Self-Defense and Gun Control, Part 1
Though the media does all it can to rile the public into thinking America is going to hell in a hand basket—that crime is rampant and getting worse—the reality is far different. Their motto is “If it bleeds, it leads”, so the first thing we hear about is murders and violent crimes (my rule for the news: upon the report of a third crime, I turn it off). Statistics show that over the last 20 years in America, property crimes are down over 20%, homicides are down over 30%, and car thefts are down over 40%. Perhaps news producers are so unimaginative they simply cling to this concept to hold the audience, and as a result, totally misrepresent the moral condition and progress of our country. Or perhaps there is a more sinister force at work.
Instead of offering such reassuring stats, what do we hear? High profile crimes with large body counts—real or staged—coupled with immediate attacks on our right of self-defense (the Second Amendment). The media generates such an aura of crisis that the citizens feel, “Oh my god, children are being killed every day! We have to do something!” And what they do is get stampeded into disarming themselves to show their devotion to peace—forgetting to weigh the motives behind the defensive versus offensive use of any weapon—surrendering the country to potential mass murder to follow.
“…with devotion’s visage and pious action we do sugar on the Devil himself.” –William Shakespeare
So if the disintegration of civility in America isn’t real, what is the purpose and urgency of disarming us?
Regarding the grim prospect of invading the United States in WW2, Japanese Admiral, Isoroku Yamamoto, is claimed to have said, “There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” True, there are over 300 million privately owned firearms in the U.S. It isn’t invading forces we need fear, it is our own internal enemies: the Spirit Murderers responsible for our degrading health and economic collapse. Our Oath of Allegiance warns us: we must defend the Constitution “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” It should say “the Constitution and the people.”
Criminals know to stay away from armed people and communities, preferring to prey on those more vulnerable. Sharks attack sick and struggling fish that can’t fight back, minimizing the risk of injury to themselves. Their senses are designed to detect weakness—it lures them—the scenario is innate in nature, and this is true for fear-driven politicians and empty plutocrats as well. This is a constant throughout the animal kingdom: the young, the old, the weak, the sick, they are all targets for predation. Weapons and armor improve their chances of survival. Giving up our guns reduces our chances for survival, and against an organized enemy, eliminates it.
Self-government and self-defense go hand in hand. No regime can provide 24/7 protection. With an average of 17 police officers for every 10,000 American citizens, the citizens must maintain the capacity to police themselves. Take away this right and the productive are sitting ducks for the destructive. Politicians may say, “To secure law and order, we will confiscate all guns”, but this will not secure law and order; it never has and it never will. It only assures guns will not be aimed at them. Life or death for citizens can then be chosen with little risk to the power structure, and their choice is always death. Granted such a victory, they quickly drop the illusion that they are working for the people and reveal the truth: that the people are at their mercy, to be disposed of at their whim. Why? Because, left with sticks and stones, the people are no longer a threat. They surrendered any comparable means to defend themselves and can now be pushed around, put to work, or punished inhumanly, and will have to endure it or face their master’s ultimate argument.
“To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
–George Mason, father of the American Bill of Rights
In his web article “Gun Control Dictator Style – Tyrants Who Banned Firearms Before Slaughtering The People”, Bradlee Dean commented, “How ironic that those who are calling for gun control are those who want the guns so they can have the control.” Dean then documented the statements and actions of the world’s most devastating butchers, and those they considered a threat.
“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.” —Mao Tze Tung
As a result of establishing gun control in China, Mao’s forces were able to round up 20 million political dissidents without a fight and exterminate them.
“To conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens.” –Adolph Hitler
As a result of establishing gun control in Germany, Hitler’s forces were able to round up 13 million Jews and political dissidents without a fight and exterminate them.
“Death solves all problems–no man, no problem.”
As a result of establishing gun control in the Soviet Union, Stalin’s forces were able to round up 20 million dissidents without a fight and exterminate them.
“To keep you is no benefit. To destroy you is no loss.” –Pol Pot
Pol Pot killed over one million citizens of Cambodia; civil, educated, disarmed people who were killed just for being intelligent, or if you can believe it, simply looking intelligent. No one so callous to the value of human life should be in power longer than it takes to discover it.
Why would we trust the representatives of a government with immense military power who do not wish to permit its citizens the same self-protection? Law-abiding citizens properly supplement the police and military. The only reason to disarm them is to extend control over and ultimately dispose of them. The cost of military intervention into public matters is so high, by far the easiest solution is to arm the citizens directly and have them handle civil defense. Many countries require military training. According to federal statute, most of us are in fact considered members of the reserve militia of the United States, and in towns such as Kennesaw and Nelson, Georgia, citizens are required to own guns. Have crimes skyrocketed in such places? No, it has plummeted. The vast majority of American citizens who own guns do so for protection and recreation; they do not live by the gun. They live productive lives and can be trusted to defend not only themselves, but infused with a fierce sense of justice, will often risk themselves to save those in harm’s way. In the worst scenario, an armed populace serves as a check to illegitimate power if ever an attempt is made to use the military, or a private mercenary force, against the people.
The US military had a hard time dealing with a guerrilla war in Iraq with 30 million inhabitants. A guerrilla war against 300 million inhabitants is unwinnable. Most of our military personnel would join the citizens anyway, once they realized their corrupt leaders expected them to kill American families like their own. Why would they take such a step? Desperation. Human health has proven too resilient. It’s just that, once you have killed all the bees and that didn’t work, stopped the North Atlantic current and that didn’t work, dumped toxic heavy metals on people and that didn’t work, foisted man-made diseases, banned cures, poisoned citizens through their food supply and personal products and that didn’t work, at some point the corrupt rich will resort to bullets to pare the population down to their magic number.
With guns, we are citizens. Without them, we are subjects, which is a nice way to say slaves. Do not let them take our guns in the midst of a voluntary, civil exchange, because after that, they risk nothing if they choose to be uncivil, which is what history has proven fear-driven governments do, time and time again. With no ability to oust them, you no longer need to be considered. Force is now an easy option for them, and your fate is in their hands; a very precarious position to be in. If they’ve discounted the value of your life and callously assumed the responsibility to decide your fate, make sure you retain the power to decide theirs.