Rick Green [00:00:07] Welcome to The WallBuilders Show, the intersection of faith and culture. Thanks for joining us today. We're taking on hot topics of the day from a biblical, historical, and constitutional perspective. I'm Rick Green here with David Barton and Tim Barton, and we're gonna try to break our record from last week's Foundations of Freedom Thursday where we covered, you got it, one question. So the challenge, David and Tim, is to answer more than one question today. If we get two, we're doing great. Now I know David always lays out like 47 questions because he's so optimistic. And then we usually get to three or four, okay, he really only lays out like four. But still, you know, the questions are there. It's just, you now, how long do we talk when we're answering the question? But I'm gonna ask the first question. I'm not even gonna look at the audience questions yet, guys, because Tim, I'm really curious. I technically consider myself a teacher because I homeschooled, well, okay. You know Cara did all the work. You know how this works. She was really the one that homeschool the kids. But what kind of teacher can come to the teacher's conference that wall builders is putting on this summer? And I know there's two chances to come. So there's two dates. and i know it's i remember you tell me a couple weeks ago how incredibly inexpensive it is i think it's like a hundred bucks that's it uh... anyway i wanted to ask if i have to be a particular type of teacher?

Tim Barton [00:01:17] Well, everybody's welcome to register and apply and there generally are kind of a variety of teachers that come. It's the week after the 4th of July, but these are two and a half day sessions. So it's going to be a Monday, Tuesday, and a Half Day Wednesday is one. And then there's going be a Thursday, Friday, Half Day Saturday. It's a week after 4th July. Teachers can find out by going to WallBuilders.com. They can click in that top right, Rick, you identified I think when we talked about Last time there was a hamburger. 

Rick Green [00:01:45] Hamburger I don't know where it came from but that's what my kids call it. 

Tim Barton [00:01:48] So yeah, it's what the cool kids say So we're gonna say it click on the hamburger in the top right and somebody's like, I don''t see a hamburger Yeah, just three lines. 

Rick Green [00:01:56] It's three lines. Yeah, the same size, too. And the meat's supposed to be wider than the bread if it's a good hamburger. So it doesn't. OK, digressing. Sorry. Sorry. 

Tim Barton [00:02:03] So if you go to a teacher's conference, there's all kinds of information there. People can find out more about it. And we do try to prioritize if someone is a professor, if they are a teacher, generally where it's a larger class. So if they teach in a public school, a Christian school, maybe even if they lead a big co-op, totally great. But we do have sometimes teachers that come from co-ops, from Christian private charter schools and from public school and then also from university level so it's kind of across the board. and we invite everybody to apply to register. If there's availability, we would love for people to come so they can go to WallBuilders.com and find out more about that. I do think that we are starting to fill both of those up, but I think there are still a couple of spots available. So if there are teachers listening that are interested or if you know a teacher... And you think, man, they really ought to come learn from original documents, the true history of America. We would love to have them be a part. They can go to wallbuilders.com to find out more. 

Rick Green [00:03:04] And this is so much better than your typical kind of continuing education, boring lecture, sitting there, just listening to people talk all the time, you get to touch this stuff. You get to see these documents. You get, to be around some really cool people. It's great fellowship. So check it out folks right there at wallbuilders.com. All right. Because I like to set us up for victory and success instead of failure. I'm counting that as a question. Okay. So there's one, one down. And also because I know I'm about to ask you a three-part question, which means David from league city, we may only get to your questions. So we're gonna count your questions as questions. So just so that again, we're set up for success here. All right, so here's David from League City with a three-part question. And if we get to all three of them, we will have gotten to four questions total, including the teacher question. All right. Howdy, David, Rick and Tim. I've been listening to your show for years and I love the excellent information I get from it every week. I have some questions regarding President Trump's promise to sign a concealed carry reciprocity law. First question is would this federal law be unconstitutional because it would override or reverse state laws? In other words, would this law be going against the 10th Amendment? So he's got a couple more questions guys, but let's tackle that one first.

David Barton [00:04:11] Well tenth amendment specifically applies to government issues, government granted issues, especially the non-numerary issues that don't belong to the federal government. So what you start with is anything that is an inalienable right doesn't belong to any government, it belongs to God. And so since the second amendment is part of the inalienneable rights, the bill of rights, no state has any say over it. No federal government has any sale over it, so what Trump is trying to do is restore an inaenable right, the natural right of self-defense, A declaration talked about the value system being the laws of nature, nature's God. And so not only do we have plenty of biblical laws, the laws have nature's god that tell us self-defense is God given right. We have the right to defend ourself clearly throughout the scriptures. There's so many passages on that, but also in nature. I mean, we're, we're part of the mammal system. And so among mammals, self-defense is a natural instinct for all mammals. I just try mess. I, you know, I've got horses. Try messing with a newborn colt and see what mama mare does to you. When she puts a hook part right in the middle of your forehead, it's just instinctive in them. They will protect their young and that's throughout the mammal species. So that's an inalienable right. What Trump is trying to do is keep the other states that have infringed on that right. And they've tried to make it a regulatory right. He's trying to restore it to, to, uh, really to an ineligible right. It would not violate federal constitutional law because the way the declaration lays it out and the constitution accepts it, you start with, there is a Creator, the Creator gives certain inalienable rights to men, below the level of those inalible rights, you can have manmade law and then down from that into municipal law and others. But it all starts with God-given rights. And so since this is a God- given right, it would not do anything against the 10th amendment. This is higher than the 10 th amendment, it's higher than the constitution. It goes back to natural law, the laws of nature and nature's God. I would love to see this reciprocity. I mean, think of it. Shouldn't we have reciprocity on free speech in all 50 states? I mean shouldn't we have reciprocating freedom of religion, all 50 States, you know, anything that's ineligible, right? We're supposed to do in all of 50 States. And we don't think about reciprocity with it. And this is in the same category as any of those other ineligable rights. 

Rick Green [00:06:26] We even have reciprocity on, I don't know if you can call driving an inalienable ride or not, uh, maybe it's a, what would you call that freedom of movement? Or, uh maybe there was a term that the founders used on that, but I don' have to get a different driver's license in every state. And, uh like you said, I can go give a speech. I'm doing what did one in Omaha last night. I didn't have to go get a permit from that government because I was a Texan. So that's a great point. 

David Barton [00:06:48] point, David. And right, just to answer your question, it's called the right of expatriation is what they call it. The right to leave one state and go to another, the right to go through states. So that's the right, of expatriation is the right. To move through states. 

Rick Green [00:07:00] I should have known it would be a word I couldn't spell, expatriation. Okay. 

Tim Barton [00:07:05] And guys, let me, let me play devil's advocate a little bit on this because I, I can already think of some of my friends who would point out, well, if you go to the 1800s, they're definitely, I mean, this was even like some old Western towns, there was a laws in towns that you can't bring your guns to town, boys, leave your guns at home. So if, if we're saying there should be reciprocity. 

Rick Green [00:07:28] Hey, was that Johnny Cash? Were you with? 

Tim Barton [00:07:31] I mean, it could have been from a song, uh, however, right. The point in fact, it is true. There were towns that would have laws that you had to check your guns when you come into town. And so how do you balance where the founding fathers certainly believed in, in a level of autonomy for states, uh they believed in local control and a lot of areas, but that you shouldn't have your enableable rights violated. They believe those two things could happen at once. And so. If we look back to some of these towns in the 19th century that were passing these laws, I don't really remember hearing or reading about any constitutional challenges to them at that time. So would this fall in a different category? And again, I'm throwing this to you guys playing a little devil's advocate. Because obviously, I absolutely support every inalienable right to be recognized in every single state and every single city, but we do recognize this is something that has happened in times past in America. And it again, I don't recall any major challenges or Supreme Court overturning and saying cities can't have people check their firearms when they come to town, et cetera. I know that's a very different scenario where we are now than it was back then. But what do you guys think about maybe that counter and challenge? 

David Barton [00:08:46] Yeah, I think in that, in that culture, there was nothing that was anti-gun in the culture and maybe anti- gun inside city limits. But as soon as you left city limits, you put all 14 of your guns back in your holster and carried them with you. And so they were so used to guns and they were, so not against guns. They just wanted to regulate some places and probably had they made an issue out of it. They could have done something with it, but there was not the movement we have today that is an anti-gun movement, anti self-defense movement. the government's in charge of all your rights kind of movement. That's where I think the distinction is, is in the tone and atmosphere in which they lived, you know, Marshal White or Marshal may say, okay, the Cowboys can't bring their guns to town. Cause every time you come to town and you shoot somebody. And so there's that kind of mentality going in some ways, but the atmosphere itself was so pro gun and pro self-defense and you were expected to have something with you to defend yourself. I don't think that that comparison works if people understand the atmosphere they're trying to compare it to. 

Rick Green [00:09:48] That'd be really interesting. I'm going to go back and read the McDonald case because Thomas, in that case gives a lot of that history. And, even in the Bruin case, the one from a couple of years ago, Alito goes back to, I think it was Alito that wrote that one. Maybe it was corsage. Um, but anyway, they, they give a lot that that history and I can't remember cause they refer to exactly what you're talking about Tim. Cause there were exceptions, which is why they left room in the Bruin in case for states or cities to have places like bars you know, if you have a 51% a 51 percent of your Revenue is, uh, alcohol, you know, that that's a place they could say you can't carry because, and that's more like what I envisioned when I think of Wyatt Earp and those guys, uh taking the, you Know, Virgil collecting the guns, right? They're on the, on the steps, uh as they're headed into the saloon. Um, and so, you, know, in those limited areas probably, and what this would do with the reciprocity thing would at least, you know, when you're literally riding from town to town, maybe if you're on your horse, riding from down to town within that state, at least then you could have your, your weapon might be the way to reconcile this with those old laws. 

Tim Barton [00:10:47] Yeah. And it's something too that following along those lines, Rick, I mean, part of my thought and even the response to this would be, well, several things about this. First of all, towns back then were not very large. And so the idea that the marshal or the sheriff wasn't able to get to everywhere. We're talking about like a city block for some of these. 

Rick Green [00:11:05] Right, right, it's not your residential 

Tim Barton [00:11:07] You know, there's like four buildings, five buildings in the town. And so it wasn't this scenario today where we're somewhere and police response time might be eight or 10 or 15 or 20 minutes before somebody can get there. Right, this is a very different scenario, number one. And number two, even though we would support Rick, as you mentioned, the idea of reciprocity that we should be able to have a gun just because I go to New York or somewhere else doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to have a gun. But even in these cities, we would acknowledge there are certain places that we fully support the right of certain business owners say, no, we don't want handguns in here, there's why there's laws and codes that are passed in place for that there's also places like federal buildings, various areas where you can't carry firearms if you're going to a gun store or actually not always gun stores in some towns and cities it is certainly not in Texas. But if you go to a guns show they do have those requirements as well. And so it's not unusual that there are boundaries put around where we can carry firearms and how that works, even in the places that encourage individuals to have carry firearms for their own protection and self-preservation. It's not necessarily contradictory. And there were different circumstances back then, but to your point, it's probably worth us going back and rereading some of those cases where some of these situations were identified, and maybe there is some additional context even in the way that those just as read it as they deliver those decisions. 

Rick Green [00:12:39] And it was Johnny Cash. I looked it up. Don't take your guns count 1958. For some reason I was hearing in my head, Keith, not Keith Whitley. Um, um, you know, should have been a cowboy. Uh, the guy that just put Toby Keith, I was here in Toby Keith in my head, but that was 35 years later when he did, uh, uh should have been a Cowboy. Okay. Sorry guys, derailed us from that. All right, before I ask the second part of David from league cities question, I have to mention the second amendment book that we have at wallbuilders.com. That is such a great primer on all of this history about the second amendment. So if you go to WallBuilders.com and you go to the store, you can search for second amendment and you'll see that green book with the big two on it and the guns inside the two. Check out that book. It's only seven bucks. Get that book, study that book I'm telling you, there's so much there. I mean, Supreme court to say court decisions to founding fathers quotes to just really good stuff that that'll give you a real background on this very question. But the second part of David's question. He says, and this is kind of the practicality of, of how do you kind of get the policy adopted? Do you need the federal law to do that? He says is such a law truly necessary or should the state's laws, which impose more severe restrictions on concealed carry be stricken down as being unconstitutional? In other words, is this law really just strengthening the second amendment? So I guess he's saying, is there a court solution instead of a congressional solution? And of course we never want it to be the courts that's having to make policy. We wanted to be Congress. that does that, but what do you guys think? 

David Barton [00:14:04] Well, if you go back to the philosophical position that an inalienable right is really, it has reciprocity across all state lines because it's a God-given right. And just as you have freedom of speech as a God given right, what if you had one state that said, well, you have free speech, but it's limited to two sentences, or you have freedom to speech, it's only limited to 15 seconds of speech. You don't put that kind of limits on it. So what we're what we looking at now this is. that all the, all the things we're talking about in terms of how big the magazine passes is a seven, 10, 15, whatever that's all done by states who won't guns eliminated a hundred percent completely gone anyway. That's, that's part of their effort not to draw it down because the wild west you're in a saloon, don't want a gun in a salon or a gun in the church, that that's their attempt to completely eliminate it. And I think that that motive itself is enough to be a real problem when it comes to this constitutionally. 

Tim Barton [00:15:00] I think dad also, even going back to identifying when the founding fathers talked about the right of self-defense, they also often would use the phrase self-preservation and, and part of the law of nature is that God put in every single thing he created a instinct for self preservation and then God put in them a level of ability, whether they fly or run really fast or they have fangs or claws and God put it in every single thing that he created. Some capacity on some level to have self-preservation so their species could continue etc. Etc And so this this idea of self-proservation is where the founding fathers really come up with this Some of this notion of self defense because you're trying to preserve yourself you're try to preserve your family your wife your kids however that looks and In the midst of this if we start regulating self-Preservation And I'm thinking obviously of firearms in this context because we're talking about the Second Amendment largely But how ridiculous would it be? We applied this logic across the board and self-preservation in the laws of nature, which deals, of course, with creation. If you said, okay, grizzly bears. Uh, we're going to say your claws can only be half an inch long. So we're not saying you can't have them. We're just saying, right. You have to file them down. Cause if they're like two inches long, that's too much. So that's two aggressive. We do not tolerate two inch claws in our town. It would be ridiculous. Right. Uh, this idea that you don't, if you are an animal that you have to defang before you go to town, you have a D claw before you got to town. That's not the way that God created in creation in general and so this idea of self-preservation That we would limit it or that we would change the standard of how Much you are allowed to or how well you are able to based on where you are Does it seem to be consistent with the laws of nature? Which certainly is what the founding fathers were basing so much of their ideas on as they're fighting to create and then defend What we know as a second amendment? 

Rick Green [00:17:01] I'm still in that one. I'm stealing it, Tim. That was too good, man. I just add that to the list of a hundred different stories or metaphors or analogies I've stolen from you. Uh, but the, the fact that the claws are at the end of the arms, which means it is a subject of the right to keep them bare arms, but claws. Anyway, I thought that was a weak attempt. I got you. 

David Barton [00:17:21] Yeah. All right. All, right. All right, go ahead, David. And by the way, guys, just because there's a lot of people who listen, who some hostile as well, and they're nitpickers and they just look for everything wrong, Tim, when you say that everything in God's creation has that defense, well, we're talking the mammal stuff. We're not talking the trees have self-defense and, you know, not. 

Tim Barton [00:17:45] I mean grass causes allergies for a lot of people. I think that's a good mechanism. You go mow the yard, right? And you, no, no. But that's great. 

Rick Green [00:17:51] Yeah, this is going to be one of those rare instances where I disagree with David Barton because I saw Lord of the Rings, Return of the King, and the trees are pretty self-defense oriented in that movie. 

Tim Barton [00:18:02] They're the reason the battle was won. There's no doubt. 

Rick Green [00:18:04] That's right. I mean, they were a huge part. Okay. So in the real world though. No, great point though, David. I mean when we say animal kingdom, I guess we're really referring to mammals, even though, like you said, there's exceptions. some of these. Well grass, I guess like you said for us with allergies, they have a pretty good defense but even some of those what some of those flowers, you know that have like a poison or a sting or whatever the. 

David Barton [00:18:26]  the Venus flytrap. 

Rick Green [00:18:27] Yeah. Yeah, that's what I'll say. Yeah Yeah, but but your points well taken that it is it is It's not every you know, every species that exists for sure, actually David has from League City has I have to keep saying League City or everybody's gonna think I mean David Barton He's got a third part to this question. Well, we got to take a break We'll be right back. Stay with us folks. It's foundations of freedom Thursday on TheWallBuilders Show.

Rick Green [00:19:54] Welcome back to the WallBuilders Show. It's foundations of freedom Thursday. And I'm, I'm happy I'm having to manipulate the numbering so that we actually get past one question because, you know, technically we're going to be doing David's from league cities questions the whole day and not break our record, but I ask a teacher question and we're breaking David's down to three questions. So we're going to, we're gonna get to four here. All right. Here's the fourth one of the day. Then do you think also from David. Do you think such a law would follow the more lenient state's current laws or the more restrictive state's laws? For example, would the federal law impose 10-round magazine capacity limitations in accordance with the more restrictive state laws or would there be no magazine capacity restrictions? So David, you mentioned the the the capacity the magazine thing earlier, and I think his point on this question is which state restrictions would be would you have to follow when you're in a particular state if we have reciprocity? Or would the feds, you know define what the restrictions could be? 

Tim Barton [00:20:45] Well, I think this is something that we've seen from the Supreme Court with them striking down some state laws that were minimizing people's ability for certain guns or magazines, et cetera. I expect to see more of that coming from the supreme court as well, with more challenges coming to move some of these regulations, but along these lines, slightly different. I think what would be interesting too, is if you have full reciprocity. So whether you're open carry or concealed carry, one of the challenges we faced in Texas, when people said, we just want to be a open carry state. is there's a lot of states that give reciprocity to Texas because when you get concealed handgun license, you have to go through a certain level of training. Now it's a very, very base level of trading, but you have so many hours in the classroom. You have to have so much hours on the range, shooting so many rounds and getting the majority of your rounds on that paper target. And so the reciprocity came by states recognizing you've gone through some basic firearm training. You have a basic idea of how this worked and how this functions. Therefore we feel comfortable with you having that firearm in our state. And I think one of the things that could be a little unsettling about this on some level, all of us are people that have grown up around firearms. We've pretty much all of 100 our whole life. Much of the meat we've consumed over the years has been from animals that we harvested. And in the midst of us having a lot of familiarity with guns, Rick, obviously what you guys are doing now with your own training facility at Patriot Academy, your own range that you're doing these constitutional defense classes. It's, it's not unusual that people come to one of these constitutional defense classes that have been around guns much of their life and they show up and they really have never been trained. And so they're, they're not doing a lot of some very basic gun safety things with their firearms. And so to me, one of the concerns is not just the standard of regulation that comes with, can we now have 15 round capacity magazines or there's no limit on magazine capacity, all these kinds of things that could come there. To me, I think one of the more interesting issues is, there going to be any kind of encouragement? Cause I don't think you should be required to have so many hours of training before you can have a firearm. Although I would highly encourage you to do that, but to me, that is, that is one of things that I think is overlooked because when the founding fathers obviously are recognizing this right of self preservation, they enshrine it in the second amendment, the right of Self-Defense. At that point in history, virtually everybody grew up in a home where there was at least one musket, where much of the food they harvested was taken with that musket. If it wasn't right grown crops in their garden, they're getting meat because they went and shot me to somebody shot me. They're growing up in the culture around firearms. So they're learning firearm safety by and large. And today there's so many people that have not grown up around firearms that haven't learned basic gun safety. And to me that is that is one of the bigger challenges. And I don't think we should put restrictions on the second amendment or on people's ability to have firearms, but certainly maybe even what we've seen in Iowa where they said part of the middle school curriculum is every kid has to take some kind of firearm safety or hunter safety. That's part of what they actually do for public school, middle school, I think is in Iowa. And there's probably other states that do that now as well, but it would seem like it might be good to return some kind of basic gun training and operation. So there's a better general awareness of firearm safety and firearm operation. 

David Barton [00:24:17] You know, a couple points to go with that, Tim, and we've talked about this before, but John Quincy Adams, when he was overseas as a diplomat, he wrote back to his brother who was keeping John Quince Adams two sons and was raising them. He said, look, the boys are eight and 10, and they really, really, really need training in guns. And John Quincy Adams pointed out that every gun accident he knew of came because people who were unfamiliar with guns were handling guns. And he said, the more training you have, the less accidents you have. And so that's a safety feature. The same thing with the car, the more training you do with the cars, the less likely you will have accidents with the car. You have more accidents generally from those who are less experienced in driving. So I think that that's like a really key point that the training needs to be there. And I think it's a good thing to require. But the other thing I'd say about the second amendment is the second Amendment doesn't grant us any rights at all. It recognizes preexisting rights. So to rely on the second amendment because it gives us rights. No, God gives us right. So our rights come from God. And the second member merely recognized a God given right and said, this is off limits for government to mess with because it's right. It comes from God government can mess with what government gives, but it can't mess with that what God gives. And so that's the other thing about second amendment. Any enable right there God given they come from God governments to step aside and recognize them say, hey, that's above our jurisdiction. This is the same thing. This is supposed to happen with the feds and the states and the local people when they say, hey, this is not our jurisdiction, this a state, or this is not the state, this federal, this not the federal, it's local. Same thing with guns. If it's a God jurisdiction, the Second Amendment doesn't give us anything. It just recognizes what God gave us and tries to protect it. 

Rick Green [00:26:00] And as we're closing out today, we do encourage everybody to get training. So that's part of what we're saying is, you know, these are God given rights, but be responsible, get a good, find a good place there in your local community or come down to the Patriot Academy campus. And I'll close out with David from league cities. Last part of his, uh, of his email that he sent in because he actually just was at Patriot academy. So he said, nice seeing you a few weeks ago. My wife and I were at Patriots Academy for the outstanding gun and gun training. Thanks for all you do to educate and inform people about the truth. God bless you, David league city. And I love this. Can't wait for the American story volume three to come out. So he's already read volume one and volume two. Everybody's excited about volume three coming out as well. Thanks so much for listening. Everybody don't miss tomorrow. We got some good news for you on good news Friday. You've been listening to the WallBuilders Show.