Britain: The Home of the Slave

Eye on Conservatism ^ | August 24, 2001 | Robert Yoho

[Rightfield14]

In a recent issue of USA Today, there was an article detailing the increase of violent crime in Great Britain. The country from which we took up arms to gain our independence banned the private ownership of all handguns in 1997. Since then, they have seen a 40% rise in the violent use of handguns. Surprise! Surprise!

Any law-abiding gun owner could have told them the eventual outcome of their hysteric and shortsighted action. Perhaps they could have learned the same thing from any member of the National Rifle Association. Moreover, they could have gained this same wisdom from the bumper sticker: "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

It sounds like a cliché, but it is nonetheless a fact. You cannot stop the criminal acts of the lawless by removing the guns from the hands of the law-abiding.

In case you have forgotten your history, the "shot heard round the world" was fired over the issue of gun control. The Redcoats were marching to Concord to seize the colonists’ supply of powder and arms. The Minute Men on Concord Bridge were the only thing standing between our freedom and continued servitude at the hands of our British taskmasters. Unfortunately it didn’t end with the American Revolution.

England is no longer satisfied with the disarmament of their own citizens. They are working hand-in-hand with the Lilliputian despots in the United Nations to ban the private ownership of firearms worldwide. And most of their shots are targeted at the United States of America.

The country from which we gained our independence is hell-bent on trying to disarm us. I find it tragic that a once-great nation--a place formerly ruled by the indomitable spirit of Sir Winston Churchill--has become the home of the slave. Oh, to find that remarkable courage in Britain once more!

In a speech before the House of Commons, Churchill gave a most uncommon speech in the defense of liberty:

"We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender!"

A nation that defiantly refused to give in to the power of the Third Reich has willingly surrendered to the pacifism of the Third Way. Great Britain was once a loyal ally in our battle against Hitler’s oppression in Europe. But even our assistance in two world wars is not enough to win our freedom from Socialistic crumpet crunchers and Bill Clinton wantabes like Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Britain fears that their county will become a culture of guns. However, their country owes its freedom to a place whose culture and heritage is steeped in the private ownership of firearms.

A poor child coming of age in the mountains of Tennessee, Alvin York learned to shoot a gun while hunting for squirrels and other game. He then used those same shooting skills in World War I to kill German adversaries in Europe. The son of poor Texas sharecroppers, Audie Murphy learned to use a rifle while shooting jackrabbits. While fighting the Second World War in Europe, Murphy climbed atop a flaming tank and employed those qualities of marksmanship to save the lives of his men.

For these selfless acts of courage and heroism, Alvin York and Audie Murphy would receive the Medal of Honor from a grateful nation.

Not everyone who learned to use a gun in America went on to receive the Medal of Honor for his service in two World Wars. However, the nation of Great Britain and much of Europe owes their freedom to the skills of squirrel and rabbit hunters and many others who simply valued the inalienable right of citizens to take up arms in defense of their own life and liberty. These so-called small arms in the hands of our farmers and mountain men served England well. Later, the Marshall Plan rebuilt a battle-scarred Europe and they reward our generosity by once again trying to seize our powder and arms.

Gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson, then owned by a British concern, made a sweetheart deal with the Clinton administration that betrayed every legitimate firearms’ manufacturer in America. It seems as though the nation of England is never satisfied with their defeat at the hands of mere "peasants." I am proud to report that the peasants once again rebelled against the British-owned Smith & Wesson, nearly sending them into insolvency and forcing their sale to genuine American patriots who respect the Second Amendment.

Churchill would be shocked by what his beloved nation has become since his death. England can no longer be called "Great" Britain. The spirit of Dunkirk is gone. The courage of Winston Churchill has given way to the capitulation of Neville Chamberlain. Their once iron will is now tarnished.

Britain's citizens have been disarmed and packs of marauding animals rule their streets. A nation that once had the resolve to face down Adolph Hitler is now powerless to defend itself against teenagers. Its growing culture of violence can only be countered by Colonel Colt’s peacemakers. But that has been outlawed.

Perhaps Britain, the home of the slave, can enlist the aid of the peacekeepers at the United Nations.

© Copyright Robert Yoho 2001 (All Rights Reserved)

[Boonie Rat]

The Brits continually allow themselves to be disarmed by their government. Everytime a war arises they then turn to the U.S. to send/loan/give them the weapons to defend themselves, and we do. Perhaps if they are again threatened by the likes of another Hitler we should allow them to be taught a lesson.

Boonie Rat

MACV SOCOM, PhuBai/Hue '65-'66

[backhoe]

England is no longer satisfied with the disarmament of their own citizens. They are working hand-in-hand with the Lilliputian despots in the United Nations to ban the private ownership of firearms worldwide

It's actually a lot worse than that- there's talk of regulating or banning knives in the British Isles- Scotland, I think... next will be cudgels---

[farmer18th]

Lexington and Concord BUMP.

[Gunner9mm]

This is why Brits are called "subjects" while Americans are called "citizens".

[Always Right]

I think if everyone was required to live in a rubber room and we outlawed all metal objects, we might finally be safe.

[g'nad]

INCOMING!!!!

[Joe Brower]

KBoom.

[jjbrouwer]

How I wish we could match your country for gun-toting serial killers!

[freefly]

How I'm glad we cannot match your country for whiney socialist slaves
that go running to their masters for help when they need it.
Which, since they cannot help themselves, is every time.

[jjbrouwer]

Yes, Master! I agree with you.

[Da_Shrimp]

There has never really BEEN mass-ownership of guns in the UK, so the ordinary person doesn't really think about it at all and it isn't really seen as a loss of liberty. Perhaps it should be. Personally I was saddened by the knee-jerk reaction after Dunblane, but what you perhaps don't realise over there is that there was MASSIVE public support for such a ban.
Even now, every time I mention that I think there should be widespread gun ownership amongst the law-abiing population of these Islands, I get strange looks and often vehement disagreement.

England can no longer be called "Great" Britain.

Couldn't let this pass! For a start England never HAS been called 'Great Britain', it's been called 'England'.
Secondly and as a point of trivia, the 'Great' in 'Great Britain' simply means 'Big' since it's larger than the other Britain (Brittany in Northern France) that already existed in 1801 when the Union was formed.

[freefly]

I wasn't referring to the US/England relationship.
(Which is what it appears your response was in reference to.)
I was referring to you and your own government...

"ooooh Mr PM....I have thugs keep busting in my door, raping my wife,
stealing my TV, and kicking my butt with their axe handles... Please help me!"

"Of course we'll help you...we'll send someone right over to write up a report..."

In my part of the country it would work like this:

"...yo, police? Yea, a couple guys with lead pipes just kicked in my door.
I shot them both when they attacked me. They are laying on my living room floor now."

"Ok, we'll be right over to take your statement. (and pin a medal on you for
making your community a safer one for law-abiding citizens)."

I notice that England has plenty of problems with murder, robbery, etc. in SPITE of it's gun laws.
Which is exactly what the politically correct keep trying to avoid admitting.

UK Ban On Handguns Has Not Lowered Gun Crime Figures

However, the REAL bottom line, an unarmed citizen is a slave at the mercy of the ruling elite.
That's the REAL reason for never allowing yourself to be disarmed.
Or do you trust politicians' morals?

[Clintons-B-Gone]

BUMP

[jjbrouwer]

And America doesn't have problems...?

I happen to know it does because I lived there two years. And that was when New York had been cleaned up. Christ knows what it was like 15 years ago.

[freefly]

I never said America doesn't have problems.
Most of them in the large (disarmed) cities.
New York is a cesspool beyond comparison.
It's also a place that only allows the "elite" (and/or criminals) to have/carry weapons.
It's a PRIME example of why honest citizens SHOULD be allowed to carry whatever they choose to defend themselves.
If the honest citizens of New York were allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights,
I'm certain there would be a lot of shootings of low-lifes in the 1st few months,
but after a year or so (once they figured out that mugging is not a safe profession anymore),
it would be a MUCH safer place to walk around.
That's been the experience of every OTHER place that turned away from the PC view about personal defense.

[BurkeanCyclist]

This is why Brits are called "subjects" while Americans are called "citizens".

Actually, Brits are called "subjects" because Britain is a monarchy.

[BurkeanCyclist]

Officially, "citizen" replaced "subject" with the 1948 British Nationality Act, but even today, many people use "British subject" and "British citizen" interchangeably. This has nothing to do with any particular legislation.

(Incidentally, since 1983, "British subject" has had a very specific official definition.)

In the US, sovereignty resides (legally as well as practically) in the people, and so the phrase "American subject" is unthinkable.