Alexander's Column

American Patriots and Guns

All Patriots Are Obligated to Be Armed and Ready

By Mark Alexander · Nov. 29, 2012
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic.” –Joseph Story

On the most recent “Black Friday,” the day after Thanksgiving, which has become the biggest commercial sales day of the year, despite the continuing economic decline, there were record sales in one notable product category: Guns – 154,873 to be precise. However, after Barack Hussein Obama disgracefully politicized the murders of children in Newtown, Connecticut in mid-December, using that tragedy as fodder to call for new gun restrictions, the Black Friday record was broken again.

The top 10 record gun sales days have occurred since Barack Obama’s election in 2008, and gun ownership has skyrocketed over the last four years. (Perhaps if Obama is really opposed to gun ownership, he should resign!) According to a worldwide survey conducted the year before Obama’s election, though the United States had only 5% of the world’s population, Americans owned 50% of the world’s guns. Of course, unlike virtually every other nation, Americans are ensured the incontrovertible right to arm themselves.

The current estimate of legally and privately held guns in the U.S. is more than 250 million (the average gun-owning household having three guns).

With that as a backdrop, I was asked this week if Patriots have an obligation to arm themselves – to be gun owners, and be proficient at the use of arms. I thought at first the question was rhetorical, but after some consideration, I realize that there are millions of grassroots Patriots who are NOT among the 60 million plus Patriots who are already law-abiding gun owners.

Apparently, the question needs to be addressed, as the answer may not be as obvious to some folks as it should be. By way of responding to this question, let me first briefly reiterate the historical and enduring case for gun ownership, which is as relevant today and tomorrow as it was at the dawn of our national founding.

There are two foundational tenets of Essential Liberty that all American Patriots must understand and embrace in order to sustain Liberty and extend it to the next generation.

First, it is “self-evident” that Liberty is an “unalienable right,” innately assured as “endowed by our Creator.” In other words, it is not awarded by men or government; it is the birthright of all people.

Second, as history records countless examples of men using the power of government to arbitrarily revoke Liberty and invoke tyranny, our Founders understood that, in the words of John Adams, “liberty must at all hazards be supported.” Adams continued, “We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.”

Thus, all American Patriots today, those imbued with the spirit of Liberty that has motivated Patriots since 1776, must be prepared to support and defend both individual and corporate Liberty, to secure the Rule of Law over the rule of men.

Of the ability to defend Liberty, James Madison wrote, “The ultimate authority … resides in the people alone. … The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.” (Federalist No. 46)

To ensure that advantage, our Founders enumerated a constitutional prohibition on government interference with that barrier, the Second Amendment, affirming, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

In his exhaustive “Commentaries on the Constitution,” Madison’s Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story, wrote, “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

In other words, the Second Amendment is not about “the tradition of hunting” as Barack Obama claimed recently, unless he was referring to hunting those who infringe on the inalienable rights of man. Of course, Liberty is the antithesis of statism, which is why Obama and his socialist Democrat cadres are endeavoring to undermine the Second Amendment. (Obama’s failed “Fast and Furious” gun control is a fine example of that endeavor.)

Obama has asserted erroneously, “The vast majority of Americans would like to see serious gun control, [but] it doesn’t pass because there is this huge disconnect between what people think and what legislators think and are willing to act upon.” His disdain for grassroots gun owners was summed up in his unguarded remarks to campaign donors in 2008, when he said that they “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Endeavoring to close that gap, every time there is tragic mass murder where the assailant used a gun, Democrats offer the disingenuous rationale that violence is a “gun problem” rather than a cultural problem. Of course it’s easier to blame guns than culture, and that serves the Left’s political agenda.

The tragic attack on young students, teachers and staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown is a case in point.

Before the bodies of murdered children had been removed from Sandy Hook Elementary, Barack Obama was, shamefully, stacking up the coffins of innocent kids to use as a platform for his disarmament agenda, which he and his socialist cadres will conceal behind a thin façade of “concern for public safety.”

Just one paragraph into his brief remarks about the murders in Newtown, Obama tearfully exclaimed, “We’ve endured too many of these tragedies in the past few years. … We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics.”

New York Demo Rep. Jerrold Nadler was less discreet in his insistence that Obama use the deaths of these children to advance the Left’s gun prohibition agenda: “I think we will be there if the president exploits it.” Sen. Charles Schumer added, “I think we could be at a tipping point … where we might get something done.”

Within hours of the deaths, Sen. Dianne Feinstein promised, “I’m going to introduce in the Senate – and the same bill will be introduced in the House – a bill to get … weapons of war off the streets.” Of course, Feinstein, et al., know that the use of so-called “weapons of war” as murder instruments is exceedingly rare – less than 2/10ths of one percent of all homicides in America occur on school grounds, and less than three percent of all homicides are committed with “assault weapons.” So what is their real agenda?

At a vigil in Newtown two days after the attack, Obama again politicized the attack, framing his remarks around his gun-prohibition agenda. He asked rhetorically, “Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose? If we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is no. And we will have to change. What choice do we have? Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?”

The day after that speech, in my daily email from the White House came a link from Obama’s “senior advisor,” David Axelrod, with a video link to Obama’s vigil remarks posted on his “Forward” campaign Web site (and we thought the election was over). Astoundingly, the video was framed inside a page seeking donations to Obama’s campaign fund.

For the record, Connecticut already has a ban on “assault weapons,” and the Newtown school was already a “gun-free zone,” but that didn’t prevent the murders of these precious children and six adults. In fact, the assailant violated more than 20 laws in the commission of this horrific crime. Also for the record, since the “assault rifle ban” of 1994 expired in 2004, gun ownership has increased and crime has decrease.

Any honest American should be deeply offended by politicians who are so calloused that they would use the deaths of innocents as political fodder for their agenda. Could Obama not exercise the most basic decency and allow time for genuine grief to pass before exploiting the blood of innocents? Obviously not, according to the first chapter in his political playbook: “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

It is no small irony that the political party that has made killing children prior to birth a pillar of their platform expresses such indignation when a sociopath places so little value on life that he murders children. Of course, it’s easier to kill children who are faceless – and I am certain that in the eyes of the sociopathic killer in Newtown, his victims also had no faces.

Further, acknowledging that the majority of murders and other violent crimes in our country are the direct result of social and cultural degradation on urban welfare plantations would be, first and foremost, an indictment of the socialist welfare state advocated by Democrats. Thus, they call for more gun control – on top of the 20,000 gun control laws now on the books.

Fact is, on average almost 50 people are murdered every day, two-thirds of them with guns. It is statistically notable that about one-third of murders are not committed with guns, and moreover, blacks and Latinos commit a grossly disproportionate number of all murders and the victims are predominantly blacks and Latinos.

For example, the very weekend that Obama and his race hustlers attempted to politicize the shooting of Trayvon Martin by “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman earlier this year, the Chicago Sun-Times (Obama’s hometown paper) reported that in just 48 hours, 10 people were murdered and at least 40 others were seriously wounded. Most of the assailants and victims were black or Latino, but not a word from Obama about those murders.

Moreover, as of this date in 2012, 62 young people between the age of 6 and 18 have been murdered in Chicago this year, a city with the toughest gun restrictions in America. Not a word from Obama about any of those deaths because they reflect the aforementioned cultural problems created by Leftist social policies, not a “gun problem.”

Even Karen Lewis, head of the Chicago Teachers Union, commented on the commercialization of the Newtown tragedy: “There might have been a time where ‘politicizing’ tragic events, especially mass shootings, was thought to be in poor taste. That has changed with the 24/7 news cycle that continues to focus far too much time and energy on the perpetrator of the massacre than that of our precious victims.”

Lewis said Obama’s education policies “kill and disenfranchise children.” “We in Chicago have been the victims of their experiments on our children since the current secretary of Education [Arne Duncan] ‘ran’ the Chicago Public School system.”

Notwithstanding the fact that violence is not a “gun problem,” given Obama’s disgraceful exploitation of the Newtown deaths, expect to see aggressive second term proposals endeavoring to implement bold encroachments on the Second Amendment.

Additionally, watch Obama’s effort to spin the Newtown attack in order to rally two-thirds of the Senate for passage of the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty regulating small arms. The ATT is a Trojan Horse. While it ostensibly exempts domestic gun sales and ownership in the U.S., with the stroke of a pen, it could implement severe gun restrictions and even confiscations – an end run on the Second Amendment that would provide political cover for gun-grabbing Leftists in the Senate and House.

Indeed, as summed up by Sen. Rand Paul, “The day after his re-election, Obama’s UN delegation voted for a renewed effort to pass the Small Arms Treaty. This effort by globalists to undermine our Constitution is set to reconvene March 18th-28th in order to pass the final version of the treaty that will be sent to the Senate for ratification. Make no mistake, they will ultimately register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens. Not long ago, Obama told Sarah Brady from the anti-gun Brady Campaign, ‘I just want you to know that we are working on [gun control]. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.’”

In regard to gun confiscation, I recommend that Obama pick up an American History text, one that has not been “revised” by teacher or librarian unions, and read about the first American Revolution. He will find that it commenced with “the shot heard round the world,” as immortalized by poet Ralph Waldo Emerson – a shot fired by Patriots at the Massachusetts governor’s enforcers, who were sent to Concord with orders to confiscate and destroy militia arms. There is a subtle lesson there…

(Sidebar: On the subject of revisions, next week Obama’s UN delegation will meet with the UN agency overseeing global telecommunications, the International Telecommunications Union, to revise Internet regulations.)

Clearly the surge in gun sales and ownership over the last four years has been driven by Obama’s agenda to implement new “gun control” measures, which are, of course, not about guns but about control, as tragically demonstrated by the appalling record of genocide meted out by tyrants toward those who had no means of self defense.

According to gun-rights expert, Professor Raymond Kessler, J.D., “In truth, attempts to regulate the civilian possession of firearms have five political functions. They increase citizen reliance on government and tolerance of increased police powers and abuse; help prevent opposition to the government; facilitate repressive action by government and its allies; lessen the pressure for major or radical reform; and can be selectively enforced against those perceived to be a threat to government.”

So, given that Liberty must be supported and defended at all hazards, and given the current assault on gun ownership, consider again the question, “Do Patriots have an obligation to arm themselves – to be gun owners, and be proficient at the use of arms?”

The answer is, emphatically and absolutely, YES. Moreover, I would argue that it is the responsibility of all gun-owning Patriots to educate their like-minded family and friends about the overarching rationale for gun ownership – the ability to defend Liberty – and to encourage them to become responsible gun owners.

I know many Patriots who, since Obama’s election, have become first-time gun owners. The fact that 49 states authorize carry permits, 41 of those being “shall issue” states providing on-demand concealed-carry permits to law-abiding citizens, has encouraged that trend. The lone state denying the right to carry is, naturally, Obama’s state of residence, Illinois.

In recent years, I’ve proudly encouraged and assisted dozens of Patriot friends to become responsible gun owners. One of those “new” gun owners was my wife, who, along with six other women friends, took the required training and now has her carry permit. Each of my children is also a gun owner. (My oldest son, an Air Force Cadet, is an outstanding shooter. The weapons my two minor children use only come out under strict supervision, but my 13-year-old already shoots a very tight pattern at 100 meters with his LMT M4.)

One of my wife’s friends said that when some of her liberal family members came to visit recently (one of those tragic “mixed families”), they got wind that she now owns not one, but three guns. Her brother inquired, “Why would anyone own three guns?” Without missing a beat, she replied, “Because I can!” (That has got to rank first among the most cutting and concise rebuttals I have ever heard.)

And on that note, three other friends, who grew up in former Soviet satellite states, told me that after becoming U.S. citizens (the old fashioned way – legally), the first thing they did was obtain their right-to-carry permits. They each have a fuller appreciation for that right.

So, how do dedicated Patriots who are not familiar with firearms make the leap to gun ownership and proficiency?

I received a letter this week from a reader among our Patriot ranks, who included a brief history of how his whole family made the transition from non-gun owners to never leaving home without one. I have included a brief excerpt of his story in order that it might help others make that transition.

He writes, “Growing up in Chicago, where guns were outlawed and only outlaws had guns, when the topic of guns came up, my parents replied, ‘Only gangsters and hunters carry guns – and we are neither.’” Given this prohibitive backdrop, I invite you to read the rest of his Second Amendment testimony.

For the record, when it comes to Liberty, I would much prefer constitutional restoration over insurrectionif the former is achievable. (I’ve been around a few revolutions in Africa and the Middle East, so I’m well aware of the violence that accompanies the latter course.) But as current day American Patriots, we all have an obligation to not only stand ready to defend our family and property, but moreover to defend Liberty.

I’ll leave you, then, with these words of wisdom on both the individual right of self-defense, and the corporate responsibility to uphold Liberty.

Benjamin Franklin proclaimed, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In the case of those who would give up Essential Liberty for nothing more than the perception of a little temporary safety with more gun prohibitions, indeed they deserve neither Liberty nor safety and, ultimately, will lose both.

Quoting 18th-century Italian jurist and philosopher Cesare Beccaria in his “Commonplace Book,” Jefferson wrote, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

Regarding our corporate obligation in defense of Liberty, Jefferson wrote, “What country can preserve its liberties, if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”

And ponder this from a man whose name is synonymous with peace: “Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” –Mahatma Mohandas K. Gandhi from his autobiography.

Appeal_patriots_day_7

View all comments

372 Comments

Justin Kline in Austin, TX said:

Upon original reading, I flagged this message critical for response.
Life happens.

God Bless you, Mark, and everyone in this endeavor !!

Here is my offering of where the core of this issue lies.

I mentioned this in my rebuttal to the Costas debacle -- Our nation ALREADY HAS many unconstitutional laws in place, and still this tragedy (Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher's murder-suicide) occurred. Now what ?? SOSDD – Laws only work for those who try to live within their influence, and many of those laws we have create defenseless people who become victims.

Murder is AGAINST God’s law. Killing in self-defense is PART OF God’s law. Get educated as to how that concept is a fundamental part of our national heritage.
Visit http://jpfo.org/rabbi/6th-commandment.htm for a revealing look at how things should be, as well as how they have gotten twisted.

Bottom line - it is our God-given (G-d, for our friends at JPFO) right as sentient human beings, not to mention our basic nature and instinct, to keep ourselves alive and free from suffering harm.
Jewish - Christian – other religion - matters NOT.
Over 200 years old - matters NOT.
Truth simply is.
No argument to be had.
Don't like God, or don't like to have Him in the discussion ??
Many do not - matters NOT.
Judeo-Christian principles are the rock upon which our country was founded.
What was undergirding them ??
God is the rock upon which our country was founded.
No argument to be had.
It is what it is.
We struggle endlessly with man's law.
This nation's laws, and founding documents, are modeled upon God's laws.

An excellent piece of writing to search out is
Renewing Our Experiment in Ordered Liberty, by Michael S. Joyce
Found at www.acton.org/
Eloquent and lofty, but the core issue is this - our society MUST honor our founding guidance in our Unites States Constitution. If that one breaks down, we will be FORCED to retreat to what undergirds it.
The Declaration of Independence was put in place to protect life against tyranny. It was laid upon basic respect for human life and our fellow man. Only then could "Ordered Liberty" exist.

ANYONE'S first responsibility in life is to self, then respect for others.

Protecting yourself is God's law to you, and is also part of God's law for you.
Thus, it is not only your right, it is also your obligation as a member of this society.

Thursday, December 6, 2012 at 1:40 AM

Clifton C. Gillespie in Three Rivers, Michigan said:

I've read and agreed with nearly all comments listed here, and would join with most in the defense of our 2nd amendment rights if it came to actually joining a fireing line and shooting at some one trying to take my guns.
My concern is who am I going to be shooting at?? Is it going to be some group of National Guardsman sent down from Lansing, or is it going to be some Marine from our local detachment who was raised next door or some soldier from some other country??
I'm a WW!!/Koran veteran, I left the military in 1953 after nearly eight years service in the Army and Airforce with oversea's service in Europe. I've seen the recovery of our nation and the begining decline of it in the sixties until what we have now, the results of our elected officials more interested in Greed/Reelection then the oath they took when taking office.
I'll perform my duty on the fireing line to the best of my ability/s but maby I don't want to know who I'll be shooting at?!

Thursday, December 6, 2012 at 11:24 AM

mary dean in ravenna oh said:

IT IS MY RIGHY TO OWN A GUN & WAS SO LONG BEFORE THAT AMERICA-HATER CAME ALONG. I WOULD URGE EVERYONE CAPLE OF HANDLING IT TO HAVE ONE THIS REGIME IS A LITTLE SCAREY & WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL DO UNTIL IT TOO LATE BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY

Thursday, December 6, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Franklin O in Littleton, CO. said:

My family was once afraid of guns. Now, my family is afraid of their own government for the first time. We all have guns and carry permits. My neighbors and their children just finished their concealed carry permit classes and now practice shooting on a regular basis. I pray non of has to use these weapons to defend ourselves from a gone bad. I hope the sedition and treason going on will be resolved peacefully.

Thursday, December 6, 2012 at 8:40 PM

andrea in portland oregon said:

"What country can preserve its liberties, if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
AMEN to that. Jacob. This is what I was just talking about. Try to make your way through this and read it all.

Sunday, December 9, 2012 at 6:06 AM

Carson in Alabama said:

"It is the responsibility of all gun-owning Patriots to educate their like-minded family and friends about the overarching rationale for gun ownership -- the ability to defend Liberty -- and to encourage them to become responsible gun owners."

I have followed your advice. Not only did I encourage my friends to own guns, I gave them handguns as gifts. They were thrilled.

Thank you for inspiring me.

oh, btw, my friends are all inner city Black males between the ages of 18-26 who are unemployed and lacking a high school diploma.

The citizenry is now more safe as a result of my gift to defenders of Liberty.

Monday, December 10, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Karen in Connecticut said:

Our state has now joined Oregon, Colorado, Arizona, Wisconsin as the site of a mass murder via gunman. I believe wholeheartedly in the 2nd Amendment, but how do we prevent a madman from killing 18 elementary aged children?! What is going on that we have massacre after massacre? Is there some conspiracy out there promoting mass gun violence to encourage tighter gun control? I am so devastated by today's senseless murders..... 12-14-12

Friday, December 14, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Mr. Buck in Indiana said:

The spirit of resistance, coupled with the availability of arms, brought us a million dead Americans in a war that, unless the last Civil War widow has finally passed away, taxpayers are still paying for.
While I can certainly sympathize with the Southerners' love for their homeland, I question whether they may have been too quick to take up arms in a struggle that cost them everything they were fighting for, and more.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Larry Rembleski in MN. said:

America would never be a part of this U.N., A.L.C.U., Muslim Brotherhood, Vatican, Masonic, any religionists! Remember Patrick Henry (1765) said, "It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, people of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."

Friday, January 4, 2013 at 12:31 AM

Maria Krasnopol in Chicago said:

I am innocent victim of CIA Domestic Enforcement , it's much WORSE , the carring the gun ! THEY TRY ANY KIN BRUTALITY AGAINST TO HUMAN !!!!!

Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 7:48 AM

Wayne J. Behrle in Atlanta, Georgia said:

Red China fighter pilots, from Chinese Aircraft Carrier, "legally", fly protective circle around their carrier, which is anchored next to China's oil drilling rig, off coast of Houston Texas.

Has Obama's Poor Leadership Dragged us into another Cuban Missile Crisis?

( Information is from the, well respected, "Judicial Watch Verdict", May 2013, Volume 19, Issue 5.)

On page 6 it provides details, on how this dangerous deal has been allowed by the Obama administration, in order to give Red China's, Government Owned, Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation, known as CNOOC, the right to buy, the Canadian energy company, Nexen Inc..

So what?

This will give the Red Chinese government all of Nexen's oil drilling rights in northern Canada and in the Gulf of Mexico.

Due to the Strategic nature, of the Gulf of Mexico part, of the deal, the United States had a legal right to block the sale of Nexen Inc. to Red China.

After considering what was involved, the Obama administration decided not to block it!

Major Obama and Democratic supporters owned over 27.9 million shares, in this huge acquisition, of Nexen, Inc.. Did that make a difference?
Again So What!

Well remember that the Red Chinese government has a long history of mixing it's business dealings with it's Military Objectives.

This business takeover will give the Red Chinese Government's Military, a potential legal right to be in Canada and also in the Gulf of Mexico, in order to protect it's assets!

Thus in one fell swoop, the Red Chinese government now has a potential right to place it's advanced military might, in very close proximity to the vital industrial core, underbelly, of the United States!

Hitler and Stalin could only dream of such a magnificent military opportunity!

For those of you that scoff at such a military view of this deal, I present the following:
Red China has been, reportedly operating, duel use ships, which are militarily armed and also transport cargo. Not to even mention Red China's New Aircraft Carrier!

This is the largest amount that the Red Chinese have ever spent, in history, on the acquisition of any foreign company.

The Red Chinese Government also paid an additional 60% more than the stocks trading value, in order to accomplish the takeover!

WHY!

Because Victory is cheap at any price?!

Wayne J. Behrle, "The Burl", American Patriots.

Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 6:27 AM

jerry Jocoy in Denton, Co. Texas said:

I just want to say, When Bill Clinton & Obama say" hunters dont need AK-47's!" Well of course they dont! Our forfathers didnt give their life so we could go squirrel hunting!! They faught & died for our right to be a well armed militia!! I am a Gulf War Veteran & proud tohave.served in The Patriot movement more than for the government but I am proud of myservice to God ,country & neighbor , sincerely, Jerry

Monday, July 22, 2013 at 5:07 AM