Heroes According to the Mainstream Media

by James Jaeger

Last week we had two more shootings.

One assailant was stopped by "good guys with guns" and the other assailant was stopped by a "good guy without a gun." Who do you think is plastered all over the Mainstream Media as a hero? Here are some of the headlines anyone can retrieve by entering "Jason Seaman, Indiana Shooting" into Google search:

Science teacher hailed as HERO after tackling gunman at Indiana middle school -- CBS News

Central Illinois native, SIU grad hailed as HERO after stopping Indiana school shooting suspect -- Chicago Tribune

Science teacher Jason Seaman hailed as a HERO after Indiana school shooting -- USA Today

Science teacher Jason Seaman being called a HERO for stopping school shooter - ABC 6

Teacher hailed as a HERO after Indiana School Shooting -- NBC News

Hero teacher who bravely stopped Indiana school shooter gets praised from White House -- FOX NEWS

* * *

But ENTER "Carlos Nazario, Bryan Whittle, Oklahoma shooting" into Google search and here's what comes up:

Armed citizen who shot Oklahoma gunman told worried crowd, 'I'm here to help' -- USA Today

2 civilians rushed to their cars to get their guns before fatally shooting Oklahoma City restaurant gunman -- ABC News

The Latest: Man Shot Oklahoma Gunman to Stop the Threat -- New York Times

Gunman opens fire in Oklahoma City restaurant, is shot dead by bystanders -- NBC News

Witness describes moment civilians took down Oklahoma City restaurant gunman -- CBS Evening News

The Latest: Man shot Oklahoma gunman to stop the threat -- Washington Post

Police release identities of suspect, armed civilians from Lake Hefner shooting -- Oklahoma News Ch 4

Police: Armed citizens retrieved guns from their vehicles to take down Lake Hefner shooter -- KOCO News 5

Not even once are Carlos Nazario and Bryan Whittle, the two "good guys with guns" who stopped a madman at an Oklahoma restaurant, referred to as "HEROS" yet Jason Seaman, the "good guy without a gun" is pronounced a "hero" in almost every article.

In fact did you even hear about the shooting that happened just last week in a restaurant in Oklahoma and was stopped by Carlos Nazario and Bryan Whittle? Did you hear anything about it on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS or even FOX NEWS at all? Of course not, because the perpetrator was stopped by two "good guys with guns" and the gun-control lobby that dominates the Mainstream Media doesn't like citizens WITH guns, they like citizens WITHOUT guns.

Here's what happened in case you haven't been getting "all the news that's fit to print." Carlos Nazario and Bryan Whittle were entering Louie's Grill & Bar at about 6:30 PM when they suddenly encountered Alexander Tilghman who began firing his gun into the restaurant. Rather than calling the police -- who would arrive in about 11 minutes -- Carlos and Byran followed their instincts and exercised their Second Amendment rights. They retrieved their guns "lawfully" stowed in the trunks of their cars and, as the active shooter turned to flee, confronted him and opened fire.

But why did Carlos and Byran have to go to the trunks of their cars when the highest law in the land says they have the right to "keep and bear" -- meaning own and have guns on their person? Some back story may be necessary.

Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia and Wyoming have it right. In these states citizens are free to "keep and bear" guns without permits or licenses. Given this, were Carlos and Byran in one of these states, they would not have had to get their guns out of their trunks, they could have born them on their person.

But wait a minute, where in the Constitution does it say citizens are supposed to have permits or licenses in the first place? Where, in the highest law in the land, does it say that Carlos and Bryan are required to keep their guns in the trunk of their cars -- especially when a madman with a gun could break out anywhere: schools, churches, concerts, cafes, movie theaters…

Welcome to the twisted world of straw arguments 38 rogue states have fallen victim to. Case in point:

Several weeks ago, Governor Maty Fallin of Oklahoma vetoed a bill that would have allowed Oklahoma residents -- like Carols and Bryan -- to carry guns without a permit. But wait how can a Governor "veto" a "bill" that's not even Constitutional in the first place?

The Second Amendment -- part of the highest law in the land -- states that "… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." What part of that clause does Governor Fallin fail to understand?

Sheriff Mack of OATH KEEPERS, in a must-see documentary film entitled MOLON LABE, says a good synonym for "infringe" is "hinder." Thus any "law" or regulation that hinders the right to keep and bear arms is illegal. The Sheriff states it boldly and bluntly: gun regulations are illegal, because they hinder the right to keep and bear.

And the Supreme Court agrees with Sheriff Mack.

In Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 442 the high court found that "an unconstitutional act is not a law; it imposes no duties; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed?"

Given this, how can any "law" that Governor Maty Fallin purports to "pass" or "veto" have any meaning at all? The Governor is thus "vetoing" something that the Supreme Court says was never a law in the first place. Again, this is the twisted world of politics the gun-control lobby and their lovers in the Harvey Weinstein-infested Mainstream Media have created to confuse the American public.

But all Americans really need to understand is:

1) they have the right to keep and bear arms anywhere and;
2) there is no permit or regulation that can hinder that right.

The Second Amendment is every American's permit to keep and bear guns, whether such be open or concealed carry.

Gun regulations, licenses and permits are illegal per the Supreme Court because they are unconstitutional acts.

"An unconstitutional act is not a law; it imposes no duties; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed". -- Norton v. Shelby

"An unconstitutional act is not a law; it binds no one". -- Huntington v. Worthen

"An unconstitutional law is void, and is as no law. An offence created by it is not a crime." -- Ex parte Siebold

The Supreme Court also ruled in Williams v. United States: "In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force and appropriate meaning; for it is evident from the whole instrument, that no word was unnecessarily used, or needlessly added...."

This means the words, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" are NOT unnecessary or needlessly added.

In summary: the Second Amendment gives all citizens -- in all states -- the right to keep and bear arms without a license or permit. Licenses and permits are infringements -- hindrances -- of the highest law in the land AND governors and legislatures that seek to pass or enforce licenses or permits are technically criminals.

The NRA thus rightfully praised Carlos Nazario and Bryan Whittle as 'good guys with guns stopping a bad guy with a gun.'

The NRA also asked Oklahoma Governor Mary Falin to "wake up" because she's doing more damage than just sleeping on the job: she's endangering the lives of the citizens of Oklahoma. By vetoing -- by even acknowledging a so-called bill -- that "allows" adults to carry fire arms without training or permits the Governor is in effect saying that "An unconstitutional act IS a law; it DOES impose duties; IS in legal contemplation as OPERATIVE as though it had been blessed by a competent court of law". All this is the exact opposite of what the Supreme Court declared in Norton v. Shelby.

Thus Governor Falin -- and other governors and legislators across the nation like Governor Falin -- are abetting, not only violations of the Highest Court in the Land, but the Highest Law in the Land: the U.S. Constitution.

These failures of leadership create a myth in the public mind that good guys with guns have no place in society;

These failures of leadership create a myth in the public mind that law-abiding citizens should be disarmed or hindered in their ability to keep and bear;

These failures of leadership create a myth in the public mind that it's NOT okay for law-abiding citizens to fulfill their duties set forth in the Second Amendment and three Militia clauses in the Constitution;

These failures of leadership create a myth in the public mind that laws, regulations, licenses and permits supercede the authority of the U.S. Constitution and the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment is Carlos Nazario and Bryan Wittle's license and permit to carry.

Had frivolous and illegal gun regulations not been passed, or put into the public consciousness by rogue politicians and usurpers in the gun-control lobby, Carlos and Bryan would not have had to "keep" their guns in their trunks. They would have been able to "bear" them on their person as envisioned by the Framers of the Second Amendment. This is what the words: "right to KEEP and BEAR mean. They mean to have guns on your person -- openly or concealed.

Where in the Second Amendment does it say anything about open or concealed carry? Where does it say anything about licenses or permits? It doesn't. Therefor any "law" passed to imply that it does is no law at all.

It is illegal and dangerous applications of the Second Amendment that have enabled the escalating rash of mass shooting we are seeing across this nation. The creation of "gun-free zones" in our nation's schools, and other public places, as well as all manner of unwise, unconstitutional, profit-driven activities that are facilitating mass shootings.

We address all this in a documentary film now in production, such entitled, GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS -- How An Armed Citizenry Deters Tyranny and Atrocities. This film is in association with OATH KEEPERS and features Stewart Rhodes, Edwin Vieira, Larry Pratt, Sheriff Richard Mack, Pastor Chuck Baldwin, G. Edward Griffin, David Kopacz, Dave Wos, Dan McGonigle, Steven Willeford and others.

Stephen Willeford, you may recall, was another "good guy with a gun" that was present when an active shooter killed 26 parishioners at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Just like good guys, Carlos Nazario and Bryan Whittle, Stephen Willesford's heroic deed was downplayed by the Mainstream Media because he was an NRA-trained instructor and he happened to keep and bear an AR-15, one of the "weapons of war" the gun-control lobby wants to ban because "there is no reason for them to be in society." Of course the MSM fails to mention that Devin Patrick Kelly, the assailant at the First Baptist Church had just done his deed using a Ruger AR-556, a variant of the AR-15 which Mr. Willeford had. Had Stephen Willeford NOT had an AR-15, would he have been able to neutralize the activities of Devin Kelly?

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15 of the U.S. Constitution AND the movie GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS answer this question.

GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS will address questions and issues the Mainstream Media and the gun-control lobby will never discuss. For instance, when was the last time you heard the MSM discuss any of the following:

1) According to Scientific American magazine, 1 in 6 Americans are on high-profit, network TV-peddled SSRI psych drugs;

2) Many teachers and school administrators are ex-military who would be happy to conceal-carry in schools;

3) Hollywood makes billions off of violent movies and games, but movies are "mere entertainment" according to former head of the MPAA studios;

4) Since Engel v. Vitale removed worship from the public schools, our children have been getting their values from Hollywood;

5) Is a bigger centralized police state the answer or should we be gravitating back towards a Constitutional Militia System, i.e., good guys with guns?

If you are concerned about any of these questions or issues, please support the production of GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS. Watch the trailer at and donate what you can at You are the only way this movie will get done.

Originated: 26 May 2018

Please forward this to your mailing list. The mainstream media will probably not address this subject because they have conflicts of interest with their advertisers, stockholders and the political candidates they send campaign contributions to. It's thus up to responsible citizens like you to disseminate important issues so that a healthy public discourse can be initiated or continued. Your comments and suggestions are welcome and future versions of this research paper will reflect them.

Permission is hereby granted to excerpt and publish all or part of this article provided nothing is taken out of context. Please give reference to the source URL.

Any responses you proffer in connection with this research paper when emailed or posted as an article or otherwise, may be mass-disseminated in order to continue a public discourse. Unless you are okay with this, please do not respond to anything sent out. We will make every effort, however, to remove names, emails and personal data before disseminating anything you submit.

Don't forget to watch our documentary films listed below so you will have a better understanding of what we believe fuels most of the problems under study at Jaeger Research Institute. We appreciate you referring these documentary films to others, purchasing copies for your library, screening them for home audiences and displaying them on your public-access TV channels. The proceeds from such purchases go to the production of new documentaries. Thank you.

If you wish to be removed from this mailing list go to but first please be certain you are not suffering from Spamaphobia as addressed at


Mission | Full-Spectrum News | Movies by James Jaeger | Sponsor |
Jaeger Research Institute