Experts Agree Gun Control Works!

The defense of the right to keep and bear arms is a defense of the core of the American Soul. The San Francisco Bleat, Nancy “stretch” Pelosi is calling for gun registration. In an interview with Good Morning America (Good Grief, America; you actually watch that?) everyone`s favorite Bolshevik grandmother called for the registration of American firearms. According to the Washington Times: “The speaker picked a television show with a viewership of 4.6 million to float the Democrats’ coming gun-control push. Questioned on ABC’s “Good Morning America” about the prospect of new gun-control laws now that “it’s a Democratic president, a Democratic House,” she responded, “We don’t want to take their guns away. We want them registered.”

Now, the Second AMENDMENT to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

``A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.``

The SF Bleat, along with many Democrats in Congress, like to twist and squirm on the language of this amendment, citing the first part about a well-regulated militia. If the maintaining of a militia-and by militia the liberals mean a government-run army-were the purpose, then why was this placed as an amendment, one of 10 dealing with the rights of the People over the State? The Bill of Rights enumerate the rights of the People, the limitations of State power, therefore this amendment is intended to limit the power of the United States. In that light, it reads very differently than the gun control advocates would have us believe.

---

First off, a militia is not an army. Militia were irregulars, ordinary folks who volunteered in a citizen defense group. They were not under the control of the central government as such, and they were regulated only in that they could not freelance ie. act as criminals. Militia members traditionally supplied their own weapons, which meant guns, and that was quite necessary to ensure this right to establish such an entity. Yet the Obama Administration has acted in direct violation of the Second Amendment by suggesting criminality in the establishment of private militias in the United States. The Department of Homeland Security has issued a 10 page report on April 7 entitled ``Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment`` in which ``right wing radical`` groups such as voluntary militias are deemed enemies of the state. This from the report:

``(U//FOUO) Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.``

Now, this is in direct challenge to the Second Amendment in that it proscribes the rights of people to organize into militias AND the right to keep and bear arms. This DHS report follows on the heels of a training report for Missouri State Police officers that likewise considered private militias subversive groups to be treated as enemies. This report, the product of a ``fusion`` foundation that tried to bring Homeland Security policy down to the state level, was withdrawn after a public outcry by many of the aggrieved parties (including people with ``don`t tread on me`` or Ron Paul bumper stickers) but the DHS document illustrates that this is was not an isolated incident, but rather a concerted policy. Indeed, it can be claimed this is a power grab, a trashing of the Second Amendment. Yet Nancy Pelosi wants to force firearm registration, for the safety of the nation, mind you. She is adamantly opposed to a well-regulated immigration flow, or with registering potential terrorists coming into the country, but she is determined to make gunowners register. Now, criminals rarely purchase their weapons from legitimate vendors, prefering to obtain their guns on the black market, so registration only effects the law abiding gun owners. Furthermore, I seem to remember that I had to fill out an informational card when I purchased the little Marlin 22 I used to take target shooting, and that was over 20 years ago. If I wanted a handgun I would have to pass a police background check (something I suspect I would fail since I wrote about the Missouri state police report). We have de-facto gun registration now; there is easily enough paper trail to follow weapons if the need should arise. The purpose of formal gun registration is not to make crime solving easier, it is to remove weapons from the hands of the citizenry. Remember, too, that the Second Amendment was written in the aftermath of a rebellion against a tyrannical state; it had EVERYTHING to do with the ability of the citizenry to protect themselves from tyrants. Hunting and sportsmanship were hardly the original intent of the right to keep and bear arms. Our founding fathers believed guns to act as a check on the State, as surely as this right made evil men afraid to committ acts of criminality. For example: ``"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson "The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." -Thomas Jefferson "(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -James Madison "...arms...discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. ...Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived the use of them." -Thomas Paine "To disarm the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave them..." -George Mason "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." -Alexander Hamilton "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun. -Patrick Henry "To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them..." -Richard Henry Lee "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." -George Mason There are many, many more such quotes from the men who actually created the nation, yet the left in this country continues to pretend that the Second Amendment is about nothing more than a government run militia. I suppose Barack Obama`s planned internal militia ie his secret police is entitled to keep and bear arms, and that the average citizen must then submit to this cadre. As I`ve pointed out, Obama wants an American internal police similar to the KGB, he demands that valid criticisms are not made of him, and he seeks to enforce this speech ban with the force of law via arrest and prosecution of his political enemies. This guy makes Capone`s gang look like Libertarians. Do we want an American Oprichnina? Do we want an internal political army at the disposal of the President? Don`t believe me? Where is Tom Delay? This was an early abuse of prosecutorial power for political purposes, and they got away with it. Here are Obama`s exact words:

``We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.``

But first the citizenry must be disarmed; that is the first action anyone who seeks ultimate power must take. The arguments are that this disarmament must take place for the public good; to stop crime, to prevent ``right wing extremists`` from performing acts of terrorism, etc. That is why the mainstream media has so marginalized the tea parties yesterday, refering to them as ``tea-bagging`` (a sexual act which should rather be referred to as ``dunking donuts``) and dismissing the participants as kooks. That the Patriots of Boston held the first such tea party to protest taxation far less expansive and invasive than that which we are facing now is never mentioned; I suspect that many reporters for CNN and the other outlets don`t even KNOW about the Boston Tea Party. And let`s not forget that Obama gave a speech (a speech riddled with untruths) about the economy on the very day of the National Tea Party. Clearly, the Administration is gravely concerned. Gravely concerned in much the same way a thief is gravely concerned about being robbed; the Left constantly projects their own deep-seated flaws onto others. They know that THEY would be thinking of rising in rebellion if the shoe were on the other foot. They know that are largely responsible for the economic crisis, with the Community Reinvestment Act forcing banks to make bad loans, with the looting of Fannie and Freddie by Congressional Democrats (particularly Obama), with their refusal to take steps to save Fan and Fred when the Bush Administration asked them. They used this to steamroll the One into power, and they have launched an unprecedented power grab, something never before seen in America. This is their moment, the historical confluence of events that will allow them to remake America in their own socialist image, and they fear missing the brass ring. Grumbling knuckle-draggers will not be allowed to destroy their utopian dreams, and so steps are being taken to intimidate the opposition into silence. Grabbing guns is part of that intimidation; an armed citizenry is a cocky citizenry-a disarmed citizenry has to take whatever is given them. And that will be legion; illegal aliens allowed to flood our country with no ``registration`` (since they vote Democrat) while guns must be registered, huge tax increases, unilateral disarmament, hyperinflation, gay marriage, what-have-you. On April 19, 1775 an armed population of colonists in Lexington Massachussetts opened fire on British soldiers (the very best military in the world) with squirrel guns in defense of their liberty. British Community Organizers had sought to ``do the work of remaking the Colonies`` by arresting Samuel Adams and John Hancock. They pursued these two Sons of Liberty (a phrase applied to the Americans by ``the Great Commoner`` William Pitt) because they were unwilling to be silent as the British government ran roughshod over their rights. The Shot Heard Round the World began a landslide both here in America and abroad as people decided their liberty, their right to live without government domination, was worth fighting for and if need be dying for. And it was that blood, that courage that gave us the Constitution, including the right to keep and bear arms. The Democrats would love to take that away from us. Doubtless this last paragraph will get the attention of the Department of Homeland Security. It is by another militia man, a guy who would today be tarred as a potential right-wing terrorist. His name was Patrick Henry:

``It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!``

Henry was lucky; he had a gun!