Home / Government / The Case for the Non-Revolutionary Ownership of Guns
Print Friendly and PDF

The Case for the Non-Revolutionary Ownership of Guns

Written by Gary North on March 9, 2012

There are two main extremes in the debate over guns. The gun control people are basically worshippers of the state. They grovel before the image of the state. They believe in the state. They see the state as redemptive: an agency of healing. This agency must be armed, they say, in order to collect the money necessary to fund the state’s messianic claims and programs.

A state that can heal must be a state that can kill. The gun control crowd worships a state that can heal. So, they call for the abolition of private gun ownership. This is consistent.

At the other extreme is the private militia crowd. They think that the ownership of weapons is basic to conducting a new American Revolution. They think that that their ownership of weapons will in some way slow down the state. Some day, the People will take up arms against the state.

I reject both positions.

Here is reality. The ownership of guns is mostly symbolic most of the time. The gun as a symbol says this: the state is not God. The state is not finally sovereign. Citizens are sovereign under God, and they possess the right to bear arms as a mark of this sovereignty.

The defenders of the messianic state go ballistic in the face of this claim. They do not accept popular sovereignty. They accept state sovereignty. They accept the fact that voters can elect masters, but they do not accept the fact that citizens have a right to exercise the mark of sovereignty: to defend themselves by force of arms. The statists want the state to possess a strict monopoly over life and death. They understand the meaning of the symbol of the gun. They want guns and badges linked judicially: no badge–no gun.

The weekend militia people are dangerous. Why? Because they have a romantic view of bloodshed. They think that the modern state can be successfully resisted by force of individual arms. This leads to a suicide mentality. The suicide mentality is the heart of the matter, not gun ownership.

The correct goal is to wait for the federal government to go bankrupt before it bankrupts us. It will go bankrupt. It is not God. It cannot afford to implement its programs of healing.

In the political vacuum that will appear in the aftermath of that national bankruptcy, armed citizens with economic assets and economic and political skills will be in a position to pick up the pieces. Local armed citizens will become the back-up of the local police, which local citizens will elect.

The main idea behind gun ownership is to maintain the right of every law-abiding resident to defend his life and property when the state cannot do it. We live in a time when the local agencies of law enforcement cannot secure the peace. This leaves citizens the task of defending their lawful zones of jurisdiction: in their cars, in their homes, and in their places of business.

The lone gunner who takes a stand against the authorities will wind up like David Koresh and his followers. It is better to live to fight politically. Suicide missions benefit the state.

As for armed students in public schools, there is a solution. Close the public schools. No one hears of bullied students who go on a shooting spree in private schools.

We should not worship the federal government. We should plan a peaceful revolution to overthrow the federal government. We should work toward the day when local governments replace 90% of the federal government.

Print Friendly and PDF
Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

166 thoughts on “The Case for the Non-Revolutionary Ownership of Guns

  1. SEAN MURRY says:

    Wild bill you got that right.

  2. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

    John Petrie’s Collection of
    Thomas Jefferson Quotes

  3. “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.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

    • Yes. Authority without restrictions on its behavior will abuse its authority-both God-given and self suscribed authority. It will see devils behind every tree, in every house. Soon those who have no real authority will convince everyone that they DO have authority – ie. Bullies.

  4. Dan DeChenne says:

    If they're symbolic then just buy a pin and wear it. I'll keep my guns. Smoking Dan.

  5. two reasons to own guns–O'Vomit and Hillery Clinton.

  6. wild bill 6924 says:

    short version:
    free men own guns but slaves can't

    • WB6924, You're right. I'd also like to point out that the 2nd amendment gives us, the American Citizen, the RIGHT to "bear arms", not the NEED, unless we feel that it's necessary. Most Law Enforcement agencies are strong enough to keep the peace. But the criminal responds to the State Law which forbids private ownership, carry or not, of a handgun for personal protection. He will salivate and kill without fear of immediate retaliation. This is the NECESSITY I referred to. Don't let the Government do an end run around the Constitution. Keep the UN out of our Right To Protect ourselves. GBA!!!

      • The unfortunate reality is the, without the Second Amendment, the rest of the Constitution isn't worth the parchment it was written on.

        • Yep. I always said the second amendment gives the first one force. I got a suspicion that the Government doesn't get that yet.

          Question. How much further are the people going to let the Government go before we explain the 2nd to them? Sort of appeal the law to our higher power given from God?

        • Really? Wouldn’t know it. Plenty of Americans own guns yet the Federal Government becomes more intrusive all the time.

        • @Dalek Actually you have it backwards as the government certainly does realize the second amendment gives the first force and the feds would just as soon get rid of both as well as any other limitation on their power. Yes, the system is crashing but the sequel is all but guaranteed to be far worse, at least for a time until – if – it too self destructs.

        • Excellent point!

      • CIA – I agree with most of what you said but like many others, you are mistaken on a critical point.
        The Constitution does NOT give us the right to bear arms. The Constitution only serves to recognize and affirm the right we already have.

      • The Second Amendment does not “give” us the right to keep and bear arms, as that right existed before the amendment was written. What it does is protect the right.

    • Slaves can own guns. They carry guns, wear matching costumes, and do the bidding of their masters. Look around you.

    • In a nation, where gun ownership', is allowed, the people are called , citizens . In a nation , where guns are outlawed ; they are referred too ,as , subjects ' .

  7. Only governments can commit mass murder on the scale seen throughout history when private ownership of guns is outlawed or the people have been disarmed via confiscation. The Second Amendment was never about hunting squirrels or skeet shooting. It was intended to give the people force of arms equal to or greater than the government's, otherwise government will have the means to march us into gulags and mass graves. It's that simple.

    • Government isn't some external entity. Millions killed millions. Millions followed their leaders and committed the atrocities. Altternatively, if you believe in personal freedom, the 2nd Amendment should indeed be about hunting squirrels or shooting tin cans, i.e. you're free to own firearms for whatever reason you want no matter what.

      • "Government isn't some external entity."

        It is in a mercantilist society like the current U.S. Federal government where the leadership is out of touch with the day to day needs of the people, and is only serving a small circle of power elite. The declaration of independence proclaimed that citizens ought to revolt when conditions sink to that of citizens serving the state, rather than the state being an embodiment of the will of the people, and accountable to citizens though things like town hall meetings. So I will retain my right to bear arms, and I will also encourage anyone who understands we live in mercantile oligarchy to ally me whether they be a Libertarian, individualist anarchist, left anarchist, or Green, we need to quite sweating the small stuff and get to know our neighbors in case TSHTF IMO.

        • Pardon, but every form of government except SELF-government IS a malevolent external entity.

          I believe Gil was trying to say that no external government can do anything without most of its people willingly doing it. The issue is one of political philosophy. Which is why your only allies will ever be libertarian anarchists, who will be allied with you on one condition: to reclaim our innate, inborn, inherent, inalienable right to SELF-govern. The implications of town hall meetings is that they are voluntary and local. There is no over-arching external government to control what can be discussed, debated, decided. That's the ideal — but I think we all know what the reality is, especially after the debacle with Obamacare.

          That is the issue: as long as there are people who believe we cannot self-govern but MUST have rulers, we will have the problem of oligarchy, dictatorships, tyranny.

          Retain your right to bear arms, but don't expect allies from the ranks of who are really your enemies.

          I admit I am, by virtue of this reality, torn on the subject of knowing my neighbors, as I live in a close-quartered suburban-urban area, and most of my neighbors are statists, who think the world will fall apart if we don't have heavily armed contingents to "keep order" at the behest of "elected" rulers.

          Majority rule is what I hear all the time. They fail to realize — or are simply okay with — "majority rules" is only mob rule under a "leader." A ruler who commands might is the right form of government the majority — regardless of political party — believes we want and need. The only issue for them is whether it's a ruler of their "choosing" or the "opposition's."

          Keep your powder dry until the time is right. That's all Dr. North is saying. And be careful who you befriend. You may welcome them as an ally; they very well may see you ultimately as the enemy, because you do not agree with their political philosophy. It matters. The Greens, the "left anarchists," the neocons, the "conservatives," are all statists, not supportive of self-rule.

          It's not about numbers; it's about who rules — and I for one believe no one — no human being — is qualified to rule me, own me, make my decisions for me, and force me to pay for them, but me.

          That's the crux of the matter. It's not even about "corruption" in government. ALL governments will eventually be corrupted; only individual SELF-government will sustain individual rights, liberty, and freedom.

          An armed populace is a civilized populace, but an external government has a monopoly on force by the numbers of delusional people willing to do its bidding, and they have a near monopoly on materiel, logistics, and command and control.

          Gil's point is that even here in America the oligarchy has huge numbers of men to do its bidding — remember what happened in New Orleans in "response" to Katrina: American soldiers went house-to-house confiscating, under threat of lethal force, private weapons.

          Not only CAN such atrocities as Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Cambodia, China, etc., happen here; it already has.

          Dr. North is saying it can get much worse if we open fire needlessly. Wait for them to self-destruct through their collapsing fiat money machine. When soldiers and sailors don't get paid, housed, fed, and maintained, they will then be more amenable to OUR political philosophy, and building a new, saner, freer — hopefully FREE! — society of equally self-governing individuals.

    • In the case of the US it will be the FEMA camps the masses will be marched into. If the military follows the orders of the Obamunist then the Conventional weapons the masses have will not match what they will use against us. At least in WW 2 the weapons were more conventional and people were fighting people, except for the tanks and the heavy artillery. Now they have armored robots and unmanned drones that wil do the work of the human soldier. The police where I live have a vehicle that will plow through cement buildings without stopping. If the police turn on the people then we are doomed.

  8. CrustyOldGeezer says:

    Here's your plan:

    In the beginning:

    After the formation of the Nation by the coming together of the original 13 colonies to form the United States of America, various other 'territories' chose to coagulate into additional States in their own Right, and as equals to the original 13 States.

    The new territory/States could not protect or defend their borders and any lands not held in Private ownership were held in Trust, and protected by, the federal government until such time as the States became strong enough to provide for their own defense against foreign aggression.

    The original 13 States were not forced to cede any lands to the federal government as a condition of Statehood, nor should any State that formed and joined the United States as Sovereign States in their own Right and EQUAL TO the original 13 States.

    Now, we have States with lands that are 'claimed' as “federal lands” fully contained within the borders of Sovereign States simply because the federal government failed to relinquish the “lands held in Trust” to the States in which they were located.

    As it now stands, those States, and the Sovereigns/Citizens are held in contempt by the federal government on the pretense of “federal ownership” of lands not actually “OWNED”.

    In nearly all the Western States huge percentages of land are denied to the States and the People.

    It makes no difference which particular State in which you live, the following applies equally to all.

    Each State with large percentages of 'federal lands' has a State Level 'bureau of land management' that controls and manages the lands using localized formulas and methods unique to each area of management.
    While the federal bureaucracy DEMANDS that all lands are to be 'managed' according to a federal “BIBLE” that takes no local needs or circumstances into consideration. Grasslands, wetlands and desert are all equally mismanaged according to the dictates of a bureaucrat with zero knowledge of individual areas and the needs of the land.

    Each State maintains a “forest Service” and manages forest lands in a manner that takes into account the needs of the lands in questions.
    Meanwhile… the federal government maintains its policies of micromanaging from afar with no knowledge of the lands.

    • CrustyOldGeezer says:

      Each State maintains its own “Parks and Recreation” departments and manages the State Parks according to the needs and unique qualities of the Park Areas, as well as the Recreational aspects of each area.
      Meanwhile, the federal government destroys, corrupts, and damages the Parks and Recreational areas under its control through blatant abuse of power and ignoring the needs and uniqueness of the areas.

      Each State maintains its own Fish and Game department with due diligence and attention to the unique needs of each individual area of need.
      The federal government throws its weight around trying to enforce unreasonable laws and regulations that were dreamed up by bureaucrats in Washington DC to justify their six figure income plus benefits..

      Each State maintains its own EPA that watches over any 'environmental damage' that may occur within the borders of the State and ensure adherence to “LOCAL” environmental needs and dangers.
      The federal government created a monster with no limits or controls that is 'self supporting; inasmuch as the 'fines' they generate are used to further “Their own agenda” through regulatory terrorism even though the 'violations' are entirely located within the confines of the States Sovereign territory. The Constitution strictly forbids the federal government any power or authority within a State.

      Each State maintains its own “Public School System” as does each individual county or city. Each school district knows, and understands the unique needs of their own areas, and the curriculum that should be taught to produce highly educated, intelligent young people that understand the real world and are equipped to enter society with full knowledge of what is needed from each to further the nation as a whole.
      Washington DC maintains the theory that only the federal bureaucrats are capable of dictating what should, or should not be taught to OUR CHILDREN. (Does ANYBODY know of any school district that is actively engaged in “Interstate commerce?)

      The same holds true for each federal government intrusion into the lives of the Sovereigns/Citizens of each State so affected by the overhanded abuse by the federal government.
      (Refer to Amendment X of the Constitution)

      It is the Duty and Responsibility of each State to protect and defend her Sovereigns/Citizens by ensuring that all residents and workers are there with the knowledge and consent (under the jurisdiction of) the State and local governments. Any illegal aliens found should be arrested and given permanent “Persona Non Grata” status and turned over to the federal government who is ultimately responsible for GUARDING THE NATIONS BORDERS.

      It is time for each State legislature to pass laws that regain control of lands that RIGHTFULLY belong to the States and the People of those States.
      It is time to claim our State's rights by the return to the Constitution, Article 1, Section 3.

      It is PAST time for the State legislatures to DEMAND “Enumerated Powers” authority for any and every federal law, regulation or rule before it can be implemented in any State.
      Any federal edict that cannot be validated by the “Enumerated Powers” shall not be allowed to be in use or enforced in any State.

      By passing bills, and having governors sign them into law, the 'need' for the federal bureaucracies diminish until there is no need for the duplication, resulting in a smaller, less expensive, federal government.

      States 14 through, and including 50, deserve exactly the same  treatment as the original 13 – Very small percentages of 'federal lands' under the iron fist of an out of control federal government.

      The ‘batf’, drug enforcement agency, depts of agriculture, labor, education, and the welfare alphabet agencies will become extinct unless they can PROVE “Enumerated Powers”, and/or “Over riding national security” in their own right.

      No STATE will be forced to send money to Washington DC to be redistributed to other States for ‘feel good’ programs. All taxes collected for education, will be kept instate and used/spent in State.

      Numerous Western States have vast tracts of lands designated as “Military Installations” and primarily used for weapons testing and proving, as well as Training facilities.

      Since these areas are for defense and national security reasons, ALL other States will pay the State(s) in which those areas are located based on the States population. Ie: if a State has 15% of the total population of the nation, that State will pay 15% of the ‘leased lands’.

      • Okay; so bell the cat.

        The point is, the states are dependent on federal funds; if they didn't like what the feds were doing, they COULD HAVE opted out long ago.

        Wasn't that what the War of Northern Aggression was all about?

        Yeah.

        Look how that turned out.

        Theory always looks good on paper. Practical application is another beast entirely.

        Ever hear the expression, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"? Well, the feds are that "hand" to the states. This is the basic reason states will not go against the feds. Today, even with the very mild and seemingly insignificant cuts to the federal budget, because fed money for state programs, projects, and businesses is drying up, states are struggling with bankruptcy, and businesses — especially those that depended on defense contracts — are going belly-up right and left.

        Just pointing out that states CAN do something doesn't make it so.

        The driving motivation to go against the grain and dive off the gravy train is missing. Until you supply a simple, workable, quick plan to attain the goal of your theory, it remains just a nice theory.

  9. rustyscrew says:

    The choice is either being a citizen of the United States or a subject of the state.
    Most of us would choose to be citizens, the left are more comfortable being subjects.

    • Really?

      Do you believe a government is necessary?

      If you do, then you are one of the subjects.

      Do you believe every person should and has the innate, inborn, inherent, inalienable right to SELF-govern, and that there is no one qualified to rule anyone else?

      If you do not, then you are one of the subjects.

      "Left"-"Right" are merely two (practically identical) sides of the same coin.

      What we need is a different coin, one of value, one of gold or silver, one whose two sides reiterate the same declaration: FREEDOM for all.

      No freedom can co-exist for long if there are rulers — "elected" or (self-)appointed — over others. Your "choice" is too shallow and too partisan; it does not acknowledge the facts.

      Question: was it intended to be "these" United States, or "the" United States? All hangs on this answer. One upholds individual freedom, the other upholds a government with subjects.

  10. UStinman says:

    To Gary North………………………"NUTS"!!!!!

  11. They will never take are guns if they try there will be WWIII so hang on to them I no I will no one will take my guns

  12. All of you, tell it like it is!!!!!!!!!!

  13. Go ahead and wait for the government to go bankrupt and give up you guns. When the state hasn't any recourse but to take your property and money to sustain it's own existance, they will come for you. Once they have your property and money, they'll have no need of you. I'll keep my guns, thankyou.

    • Please tell us where in the article Dr. North even hints at "giving up" our guns?

      Thank you.

      Read, man, slowly, carefully, with understanding.

  14. if we stand up we are named crazy an we make the frount page an all tv news in small groups as rad.you cant organize they have every comm source covered.they will win you will die

    • The point is, NOW is NOT the time to "stand up."

      Timing is everything.

      Keep your powder dry until the time is right; you will know it when it finally is. Dr. North has revealed how to recognize it.

      Be wise, not reactionary. Reactionary is crazy.

  15. I totally agree with the 2ND ammendment of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. I also believe in a balance of power. We the people not only have a right to own guns, but, we also have the need to protect ourselves and loved ones.

    • j pro you got it right we the malitia was and always will be the True Malita and the true balance of power. this means a Well Armed Malitia.

  16. I also agree with the mention: As for armed students in public schools, there is a solution. Close the public schools. No one hears of bullied students who go on a shooting spree in private schools. If public shhools were closed, then there would be no need for school taxes. Instead, those with children would be paying for their own children to be educated not the other way round as it is today. Most people that do not own property do not have to pay school taxes meaning that is upon the property owers to pay for the so-called free education of other peoples children.

    • The public school was NEVER about educating and equipping children to solve problems. It was based on the Prussian statist model of creating compliant servants and drones for the BENEFIT OF THE STATE!! And this government mandated warehousing of the children enabled European despots to register and disarm their pacified citizens years before Hitler and Lenin.

      And many conservative Christians put their kids in public schools without any concern or protest. The kids come out with a brainwashing that makes them advocate LGBT deviancy, anthropogenic climate change propaganda, and progressive taxation. Worse yet, the school commandantes vigorously reinforce the "no self-defense" policy that breeds bullies and turns children into pacifist weaklings.

    • Technically, the owner of the house or apartment that is being rented pays property/school tax. When those taxes go up, so does the rent. Granted, the renters don't pay as much, but they still pay something considering they don't own anything.

      As for the private school thing. I'm just thankful that I don't have kids in school today.

      • A renter's paying of property tax is incidental and indirect; the renters do not pay extra for the unrented properties, even though the property tax is the same.

        More importantly, renters without children pay the same as those with them.

    • I agree with almost all you wrote. Saying that renters do not pay school taxes is not only incorrect but in fact they actually pay more than homeowners pay. Reason: Landlords pay the say school tax as home owners but do not get to claim a homestead exemption(at least in Texas) and the renter pays for that tax through their rent.

    • The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 required the states to provide a public education to allow for a more informed electorate. Having a public education system benefits all Americans. If you want to go the a grocery store or restaurant, you want the people there to be able to read, write and make change. Computers can only do so much. Most people depend on the police, the fire department and teachers to ensure the public safety, again they need to be able to read,write and do arithmetic. That cannot be done only with private financing of education.
      As to carrying guns everywhere, our grandparents and great grandparents fought so that aspect of the ‘wild west’ would become history. Having gunslingers and wannabes’ was not compatible with either a free society nor any public good.
      Many gun owners are responsible people who know how to use their weapons and many know when to use those weapons. There are just as many who do not have the benefit of a safety class other than the one day course required for a concealed carry permit. Many more have never had any training on how to properly use or care for a weapon or WHEN it is appropriate to use a weapon. My grandfather said, if you take up a weapon you are shooting to kill. Most people cannot pull of the shoot to wound shown so often on TV or the Movies. Not knowing how or when to use a weapon in a situation requiring split second decisions is a recipe for getting the novice gun owner killed. There ARE legitimate state concerns for background checks and training requirements. The state is us, not a disembodied “them”.
      As to the second Amendment, for over 200 years the second Amendment was ruled to apply only to state militias (“…a well regulated militia…” as the Amendments were first applied only to the states. The 14th Amendment was deemed to make the amendments apply to individual citizens. The Court consistently ruled up until the Roberts court, to continue to apply the “framers intent” (Scalia’s claim to fame)to the issue of second amendment rights for states to regulate guns in their respective jurisdictions.
      To sum up: The framers of our Constitution required public education for the benefit of the republic and all her citizens. They intended the second amendment how they said it, “…a well regulated milita…[of each state]…”.
      I am a gun owner and I have a concealed carry permit but, I believe in state interests as applying to individuals who own guns and those who do not being regulated so that only those who can pass a background check and who have undergone training similar to that police officers undergo may obtain a concealed carry permit. I believe that anyone owning a gun should be required to take something akin to “hunters safety classes”. This does not create a nanny state, it provides for all our safety regarding both education and the ownership of weapons.

      • Franklin Pierce says:

        ETT53,
        I don't know what version of the Northwest Ordinance you read but it most definately does not require public education, Art 3 states;

        Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. The utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity, shall from time to time be made for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace and friendship with them.

        The word "encouraged" is not synonymous with "required", the first implies free will the second implies submission.

        The remainder of your rant is nanny statism at its best. You believe the state knows best, that everyone must submit to state authority. Colorful language fails to hide your statism, to presume the intention of others without due process is exactly why we no longer live by the rule of law, we live by the rule of men.

        You carry with you the Calvinist theology, the belief in the shining city on the hill, the self righteousness to dictate to others how they must think and live their lives, no matter how many you kill or enslave in your messianic crusade.

        • On the contrary, "the belief in the shining city on the hill" is the belief in being a good example being enough to persuade others to seek the truth. You imply that he is not satisfied with that, but wants to force others to do his will, which is decidedly not Calvinist, although it is definitely messianic, though not of a Biblical messiah.

      • Funny, how often you find ignorant and pedantic together in the same little package . . .

      • ANTICRIME says:

        THE MILITIA as used in the Second Amendment, is WE THE PEOPLE! ~ Basically we are NOT supposed to convene STANDING ARMIES except during time of war, after which they are to be dissolved 180 days after wars end! ~ Keep in mind that WE THE PEOPLE formed the STATES, along with the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT for our BEST INTERESTS….not to fleece us in taxes and bind us in over-regulation of our Constitutional rights!

      • Uh, you need to do some more homework. Try John Taylor Gatto on education, for a great beginning, especially his book, Eyeless in Gaza, one of the most thorough documentations of American "free" public schooling out there and easily accessible.

        You can even find excerpts at lewrockwell[dot]com.

        Go to it, sir. And while you're at it, perhaps you could also do some boning up on the works of Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Dr. Walter Block, Llewellyn Rockwell, etc.

        I believe Dr. North has much excellent material, as well. Right here and on his other Web site(s).

        The Internet is great if you want something other than the standard error- and propaganda-riddled fare.

    • observeronthehill says:

      if I don't own property then I rent. Don't you realize the cost of my rent will necessarily INCLUDE the property owners cost of taxes on the building that I am renting ? Therefore I am paying the freight one way or another. Your argument is a good one for disbanding public schools – people like yourself who attend them can no longer think in a logical manner.

    • Rod Crane says:

      Even if you rent you are paying property taxes; in fact, when ever you buy anything you are indirectly paying property taxes!

  17. How do you plan to control the looting when the entitlements run out?

    • The gist of the article is, that is precisely what having private weapons is all about: private self-defense.

  18. Don't forget the crowd that just likes to hunt or shoot skeet without a symbolic or political motive.

  19. red dawn only hope

  20. Nice article, Gary. On your thoughts of closing the public schools . . . don't forget the best option – homeschool! There's a lot of us conservative Christian homeschoolers who have taken to heart God's design for us to take responsibility for our children's education . . . and to raise up responsible, patriotic THINKERS who recognize God as our Sovereign authority.

  21. A Government that fears it's citizens is a Free Republic. A government who's citizens fear it is a Communist Dictatorship.
    Which do you want to live under?

    • Strider55 says:

      "When governments fear the people, there is liberty.
      When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
      — Thomas Jefferson

      "People should not be afraid of their governments.
      Governments should be afraid of their people."
      — "V"

  22. “…The weekend militia people are dangerous. Why? Because they have a romantic view of bloodshed. They think that the modern state can be successfully resisted by force of individual arms…”

    Wrong. Look at what happened in Afghanistan to the biggest, baddest Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps in the world.

    The U.S. Army and Marines, along with aid from NATO, like the Soviets, failed to subdue Afghanistan. Per Lt. Col. Davis, we tried to subdue Afghanistan with 100K troops, when we needed to use 300K: http://www1.rollingstone.com/extras/RS_REPORT.pdf (p. 33)

    The U.S. Army, including Reserves and National Guard, is 1.1M. Marine Corps, including Reserves, is 241K. Thus, total land-based U.S. armies are 1.3M, of which ~2/3 are combatants, ~900K.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S_Army http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine

    300K is a big chunk of our 900K combatants. And, Afghanistan is only 30M folks and 252K sq. miles. The U.S. is 313M folks and 3,794K sq. miles, 10X more populous and 15X larger.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_states

    Last week or so, I read that the number of hunters in Texas alone is larger than the combined strength of our Army and Marines. Per the linked report, below, 22M hunted within the past five years, which is 20X the number of combatants in our Army and Marines:
    http://www.nssf.org/PDF/HuntingLicTrends-NatlRpt….

    Per Lt. Col. Davis, p. 80: “…The United States, along with over 40 NATO and other allied nations, possess the most sophisticated, powerful, and technologically advanced military force that has ever hit the field of combat. We have the finest and most well trained Soldiers that exist anywhere; we have armored vehicles of every type, to include MIA2 Main Battle Tanks; artillery, mortars, advanced rockets, precision guided missiles, and hand-held rocket launchers; we have a wholly uncontested air force composed of NATO’s most advanced ground attack fighter jets, bombers, AWACS controllers, spy planes, signals-interception aircraft, B 1 bombers, attack helicopters, and massive transport jets to ferry our troops and critical supplies where they are needed; we have thousands of unmanned aerial drones both for intelligence collection and missile-launching; we have a helicopter fleet for personnel transport and attack support; we have an enormous constellation of spy satellites; logistics that are as limitless as the combined weight of the industrial world; we have every technological device known to the profession of arms; we are able to intercept virtually every form of insurgent communication to include cell phones, walkie-talkies, satellite phones, email, and even some ability to eves-drop on otherwise private conversations; a remarkably capable cohort of intelligence analysts that arc as educated, well trained and equipped to a degree that used to exist only in science fiction; and our various nations have the economic wherewithal to spend $10s of billions each month to fund it all. And for almost 10 years we have pitted this unbelievable and unprecedented capability against: A bunch of dudes in bed sheets and flip-flops.

    My conclusion – we do not need to be armed to a comparable level with the local police and our Army, Marines, and Air Force in order to successfully resist. We just need our hunters, and folks like me who are rifle target shooters, to take up arms at the appropriate time. It will be tough, but doable, to defeat any force that attempts to subdue us. No doubt, we civilians will take huge casualties when we resist. But, mechanized and air forces have lots of weak spots, like fuel supplies, logistical trains, and landing and takeoff approaches, which is where ‘bed sheets and flip-flop’ types wreak their damage. And, of course, many in the military will refuse to take up arms against civilians, and will help us civilians resist the remainder and the inevitable British, Dutch, German, French, and Israeli imports/mercenaries.

    Man up, Dr. North!

    • You seem to forget we ARE our government. We either participate in it for good or we will be subject to bad governance. Human beings are social creatures who demand some kind of hierarchy in leadership in order to feel safe in our selves and our property. WE formed a democratic republic to do this in OUR country. There is no "Us versus Them", there is only active participation or passive refusal to do one's duty as a citizen -to vote and be an informed voter. No corporation can buy all the votes if WE do our civic duty. We no longer live in a romanticized "wild west" environment. We have agreed to become more civilized ,as our forefathers intended.
      There is a reason there is a definition of "treason" in our Constitution- it is exactly to counter your argument about conspiring in "…the violent overthrow of our government…". AS far as a question of loyalty to the Constitution, the questions to get any government position, including induction into military service, the questions include, "Are you a member of the Communist party OR a member of any organization or group that advocates the violent overthrow of the US government… amongst others. Is that the company you wish to keep?

      • ET53 Wrote, "There is no Us versus Them"

        Man, what planet are you from? It's always been us vs. them.

        ET53 Wrote, "we ARE our government"?

        Is that a joke? Cause it sure is ridiculous.

        ET53 Wrote, "We no longer live in a romanticized "wild west" environment."

        When did "we" ever live in a romanticized "wild west"?

        Try this bit of history to get up to speed, will ya?

        The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality
        http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo195

      • Who is "we?" Unless you're a bureaucrat or politician, you're really not part of the government. Even they have limited influence on the state.

    • I hate to break it to you John G, but lazy, tee vee addled Americans don't have anywhere near the toughness and resolve of the Afgan resistance fighters. I know you have fantasies of taking on the Feds with your 30-06 Winchester, but the minute a TOW missile takes out your pals you'll fold like a trailer home in a tornado.

      • Fred, you can't say what John G. would do, but you are right about the difference between the character of the average American and the average Afgan. Afgan's come from a culture that places honor, family loyalty, and faith above money, comfort, and loyalty to the state. The majority of Americans value comfort, money (or at least material "things" that are somehow provided for them), and hold more loyalty to the state than they do to their own families. Also, I don't believe that most Americans would continue to fight (if they ever actually started) once the government started rounding up their families into concentration camps and laying waste to every point of supply. These kinds of brutal tactics are what finally made the hearty Boors of South Africa surrender to the British Empire, and ended the Philippine resistance to the American empire. Both of those peoples were much more suited to resistance than Americans are today, constitutionally if not materially.

        The point being, Mr. North is probably right when he says that the best course of action is to let the beast spend itself to death, and then have your weapons on hand to protect yourself during the fallout and, perhaps, help put the pieces back together.

      • Fred, I’m a vet, just as many millions of others here in the U.S. Per DHS, we vets are potential terrorists.

        DHS is wrong; we vets are not potential terrorists. We are just men who have no fear of government force

        And, we vets know, firsthand, the limitations of the machine. There are lots of weaknesses in the machine (it requires lots of food and fuel), and lots of current military (‘Oathkeepers’) who will quickly switch sides once government oversteps its bounds.

      • I'm sure some Americans are as tough as the Afghan fighters, but no I'm sure the average civilian isn't. He might THINK he is.

    • Do you have the least inkling of what the topography of Afghanistan is, and what ours is on average in the continental 48? Add to that most of our population lives in urban centers. No defensive positions to take up. A turkey shoot.

      You may have an overabundance of defiance, but without tactical and strategic advantages, it WILL get you Koreshed. Plus our military KNOWS the lay of our own land, and is trained on it.

      Remember the war games staged in Kentucky in the Appalacian forests last year?

      Yeah.

      That's what Dr. North is talking about.

      Basic training. It's not a matter of numbers; it's a matter of tactics, strategy, logistics, and mobility.

      • GrayCat, yeah, I know what the topography of Afghanistan is. Special Forces used to train within miles of my ranch for mountain fighting in Afghanistan.

        There are whole swaths of the U.S. that have foreboding characteristics, whether it is mountains in Appalachia, forests in the East, woodlands in the West, great distances in the Midwest, etc.

        How long did it take the Germans to subdue lightly armed Jews in a small corridor of Warsaw? And you think it will be easy to subjugate NYC? Stalingrad survived a siege; NYC would, too.

        The machine is nowhere big enough to take on the armed populace of the U.S.

        Recommendation — do not listen to Alex Jones and his ilk. His job is to scare you into surrendering your arms — ‘Resistance is futile when those FEMA camps start taking in folks’ — when the government asks for your weapons.

        • Libertymike says:

          what about the families of those carrying the badges and wearing the state's uniforms?

          Greycat and Tim, do you doubt that the identities and whereabouts of such families would be inaccessible to those who would find such information helpful?

          It will not be pretty for those who side with the state.

        • Sorry to put a kink in the works, but the issue is whether there will be a "critical mass" of people in places like the ultra-statist NYC. And most cities and suburbs of America are ultra-statist. They will side with the government, not us. They will turn us in; will we then start firing on our neighbors, friends, relatives — just like the government enforcers will?

          And my point about Afghanistan is that the topography of most of the U.S. is nowhere near that rugged or isolated — but even if it were, whereas the Afghanis LIVE among the isolated mountains and live off them, Americans are mostly in cities and suburbs. Your ranch sounds wonderful. But are you ranch owners anywhere near a majority of the population?

          Add to that the continental U.S. is owned and known intimately by the U.S. military; special forces even trained in the mountains near your ranch. Didn't do them much good in Afghanistan, but it will be all but unnecessary here in the U.S., because the U.S. isn't Afghanistan.

          This is not 1776 or even WWII. Where the Nazis might have been thwarted in an isolated case of resistance (ultimately, for a pathetically little while), they didn't have the fly power our military has, the bomb variety and power, the missiles, the drones, the satellite recon, GPS, night-battle capability, the armored vehicles, or even the kind of individual weaponry our military has today, not to mention the logistics capabilities, and the intimate knowledge of our own terrain.

          If our armed, pumped-up "patriots" insist on fighting past battles and wars against today's reality, it's gonna be a cake-walk for government forces. And Alex Jones doesn't have a thing to do with that.

          • Sorry; should have been "whether there will be a "critical mass" of people to resist the government in places like the ultra-statist NYC."

  23. Hilliary Clinton has just handed over our right of gun ownership to the United Nations. The next step will be confiscation. The NWO agenda is to disarm us totally so that we cannot resist. When the order is given to take our guns there will be a fight.

    • Calusirius says:

      Obama handed over the leadership of our US Military to the UN. They must feel strongly that if we object to them misusing our military forces, that they can call in the UN to help subdue us here in our own country. Like they used our military to subdue "rebels" in their own country. Sad isn't it?

      The Pentagon & Obama declared a Coup D’etat on our Constitutional government. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military. During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence. Obama and his administration has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations over the US Constitution, over the country he was elected to represent.

    • They will not be taken. They will be regulated away.

      Silencers will sell at a premium at that time.

    • Note this country is not run by Hilliary or the united Nations it is run By congress and our elected people whitch seam to be unable to do their job. We need to stop paying them because of this,Money is all they care about anyway and we do not have it to throw away on do nothings.

  24. bullrider says:

    It was all those armed Americans who discouraged an attack on the mainland in WW2.

    • Yeah right! The Japanese was so afraid of the U.S. that they didn't attack. Oh wait. They did and Americans with weapons retaliated. So much for the deterrence factor.

  25. Bill McCroskey says:

    Those that appear to be attacking the premise of this essay make me think you didn't read it clear thru or misunderstood Dr.North's message. None of us can remotely expect to survive an armed confrontation with the authorities at this time. Dr. North is saying keep your powder dry and upon the demise of the state THEN make our move (militia) to protect ourselves. Not one of us here can defend against urban assault vehicles and if necessary tanks and heavy infantry squads with our rifles and hand guns. That is the classic analogy of bringing a knife to a gunfight….except it would be more like bringing a pea shooter to a artillery fight.

    • Not one of us here can defend against urban assault vehicles and if necessary tanks and heavy infantry squads with our rifles and hand guns.

      Really???? …Hmmmm , I seem to recall afghani freedom fighters decimating the Russians while on horse back and camels during the 80's with nothing more than single shot rifles.and until we got involved and provided them with shoulder mounted stingers…..the russians were decimated…..never underestimate a single man or woman defending their home territory. Just because the tanks are bigger….doesn't mean they cant be beaten…they can be…and quite easily

      • Strider55 says:

        Excellent point. Military hardware is useless without "software" — that is, the personnel who operate and maintain them.

        Case in point: It takes about a year and $1M (1980 dollars) to put a single USAF officer through basic flight school. (I know this because I worked at such a base back then.) Even more time and money is required afterward before said officer becomes a certified pilot. Kill those pilots and the USAF's fighters, bombers, etc. instantly become static display models. For good measure, one can also eliminate the ground troops who keep the planes fueled, armed and repaired — like pilots, those are highly technical jobs that require a great deal of training, which means those people are very difficult to replace.

        The same principle applies to drones, tanks, UAVs and the rest of Uncle Sam's lethal gizmos. Kill off the highly trained troops who use them and keep them running, and they quickly become irrelevant.

        And does anyone really believe that in a true SHTF scenario the military would hold together, especially when they're being paid sporadically (or not at all), as would likely be the case? In fact, desertions and defections would be rampant. Imagine thousands of angry soldiers joining the popular insurgency and bringing their advanced weaponry with them. We could even see the military crack up along racial lines as predicted in Tom Chittum's Civil War II, in which case the black divisions will be utterly annihilated.

        • Calusirius says:

          Particularly when they discover that the Freedom of the USA they were supposedly fighting for is a lie.
          President Obama, Defense Secretary Panetta, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey declared a Coup D’etat on our Constitutional government. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military. During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence. Obama and his administration has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations over the US Constitution, over the country he was elected to represent.
          Yep, the UN and NATO took over the leadership of OUR US Military forces – well, were given the leadership by Obama.
          Not that he can legally do that.

      • Do you have the least inkling of what the topography of Afghanistan is, and what ours is on average in the continental 48? Add to that most of our population lives in urban centers. No defensive positions to take up. A turkey shoot.

        You may have an overabundance of defiance, but without tactical and strategic advantages, it WILL get you Koreshed. Plus our military KNOWS the lay of our own land, and is trained on it.

        Remember the war games staged in Kentucky in the Appalacian forests last year?

        Yeah.

        That's what Dr. North is talking about.

        Basic training.

    • Bill, you apparently have no experience in unconventional warfare so I can understand your Noam Chomfsky comment.

    • S.L. ZENATNOF says:

      HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF GUERRILLA WARFARE? EITHER URBAN AND JUNGLE WORKS FINE. THAT'S HOW AMERICA STARTED ON IT'S WAY TO FREEDOM FROM THE ENGLISH…IT WILL WORK AGAIN IF THE SITUATION ARISES.

  26. "The correct goal is to wait for the federal government to go bankrupt before it bankrupts us. It will go bankrupt. It is not God. It cannot afford to implement its programs of healing."

    What if, anticipating bankruptcy, they act to confiscate arms first? This would be for many the line in the sand. In Germany first came the confiscation, then the ovens of the State.

    "The weekend militia people are dangerous. Why? Because they have a romantic view of bloodshed. They think that the modern state can be successfully resisted by force of individual arms. This leads to a suicide mentality. The suicide mentality is the heart of the matter, not gun ownership."

    I don't know any weekend militia people, I think they are a very tiny minority whose size is exaggerated by the journo class as a political strategy, and those that do exist will not be particularly effective.

    Compared to Afghanistan, here instead, the enemy of the citizenry will not be the military but instead will be the political/journo class.

  27. James Link says:

    I sure hope the “weekend militia” which Dr. North mentions, doesn’t include those who practice their skills so they can actually use their weapons if needed. Ask any police person or military person: You must practice, practice, practice.

  28. wizzrdofaz says:

    Suicide? I don't think so. As Patton said, "Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. "

    • Yeah; and you're Patton, and this is WWII, right?

      See ANY similarities?

      Even Patton didn't make a move without considering logistics, materiel, tactics, and strategy.

      No one ever won a war by being reactionary, armed with out-of-context slogans — and fighting a past war.

  29. john cummins says:

    this is all very fine UNLESS the local politicos are corrupt, then the guns are needed as this true video illustrates in TN: http://youtu.be/U5ut6yPrObw

  30. Right now, in the pre-collapse, pre-looting era; when seconds count – the police are minutes away. In the post-collapse time when the "entitled " get hungry and the looting is rampant, it will all still be up to you because the police will not be arriving in hours or days or ever. Husbands and Fathers MUST Provide AND Protect their families, now and always. Man Up !

    • Pray tell where it was implied in the article that anyone should depend on anyone or anything but prepared self-defense?

      You people who do not read clearly and with understanding, but who see only insults to your manhood in everything that suggests prudence and wisdom, illustrate the idiocy of the reactionaries highlighted in the article quite well.

      If this demonstration of knee-jerk "patriotism" is the caliber of intelligent resistance in this country, we are indeed lost.

  31. William 1 says:

    Only when this deformed government is dead will, we be able to do that! They think they are totally right and too dumb to repent!

  32. You're nibbling around the edges of the truth, North. What too many people who should know better seem hesitant to say is the the Second Amendment was added to CONFIRM the right of the people to keep and bear Arms SPECIFICALLY to use against gummint if it gets out of control. It is and has been so far out of control that that time was a long time ago. WTF are we waiting for?

    • We're waiting for enough people to realize the government is illegitimate. With maybe 5% understanding today, any action now would not only be crushed, it would be used to convince the other 95% that the government really is their savior against the forces of chaos.

      • Exactly so.

        Nowhere did Dr. North suggest or even hint at denying the intent of the Second Amendment. If you think otherwise — and for some reason it seems most here posting thought so! Our education system is worse than imagined! — please go back and read it again, carefully, with understanding.

  33. The "line in the sand" past which the COlonials refused to allow their tyrant captors to cross was the disarmement of the common man. Once Tom Gage began to send his troops out to seize powder, shot, arms, and stores, the Colonials stood firm and repulsed him. 19 April, 1775, between Boston and Lexington and on to Concord and return, Gage lost nearly one fourth of his officers. With them out of action, the grunts could do nothing but beat a hasty retreat, running for their lives.

    Should today's tyrannical overlords come round to seize OUR powder and shot, they should be met with a similar fate by a similarly aroused population.

    • Yeah. Good luck with that.

      Do you REALLY see no difference between then and now?

      And did you know that barely one-third of the colonials wanted to fight against their king? Most had to finally be conscripted and forced to fight. If you carefully read the history of the Revolutionary War, you will learn that our victory was more due to serendipitous accident than superior-anything.

      It's not all glory and guts. It's force of arms, materiel, logistics, tactics, and strategy that matter. And this is 2012, with EMPs, drones, heavy armor, long-range land and sea missiles, "smart bombs," and stealth air ability, not 1776 with blunderbuses, muskets, and long-rifles, powder and lead, and meager cannon.

      If you continue to live in the past, you will be defeated by the past.

  34. Mr. North, I usually enjoy and agree with your articles but on this one it looks like you’ve been shot out of the cannon and missed the net so to speak. I know you have read the constitution and the writings of the founders concerning the 2nd amendment so what is all this blather about not taking up arms against an overbearing tyrannical government WHEN THERE IS NO OTHER CHOICE. If you mean, and I’m only hoping because it surely doesn’t sound like it, exhaust all diplomacy before taking up arms, then I’m with you. Whose side are you on? You know they will never stop unless they are forced to, this type oppression has been going on since before the time of Christ.

    • Go back and read the article CAREFULLY and with understanding, please.

      And stop living in the past, as per my previous post.

      Sheesh!

  35. creolegenius says:

    My high school English teacher taught us (1969) that anyone using strings of many short, seemingly logical sentences, is most probably a Sophist. What passes for profundity here is really a rhetorical trick. Gary, please develop an adult literary style to go along with your adult thoughts.

    • Maybe you should advance beyond your high school English teacher, and consider context and content, and readability, rather than sentence length, yah?

      For instance, can you point out any fallacies or falsities in anything Dr. North wrote?

  36. Many of the founding fathers were descendants of Huguenots survivors. Unarmed Protestants, they were slaughtered by the thousands while under a flag of truce of the French state. This led directly to the Second Amendment.

  37. I have a point of view. You have a point of view. The only way for you to get me to change my point of view is either persuasion or force. Those are your ONLY options. Now, if we're both armed, we can discuss our different points of view and attempt to persuade. We may never share the same point of view, and peacefully continue a persuasive dialog. My ability to be armed, and yours, creates a balance. This applies to individuals, communities, or states.
    Lately, the State's points of view (and actions) seem to be illogical, weak or nonsensical and are not persuasive. The 2nd amendment was designed to keep peaceful discourse on points of view.
    The Mideast is a classical example of this fact. In our ascendancy to empire, we subverted the local form of due process and government. In the last 30+ years, those who were subverted were removed from positions of power. Many types of regime's formed. Most saw our subterfuge and were not predisposed to deal with us on our terms (point of view). So, since we couldn't persuade, we used force and continue to do so.
    Any vet of the Vietnam era like me has seen the full cycle. Before entering the military (drafted) gifted and focused professors of SE Asia taught that there would be one Vietnam. We had 500,000 men in uniform. The force we applied could not overcome the forces applied against our point of view; the edge was they were applying force to defend their home. Today, Nike is the largest employer, and we have a peaceful economic relationship. The use of force was negated, so it was back to persuasion, and two nations found ways to share points of view, and economically, Vietnam and its people are "back to normal."
    My right to be armed ensures while we have different points of view, we must try to persuade each other to seek any shared point of view, as the other option, the only other option is not available.

  38. Michelle Obama says:

    Nonsense about gun owning being symbolic. This sounds like someone who lives in a mostly all white gated community, in a house with an alarm system, and who never shops outside the upscale areas. For those living in the real diverse world, a gun is a means to protect oneself and family against multi-cultural savagery. I encourage everyone who lives in the real world to obtain a concealed permit, and learn how to shoot. It is especially important if you live downtown, or in an otherwise diverse area.

    • Anywhere in Dr. North's article did he advocate not owning weapons? REALLY?!

      Please go back and re-read the article carefully, with understanding. Put your safety on and get your finger off your hair trigger. Read and understand the English?

      Sheesh!

  39. Bill Ingram says:

    I believe that you left out ‘not’ in the second sentence of the last paragraph. Providing that is the case, I agree 100%. Great article!

  40. Economically, Gary North is a great teacher, but when he starts in on his "God this…. and God that" it just doesn't make any sense. He doesn't want rulers but yet believes in God.
    Guns or no guns; small governments become big governments, that's how it is. If you want to roll back government to a small size like in the founding days, then you are advocating a big government for the future. There has never been a government that shrank any considerable size and stayed that way because 'the people" wanted it to.

    No Gods, No Government, No Rulers

    davkiz

    • So . . . where in the article did Dr. North say ANYTHING different?!

      If God is the only ruler, what have you to fear? It is from God that SELF-governance, with no HUMAN rulers, comes from. If there are no human rulers, there can be no concerted force against any other human beings without their consent.

      THAT's the point.

      You DON'T HAVE to not believe in a God to advocate SELF-government and no government of rulers over you.

      DUH.

      If you advocate that only people who do not believe in a God can be free, you are doing what you deny should be done.

      If you rule yourself without others ruling you, no one can FORCE you to "believe" in a God. By the same premise, you have no right to force others NOT to believe in a God.

      God isn't a criterion for No Government, No Rulers.

      God is the part of the equation that's FREE CHOICE. Yah?

  41. 'Bill Ayers' says:

    Gentlemen:

    Everyone who contemplates matters such as these should remember the lessons taught by the Chinese strategist Sun Tzu (The Art of War). First, and most important is NOT to attack in the face of strength, i.e. when an M1 Abrams is at the front door. There is no good reason to rashly throw one’s life away. Rather, the wise patriot will ‘keep his powder dry’ and strike at carefully considered opportune times . . . the enemy can never be strong everywhere.

  42. Carpenter says:

    "suicide mentality"? What is suicidal is to support governments that want to replace Western peoples with countless millions of non-White immigrants. But that is the one thing you can't say. Libertarians like to paint themselves as bold truth-tellers, but they only talk about side issues, never the one thing that matters, the survival of the people. As such you aid the state in the only issue that really matters to it, by directing people's attention elsewhere. "We must legalize heroin! Freedom says so!"

    I think I know what guns should be used for better than you do, Gary.

    • You reveal yourself to be a reactionary putz.

      Freedom is either for everyone or it is non-existent.

      If you want a personal enclave where you can keep out "non-White immigrants," and prohibit heroin use, in a libertarian society, you would be free to do so — on your own property. You would not be able to force anyone else to do what you want them to do, without jeopardizing your own self. That's the way freedom works: no rulers. Everyone free to make his own decisions and peacefully trade with whomever he chooses, and unprovoked aggression and violence automatically forfeits the perpetrator's rights.

      You want to rule your own life, fine. You may not rule others' lives. That's what freedom is.

      You might be interested in panarchianism; Dr. Michael Rozeff has written great works about this aspect of free society; you can find it archived at lewrockwell[dot]com. You might also find Dr. Walter Block's book, Defending the Undefendable, helpful.

      The issue is external government/the state/rulers over others versus SELF-government, SELF-ownership, SELF-rule.

      You got it partially right: suicidal is to support any government but SELF-government. And that's what Dr. North and libertarians are saying. No one's talking about using any government to take away YOUR rights. But you are also NOT ALLOWED to use any government to take away anyone else's rights. Yah?

  43. threeper says:

    They can take my guns, but only after they take the ammunition. One round at a time. At 2750 feet per second.

  44. Very disappointing Gary. While you are waiting for them to go bankrupt, which we are and they will, you are willing to submit to anything at their hands? Disarment? Enslavement? You have no line you will not cross?

    It's not about suicide, it's about this far and no further.
    Fred
    MOLON LABE

    • Yeah, right.

      Please go back and re-read with care and understanding. Please find where Dr. North advocates putting up with "anything" while waiting; we're waiting for you to cite it.

      In the meantime, with what, exactly, will you enforce your "this far and no further" ahead of their unavoidable collapse?

      This isn't 1776, but 2012. This isn't Afghanistan; it's America, which this government military KNOWS and trains in, and is in command of, with superior knowledge, tactics, strategy, materiel, and logistics. You may have some very fine and powerful firearms. They have far superior, in number and firepower; they have tanks, armored everything, land and sea missiles, "smart bombs," satellite recon and GPS tracking and pinpointing, drones, stealth and standard fighters and bombers, rabbit warrens, etc.

      Good luck with your over-abundance of confidence and defiance coupled with your dearth of balanced, knowledgeable, and practical intelligence.

  45. We should plan a revolution to overthrow the federal government.

    Didn’t you mean, “We should not plan a revolution to overthrow the federal government.” ?

    • Read the last sentence.

      We SHOULD plan to overthrow the government by PEACEFUL, inexorable means; when it collapses, we should "take over" by peacefully asserting our individual independence and freedom from rulers.

      We should fight evil with good. If it is evil for the government to encroach on us, we should not encroach on each other in the name of "fighting" the government. If the government must use force to force us to be ruled, we should eschew the use of force to "enforce" our peace and freedom from it.

      SELF-defense means that: to defend oneself and family and property against unprovoked aggression. To use our defensive means to force others to do our will is to become the government we want gone.

      Who is qualified to rule anyone else? That's the issue. THAT's the R3VOLUTION!

  46. Tatiana Covington says:

    How about "Hey, I feel like having guns, so I will! And if you don't like it, lump it."

  47. Calusirius says:

    Another reason for our right to bear arms is: The Pentagon & Obama declared a Coup D’etat on our Constitutional government. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military.
    During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence. Obama and his administration has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations over the US Constitution, over the country he was elected to represent.
    Both Panetta and Obama are impeachment for abusing their power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above its jurisdiction. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey should be facing military charges of traitor, etc and be prosecuted.
    All are traitors, committing treasonous acts. Gen. Martin Dempsey had better be under arrest, with NO military taking any orders from that traitor. The bad thing is that a lot of our sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers have been seriously hurt or died doing illegal wars for the UN under traitorous Obama. The only good thing is it does qualify as Murder under our laws, and those three, plus whoever assisted in doing this and covering it all up all qualify to be tried for murder here in OUR country; UN or NATO laws do NOT apply here in our country!

      • So, why don't we just walk away from this treasonous, corrupt government, and instead rule ourselves? Why don't we stop indoctrinating our children with "My country, right or wrong, my country," so that they don't join anyone's military in the name of "God and country," out of a perverted sense of "patriotism" or "duty"?

        Love of military, love of might and glory, is why we're in this pickle. Stop sending our children to fight ANYONE who is not actually trespassing their private property.

        What a foreign idea!

        Why?

        We keep feeding the beast and crying "occupy, occupy, occupy foreign countries, make them safe for democracy and Christianity!"

        Well, this is what it means. It's what the NWO needs to live and thrive.

        You make yourselves slaves of others because you want rulers to force your neighbor to do what you want: you want to control others, even if it means giving up your own humanity and rights.

        Isaiah 56 – 59.

  48. Ming Bucibei says:

    “…political power grows out of the barrel of a gun….”–mao

    Mao Zedong – Wikiquote

    en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong – Cached

    [edit] Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong (The Little Red Book)(1964). Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. 不怕打,一聽打仗我就高興,北京算 …
    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong

    Quote Details: Mao Tse-tung: Political power grows out… – The …
    http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/11358.html – Cached

    Quotation #11358 from 20th Century Quotations: Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Mao Tse-tung. Chinese Communist politician (1893 – 1976) …

    One of the core tenets of ‘liberalism’ is William Kunstler’s “The criminal class is the shock troops of the revolution.” Bad actors can’t be stirring things up if they’re locked up, or shot.

    A gun represents freedom which the statists abhor!!

    Ming Bucibei

    • Bad actors can't be stirring things up if we have no rulers. It's the rulers who are the criminal class, and if you think someone ruling you is necessary to "keep the peace" and "keep order," you're one of them.

      The whole of government is force. Look that up, too.

      A "government" is a collective of a few criminal bullies forcing others to give up their freedom and the fruits of their labor. And it's usually done in the name of "the greater good," "it's for the children," "it's necessary to preserve our freedom."

      My favorite is "freedom is not free."

      OF COURSE it is! But you may not like how I use my freedom because it "offends" your sensitivities, morals, etc., even though I am not harming you or yours in any way. THEN, when you try to curb my freedom, you make freedom a costly farce.

      How is it that our military are in most foreign countries today, "defending" and "protecting" our freedoms, while here our freedoms are every day being taken away? Exactly what freedoms are they defending and protecting?

      Remember, the government doesn't exist to protect you or your freedoms; it is there because you PAY IT TO BE.

      What would happen if we all just stopped feeding the beast?

      Yeah; we all fear our masters: the Federal Reserve System and its thug collection agency, the IRS.

      Yet if we were all more concerned about starving the beast rather than how many guns we have, it would die practically overnight.

      Is it too late, with all the surveillance and tracking and records they have on all of us now — not to mention the hordes of our fellows who support and believe in this government who would be against us?

      I believe Dr. North is right; the collapse is coming, it is inevitable. We just have to be prepared to pick up the pieces and do things the right way when it does. It will never be accomplished at the barrel of a gun; that's the government's way.

  49. David Dirtscratcher says:

    Those like Mr. North and others misunderstand the right to bear arms and the right to self defense. From my readings of the Founding documents and their authors' sentiments, I believe the purpose of gun ownership and the Second Amendment was not to win a war against the government, but to make the government pay a very dear price for oppressing it's citizens. This we will do.

    "……….cold, dead hands"

  50. VikingLS says:

    The problem is that the Republican party has been essentially trying to play for both teams for decades. (The Democrats are pretty solidly with the state.) So on the one hand they've sucked up to the NRA and promissed to protect our right to bear arms, while at the same time declaring and amping up a war on drugs that has militarized the police and giving arms to the military and police beyond the wildest dreams of civillians. People like us might survive an armed confrontation with the state long enough to escape, we could even make places like the mountains and swamps more trouble than they're worth, but that's about the extent of it. Right now we need to look seriously at what we can do politically to restrain the state, but I fear that's going to be like trying to paddle a canoe upstream with a toothpick.

  51. Militia's are dangerous?? North is an idiot. Who is the Militia? It is all of us who are able to bear arms and will at a moments notice take them and defend their family, friends, neighbors. Gary has been drinking too much of the mainstream media's kook aid and has just alienated most of his readers with that one stupid sentence. A lone man with a gun is an obstacle. Many men in a unified group is a force. Pull your head out of your backside Gary.

  52. [...] I say this, because the Tea Party movement has attracted Koresh-minded people. I know this, because a few of them have expressed displeasure with my previous article on the use of arms. [...]

  53. All this talk about guns has me thinking if "this is my rifle and this is my gun. Which do I shoot? Which is for fun?"

  54. I just love to pick upon the nescient! Few of you know a damned thing about arms, history, or much else. You all pontificate upon various subjects just so you can hear yourself talk. Try this on; 1.)Have any of you ever read DeShanney v. Winnebago Cnty Soc Servc’s and the related cases? Government nor its agents obtain to any legal liability to protect any private interest in life, liberty, or property. “To Protect and Serve” is a myth rooted in ignorance and deception at your peril. 2.) There are countless of examples of police corruption in almost every Department in the nation. The general motto in these departments is shoot first, reload, shoot again, and have the D.A. and the courts declare the homicides are “justifiable” because the officer(s) were in fear of their lives. I do not know about you, but I fear a cop every time I see one because he apparently has the same license to kill with impunity that James Bond had. And, do not forget the most corrupt police force in America abandoned their posts and the City of New Orleans in the wake of the Katrina disaster. Give you all warm and fuzzy feelings about the competency and conviction of your local constabularies? If you are stupid enough to believe that anyone is going to see to your survival or care in a disaster…get ready to be really really disappointed! Arms are what separate the victims from the survivors. The Founding Fathers told us that and in case any of you failed history (if you even paid attention) and hava an aversion to caring for yourself and yours and option for mother gov’t to do it for you…well good luck morons.

  55. This is the best video i have seen explaining the The Second Amendment and the facts about it. Educate yourself , friends and family. Make this viral today. We might need it soon.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RgLEGibyXs

    We are the Militia. You , Me, any citizen that will protect the constitution , their family and their community.

    THE MODERN MILITIA MOVEMENT,
    is Dedicated to the Preservation of our Freedom, the Security of our Rights and the Restoration of our Constitution to its rightful place as the LAW of our great Republic.

    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.

    IF YOU WANT TO PRESERVE YOUR RIGHTS, AND FREEDOM WATCH THIS VIDEO, AND JOIN US IN THIS MOVEMENT.

    Our founders created it for good reason.

    "Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
    George Washington
    First President of the United States

    "Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
    Patrick Henry
    American Patriot

  56. Actually if you read what the founding fathers wrote in reguarding the 2nd amendment and militias in relation to the Constitution, you will see that they spoke of at least 2 types of militias
    1. the organized militia ie state guard (not the federal national gaurd ) but a state gaurd.
    2. the unorganized militia ie all the citizens that would b e armed to assisit and back up the organized militia in times of emergency.
    And that the right to keep and bear arm is the every citizen not for just a select group.

    "Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
    Patrick Henry
    American Patriot

    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … "
    Thomas Jefferson
    letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.

    And as for the Constitution itself, well this says it all, and is very frightening in light of what the Obama administration is doing everyday.

    "The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."
    Thomas Jefferson
    Third President of the United States

    The United States Supreme Court has defined the Militia in clear and unambiguous terms:

    The Militia is all males physically capable of acting for the common defense, expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves, arms of the kind in common use at the time, part of the "ORDINARY MILITARY EQUIPMENT." U.S. v Miller (1939)

    "All citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserve Militia… The States cannot, even laying the Constitutional provision (Second Amendment) out of view, prohibit THE PEOPLE from keeping and bearing arms." Presser v Illinois (1886).

    The Militia Act of 1792: REQUIRES: EVERY able-bodied male" to possess a "MILITARY STYLE RIFLE," FOR SELF DEFENSE, AND DEFENSE OF FREEDOM."

    As for the case of dis-arming the law abiding citizens of a country, well this next statement says it best.

    "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
    Adolph Hitler
    Chancellor, Germany, 1933

  57. GOD – FAMILY – COUNTRY

    What is the Militia?
    As defined by our founding forefathers, the militia is defined as “the whole people”.
    It is every able-bodied citizen who is not disqualified by criminal conviction or mental
    …defect, except those few persons who hold public office, such as judges, legislators, et
    cetera…

    Concept of Militia
    The Citizen Militia IS:
    A deterrent, defensive force. A first response mechanism, to assist
    in times of disaster (i.e. hurricane, floods, etc). A chain of command, which we can use to offer leadership and assistance to our fellow citizens, community and families.
    A legacy passed from our forefathers to us; and from us to our posterity.
    A realization and practice of our God given Rights, Liberties, Duties and
    Responsibilities. An organization of, by and for the Constitution of the united States, and the people whom they serve.

    The Citizen Militia is NOT:
    An offensive force. A racist or subversive group. A private army subject to the dictates of any individual, corporation, or other private group.
    An organization formed for sustained combat operations (a ‘standing army’). To be used as a forum or launching point to any particular or religious
    agenda.

    Who Can Join ?
    Any citizen of The Republic who a legal residence in the state and has resided in the
    state for at least, the past 6 months, and is not otherwise disqualified from being a member of the ‘militia-at-large’. The Volunteer Militia exists by law under the Constitution. Amendment II
    “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.”

    Who Belongs To The Militia?
    Doctors Policemen Firemen Lawyers Sheriffs Deputies Pastors Teachers EMT’s
    Plumbers Salesmen Nurses Electricians Truckers Students Housewives Construction Workers Mill Workers Carpenters Mechanics And the list goes on.!!!

    GOALS
    To secure and practice all of our Rights and Liberties; To open ranks to all citizens who love Liberty without regard to one’s race, creed, religion or gender; and to deny participation to those who seek to harm the Republic, discredit us, or our goals;
    To be an effective deterrent to tyranny;
    To clearly state that we are committed to a posture of defense, and do not advocate the unlawful overthrow, targeting of or overthrow of our form of government by any person(s);
    To uphold the just and lawful statutes of the nation as stated in the US Constitution; To declare no enemies; yet be mindful of those who declare us to be enemies;
    To teach the correct, unvarnished history of our Republic and our State, the formation or our Constitution and Bill of Rights; To teach & promote participatory
    citizenship;
    To promote the safe and responsible use of Arms for the protection of our families, our property, our American way of life and our republican form of government; To teach that our Liberties and Rights are not limited to those which are enumerated in the Bill of Rights; and are granted by our Creator.

    To assist duly elected, sworn and bonded public officials in time of emergency or in the defense of our God – given Rights, Liberties, and the Constitution(s).

    It is the goal of all Militia members to be prepared and never needed, as opposed to being needed and not prepared
    http://modernmilitiamovement.ning.com/

    We are the Militia. You , Me, any citizen that will protect the constitution , their family and their community.

  58. 2WarAbnVet says:

    Here’s a bit of the Founders reasoning for writing the Second amendment.

    “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson

    “… to disarm the people is the most effective way to enslave them…” – George Mason

    "Arms in the hands of individual citizens may be used at individual discretion…in private self-defense." – John Adams

    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence." – George Washington.

  59. Molon Labe says:

    Gary North YOU ARE WRONG!!!!!!

    You would make a great Obama Administration Czar as you know nothing about what you speak.

    Read the 2nd Amendment and the intent of our Bill of Rights as it applies to Government tyranny.

    Where do they find you people to write articles like this?

    MOLON LABE!

  60. The day is coming when people will have to make a choice. Make a stand against a corrupt and overreaching government or become a sheep that disappears into the night and is either slaughtered by the government or worse.

    Once the government decided they can hold you without trial or due process, and can take your life without either, you really don’t have anything to lose by defending yourself. If you do not, then you will likely end up like the Jewish people under Hitler’s reign.

    They were slaughtered by the millions, often starved to death.

    Obama’s mentor, Bill Ayers indicated back in the 60′s that they figured they would have to murder 25 million American citizens to implement their left wing agenda.

    That would be consistent throughout history where the left has slaughtered tens of millions of their own citizens (think China and the old Soviet Union).

    It is much better to deal with the issue at a voting booth than having a civil war.

    People need to vote wisely.

  61. Joe Levi says:

    I couldn't agree more!

    - Joe Levi
    http://www.SittingDuckPolicy.com : True Stories of Self-Defense

  62. The right to keep and bear arms is not relegated simply for protection against bears, murderers and rapists, but primarily against a tyrannical government.

  63. I agree with his article. The Christian view of the state is that obedience to it is obligatory except in certain cases. Apostle Paul who laid out the New Covenant blueprint, wrote that we should be in subjection to the state, not as if it is God, but as an agent of God. The Noahic Covenant is still in force, which states that governments have the right to put to death. It also gives mankind the responsibility of keeping the earth from pollution– the pollution of toxins as well as adultery.

    The state can and does forfeit that right, however, as in the case of inalienable liberties. I'm sure not many people read their bible, but if the right to read it or even to own one was denied them, we would go around the "law". Same with gun ownership.

  64. As a man who has provided his family with a virtual arsenal, I'm vested to speak to this one. North is mostly correct. If U.S. armed forces earnestly went head to head against all armed U.S. civilians, I doubt we'd last long. But civilian ownership of arms are important for all the reasons North listed and more. Besides being protection against criminals and anarchy, they up the ante. Just like your average thug, a state apparatus with tyrannical ambitions will move against unarmed people with impunity. But if the people are well armed and prepared to fight, most criminals and criminal states will think twice, knowing that bloodshed ups the ante considerably. And, of course it is likely that many U.S. soldiers would be reluctant to fire upon their countrymen. But if their countrymen are unarmed, they can be herded like sheep with hardly a need to fire a shot.

  65. S.L. ZENATNOF says:

    OWNERSHIP OF WEAPONS IS WHAT KEEPS THOSE BASTARDS IN WASHINGTON FROM TAKING OVER . ONE THING THEY KNOW AND TRULY BELIEVE, IS THAT WE AMERICANS WILL NEVER ALLOW ANYBODY, NO MATTER FROM WHERE THEY COME FROM, PLANTING THEIR HUNCHES ON THE GROUND AND TELLING US TO MOVE , WE ARE TAKING OVER,… IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. THEY CAN BUY THE POLITICIANS AND THEY DO….OFTEN….THE PEOPLE?… I DON'T THINK SO. WE RATHER FIGHT, IF WE HAVE TO.

  66. Pick the Right Foe says:

    "…The weekend militia people are dangerous. Why? Because they have a romantic view of bloodshed. They think that the modern state can be successfully resisted by force of individual arms…"

    It can. The State needs subjects to rule, that is where it gets it's power. They don't need to fight the Military of the State, they just need to fight/capture/wipe out, the unarmed subjects of the State.

    No Subjects, No State, No Problem.

  67. Peaceful revolution? Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. A lone patriot standing defiantly against the authorities is soon subjugated. A real revolution involves millions of patriots; in crowds, behind trees, striking in the darkness, joined by millions of the much abused by the left armed forces. The left depends for its success on the oppression of the majority by a minority. They fear an armed majority.

  68. I think that both ends of the scale in the gun debate are totally nuts, and have turned their opinions into religious beliefs, so that they don't have to talk to each other. It is only when we move towards the middle ground, that we can make progress on all the issues that divide us.

  69. Joel Otto says:

    Gary has set up a straw man argument. First, he mischaracterizes the gun control crowd as a rational agent. Those who support gun control are largely unthinking, and act on an emotional level. Then he ascribes full logic to gun owners, saying we own guns to defeat the state when it decides to become tyrannical.

    No one can predict the future. We own guns because we have an affinity for guns. The affinity is based on many different reasons, but centers around the ability to defend ourselves and our loved ones, and the satisfaction we get from ownership and shooting. Gun ownership is preparation for an uncertain future, not a certainty of resisting the UN army.

    Wide ownership of guns by citizens reduces the risk of government overreach without a shot being fired. Any legislator, judge, regulator, or enforcer has to have in the back of his or her mind that there is a limit to what we will accept, especially when we are armed.

    Despite what Stilo wrote six posts ago, Bible does not support obediance to the state if read clearly. http://www.anti-state.com/redford/redford4.html

  70. andromedastrain says:

    Dr. North, Did you forget or were you not aware that armed citizens had to restore liberty in Athens, Tennessee in 1946? Apparently there was a time in recent history citizens had to overthrow the law enforcement and politicians because of corruption and voting violations. They armed themselves and certainly restored liberty.

    This is a 13 minute reenactment of a real event in Tennessee. A 1946 gun battle occurred between town citizens and corrupt elected officials to ensure honest elections in Athens, Tennessee. Would any of us be willing to do the same?

    This is exactly why the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution needs to be held sacred.

    Outstanding film of a true story.
    http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/Battle-of-A

  71. jimpeel7734 says:

    The firearms debate will eventually come down to this:

    The number of American citizens willing to die to keep their firearms vs. the number of American citizens the government is willing to kill to take them away.

  72. Constitutional_Right says:

    12 REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD OWN A FIREARM

    1. Because You Own a Fire Extinguisher. Bad things happen. You can still call 911, but when seconds count, you need to act quickly to save your life and the life of those you love.

    2. Because Shooting Is An Olympic Sport. Shooting is an Olympic sport and the United States holds more gold medals than any other nation.

    3. Because Most Americans Own Guns. You’ll be in good company as a gun owner; nearly fifty percent of households in the U.S. own a firearm.

    4. Because You Respect The U.S. Constitution. Sometimes you won’t like it when people exercise fundamental freedoms protected by the Constitution, such as freedom of speech. But that simply doesn’t matter: The Supreme Court ruled that every person has a constitutional right to own guns. So respecting the Constitution means respecting the right of others to exercise those constitutional rights.

    5. Because You Are More Likely to Die By Falling. There were 613 fatal firearms accidents in 2007, one-half of one percent of all fatal accidents. You’re more likely to die by driving, poisoning, drowning or falling than by a gun accident.

    6. Because Guns Stop Burglars. Last year, the CDC estimated that Americans used guns about 498,000 times to frighten away intruders attempting to break into homes.

    7. Because Gun Bans Increase Murder Rates. After D.C. banned handguns in 1984, the average murder rate jumped 73 percent while the U.S. murder rate fell 11 percent.

    8. Because Guns Don’t Cause Murder. A New York Times study of 1,662 murders in the city found that 90 percent of the killers had criminal records. Murderers are not ordinary, law abiding adults. Instead, virtually all murderers are extremely aberrant individuals with life histories of violence, psychopatholoy, and substance abuse.

    9. Because Gun Owners Win Political Battles. Gun rights groups have donated $22 million in political campaigns over the last decade, while gun control groups gave $1.8 million.

    10. Because Ignorance is Dangerous. At current homicide rates, 1 in 240 Americans will be murdered this year. You need to know how to operate a tool that will immediately stop a threat and save your life and the life of those in your household.

    11. Because Guns Don’t Make Countries More Dangerous. Switzerland has one of the world’s highest gun ownership rates and also one of the lowest homicide rates. In contrast, the countries with the world’s worst homicide rates—South Africa, Columbia, Brazil, Mexico, Filipines, Taiwain—also prohibit law-abiding citizens from owning guns. Compare the 20 per 100,000 homicide rate in Russia, which bans guns, with the 2 per 100,000 rate in neighboring Poland. Compare gun-free Luxembourg’s 9 per 100,000 murder rate with Germany and France with rates of 0.93 and 1.65.

    12. Because Gun Control Laws Don’t Increase Safety. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences failed to identify even one gun control measure that had a statistically significant reduction in violent crime, suicide, or gun accidents. The Center for Disease Control reached the same conclusion in 2003.

  73. Ranchman says:

    If it's suicide to go against the state, then what do you suggest we do when they stack their vehicles on our house to confiscate our firearms? Should we go "peacefully into the abyss?" NO, Mr. Gary North. You might elect to take that pacifist route, but American Patriots WILL shoot back when fired upon…period. And I for one am thankful to be counted among the Patriots, thank you very much.

  74. The Viet Cong kicked our butts outta Viet Nam using very primitive weapons, much older than what our citizens possess today. The soviet union was kicked out of Afghanistan by similar technique.

    Only a liberal would consider that a fight against tyranny is suicide. Our founding fathers didn’t buy into that crap.

    Consider this, there are more armed American citizens than there are all of the armies of the would combined. You can add the police in there as well.

    I would not want to make the assumption that you can go in and take the citizens weapons like a walk in the park. The last civil war cost us over 650,000 American lives. The next one may cost tens of millions of lives.
    The only way for our government or any government to win is to nuke us. Then they also lose.

  75. As I see it, as long as there are Obamas, Clintons, Pelosis, Penettas etc. holding high offices in OUR federal government, the cancer they are spreading will continue. At this time, I think the best action American citizens can take is to push relentlessly, loudly and vigorously for IMPEACHMENT! Obama and his Cabinet have GOT TO GO….period! As long as they're around, and as long as we are paying extrordinary salaries for an anti-Constitution Senate and a spineless Congress, nothing positive can even gain a foothold….they must go!! In addition, I think that starting a movement geared for the mass-refusal by Americans to pay their UNConstitutional "Federal" Income Tax (which actually supports the so-called "Federal" Reserve run by multinationalist bankers)! Is the fed going to go after an entire city – or state?? If they threaten us with their FEMA Camps, then it's definately time to lock 'n load! Obama and his pit of vipers Cabinet MUST GO!!

  76. Big surprise that this illigitimate government has been actively encouraging in every way the ever-increasing torrents of illegal invaders streaming across OUR borders, all with hands out, palms up….utterly dependent upon government handouts, freebies etc., thereby ensuring their absolute allegiance to "the state"! If and when American patriots are pushed to the point of armed rebellion, this scum-bag government has in place a force of it's own who will stop at nothing to defend their "golden goose"! They would see patriotic Constitution-loving Americans as the enemy who would rob them of their preferred place among mama hog's teats! Count on it! How many millions are there now? Twelve, fifteen? Hmmm? Not only that, but many illegal invaders hail from Iran, Iraq or Syria and enter into this country via the Mexican border; there is a ton of proof to that! Would any of them stand and fight with American citizens? RIGHT!! The feds know this….they are counting on it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>