We Must Become Second Amendment Zealots If We Are To Survive.

If you wonder at my use of the word "zealot" in the title, I would explain that by saying I feel that the majority of the so-called "defenders and supporters" of the second amendment have long since sold their souls to the powers of government, and those of us who believe it holds the key to freedom, must from this point on be zealots in its defense.

We must face the fact that no one connected to government will be able to prevent the usurpation of our right to own arms sufficient to protect our homes and families. Wake up folks! Government has been involved in a well-planned, incremental approach to the disarming of the citizens of this country for decades.

Billions of dollars and man-hours have been spent through groups such as the National Rifle Association over the past 80 years, lobbying those in government to protect our rights as granted by our creator and enumerated in the Constitution they swore to uphold and defend. And what has it bought us?

No matter how sweet the prose of the names of these pieces of legislation or how they inflame the passions of the ignorant socialist masses, the fact remains; they are all unconstitutional - and deadly to our freedom.

One of the real problems we face as Second Amendment "zealots," is the fact that the largest of our right to keep and bear arms "defenders", the NRA, has supported a great majority of the above listed government infringements on our firearms rights. Almost two years ago I wrote of this betrayal. NRA: Pro Second or Government Lapdogs?

We must face the fact that we are wasting resources and time lobbying those in government. They will never turn on the god they worship. Government is the source of their power and wealth. Government, as it becomes more and more corrupt, requires the people not have the means to resist that corruption. Thus, the gradual encroachment on our ability to possess the type weapons necessary to remain free.

We see our military issuing - what one could only assume to be fully automatic AK-47's - to people they do not even know in Iraq, but we here in the US of A are forbidden to own similar rifles. We may have "semi-automatics", but not if they have a bayonet lug or high capacity magazine. This fact speaks volumes. Does an unknown Iraqi policeman have more rights to freedom than we?

If we are so naïve as to place our hopes for adherence to constitutional principles in the republican or democratic party, we should just turn in our firearms now and submit to the tyranny that follows without wasting any more time or resources. How long will it take before we all realize they are players for the government, not the people, and are only distinguishable when they switch their "home and away" uniforms?

Can the facts be painted any more vividly than the White House's support for the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994? Just take a look at those who are singing the praises of the Bush Administration. When those who call themselves "conservative" are lauded by the likes of Feinstein and Schumer, its time to seek high ground. Both of these fine representatives of Marxism have said legislation will be introduced to make the AWB permanent and to close the loophole on importation of high capacity magazines. And Bush is now on record in support of this legislation.

Of course, Feinstein must be on the administrations short list of favorites, what with the 600 million dollar government contract to her hubby's business.

In the 2004 Presidential Election, we as Second Amendment zealots are going to be faced with two candidates who support our disarmament. This is the goal of government. Vote for whomever you choose. You still get that which they want you to have.

Republican faithful will preach of how much worse off we will be with the democrat who would disarm us, and besides, there are so many other things that need to be accomplished that only a republican administration can handle. We have found that to include the Patriot Act, Patriot Act II and a run amuck Department of Homeland Security. How much more of this style government can we tolerate and still call ourselves a free people?

Democrats will continue with their Marxist agenda. And, God forbid, should there be another act of terrorism in this country, the cowards will gladly surrender the wisp of freedom we have left if mother government will only let them hide behind her apron.

Trying to secure our second amendment rights through the Congress will be a further effort in futility. We are all familiar with their machinations, and besides, haven't they brought us to the place we are now?

Statistics tell us there are approximately 88 million of us gun owners in this country. Unfortunately, only half of that number might qualify as gun zealots. There are those who place politics above the guarantees of Creator and Constitution. There are those who believe as long as they can participate in their little competitions, whether it be shooting make believe outlaws, clay pigeons or metal gongs, that no one needs an assault rifle. There are those who have been perverted totally out of phase to the original intent of the second amendment and its guarantee against tyranny.

History has been replaced with Social Studies in our public school gulags. A look at a public school textbook for middle school reveals no mention of firearms in the discussion of the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment is only discussed in the realm of militias and how they were used in the revolution. It further states that because we have organizations like the National Guard there is no need for private possession of firearms!

It is my belief it is now time to either fish or cut bait. The lines have been drawn. We must present a united front. 40+ million Second Amendment zealots could present quite a problem to anyone seeking the presidency, or any other political office. But that will not be accomplished if we continue on the path we have been on for the past 50+ years. Political parties, the NRA and compromise on our God given imperatives are not working. Over 2,000 gun control laws on the books should tell us something. People who write and support gun laws either don't understand the Constitution, hate our guts, or both. You will not secure freedom by trying to appease them.

We have been blessed with one man in this nation who understands the concepts of liberty and freedom and fights for them daily. We Second Amendment zealots must unite behind this man of whom it has been said: "He personifies the Founding Fathers' conception of the citizen-statesman. He made it clear from the start that his principles would never be compromised, and they never were." Another added: "There are few people in public life who through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. He is one of those few."

I speak of none other than Congressman Ron Paul, 14th District of Texas. Former Treasury Secretary William Simon, put it best when he said: "Dr. Paul is the one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill.

The ball is now in our court. We can continue on the path we have been on, supporting political parties, sending our hard earned dollars to organizations that compromise on every gun control issue, and supporting those in office who promise anything to obtain that office and then sell our Constitution and their principles to the highest bidder, or we can give our solid support to a man who knows no compromise when it comes to the oath he took to "uphold and defend."

40+ million Second Amendment zealots with Dr. Ron Paul as our standard bearer could make a difference. What say ye?

What is "tyranny"? If you look up the definitions you will see a common thread - "absolute power." In the exercise of that absolute power you will also notice other traits: oppressiveness, harshness, severity, cruelty, restrictiveness.

We just removed a true tyrant from power. You offend me when you compare our government to that one.

Now, when it comes to taxes, I have great sympathy with your observations. But our tax system is not the problem. We are all guaranteed "No taxation without representation." If you don't like the tax codes, work to elect people who will change them!

As to your other points regarding public schools and social welfare, you are just showing yourself to be a fringist. Ask yourself the same questions, in the negative (i.e. "Is it unconstitutional to start a public school" etc.). You will find the Constitution is silent on these matters, so the rights are reserved to the States and the People.

Now, when it comes to taxes, I have great sympathy with your observations. But our tax system is not the problem. We are all guaranteed "No taxation without representation." If you don't like the tax codes, work to elect people who will change them!

Again, if you read Title Code 26, you will find that our own government doesn't play by it's own rule book. This is a "rogue" Government. Because the people do not or will not stand up for what is right, the government will continue to run rampant.

We just removed a true tyrant from power. You offend me when you compare our government to that one.

We have "checks and Balances" do we not, it is this same government that kept him in there even after a Impeachment! ever wondered why? Fear of reprisals!

Tell me why are we sending your hard earned dollars to other countries? Tell me why there had to be welfare reforms passed by the Federal legislation? Tell me why Public schools are being funded by Federal Dollars when it's a "State" reserved right? Where ever Federal money is, it becomes a Federal issue, or property. If The constitution is silent on these issues, why is the federal government "assuming" these powers when the Constitution states that where the Constitution is silent the States do assume those rights? You see, we are in a tyranical governing power, the Federal government is becoming the "absolute power".

What is "tyranny"? If you look up the definitions you will see a common thread - "absolute power." In the exercise of that absolute power you will also notice other traits: oppressiveness, harshness, severity, cruelty, restrictiveness.

You are kidding right...Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, Elian Gonzales, sure, I mentioned items under the last administration, but who let these things happen? CHECKS AND BALANCES my friend, you are only looking at 1 of 3

I was a history minor in college (geology major). You listed some interesting incidents, but I don't think they match the concept I was thinking about, or the one that had been used as an example in an earlier post (A-10 attack plane firing Hellfire missiles at citizens).

Let's look at the "Bonus March" of 1932. Over 20,000 WWI vets had marched on and encamped in Washington D.C. They were demanding early payment of service vouchers (due to be paid in 1945). The marchers had clashed with D.C. police, who had been overwhelmed. Three of the leaders of the marchers were known Communists trouble makers. When the House passed an early payment bill, but the Senate failed to pass the bill, the marchers became riotous. D.C. police could not handle the situation and there was no State militia or National Guard to call upon.

Hoover called on the Army to restore calm before a full-blown rebellion erupted. Douglas MacArthur ordered the Army to remove the illegal squatters. They did so without firing a shot! The Army fixed bayonets and the Cavalry drew their sabres, but there was no gunfire. The Army torched the illegal encampments and also used tear gas - a common enough police techniques. Although it was a public relations disaster for Hoover, the Army showed remarkable restraint.

In the case of the National Guard incidents at the Kent State and Jackson State in 1970, you are dealing with non-federal forces. In both cases, you had state National Guard units reacting in a defensive posture. I disagree with your statement "... they posed no threat to the Guard. At Kent State, they did pose a threat by their very numbers and actions, and in light of the events of the prior 24 hours.

At the Branch Davidian complex outside of Waco, TX, I think we witnessed a mass execution. I agree that the actions of the Clinton Administration to end the seige were an abuse of power and totally unjustified. However, the final "assault" was made by "police" forces and not military forces. Any military forces in the area played an auxilary role, at worst.

You mention quite a few items here. Let me reply to the ones I know about.

My point on taxation is, don't blame the code. Blame the representatives who wrote and who support the tax code.

Regarding the Clinton impreachment: Clinton was impeached (charged with a crime or crimes which could be cause for removal from office). He was tried on 4 counts in the Senate. The Senate, acting as a jury, failed to muster a 2/3rds majority on any of the counts to convict and remove him. There were enough Democrats in the Senate, if they voted as a block, to stop his removal. Impeachment is a political trial. Clinton is still well within the Statute of Limitations on criminal charges, but I don't think that will happen. Reprisals? No, politcal reality. Nevertheless, the process worked. Had Clinton, or any President, been a tyrant, there would never have been an impeachment.

You make a point about Federal dollars going into State schools. When the Federal Government mandates certain programs, they are supposed to pay for them. The money is going into those "programs." My wife works as a special education teacher in the County school district. Many of her students are entitled to Federal funds, earmarked directly to them.

I have said before that I think the various governments we elect have too much influence in our lives. That's why I work hard to elect people who believe in smaller, less intrusive government. But I don't believe they have absolute power. The examples you cite are ones that show excessive force by various police forces, not government tyranny.

The examples you cite are ones that show excessive force by various police forces, not government tyranny.

And these police forces are from what agencies? CIA (federal) FBI (Federal), ATF (Federal),U.S. Marshalls (Fed) All Government agencies involved at all of these events. Do not get me wrong, I am not an "alarmist". I know my day to meet the Lord will come, but for the future of our next generations, we need to clean this Federal mess up!

I may not agree with the Branch Davidians, if they broke the law, they should be punished, however just because they were different, doesn't mean that they had to die like they did.

I may not have agreed with with the style of living the Weavers had at Ruby Ridge, but what caused that issue? Something about giving up arms?

The Justice Department acted too quickly in my opinion to convict Nichols and McViegh. Because America wanted an answer, it made the Militia look like a bunch of fanatics.

The Title Code 26 is a wonderfuly confusing piece of work. The average "joe" couldn't decipher the entire document, niether can most attorney's and congressman. If you were to actually read it, it protects the American working citizen, not penalize him/her. The Legislators use this document to hide thier agenda and write thier own interpretation. With no one to refute it, it becomes law. There isn't anything wrong with the Title Code 26, it's those that misinterpret. Like some I know with the Bible. True, electing those that will make things better could help, but let's be real here. It isn't going to get any better.

Now, I am all for the States taking over welfare, Schools, roads, pet projects and such. I leave the Federal Government to legislate for the Commerce and defense of the nation. If those in Congress, Supreme Court, and executive office feel that poor nations need money, have them give out of thier own pockets, not with mine. I have a small nation I am trying to take care of. (4 kids, wife, dog, 2 mortgages, 2 cars...etc.)

Oh, uh, that's just peachy but I think you may have misunderstood me. I didn't ask what you believe in. I asked what do you actually DO to protect your Rights.

I told you already, but I suppose you did not understand the bit about appeasers and the two-steps forward, one-step backwards. I argue against appeasers, such as the NRA, who directly or indirectly support a gradual and silent encroachment on our RKBA. It is better the tyrant usurp our RKBA in a single piece of legislation so there will be a chance for rebellion.

You find out that Congress is trying to pass a Bill that will ban military ammunition. They may or may not have the votes because the gun grabbing dems control the House and Senate. You live 1000 miles from Washington D.C. and you have a full time job. The vote is in one month. What are you going to do about it?

Nothing. It would be a total waste of time, and counter-productive to our RKBA. If it doesn't pass, we still have 20,000 laws infringing our RKBA. If it passes, we have 20,001. Big deal.

I was a history major (B.A. History, University of New Orleans). Some of your points are well-taken. I realize that some of the incidents did not involve federal troops, but they were troops, nonetheless (and subject to federalization if called upon in that regard). But as for Kent State, even the National Guard officers commanding later testified that the Guard was in no immediate danger, and that in fact most of the students were 300-400 yards away. Oh, you had some students throwing tear gas cansiters back at the troops, but they landed much too far away to constitute any real threat. Kent State happened because a Guardsman got trigger happy, and started something that never should have occurred. Immediately the shots were fired all the officers and NCOs began ordering a cease fire, and were not subtle about it.

I still think the context of Kent State is often overlooked. As I recall, the ROTC building had been torched the night before. Also, there had been widespread looting, window breaking, and drinking in the town.

I remember seeing some home film, taken by a student in a dorm or apartment. It shows the Guard on the top of the hill, with hundreds of students headed their way, up the hill and out of nearby buildings. The situation looked provocative, and the events of the previous 24 hours did not help things. And, as you point out, there was a breakdown in command.

Nevertheless, I don't think that the Kent State incident is a good example of the Federal Government using military force against the population.

We saw what happened in Iraq, with our fine military just walking over an entire Iraqi army. Do the RKBA folks _really_ believe they could do better? If so, they are deceived.

I hear garbage like this all of the time from snot nosed civilian lefties! So I feel the need to point out a small fact that most of you commie pinko fascists seem to ignore...

That fact is that a very large portion of those serving in the United States Military are in fact R.K.B.A. types A.K.A. American gun owners. Hello, anybody in there numbskull??? We are the one's who are flying the A-10s, driving the M-1's and defeating America's enemies abroad. If you think that we will one day come home and start slaughtering American patriots instead of taking out the trash in America that is the people like yourself then you sir are the one whom is deceived!

You and the rest of your un-American cronies might want to wake up, put the crack pipe down and take a deep breath of reality now!

--Rebel Dawg

SSgt USMC

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.