Help! Why should you care to fund this campaign?

What has happened to me can happen to you! It may have already happened to someone your
close to, it affects everyone and society as a whole. Unless your happy with the BAD agents of
government conspiring to making up crimes to oppress people that are engaged in protected, yet
politically unpopular activities.

After being kidnapped, falsely imprisoned, tortured and subjected to indignant strip searches,
malnourished, poisoned, denied dental care, medical care, raped and robbed of my labor, and
possessions for over 45 months, I need your help with getting back on my feet again and just
living and medical care and then with holding those accountable that caused this deprivation of
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in law and Equity.

Oppression occurs when infamy is imposed on the citizen by the state! In other words when a
Conspiracy of Bad actors work to vilify you and cause you a loss of standing in the community.
The philosophy should be obsta principiis!

There is nothing more inequitable then having a person serve a sentence in a federal prison for a
non-existent crime , for an act the law does not make criminal. To punish a person because he
has done what the law plainly allows him to do is a due process violation fo the most basic sort
and for an agent to pursue a course of action whose objective is to penalize a persons reliance on
his legal rights is patently unconstitutional.

I will show you that everything in my case was fabricated (related to any crime using the
Supreme Court, and history through the law of nations and nature, the constitutions of the us and
state and many other lawful treatises) to purposely libel and defame me and my reputation. I am
convinced that you will see with clarity the veracity in all I write. I did not do anything unlawful
or illegal and I will continue to provide first-hand actual irrefragable proof of the law as it is
written and interpreted.

A man is measured by his virility to include providing support for his family. They stole assets
of my labor and estate and my ability to be a patriarch for my loved ones. They caused me a loss
of consortium, alienation of affection and intentional infliction of emotional distress and slavery.

This is a very humbling experience for a man to ask for help and evinces a gamut of
questions. As i ponder looking at things from the penumbra of perspective angles such
as; philosophically, emotionally, politically, socially, spiritually, materially, I am compelled to
ensure, I am just as candid with people as I expect them to be with me.

Imagine, being a Dad who has never committed, much less convicted of a crime (many people
mistake the word crimes lawful meaning, not legal) and the disappointment that you feel that you
let your daughters down because you know the LAW, but some BAD actors kidnapped and
falsely imprisoned you, For an act the law does not make criminal, violates the law of nature and
nations, maxims and principles of law, the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th , 10th and most of all the
13th amendments?
[For it is this amendment that created slavery out of crime. But who defines crime? If we make
a voluminous set of laws and call them felony's, then we can create a subclass of people called
"felons" and do indirectly what we can't do directly and take away peoples arms in a multi-tiered
approach.]

Imagine the imprisonment is in a dungeon, without any daylight for 13 months except in fetters
(chains) to be transported to a court that is filled with parasitic minded people that feed off your
incarceration! Violating the eighth amendment, “Excessive bail shall not be
required”! Wait? Doesn't this violate the presumption of innocence under the 5th
amendment? Then an additional 32 months for a total of 45 months, despite the alleged crime
only carried with it 6-12 months imprisonment and the judge sentences you in violation of due
process to more then the statutory maxim. Which the supreme court clearly says is plain error in
gall and the 11th circuit appeals writer seems to brush it aside. Well doesn't this violate equal
protection under the law? Well maybe, if you look at the context it was written in and if there is
any supportive evidence....

[I will post my en banc petition to point out the multitude of evidence that supports she was
obviously prejudicial against me. by conflating the clear and convincing evidence standard
transcript of the sentencing hearing with the beyond a doubt standard trial transcripts to support
her dicta to convince the public and reader that the conviction was justified is one example! This
way there is UN-rebutted testimony that can arbitrarily be found by a judge instead of a jury to
increase your sentence.]

Imagine these bad actors are subjecting you to strip searches every day, Violating the eighth
amendment again under the cruel and unusual punishment clause. You are denied law resources
to prepare your case, Violating Due Process and the Sixth Amendment. You are malnourished
and even poisoned with toxic water and food. This is after they have already violated your
privacy, the fourth amendment with an invalid warrant for an act the law does not make criminal.
Imagine you are in this confinement with real violent criminals that injured his fellow man and
really deserve to be in jail.

Then you have a judge that does not allow the Jury to read the law and tells them, I will tell you
what the law is, you decide the facts over your objection, constructively amending the statute,
violating separation of powers clause, putting the judge in congresses stead, violates the ex post
facto clause by completely misquoting the law , the due process clause and the trial by jury.

And then the appellate court says it was wrong but it was harmless because there was no
evidence supporting him reading the law, when the very acts themselves evince that the acts are
embodied in the law. That this act by the court and the appellate court, violates the contract
clause, due process, the ex post facto clauses, involuntary servitude and flat out slavery!

Harmless error review applies only when the jury actually renders a verdict-that is, when it has
found the defendant guilty of all the elements of the crime and being able to discern between the
exemption of the crime as the law is written. Confirming speculation does not disturb this
allocation, but substituting speculation does, as the 11th circuit did here. Neder v. United States
and Sullivan v. Louisiana both addressed the speculation of the appellate courts decisions on
whether the jury came to the right conclusion when the district court judge misquoted and
omitted parts of the law as it is written and the Supreme Court reversed it!

Justice Bradley said it best in Boyd v.United States in 1885;

It may be that it is the obnoxious thing in its mildest form; but illegitimate and unconstitutional
practices get their first footing in that way; namely, by silent approaches and slight deviations
from legal modes of procedure. This can only be obviated by adhering to the rule that
constitutional provisions for the security of persons and property should be liberally construed. A
close and literal construction deprives them of half their efficacy, and leads to gradual
depreciation of the right, as if it consisted more in sound than in substance. It is the duty of the
Courts to be watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the Citizens, and against any stealthy
encroachments thereon. Their motto should be Obsta Principiis."

What the Judge did to me was described as slavery in 1690, how history repeats itself. You can
go here for the Second Treatise of Civil Government John Locke (1690)
https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/politics/locke/ch04.htm

"Absolute, arbitrary power that man asserts over another...nature does not give this and contract
cannot convey this power"

"Freedom means liberty of men under a government to have a standing rule to live by, common
to everyone of that society, made by the legislative power erected in it, and not to be subject to
the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man." John Locke

"The accumulation of all powers, Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary, in the same hands,
whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly
be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." James Madison

and Thomas Jefferson believed that; "allowing only the un-elected judiciary to interpret the
Constitution would lead to judicial supremacy. "It is a very dangerous doctrine to consider the
judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions," said Jefferson. "It is one which
would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy."

When in short either branch of government usurps that part of the sovereignty, which the
constitution assigns to another branch, liberty ends, and tyranny commences. Glass v. The Sloop
Betse, U.S. 6,3 Dall. 6,1794 WL 690 (U.S.Md.),1 L.Ed. 485(1764)

So why is it an emergency? Well there are many reasons. After stealing everything from me
they released me from Prison with a bus ticket and a $100, after they stole all my possessions for
subsistence.

So what is the emergency I need assistance with? I will let you decide if I was politically
persecuted or not. The help that is needed is:

1. 10K for 3 months of Food, Hygiene. Shelter, Clothing, Travel, Postage, Communication
Devices, Scanner, Printer, Copier, Paper, Costs for legal expenses and Filing fees, Security,
websites for posting progress of my case for suits in violation of my rights in Equity.

2. $2000-3,000 Medical Care, I was provided with no medical care in prison, it’s a farce to
say people get medical care. Anyone that wants to know what single payor medical care is, just
look in prison, it is synonymous with “Non-Existent”. Why? There is no incentive to give you
medical care and certainly no competition, for they get paid the same whether you get it or
not. Who are you going to complain to, the people that designed the system to work this way?

3. $300-$1000, I need eyeglasses desperately to read and write. I am using some walmart
reading glasses right now and my eyesight has deteriorated significantly and even with these
reading glasses I have to have the paper directly within a few inches in front of my face.

4. $3000-$5000 in dental care, I was locked up for 45 months and I was right at a year since I
had dental care before I was kidnapped. Absolutely no dental care, not even a cleaning.

As a result, it is an emergency for me to give a broad overview of what the funds will go towards
to lawfully holding those accountable in a court of Equity, thus creating better protections for my
fellow man and get the public trustees in offices of honour, that ultimately are suppose to serve
the beneficiaries of that trust and have instead chose to abuse their authority.

If the Bad actors within our government are allowed to manufacture crimes and steal your equity
for an act the law does not make criminal, it is the path that leads to despotic tyrants. Your help
will also go toward holding these agents accountable in the Supreme Court and create better
protections for our fellow man.

They have used things like "dark web, deep web" to attack peoples want to be private and
anything done in private is bad. Why not discuss the private web? or the Secret web or the
enlightened web, or just plain old hidden web.

THE INTRODUCTION:

He who wants Equity must give Equity. The principles of Equity are the characteristics that we
strive to embody in our lives and what our parents always tried to teach us. but they just didn't
know how to express it to have standing in the realm of the law. It is spiritual. Every Man,
Woman and Child should have a good foundation in Equity because all law is derived from
it. All I have done is study law and equity from 8am to 8 pm in prison.

What is Equity? Black’s law dictionary defines it as:

equity, n. (l4c) 1. Fairness; impartiality; evenhanded

dealing <the company's policies require managers to
use equity in dealing with subordinate employees>.
2. The body of principles constituting what is fair and
right; natural law <the concept of "inalienable rights"
Reflects the influence of equity on the Declaration of
Independence.

Consequently, all language I use in this campaign is, as defined by Black’s law dictionary.

Moreover, IN article 3, section 2 of the constitution it states:

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,
the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;
etc…

Also please note, that it is impossible to understand the constitution without having thoroughly
read and understood, The Law of Nations, the Natural Law of Man applied to Nations and
Sovereigns. By: Emer de Vattel. Why do I say that? Because it was instrumental in
drafting the Constitution as noted by Benjamin Franklin in ‘s reply to W.F.Dumas In 1775: “It
came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising State make it necessary frequently
to consult the “Law of Nations”.

So who am I? I am and have always been a man that strives to be virtuous and practice equity
unbeknownst to me, until I learned Equity. I have been studying law now for almost 10 years,
what I didn’t know about the law was that it is not about fairness, it is about the wealthy,
powerful and educated ruling the poor, weak and uneducated. Equity balances the equation.

What I also didn’t understand was how important procedure is with regards to law! Not equity,
Equity looks through form to substance. In law, procedure is like location in real estate. In law
it is procedure, procedure, procedure. In fact, most of the cases are won on this and this is what
the attorneys study! Moreover, as in my case they use the technicalities of procedure to override
the law.
In other words, you don’t have to commit a crime at all, they just have to accuse you and if you
don’t know the procedure on how to defeat them, you WILL be found guilty and convicted for
an act the law does not make criminal.

How did I learn Equity? Henry Richard Gibson’s, Treatise on Suits in Chancery. Still
Valid today! Under the Judicature act of 1873, In all matters in which there is any conflict or
variance between the rules of Equity and the rules of law, with reference to the same matter, the
rules of Equity shall prevail!

Notice I am not talking about what is legal? There is a distinct difference, but more on that
later. For Now I will first state why it is an emergency for me to have funds now, how I got here
and why I hope the funding will be successful in different stages and why the stages all run in
tandem and how they are tethered to each of the other categories of help.

This is a bona fide (good faith) effort to share with you not just the facts of why I need your
help, but, why helping me is mutually beneficial to your life, your children's life, your parents,
grandparents , your brothers, sisters, cousins, uncles, aunts, friends and society as a whole. It is
of my opinion that I am creating better protections for my fellow man and woman.
Will you agree? With some things I am certain of it! With everything perhaps not. This is a
growth experience for me and I hope it is equally for you.

This private listing is an express contract for those that have an open mind to express their views
and to ask questions and I will reciprocate and answer a portion of my private life related to this
campaign and the subject matter herein with the express intent to improve protections and rights
of my fellow man. I am a private man seeking help and protection by people with intelligent,
candid and insightful ideas about how to approach life's problems with lawful standing.

more to come....As I am funded I will obtain a website to post all the links to the documents,
evidence, facts, pleadings, motions, orders , opinions and testimony with irrefragable transcripts
and recordings. you may privately contact me at. Michaelsgofund@protonmail.com

Yes, I am the Michael Focia on linkedin, I just can't access my account right now because it's
been 4 years worth of undernourishment that effects my memory to remember my passwords.

BTW: You can find my actual filings on Pacer.com, and most of the opinions on line.

Here are authority’s that will prove the veracity of what I say:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1493_5468.pdf

"Yes, Congress decided to regulate dealers’ sales, while leaving the secondary market for guns
largely untouched. As we noted in Huddleston, Congress chose to make the dealer the “principal
agent of federal enforcement” in “restricting [Peoples, criminals’] access to firearms.” 415 U. S.,
at 824. And yes, that choice (like pretty much everything Congress does) was surely a result of
compromise. The line Congress drew between those who acquire guns from dealers and those
who get them as gifts or on the secondary market, we suspect, reflects a host of things, including
administrative simplicity and a view about where the most problematic firearm transactions—
like criminal organizations’ bulk gun purchases—typically occur. But whatever the reason, the
scarcity of controls in the secondary market provides no reason to gut the robust measures
Congress enacted at the point of sale

In so designing the statute, Congress chose not to pursue the goal of “controlling access” to guns
to the nth degree; buyers can, as the dissent says, avoid the statute’s background check and
record-keeping requirements by getting a gun second-hand. But that possibility provides no
justification for limiting the statute’s considered regulation of dealer sales.

We simply recognize that a court should not interpret each word in a statute with blinders on,
refusing to look at the word’s function within the broader statutory context. As we have
previously put the point, a “provision that may seem ambiguous in isolation is often clarified by
the remainder of the statutory scheme . . . because only one of the permissible meanings
produces a substantive effect that is compatible with the rest of the law.”******
[Did you just read that right? YES!]

There you have it right out Justice Kagan's dicta, People can avoid the statutory scheme by
purchasing on the second hand market.

Moreover, Truth is truth, past, present and future. Elaboration may obscure with sophistry and
dialects, but it can not make clearer the intent and reach of the law.

It is axiomatic that statutes creating and defining crimes cannot be extended by intendment, and a
court is FORBIDDEN to criminalize an act simply because the court deems that act of equal
atrocity , or of a kindred character with those that are enumerated. No stature pursues its stated
purpose at all costs. Congress cannot do indirectly what it cannot do directly with the collusion
of judges of a political bent.

Now wait there is far more supportive evidence that the agents are exceeding their delegated
authority under 28 USC 599(a).

Proof that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is acting outside their
delegation of authority, "ultra vires" here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/599A

Title 31 Lists the Treasury and its entire Agency’s. The IRS and BATF are not among the
Agency’s listed. Why? Is it possible that they are the collection agency for the International
Monetary Fund and not the Treasury of the United States of America?

Now lets move on to more proof that the officers of the court, the AUSA, BATFE and the FBI
were put on notice that their acts were ultra vires. In the following case Eric Holder, then
Attorney General argued that the laws don't apply to Lane and therefore had no standing to sue
because the federal firearm laws only apply to Federal Firearms Licensees.

Lane v. Holder

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/111847.P.pdf

"Congress enacted the federal statute at issue, 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(3), part of the Gun Control
Act of 1968, Pub. L. No. 90-618, 82 Stat. 1213, "to strengthen Federal controls over interstate
and foreign commerce in firearms and to assist the States effectively to regulate firearms traffic
within their borders." H.R. Rep. No. 90-1577, at 6 (1968), reprinted in 1968 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4410,
4411. One of the mechanisms for doing so was a requirement that interstate transfers of firearms
take place through federal firearms licensees ("FFLs"). 18 U.S.C.§ 922(a)(1)-(5). Under the
federal statute, a buyer may purchase a handgun from an out-of-state source."

You must understand the rules of statutory interpretation and apply expressio unius est exclusio
alterius. And remember the cases must be interpreted in context.

As an initial matter a private man does not fall under the definition of the Gun Control ACT,,
further evidence it only applies to people that contract with the government.

First lets look at the definition of the word person:

18USC 921(1)The term “person” and the term “whoever” include any individual, corporation,
company, association, firm, partnership, society, or joint stock company. All artifical entities.
Obviously when you apply the canons of statutory interpretation of "Ejusdem generisand
expressio unius est exclusio alterius, it would preclude the term "Natural person or man or
human.

Distinguish the above definition and the definition at 1 USC 1, the words “person” and
“whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint
stock companies, as well as individuals; noticeably absent is the term "as well as"

Now here is what the Supreme Court said about the definition in Mohammad v. Palestinian
Authority, 2012; the phrase "as well as", makes "individual" distinct from the list of artifical
entities that precedes it There you have it write out of the Supreme Courts mouth! Look it up
yourself.

Next Dealer is clearly defined:

Definition of a dealer is found at 18 USC 921(a)(11):

The term “dealer” means (A) any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at
"wholesale or retail", (B) any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making
or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms, or (C) any person who is a
pawnbroker. The term “licensed dealer” means any dealer who is licensed under the provisions
of this chapter

NOTE: "SELLING FIREARMS AT WHOLESALE OR RETAIL"! In interpreting the Act, we

must assume that it is a taxing measure, for otherwise it would be no law at all. Nigro v. United
States , 1928

18 USC 921(a)(21) The term “engaged in the business” means—

as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who devotes

time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the
principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms,
but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or
purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who
sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms;

and

In the case below, it was decided that under Article 4, Section 2 of the privileges and immunities
clause a state can not make it anymore of a burden for a man to dispose of his property even
though he be a non-citizen. It has been said by eminent Justices that this amendment was what
fostered friendship amongst the states.

Ward v. Maryland

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/88411/ward-v-maryland/
"Comprehensive as the power of the States is to lay and collect taxes and excises, it is
nevertheless clear, in the judgment of the court, that the power cannot be exercised to any extent
in a manner forbidden by the Constitution; and inasmuch as the Constitution provides that the
citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several
States, it follows that the defendant might lawfully sell, or offer or expose for sale, within the
district described in the indictment, any goods which the permanent residents of the State might
sell, or offer or expose for sale in that district, without being subjected to any higher tax or excise
than that exacted by law of such permanent residents."

In a case that they try to hide and is labeled at the top "DO NOT PUBLISH": Klayman v.
Obama D.C. Docket No. 9 :16-cv-80087-DMM and 11th circuit appellate case No. 16-14963
found below,.

Klayman sued Obama and the BATFE for trying to take executive action on criminalizing
the very exercise of my god given natural right to provide for myself by the law of necessity,
and nature.and that my case
proves I was politically persecuted....This shows you I committed absolutely NO CRIME!

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/04/fact-sheet-new-executive-
actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our

They are not only using their subjective arbitrary reasoning, but they say he is not at risk for
selling his guns because it does not rise to that of a dealer and can be deemed occasional sale or
hobby like the law says. Gee imagine that! In my case their were two guns in a 14 month period
that is it, absolutely no evidence of any other guns sold.
In my case they then use the sentencing transcripts were they did not have to use the "beyond a
reasonable doubt standard" and just say a number and then defame, libel and slander me saying
it's some outrageous number that they created out of whole cloth and that would I did was illegal
when it clearly is not by the law itself, case law, maxims and principles of law, the law of nature
and nations.

Klayman's 11th circuit Opinion:

http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/201614963.pdf

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-14963 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 9:16-cv-80087-DMM
LARRY E. KLAYMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, Deputy Director of the U.S. Department of Justice, Head of the Bureau
of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA,
c/o U.S. Department of Justice Attn: Attorney General
Loretta Lynch 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530, Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
(May 9, 2017)

Klaymans complaint:

https://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/160119-
ComplaintasFiledExecutiveActionGunControl.pdf

Klaymans motion for summary judgement

https://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/160203-MotionforSummaryJudgmentASFILED.pdf

"An individual can invoke a right to constitutional protection when he or she is harmed, even if
the broader public disagrees and even if the legislature refuses to act. The idea of the
Constitution “was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to
place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles
to be applied by the courts.” West Virginia Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U. S. 624, 638 (1943).
This is why “fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of
no elections.” Ibid."

If the right to same sex marry is protected under the penumbra of the first amendment in an
opinion by Justice Kennedy in the 2015 Supreme Court opinion of OBERGEFELL v. HODGES,
576 U. S. and it is not enumerated, then basic common sense reasoning tells you that the right to
the first law of nature of self-preservation is with much greater protections that are embodied in
the ENUMERATED RIGHT of both the second and fifth amendments and are absolutes!

See the Opinion and quote here:https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

"And liberty regulated by law cannot be permanently secured against the assaults of power or the
tyranny of a majority, if the judiciary must be silent when rights existing independently of human
sanction, or acquired under the law, are at the mercy of legislative action taken in violation of
due process of law."
See :United States Supreme Court, TAYLOR v. BECKHAM, (1900) No. 603
Argued: Decided: May 1, 1900

Maxims of property law and Equity:

So fundamental are maxims of law and equity that those that dispute their authority is regarded
beyond the reach of reason.

If the law is inadequate, the maxim serves in its place.

It is unjust for freeborn individuals not to have the free disposal of their own property.

Use your property so as not to damage another's; so use your own as not to injure another's
property.

The owner of property interest may dispose of all or part of it as he sees fit

It is an inherent right of man to acquire property as well as dispose of it as he sees fit.

Quotes from the Law of Nations or Principle of the Law of Nature applied to the conduct and
affairs of Nations and Sovereigns, 1758, by Emer de Vattel;

Book II Section 79: Domain is necessarily a peculiar and exclusive RIGHT. If I have full right
to dispose of a thing as I please, it follows that others have no right to it at all,since if they had
any at all, I could not dispose of it.

You can find it

here: https://books.google.com/books?id=z8b8rrzRc7AC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge
_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

and finally in Murdoch v. Pennsylvania the Supreme Court (SC) said: A state or UNITED
STATES can not chill the assertion of rights and turn a right into a privilege and tax, put a fee on
it and fine it, and Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, Ala (SC) said; If they do turn the right, into a
privilege you can ignore that law and do it with impunity. And US v. Bishop says, If you have
relied on a Supreme Court Decision, then you couldn't have done anything willfully! (Breaking
any law that is)

Scalia in DC v. Heller stated exactly what is happening today when he stateed "That history
showed that the way tyrants had eliminated a militia consisting of all the able-bodied men was
not by banning the militia but simply by taking away the people's arms, enabling a select militia
or standing army to suppress political opponents."

The law itself that is evidence by 18USC921

I leave you with two quotes from Thomas Jefferson:

"Our citizens have been always free to make, vend and export arms. It is the constant occupation
and livelihood of some of them. To suppress their calling, the only means perhaps of their
subsistence, because a war exists in foreign and distant countries in which we have no concern
would scarcely be expected. It would be hard in principle and impossible in practice. The law of
nations, therefore, respecting the rights of those at peace, does not require from them such an
internal derangement in their occupations. It is satisfied with the external penalty... of
confiscation of such portion of these arms as shall fall into the hands of any of the belligerent
powers on their way to the ports of their enemies. To this penalty our citizens are warned that
they will be abandoned; and that even private contraventions may work no inequality between
the parties at war, the benefits of them will be left equally free and open to all." --Thomas
Jefferson to George Hammond, 1793

After reading that quote it evokes the question: Are we at peace? If not, we must be at
war...Who is the enemy?

and

"Liberty and ignorance cannot co-exist, those that expect to have liberty and be ignorant (of the
law), are expecting something that never was and never will be, the educated will always rule the
un-educated."

It doesn't matter what field you choose to pursue, you can be the best in your field of expertise, if
you don't have a good foundation in law, it will be used to steal everything you have!

It is true mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are suffer-able, than to right
themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed! Make a difference and learn
to make these agents accountable, its' all about contracts!

Michael Focia

18 U.S. Code § 926 - Rules and regulations

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’
Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of
the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled
by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration
of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this
section expands or restricts the Secretary’s