Second Amendment as Defense Against Tyranny : Gun Studies

Opinion by Alan J Chwick & Joanne D Eisen

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- The time has come to ask some questions because it’s obvious that the Democrat Party attempted to steal the election of 2016. What would have happened if they had succeeded?

Their maniacal anger, in defeat, reveals the likelihood of future troubles.

What would happen if, no when, a weak President is elected who cannot deal with fake accusations of heartlessness, and who will be eager to compromise? We can be sure that the Democrats will be waiting, in the shadows, to finally orchestrate their long-awaited opportunity to regulate the Second Amendment out of existence.

We gun owners have spent years preparing for the possibility of criminal violence against our families and violence that would accompany various social disruptions such as hurricanes and earthquakes. But are we ready for a political onslaught? And, are we prepared for the inevitable devastating attacks on our Constitution?

The Democrats and their Left minions appear to be dragging our country into new, unknown territory.

There are questions that each of us must answer. How do we feel about death with honor rather than life with chains and slavery? What is moral and what is not in defense of family, and does morality even matter? How righteous is a preemptive strike to protect one’s family?

David Kopel discusses the morality of violence and comments, “If violence – especially deadly violence – is always and everywhere immoral, then the Jews who violently resisted Hitler acted immorally.” Kopel believes that the discussion of the morality of violence is, in reality, a discussion about the appropriateness and the circumstances of the use of violence. He further comments, “the failure to use violence may itself be wrongful.”

While the serious nature of these questions began with the Founders, in 1994 the book Lethal Laws, by Zelman, Simkin and Rice, heated the discussion. The book is still available used online. Zelman believed that genocide was easily committed by the government against unarmed people. The early data describing seven genocides revealed that 55.9 million unarmed civilians had been murdered.

Daniel Polsby and Don Kates wrote as essay reviewing the book and commented on the notion of self defense against rogue government. They note, “It is hardly a secret that lawful governments sometimes do grotesque things, quite often to popular acclaim.”

But, Polsby and Kates warn, “Though it is a long step between being disarmed and being murdered – one does not usually lead to the other – but it is nevertheless an arresting reality that not one of the principle genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed…An armed population is simply more difficult to exterminate than one that is defenseless.”

The researcher, Rudolf Rummel, coined the word ‘democide’ to include genocide and mass murder by government. He calculated 169,202,000 deaths by the government in the twentieth century. We note, that his books make fascinating reading.

Paul Rosenberg suggested that statists, which prefer large bloated governments, believe that any government is “morally superior” to its citizens. In their view, individuals cannot control themselves with deadly weapons, but, says Rosenberg, the opposite is true.

But one question is asked, as a warning. How can anyone armed with a fully automatic weapon prevail against a government force with tanks, planes, and modern technical weaponry? Aren’t we making empty threats? Can we even think of resistance?

However, David Kopel, in his review of the Zelman book thinks that armed resistance can be quite successful. There could be no pitched battle of man with rifle against tank and helicopter, but the Tyrant would face a huge economic price. Kopel explains that the kind of well prepared civilian resistance that would exist in the US would be quite successful.

Kopel further writes, “the most important benefit of defensive arms is their deterrent power. As long as a potential dictator must take into account very serious risks involved with taking action against the American people, then the prospect for such actions being taken becomes marginally smaller.”

Yes! He is correct, as our possible enemy does not know our strength! They can only guess. We do not demonstrate. We do not make trouble. Meanwhile, the Democrats’ behavior shows that they are not aware of any risk.

Kopel is concerned, though, about the timing of violent resistance. He suggests,”One guide for when a subject people should resist may be the people’s assessment of the government’s degree of hatred.”

But we find the country, under President Trump, to be neither a budding tyrant nor a hater. It is the Democrat Party, especially with their socialist wing, who are exhibiting abnormal amounts of hatred against the President, and his supporters. So we might be looking at an impending civil war.

At some point, in the foreseeable future, these people might be voted into office and attempt another coup d’etat. They might be legally able to realize their desire to create a list of guns and gun owners via an expanded background check system which is mandated to save the records of the NICS system. They have definitely become bolder and are out of the closet that hides their intent to destroy the Second Amendment and our right to own legal weapons. “Repeal the Second Amendment,” the New York Times blasted out.

Even if such a time exists, they will never be able to disarm us. We will always wish to avoid violence in our streets and homes.

We suggest that these and other papers we presented here which discuss our Founding Father’s view of civilian weapons wielding should be read and discussed more publically. Revolt of the Masses by Charles Dunlap [dunlap] is an interesting read.

We laud the Three Percenters because already know. We are so armed and so ready, yet those idiots act like they are not aware that they are racing toward danger and that they will never get the stuff they want by using violence. We tolerate a lot from them because we have a lot to lose if violence begins.

It may never be about genocide, but it will be about freedom.

Simply put, The Left needs to know about the decentralized power of armed citizens. They need to fear us.

About the Authors:

Alan J Chwick has been involved with firearms much of his life and is the Retired Managing Coach of the Freeport NY Junior (Marksmanship) Club, Division of the Freeport NY Revolver & Rifle Association, Freeport, NY. He has escaped from New York State to South Carolina and is an SC FFL (Everything22andMore.com). – [email protected] | TWITTER: @iNCNF

Joanne D Eisen, DDS (Ret.) practiced dentistry on Long Island, NY. She has collaborated and written on firearm politics for the past 30+ years. She has also escaped from New York State but to Virginia. – [email protected]

The post Second Amendment as Defense Against Tyranny : Gun Studies appeared first on AmmoLand.com.