Arm the People (II)

Give me Liberty or Give me Death Site ^ | 12 November 2002 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

Amen to being armed and prepared indiidually anyway.

I hope we can group together as individual citizens and provide for the common defense of our communities as well ... as we have a duty to do and are supposed to do.

[Jeff Head]

Thanks. Some good comments on this thread already. The earlier version had over 700 comments.

[Slip18]

Slip signing in and on. I've been armed for years. No military service, but I sure can shoot quite well with a revolver, .9 millimeter, shotgun and rifle.

[Charles Martel]

Scuttlebutt is that the CMP (Civilian Marksmanshp Program) has struck a deal with the ATF to allow M-14s that have been converted to semi-auto only to be sold as surplus to the general public.

If true, that would be very welcome news. Back in the 1960s, the U.S. Army had regulations specifying a list of permanent modifications to the M-14 which rendered it legal for sale through the DCM (predecessor to the CMP). Since that time, the applicable army regs have been repealed or replaced and the BATF's internal policy of "once a machinegun, always a machinegun" has been the standard applied.

I don't know how many M-14s were originally produced in semi-auto-only configuration, but those would seem to be the only such weapons that the CMP could even suggest selling. We have literally given away a huge piece of the M-14 stockpile to other nations, as well. I'll bet they never return, as the Danish M-1 Garands did.

[45Auto]

Its an intersting idea that has merit, but I can see the liability issue as well. However, the current states with successful shall issue CCW programs might suggest that the liability issue is over-stated; after all, do those states now share responsibility for the actions of those to whom they issued state-sanctioned carry permits? I think not. The fact is many citizens are armed in this country, and many take very seriously their DUTY under the Constitution to be so armed.

One more event on the magnitude of September 11, and a hell of a lot of us are going to be carrying, permit or no damn permit. I would like to see a Federal reciprocity bill that might force states like California to institute shall issue laws; the current state of affairs here is nothing but corruption relative to CCW.

An armed society is a free and safer society.

[Travis McGee]

I can't see anything like this happening unless and until we are suffering Israeli level terrorism.

The goobermint does not trust yokels with guns, face it.

[Jeff Head]

80 million of us already have guns. All we have to do is organize something like this and get it going at the county/local level. I can't see how the Feds can stop it if it occurs at that level.

[Jeff Head]

Suggest something like this to your local Sheriff. If he doesn't have the stomach for it, find someone who does and then support them in the next election.

That's what I am going to do.

[Ohioan]

George Washington wanted to see Americans adopt the Swiss system, with every household armed with military grade small arms. (See Right To Keep Arms.) He explained his reasons very clearly.

By the way, will anyone dispute the fact that for two centuries, thereafter, Switzerland had one of the lowest crime rates on the planet?

Keep making your points!

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Travis McGee]

And that will happen if terrorism gets bad enough and the feds are ineffective.

[Jeff Head]

Sadly, I am afraid that is exactly what it is going to take ... and bad enough is going to end up being unbelievably atrocious before we wake up.

If we can get ideas like this seeded into people's minds earlier, perhaps a few Sheriff's will institute such a policy at the behest of their constituents (us).

Maybe even a couragous Governor somewhere (like FR Governor Mike Huckabee in Arkansas) will step up to the plate.

[climbngrunt]

Steps need to be taken to protect this great nation as our forefathers did. Those "volunteers" who came to arms against the aggressor did just that. The end result is what is now known as the National Guard. Just as our government has evovled the Homeland Security, maybe they should consider a "deputized force" just like the one you speak of.
As far as taking notes, yes, this is happening....at an alarming rate. This enemy is within our AO so we must remain vigilant and exercise caution.
Lastely, Jeff, I have the privilage of writing intel reports for the military.......with your permission......I would like to use part of your Arm The People (II) speech.
Good Job.

[Jeff Head]

Thanks. I liked these from your book...

Yet perhaps the single most important reason why Washington wanted America to adopt the Swiss system, is that it teaches the youth--in the most immediate and compelling manner--the importance of that level of personal responsibility on which all of our other institutions are based. It gives youth a sense of purpose, importance and self-worth, for which all the words expended by "Liberal" theorists, from the Creation to this day, are no substitute.

---

The idea that the defence of property can not justify taking a human life, is the precise basis for that other aspect of the muted response, seen across America in departmental protocols that require police to chase, rather than shoot, fleeing criminals; that sometimes lead to charges being filed against property owners who successfully defend what is theirs by "taking out" those attempting its removal. It would make as much sense to respond to an invading army with slogans about "the sanctity of human life" and "social justice"; nay, more sense, because the invading army could well be populated with decent and honorable young men, serving their country; while the thief, waging his personal war on you and your neighbor, may be morally the scum of the earth.

The concept that there is a dichotomy between property rights and other human rights, is at the core of the most mischievous heresy against reason and common sense in all the annals of pseudo social progress. Men and women hold property; not property, humans. One's property may represent the fruits of a lifetime of labor; perhaps the fruits of many lifetimes of labor. Most of those with a sense of heritage and purpose, labor in large measure for what they can do for those who will come after--their children and their children's children, down through the generations. Even among those of a spiritual, rather than material pursuit, private property may still represent the blood, sweat, toil and tears, of persons living or dead. Indeed, it is often that little bit of material wealth, which makes possible a life-long pursuit of things of the spirit.

No one can relive the past--other than in the eye of memory. One may be able to replace stolen property through insurance, or by laboring to replace it; but the cost of that replacement will be an expenditure of time or money, otherwise available for other purposes. You can never bring back the years you spent in struggle; nor ever, the lives of loved ones, who may have worked their whole lives that you and yours could live better lives than they.

The choice then, whether to use force to stop one from stealing what is yours, is not a question between life and property. Both you and the thief are live beings; the issue between you is property. The question involves whose life, and what shall be the quality thereof: The life or lives--or a significant portion thereof--of those who respect, or respected, the social order and the ways of civilized peoples--including their rights to property and privacy--versus the life or lives of those waging an immediate and personal war against those fundamental rights of you and your loved ones? The decision should really not be terribly difficult!

Nor should the subsidiary one, of how we defend what is rightfully ours. Do we make that defense dependent upon the criminal's choice of weapon? Do we expect the property owner--or maybe his wife or daughter--to have to wrestle with some thug over the family silver, or maybe even over the sanctity of his daughter's body, because some "Liberal" has said that guns are too dangerous to be allowed in the home? The cruelty inherent in that suggestion is staggering!

Again, the threat when it arises is savage and immediate. The Police can only respond later--maybe to start the punishment process after the damage has been done; often only to file a report, on which no action is ever taken. And no Police work, however skilled, can ever restore your daughter's innocence. (As for your grandparents' silver? That will be melted down without a trace.)

It is fundamentally wrong, morally wrong, to deny the law-abiding mainstream the right to use logical tools to defend themselves against such thuggery!

All very well said indeed. Nice site.

Here's mine ... HERE

[Jeff Head]

You have it ... the more who hear and consider such proposals/suggestions the better.

[Travis McGee]

There's no harm in planting the idea now, but nothing will happen until we get our pizza parlors, buses and malls blown and shot up.

[Jeff Head]

I believe, particularly in certain counties in Montana, Idaho and Nevada, that something could well happen of the idea were presented to those Sheriff's.

We'll see in a few weeks when I am back in Idaho what my own says.

[archy]

I disagree only on a couple of very minor technical points:

Use surplus M1s or M14s for long guns...

There aren't nearly enough to go around, less than 100,000 M14s in the national inventory last time I checked [some of those *condition H* guns usable only for cannibalization to keep others working] and too few Garands as well, better spread out to those who can best use them through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Most [though not all, by a long shot] of those who carried the Garand during their time in service are beyond the age for more strenuous duties and even when the Garand was service0-wide issue, there were 5 or more M1 carbines issued for every Garand. The less-appreciated carbine is simply more suitable for hastily or spottily trained reservist troops, as the South Vietnamese C.I.D.Gs, Israeli Mishmar Esrachi police reservists, and Guatemalian rural civil guards have all shown.

Happily, there's a long-used and respected U.S. substitute that can supplement the shortage of useful military weapons: the 12-gauge pump shotgun, long used as an auxiliary *trench gun* and military police weapon, and long familiar- and often available- in many police arms rooms and lockers. The shotgun can provide very effective close-in or nighttime firepower, and yet can be operated by a user with a minimum of training; anyone who can't be trained to safely use a pumpgun in a one-day class likely shouldn't be issued a firearm at all. There's even a dedicated *Homeland Defence* model now available, from Ithaca, I believe. Augmented by available rifles, or even GI carbines for additional range, the shotgun could equip as many as half of those needing weapons, at least until something better could be obtained.

Have the sheriff set up sentries (two to a location)...

There's nothing wrong with the *buddy system* but just two guys to a position doesn't cover all the possibilities of inclement weather, multiple shifts, personnel absences and all the other little difficulties that plague a small unit commander's days...and evenings. Four is better, and a small unit of six even better, enough bodies that a small building's perimeter or roof can be covered, or to staff a roadblock or checkpoint, if need be. Two teams of four can effectively cover both ends of a bridge, or in a pinch, a single unit of six can do it; I've done so at times when our adversaries were expected to be multiple and armed as well or better than we were. And four can fit in a single vehicle...which can break down; better would be six personnel, in two vehicles- one with jumper cables, a complete toolbox and a towstrap.

Not that I want to see that poor local sheriff or county emergency manager told how he has to deploy his available volunteers. But a quick and easy arrangement is to assign a team of a half-dozen armed volunteers to an existing deputy or police reservist with a radio, providing command and control from the existing source of local expertise, and adding manpower and firepower way beyond what any one-man patrol car has in what can be too-lonely times.

During WWI, my granddad was a volunteer guarding essential industry assets from the threat of possible enemy sabotage. When an alert Coast Guardsman and his K9 partner actually caught a couple of saboteurs landing on *his* beach from a German sub, those duties were taken a LOT more seriously. Though he could have taken an inside job as a guard at the essential industry where he was employeed, he instead chose to be assigned as needed...and drew night watch duty as a guard on a mainline railroad bridge across a state line river that fed the southern Illinois oilfields and refineries output to Army Air Corps training fields.

There's no doubt in my mind he'd recognize the duties, if not the more recent equipment. But he'd do his part, I have no doubt, and he'd expect me to do mine.

I intend to.

-archy-/-

[tet68]

You tell 'em bub.
This is America, we don't need to be issued weapons, we can buy our own.
(hint. If you're not armed already...... there IS a war on.)

[Jeff Head]

The issuing of guns is not as critical ... but would provide some form of compensation for services rendered.

I would just as happily use my own FAL.

The "buddy" system is not meant to be the sum total of a particular location's sentry duty. Folksw ould be intended to take four six hour shifts a week ... with the intent to fill enough positions to watch all critical infrastructure 24X7. In most counties, I believe you would have sufficient volunteers.

This is simply a suggestion/proposal and would clearly require further refinement for implementation. But, I believe it is the type of thing we should be doing for "Homeland Security" as a first line at the local levels as opposed to depending on Federal bureaucracy.

Fregards.

[VietVet]

This proposal (for civilian self defence militias) could be done at the local or county level, as suggested, but it could also be set up at the state levels.

During WWI and WWII, many states had "State Guards" to take over the role of the National Guard units which were called up and deployed overseas. Here in Maryland, some units were formed which were on full-time deployment at bridges, rail-road yards, reservoirs, and so on.

Today, many states still have "State Defence Forces", State Militia Organizations independant of the State's National Guard units. Most state Adjutant Generals don't seem to know what to do with them, and have reduced them to purely administrative or ceremonial roles. This is a natural mission for them, and the State Guard or State Defence Force framework provides an excellent organization system for training and supplying such local security forces. Moreover, they, and the laws authorizing and organizing them, are already in place, and no new legislation, setting up extensive new bureaucracies, are needed to start them up. (Maybe that is why there is no enthusiasm for entrusting them with the Homeland Security Mission!)

VietVet