoke about how the skills that the C.S.G. taught me allowed me to talk to my peers about politics in a way they would understand and get motivated to exercise their civil rights.

  When I made it back to my seat, my lunch had arrived.  As I ate, I spoke with my dining companions.  One gentleman owned his own business and was a military contractor.  He made parts for the F-16, F-18, and F-35 combat fighter planes.  During lunch, all Republican candidates for governor present walked onto the podium and gave a short speech to campaign.

   In conclusion, the Lincoln Day Luncheon is an event that I highly recommend, whether you are involved in the political system or want to be.  You can meet a bunch of different people at the local, county, state, and federal levels by just being there and mingling.

Mark Herr and the Center for Self Governance

After taking the Level 1 class of the Center For Self Governance, which is an organization that teaches citizens how to maintain an open dialogue between government and people, I was able to contact the organization's founder, Mark Herr.  We managed to arrange time for us to get together at a Jason's Deli for an interview.

He was born in England, raised in Korea on a military base, served in the military on Japan, and now lives in Tennessee.  When asked what his background in politics was he answered, "Nothing... I have no background in politics." After seeing how things were going in Tennessee, he met with three other concerned citizens and organized the curriculum and the organization. 

In 1787, after the first constitutional convention, as Benjamin Franklin walked out the door, Mrs. Powel, the wife of the inn owner where the founders were staying, asked him, "What kind of government have you given us?"  Benjamin Franklin replied, "A republic, if you can keep it."  This is significant because when he said "you", he was directing that to a woman who could not vote or own property.  So even if you can't vote or run for office, you are not absolved of your duty to stay involved.  It is very hard to be involved if you don't know the system, though.

The Center of Self Governance teaches to focus on Ms. Powel, not the issues, because Ms. Powel is a metaphor for the ultimate source of power: the people.  "If you don't know how to wield your power then you will be stuck in the quicksand of issues and candidates.  And it will suck you into fighting fires set by people who do not want you to wield power," Mark stated.

People of all walks of life can go to these classes. There have been several Democrat state legislators from Washington State who attended classes.  There have been Democrats, Republicans, young, old, white, black, Hispanics, atheists, Christians, and candidates running against each other in the same class.  It doesn't matter because the Center For Self Governance is not a partisan group.  They teach the fundamentals of liberty, which are all the freedoms described in the Bill of Rights.  Those are God-given, inalienable rights that no bureaucrats can lawfully change.

Mark then outlined what he wanted students to take away from each level class.

1. In level one, students learn that they don't know the language that is spoken at different levels of government. Because they don't know the language, they are losing the battle to keep the republic.  They don't know the difference between a democracy and a republic, power and governance.  Contrary to what is taught, the United States is a republic.
2. In level two, students learn the technical skills to communicate effective self governance.  Things like appearance are very important.  For example, in some parts of America, if you knock on doors wearing a suit, the first impression many residents will have of you is that you are from the police or CPS, whereas in a wealthier part of town if you knock on doors with your pants sagging, people will not open their doors to you because in both scenarios you are deemed a threat.
3. Level three is a macro view of government, much like the way an astronomer studies the night sky. We see the big picture on how and why things work.
4. Then level four is like how a biologist looks into a microscope to see the DNA.  We have a micro view of the workings of government.  In level 3, we looked at Congress as a whole, and now we look at how the various sub-committees work and why they exist. 
5.  Level five brings all the pieces together.  The understanding of the language, the knowledge of the inner workings of government, and an understanding of their fellow citizens all combine to form an effective tool to open up a dialog with government, collaborate with their fellow citizens, and plan strategies with their team to save the republic from social and political corruption. 

I recently attended and finished the class portion of Level 2.  I am having a bunch of fun doing these classes and will continue all the way to Level 5.  One of the things that I took away from the two levels of classes that I've done is the story of Mrs. Powell.  I am looking forward to learning about the more overt workings of government.