In Part One, I discussed the infringement of our rights by government, and in many ways, it is the same as putting a frog in cool water and then slowly heating it.  In Part Two, I looked at the danger of being uneducated (ignorant) of our rights and why our founders restricted government in the first place.

In this final part of the series, we will look at the fallacy of gun control, and in reality, the fallacy of any form of control whether that be speech, arms, or loss of due process.  We’ll also look at what the responsibilities are of “we the people.”

In Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste I pointed out how those who would take your rights use a crisis to nibble away at our liberty, all while ignoring things that are far more deadly.  They don’t care about life; they care about control.

The term “assault rifle” was developed in the 1990s in an effort to create fear among the ignorant masses.  It was successful in creating the “Assault Weapons Ban” in 1994 under the Clinton administration.  Thankfully, that law had a sunset date in ten years, and enough people had been educated, so it was not reinstated.

Now, if you listen to the news, you’d think about every gun death was committed with an AR, an AK or some other similar weapon.  The FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2016 tells a different story.

You are more than four times as likely to be killed by a knife and twice as likely to be beaten to death by someone without a weapon than you are to be shot with a rifle of any kind.  Of the estimated 100 million gun owners, approximately 5 million own “AR Style” rifles.  The numbers alone tell us this is not the real problem or goal.

In case you have not noticed, the right to bear arms is not the only right under attack. Progressives have been chipping away at all our liberties for over 100 years! When legislation cannot be passed, it is accomplished by a judge.  If that doesn’t work, they use “Alinsky” tactics to shame or scare people into compliance.  They also have no qualms about resorting to violence as has been proven in several incidents at college campuses where a conservative is scheduled to speak.

I frequently repeat the words of the late Paul Harvey, “With increased liberty comes increased responsibility.”  We typically take that to mean we are to be responsible as we exercise our rights … and that is vital.  However, I believe we have been remiss in other responsibilities.

Social media has enabled people to become brash, vulgar, and uninhibited in many ways.  Our founding was built around freedom and liberty, along with personal responsibility and self-restraint.  Just because you can do something does not always mean you should.  Unfortunately, common sense is not so common.  Personal filters seem to be a thing of the past as we watch people air their differences publicly on Twitter.

It bothers me when I see someone say, “I carry a gun because it’s my right.”  I agree it is a right but is that the reason to carry or otherwise keep arms?  I view it as a responsibility.

Just as it is a responsibility to have the “right” to say something and refrain…or say something rather than refrain…judicious use of the right is always in fashion.  We have devolved into a society that waits for government—  federal or local, to keep us safe.  That is a job they are neither equipped to do or are capable of despite all of warning signs and labels, laws concerning smoke detectors, seatbelts, helmets, and car seats – to militarily equipped police. Our due process has been taken away by civil asset forfeiture all in the name of “keeping us safer”.

Are we not the original “first responders?”  I believe it was Jimmy Carter who coined that phrase, and I do not mean to diminish those who dedicate their lives to serving and helping others – my wife worked in EMS (emergency medical service) for over 20 years.  However, do we not understand that some essential knowledge of lifesaving techniques are a good idea for all?  I’m not a firefighter, yet I have smoke detectors and fire extinguishers.  I know basic first aid and CPR. I can do (and have used) the “Heimlich Maneuver.”

If we are the first on scene of a situation, WE are the first responder.  It is our responsibility to help our fellow man in need, and our limited assistance until those with more knowledge and equipment can arrive can make a difference between life and death.

Why is our responsibility to keep and bear arms any different?

“I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.”

“When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.”

Cute comments, and true.  While it is an important part of the right and responsibility, our personal safety is not the primary reason for the protection of the second amendment.  The ability to hunt for food or shoot for sport is a nice side benefit but not the reason for protecting the right.

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.

Regulated in the day meant equipped and prepared-- so well equipped and prepared that the militia was the common man, 16 to 50 years of age who was the “first responder” to threats from invaders.  Because the free state depends on this readiness, this right is not to be infringed, changed in any way.

“Every able bodied freeman, between the ages of 16 and 50, is enrolled in the militia. … The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service.” – Notes on the State of Virginia, written by Jefferson, published in 1781, updated in 1782

“…in this country, every man is a militia-man… –Thomas Paine The American Crisis series, # 9, dated June 9, 1780

No free government was ever founded or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the state…. Such are a well regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen.” -Patrick Henry

Tyranny was a threat from without and within.  All military, elected officials and law enforcement take an oath to defend and protect— not the government, but rather the constitution.  That defense is against threats both domestic and foreign.

While there is nothing in writing to be found, it is said Japan and Germany were both hesitant to consider an invasion of our mainland because the American citizens were armed and known to be willing to protect their homes and homeland, after all, the revolution and War of 1812 were not done in a closet.

When you consider that all tyrants first disarmed their population before seizing complete control, they well understood there comes a point beyond which you cannot expect people to “just take it.”

The “Security of a Free State” depends on the personally responsible, self reliant citizen, not only bearing arms, but exercising speech, assembly, and redress  Governments are instituted among men to secure rights—  not to just take them in case someone “goes postal.” 

Wake up America.  

Laws and “compromise” never take us to more freedom but always less.

Written by Michael Murphy The Voice of Reason

The Voice of Reason

0 Responses

leave a reply

login to reply to thread

Sign Up
Forgot Password