Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0/Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0 (L0pht Heavy Industries, Inc.)(1997).ISO/tezcat/Guns/Gun_Ownership.txt

Text File | 1996-07-08 | 18KB | 385 lines

From the Radio Free Michigan archives

ftp://141.209.3.26/pub/patriot

If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to
[e-mail].
------------------------------------------------

 ****************************************************************

                        "ALTER OR ABOLISH!"
                THE REAL REASON FOR GUN OWNERSHIP

 ****************************************************************
 ****************************************************************


                THE STATE CREATES ITS OWN ENEMIES

   Ghoulishly capitalizing on the tragedy of a mass murder, the
anti-gun forces are surging forward with their plans for total gun
confiscation. If law-abiding private citizens were disarmed, they
claim, criminals and crazies would be unable to kill and maim.
That's an obvious lie--criminals, by definition, disobey laws, and
madmen can kill with knives, cars, or champagne bottles as easily
and as senselessly as they can with guns. The not-so- secret
agenda of the State and its apologists is clear: disarm peaceful
citizens to render them powerless. Turn law-abiding Americans into
criminals with the stroke of a legislative pen. Anyone who refuses
to surrender his or her weapons would become an Enemy Of The
State, much the same as any armed citizen is right now in the
Soviet Union, or Communist China, or Socialist Nicaragua, or
Fascist El Salvador, or Monarchist Great Britain. Gun confiscation
is non-partisan--it is always and forever aimed at anyone disliked
by the current gang in power.



               GUN SEIZURE SPARKED 1776 REVOLUTION

   The American Revolution began in a dispute over gun control
when British Redcoats marched toward Lexington and Concord to
disarm farmers there. London claimed to be the "legitimate"
government ruling America, just as Washington or Sacramento or
Albany claims to be today. And their attempt to disarm us stems
from the same power lust that drove King George. We must,
therefore, hold onto our guns--legally or illegally--for the very
same reason the colonists did.



                    THE TRUTH ABOUT GUN OWNERSHIP

   The anti-gunners, certain that the role of government is to
grant privileges and dictate behavior, shout that citizens have no
reason to be "allowed" to own assault rifles, which have "no
legitimate sporting use." The Constitution, though, says nothing
about "a well-regulated hunting club" being necessary. We do not
own handguns, assault rifles, shotguns, and other powerful weapons
because we are hunters or plinkers or collectors. We do not even
own guns because the Constitution "allows" us to. The Constitution
does not "grant" rights. It recognizes rights already and
irrevocably held forever by the people themselves (individuals),
and forbids government from trampling on them. We have a right to
keep and bear arms regardless of whether the Second Amendment
exists or not! All Article Two guarantees is that we shouldn't
have to defend that right against "our" federal government. We've
seen that simple guarantee erode, though, haven't we?

   The real reason for gun ownership is to protect the individual
from the State, whether it be an invading State from across the
seas or a domestic State grown tyrannical and oppressive.

   The goal of total, repressive confiscation is clear in the
subtle, shifting arguments of the anti-gun forces. When handguns
were the target, they clamored for prohibition because handguns
were not militia-type weapons protected by the Second Amendment.
Now they cry for assault rifle bans because "mere citizens" have
no business possessing "military-style" weapons!

   These eager confiscators rightly point out that assault rifles,
handguns, and indeed all "weapons" have only one purpose: to kill.
Again they speak a truth, but only partially. The unasked question
is, "To kill whom? And under what circumstances? The answer is,
"To kill any who attempt to rob, maim, rape, or kill us." Even
that answer, though, does not fully express the most important
reason for gun ownership. Only a small number of people are
actually touched by criminal violence. The State, though, touches
each and every one of us every hour of every day. People in
government seek to tax our earnings to pay for their whims, to
draft our children to fight in wars they start, to regulate and
interfere with our lives out of pure love of power and their
desire to wield it. They have become as tyrannical as any Tory
redcoat, Soviet commissar, or Nazi Gestapo. And they are coming to
steal your last line of defense against them. Will you meekly
obey?



                GUN CONTROL ENFORCED AT GUNPOINT

   When any law against guns is passed, how is it backed up? How
will the State remove banned weapons from private hands? How will
agents of the State disarm the citizenry? Why, by the use of guns,
of course! This contradiction has never bothered statists. Why are
handguns and assault rifles evil and wicked in the hands of
private citizens yet perfectly fine in the hands of employees of
the State? If this is truly "government by the people," why do we
see the servants disarming their masters by force? What do they
fear from us, if theirs is a legitimate, benevolent government? If
the State does not seek to control us, why does it want us
disarmed?

   The usual answer--stripped of equivocation--is that "mere
citizens" are like half-witted children, incapable of safely
handling "dangerous" commodities such as weapons or explosives or
medicines or information. And only when some half-witted children
pass a civil service exam or are elected by other half-wits to
work for the wise and benevolent State do they magically become
smart and honest and trustworthy enough to carry weapons and
decide whom shall be "allowed" to possess guns and what sort of
design, shape, or weight such weapons shall be.

   Sounds pretty condescending and paternalistic, doesn't it?
That's how they view us. Sheep for the shearing at tax time,
cannon fodder during war time, and dangerous idiots the rest of
the time.

   And they dare ask us to obey their decrees?



                    GOVERNMENT CREATES CRIME

   What many gun owners refuse to face, usually by saying "it
can't happen in America," is that the government can and does
create new classes of criminals with the mere stroke of a pen. In
1919, Prohibition turned millions of people overnight from
sociable drinkers to Enemies Of The State. The victimless crime of
ingesting alcohol turned neighborly, peaceful people into fair
game for imprisonment, fines, and seizure of property. Some fought
back, often with simple shotguns against "revenooers" armed with
assault rifles (the Thompson sub-machine gun) in a modern version
of the Whiskey Rebellion. The Prohibition amendment created crime
by definition. If, tomorrow, smoking or drinking coffee or owning
a book were declared illegal, the State would suddenly point to a
new "criminal underworld" of massive proportions. In the eyes of
the State they would become "a new breed of criminal" to be weeded
out of society and thrown into prisons. So it is with any
prohibition of popular activities, including gun ownership.



                GUN PROHIBITION DISARMS THE POOR

   Let's face it--police respond faster to calls from Beverly
Hills than they do to calls from Watts. And the rich can afford
armed guards, to boot! When so-called Saturday Night Specials are
banned, does it affect those who can spend hundreds on a fine
pistol? No. Does it prevent criminals from stealing whatever
weapon they want or buying it on the black market? No. The only
people harmed by a "cheap handgun" ban are the honest poor who
have hardly enough money to feed their children, let alone defend
them from inner-city marauders. Any form of gun control disarms
those least able to defend themselves. And what good is a 15 day
waiting period to someone who is threatened by an armed criminal
coming by tonight? When one perceives a threat, one should be able
to acquire protection immediately.



                   GUN PROHIBITION IS RACIST

   The Gun Control Act of 1968 was rammed down the throats of the
American public, blatantly exploiting then-current fears of gun-
toting black rioters by implying that the law would help to disarm
American Blacks, other minorities, and all dissenters at a time of
civil upheaval. To paraphrase a popular slogan, "If the government
does not trust minorities with guns, minorities cannot trust
government." Ask any Native American.

   In a mirror image case 20 years later, assault rifle bans are
being ramrodded through legislatures by appealing to fears that
gun-toting white racists are on the loose.

   The real and only purpose of gun control is to disarm the
innocent and the peaceful, of whatever race, creed, or social
status.



                   GUN PROHIBITION IS SEXIST

   The same goes for women. Police and purported feminists urge
women to resist rape with fists, fingernails, keyrings, and
screams. But why should any woman allow an assailant to get within
arm's reach of her? Why don't Women's Rights activists in or out
of government reveal the most effective way for a woman to defend
herself: to buy a gun and learn to use it? The truth is, they want
women to feel weak and perpetually threatened so that they will
beg the State for protection. A woman standing proud, armed, and
fearless is the last thing most self-proclaimed "feminists" want
(since that would undercut their perverse longing for a huge
paternalistic government!)



         GOVERNMENTS KILL MORE THAN ANY MASS-MURDERER

   How can people who work for or worship the State--statists
point to the murder of five children in a schoolyard or twenty
people in a restaurant--claim that as sufficient reason to disarm
tens of millions of Americans? Are they so presumptuous as to
suggest that we are capable of such violent madness? Perhaps there
is a degree of psychological projection going on here: statists
feel within themselves the urge to kill and project it onto the
people they fear the most--us, the victims of the State. For while
tens of millions of people own guns, only a minuscule fraction
ever use those guns to aggress against others. Every State,
however, has guns and even more powerful and terrifying weapons in
its clutches and every State has used them, will use them, and are
using them to murder hundreds, thousands, and millions of
innocent, unarmed people.

   How can the insane actions of a Patrick Purdy or a Richard
Speck even dream of comparing with the death toll of the most
minor skirmish in the smallest of wars or "police actions"? The
murder of five innocent children is heart-rendingly tragic, but
how many thousands of innocent children were roasted in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki? How many died in the bombings of London and Dresden
and Paris? How many women, children, and old people have been shot
by the bullets of "their own" government in Vietnam, Cambodia,
Angola, Nicaragua, China, El Salvador, India, Israel, Afghanistan,
Tibet, Argentina, Libya, Ireland, Russia, South Africa, Chile,
Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Iran, and on and on and on for every State you
can name, even "our" United States. For statists to use the "mass
murder" of a few people as an excuse to disarm all Americans when
the State is the largest, bloodiest, longest-lived institution of
mass-murder in all of history is appallingly hypocritical. Do we
owe allegiance to the apologists for such atrocities? NEVER!

   Private ownership of weaponry is the last defense against all
tyranny, foreign and domestic. The thought that there might come a
time when peaceable gun owners (even members of the patriotic NRA)
must take arms against their own local police and the US military
is anathema to nearly everyone. The possibility, however, must be
faced. A lot of American colonists were horrified at the thought
of defending themselves against "their" king's army, too.




       CIVILIAN-BASED DEFENSE PREFERRED TO STANDING ARMY

   Some say that the Constitution "granted" the right to keep and
bear arms to provide for a "well-regulated militia." Since we have
a standing army, the argument goes, civilians no longer need to
own guns. Yet that amendment was written precisely because the
British used that exact argument in their attempts (from 1768 to
1777) to disarm the colonists. Americans detested the standing
armies of the British government and knew that civilian-based
defense was the ultimate, perhaps the only, protection against any
threat to liberty, whether from London, Moscow, or Washington D.C.




            DEFYING UNJUST LAWS IS RIGHT AND PROPER!

   When the day comes (and it will, if we don't raise our voices
in protest now) that the Imperial State commands its subjects
(that's how they view you and me, regardless of what they say) to
turn in our weapons, what will we do? Make no mistake--if people
refuse to surrender or destroy their weapons, they will be dealt
with by heavily armed police; they will be imprisoned, fined,
perhaps even shot if they try to defend their Constitutional--nay,
their human--rights.

   Of whom should we be more wary--invading foreign troops whose
rule we would never sanction, or "our own" government, to which
most of us grant some legitimacy and which is right here, right
now, all around us? Perhaps paraphrasing a parent's question will
help provide an answer: If the State passed a law telling you to
jump off a cliff, would you? No fair answering that "good, pure,
sober, honest politicians wouldn't let that happen." With guns, it
is happening right now.

   And when that friendly cop on the beat (whom most gun owners
exalt as a good man just doing his job and who may even be a
fellow NRA member!) comes around to your house, he will come armed
with "good government" handguns and assault rifles to seize our
"bad private" handguns and assault rifles. "Sorry pal," he'll say,
"but the law is the law."

   That possibility is something many gun owners--staunch
defenders of law and order and supporters of local police--refuse
to face. They blank out the fact that even--perhaps especially--
in America, they may have to choose between owning their guns and
facing the full implication of the Declaration of Independence,
"that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of
these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish
it"

   Some would rather surrender meekly to the State, giving up
their last shred of defense against tyranny, rather than face that
choice. But if they do surrender their firepower, the choice will
have been made. And it won't matter whether our new masters speak
Russian, Chinese, Japanese, English, or American Bureaucratese.
They will be our masters nonetheless.



                             WHAT TO DO

   First of all, keep your guns! Do not turn them in just because
some law is passed ordering you to do so. That's just what they
want--sheeplike compliance. You are not a criminal. Don't let the
State declare you one or treat you like one. The colonists who
turned in their weapons to their Tory town governments soon
learned the folly of their actions. Any government that outlaws
gun ownership is an outlaw government! It is no more necessary to
obey an oppressive, tyrannical State than it is to obey any thief
who demands that you turn over your property under threat of
death. We know the free person's answer to such a demand. So does
the State. That is why statists seek to browbeat us into disarming
without a fight. They need the sanction of the victim. They cannot
hope to disarm us by force. That would tip their hand and
guarantee a revolution. But by stealth, instilled guilt, and
appeals to our peaceful, law- abiding natures will they attempt to
expropriate our only defense against their continued and
increasing predations.

   Resist the urge to obey the edicts of self-proclaimed rulers.
Don't walk timidly into a concentration camp filled with once-free
men and women. Decry with every fiber of your being this trampling
of our fundamental human rights!

 ****************************************************************
 ****************************************************************

             THE RIGHT TO OWN GUNS IS A CIVIL RIGHT,
              WITHOUT WHICH ALL OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS
                   ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO DEFEND.

      THE RIGHT TO OWN GUNS IS THE RIGHT TO OWN--AND PROTECT--
                 YOUR BODY AND YOUR PROPERTY.

      THE RIGHT TO OWN GUNS IS THE RIGHT TO RESIST TYRANNY.

           ANY WHO SEIZE GUNS ARE THIEVES OR TYRANTS.

 ****************************************************************
 ****************************************************************


   Every law restricting free, immediate access to firearms is a
direct attack on individual freedom. The course of action is up to
you. Demand the repeal of all such laws or ignore them with
impunity. But never accept them as legitimate restraints upon your
liberty. Nothing legitimate can issue from the pen of tyrants.
[Permission is explicitly granted to reproduce this pamphlet by
photocopy, computer bulletin board, or any other method, as long
as the Company of Freemen is credited as the source.]

                      THE COMPANY OF FREEMEN

                               *****

The author of this pamphlet, Victor Koman, is an award-winning
novelist (THE JEHOVAH CONTRACT, SOLOMON'S KNIFE). A substantially
different version of this article appeared in the February, 1990,
issue of GUNS & AMMO.

------------------------------------------------
(This file was found elsewhere on the Internet and uploaded to the
Radio Free Michigan archives by the archive maintainer.


All files are ZIP archives for fast download.

 E-mail [e-mail])