Report 23, Thoughts on the Second Amendment

Today President Obama announced that he was taking unilateral action of tightening up controls on guns. He is of the opinion that he can take whatever action he wants without congressional action. This is just the latest in a long list of illegal and, pointedly unconstitutional actions he has taken, but that is a conversation for another time. For now I want to focus just on the Second Amendment.

When the Founders were forced to add the Bill of Rights in order to achieve ratification of the new Constitution they worked under the premise that our rights were endowed by our Creator, God. Under that umbrella they viewed self-protection as a God-given right. It is important to point out here that the government does not grant those rights. The Constitution merely enumerates them.

While discussing the Second Amendment, they were not talking about putting meat on the table, or sporting events. We had won our independence from an oppressive king only a few short years before. The battle of Concord wasn’t about some demonstrators unhappy about the tax on tea. Concord happened because the British were coming to confiscate the colonists’ guns. If they had been allowed to take the guns, the colonists would have been completely helpless. This memory was indelibly burned into the memories of the Founders. They knew that the final guarantee of all of our freedoms was a well-armed citizenry. After all, it was a well-armed citizenry that enabled this new country to exist.

As a professional firearms instructor, the last thing I want to have happen is for bad guys to have ready access to guns. [I’m not going to get into definitions here] However, establishing and maintaining a national database of gun owners isn’t the way to do it. That is exactly what the President is attempting to make happen. His executive order regimen is like the Chinese proverb of “Death by A Thousand Cuts.” Not one cut hurts too badly but when they add up, the damage is done.

If a national database must be established, it should be of those who have been adjudged as ineligible. This list could include those people who have been professionally diagnosed as mentally ill, immigrants who are not permanent residents, immigrants who have entered this country illegally, convicted felons, known terrorists, etc. There should also be a way to be taken off this national database.

Anti-gun advocates like to point to the United Kingdom and Australia as the poster children for gun-control. This is interesting because if you look at the UK, their problems have multiplied with their expanding acceptance of the Muslim ideology of government and jurisprudence. I don’t talk about the Muslim religion because it is my belief that Islam is primarily a method of living, not a religion; religion is merely the excuse they use for their perversion. There are areas of the UK that non-Muslim authorities and citizens do not enter for fear of their safety. This is also the situation in France. People no longer have the ability to protect themselves.

It is a well-known fact that the world’s worst despots have started out their reigns of despotism by eliminating two elements from society, guns and the Bible. This was true in Germany, USSR, PRC, North Korea, and Cambodia, to name a few. Now, President Obama and Hillary Clinton are advocating the establishment of a national database and Mrs. Clinton has advocated gun confiscation. A national database of gun-owners is the first step to confiscation. Since 1934, when the National Firearms Act was passed we have become like the frog in the hot water. The water got a bit warmer with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Fortunately, a large number of states have taken the bold step of establishing very permissive concealed carry permit and Castle Doctrine laws. While these steps are encouraging, the actions of the Obama administration are indeed troubling.

The first question I have to ask is who is going to enforce these executive orders; ATF, FBI, Homeland Security? It is legitimate to ask if these agency employees are going to obey the president or their oath to uphold the Constitution. This is a question that each and every agent of each of the agencies have to ask themselves. At the same time, each citizen needs to ask himself how important his freedoms are. Are we going to be pitting American against American?

With the international popularity of the UN Arms Trade Treaty, is there a possibility that blue helmeted troops will be moved into our communities to enforce firearm confiscation? Are our local sheriffs prepared to fend off this foreign invasion, and do they have the moral will to do so? Are average American gun owners ready to actively defend their freedoms as envisioned by the Founders? The patriots at Concord were prepared; are we?

 

2 thoughts on “Report 23, Thoughts on the Second Amendment

  1. Dan,

    You make excellent points as usual. I believe American gun owners have the will to defend themselves however our sense of community is all but gone. We don’t even know our neighbors so how can we organize enough to be effective in defending our God given freedoms?

    If Americans saw the Redcoats marching on Concord I believe their response would be the same as the colonists 200 years ago. However, our current antangonists issue their fatwah’s from thousands of miles away and send their federal enforcers when their wishes are disobeyed. They pick off one “offender” at a time rather than don red coats and march en mass.

    Endo

Comments are closed.