Guns

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"

The Second Amendment to the US Constitution

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.

--George Washington

"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the Americans freedom, and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight."

John F. Kennedy- Columbia University, Nov. 12, 1963

"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 governent."

Thomas Jefferson

Note to Sheriff John Pelle in Boulder: I hope you remember when Mike Hingle and I visited your office two years

ago to explain how IRS agents were violating we the people's rights and committing criminal acts by seizing property

and garnishing wages without a court order. Thank God these Wyoming Sheriffs now understand that the real law breakers aren't the

people in their county - it is the federal agents. It is totally unAmerican for the government/agents to violate the law in

order to 'harm and punish people' without having to prove those people have knowingly, willingly and intentionally violated

any law.

We need to write Sheriff Mattis and thank him and the other co-plaintiffs for standing up for our American birthrights!!!

Janet Lee and Jim Meisinger

Thanks to: sharon voss

The Gun is Civilization

by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and

force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either

convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under

threat

of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories,

without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact

through

persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social

interaction,

and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use

reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on

equal

footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad

force

equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the

young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a

civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a

successful

living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal

that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is

fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are

won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute

lethal

force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it

with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an

octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight,

but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means

that I

cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid.. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally

armed

and can only be persuaded, never forced.

Wyoming sheriffs put Feds in their place.

From: James W. von Brunn

Here's one the mainstream media isn't going to tell you: County sheriffs in Wyoming are demanding that federal agents actually abide by the Constitution, or face arrest. Even better, a U.S. District Court agreed according to the Keene Free Press: The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF and the IRS by Mattis and other members of the WyomingSheriff's Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought restoration of the protections Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.

Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated,Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.' Go back and re-read this quote. The court confirms and asserts that 'the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official.' And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and buried — not in Wyoming, not yet.Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis comments:

'If a sheriff doesn't want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to leave, or retain them in custody.' 'I am reacting in response to the actions of federal employees who have attempted to deprive citizens of my county of their privacy, their liberty, and their property without regard to constitutional safeguards. I hope that more sheriffs all across America will join us in protecting their citizens from the illegal activities of the IRS, EPA, BATF,FBI, or any other federal agency that is operating outside the confines of constitutional law. Employees of the IRS and the EPA are no longer welcome in Bighorn County unless they intend to operate in conformance to constitutional law.' The implications are huge!!!

But it gets even better. Since the judge stated that the sheriff 'has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official,' the Wyoming sheriffs are flexing their muscles. They are demanding access to all BATF files. Why? So as to verify that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibits the registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm owners. This would be wrong.

The sheriffs are also demanding that federal agencies immediately cease the seizure of private property and the impoundment of private bank accounts without regard to due process in Wyoming state courts. This case is not just some amusing mountain melodrama. This is a BIG deal. This case is yet further evidence that the 10th Amendment is not yet totally dead, or in a complete decay in the United States. It is also significant in that it can, may, and hopefully will be interpreted to mean that 'political subdivisions of a State are included within the meaning of the amendment, or that the powers exercised by a sheriff are an extension of those common law powers which the 10th Amendment explicitly reserves to the People, if they are not granted to the federal government or specifically prohibited to the States.'

__._,_.___

__,_._,___

Der grï¿½ï¿½te Unsinn, den man in den besetzen Ostgebieten machen kï¿½nnte,
sei der, den unterworfenen Vï¿½lkern Waffen zu geben. Die Geschichte
lehre, daï¿½ alle Herrenvï¿½lker untergegangen seien, nachdem sie den von
ihnen unterworfenen Volkern Waffen bewilligt hatten.

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the
conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all
conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have
prepared their own downfall by doing so."
-- Adolf Hitler, April 11, 1942

"... surveys imply that private firearms may be used in self-defense up to two and a half million times each year, with 400,000 of these defenders believing that using the gun 'almost certainly' saved a life", Professor John Lott

(This is 6,849 acts of self defense and 1,096 lives per DAY)

BY FAR, the biggest threat to the Second Amendment is not jews, not our wayward politicians, not the out of control news media, not our schools--BUT THE WOMAN VOTER!

IMAGINE that, in this age of enlightenment, with the internet, and public libraries all OVER the place, with ponderous tv and radio and magazines and newspapers, with the ABILITY to comprehend the Founding Fathers intent with the Second Amendment RIGHT AT THEIR FINGERTIPS, that more women (39%) support even more FAILED "gun control" than oppose it (only 36%).

Marine Corps General Reinwald was interviewed on the radio the other day and you'll love his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns and Children. Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you gotta love this!!!!

This is one of the best comeback lines of all time. It is a portion of National Public Radio (NPR) interview between a female broadcaster and US Marine Corps General Reinwald who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military installation.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: So, General Reinwald, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL REINWALD: We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and shooting.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?

GENERAL REINWALD: I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL REINWALD: I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: But you're equipping them to become violent killers.

GENERAL REINWALD: Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?

The radio went silent and the interview ended. You gotta love the Marines!

Before even one gun control law was passed, the homicide rate in the US in 1957 was 4 per 100,000 population, but by 1993, after 22,000 gun control laws had been passed, it had increased 2.3 fold to 9.5. There were an extra 14,087 homicides in 1993 alone due just to this increased homicide rate. Had the US homicide rate just remained at its already high level in 1957 (four times higher than it was in 1902), there would have been more than 380,000 fewer homicides since then, which is an average of 17 additional homicides per gun control law. If it cannot be proven that other factors caused this skyrocketing crime spree, then we have incontrovertible evidence that each new gun control law was responsible for killing 17 additional American citizens, and that the sponsors of these laws are some of the worst traitors to the United States Constitution in our short history. Not only are these gun control laws unpopular, expensive, unconstitutional, and dangerous, but they're KILLING Americans at a rate 126 TIMES greater than the Muslim terrorists our government proposes to spend tens of billions of dollars to punish.

Let's save billions of dollars and thousands of American lives by tracking down, investigating, and punishing these traitors to the US Constitution, so that we can discover once and for all why they were so willing and anxious to put so many American lives at risk. Let's open this issue up to public debate in such a way that we don't ever make such mistakes again. Let's put the teeth back in the US Constitution by imprisoning those who would overthrow it so readily and easily.

Who makes up this minority group that opposes the Second Amendment, and why does OUR government ingore we the people in favor of them?

	Less than 4% of those polled by BeCounted support gun control and less than 8% believe it is effective.
	Only 8% polled by About Today support lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
	Only 16% polled by Fox News support a ruling that pilots can't carry guns in the cockpit.
	Less than 20% polled by Time Magazine want more gun control laws, and less than 26% think the Brady Bill is a success.
	Less than a third of police chiefs polled by CNS News oppose citizens' right to carry concealed guns.
	Less than 21% polled by Vote.com favor more gun control laws http://www.vote.com/vResults/index.phtml?cat=4075633
	Only 7% polled by Vote.com oppose concealed carry of handguns in Illinois.
	Less than 7% polled by WND agree with Google's policy of restricting advertising for private firearms.
	Only 18% polled by Vote.com oppose gun groups showing gun safety videos in public schools.
	Half of American women favor stricter laws but know they won't work.
	94% want Canada's national firearms registry to be abolished.

176,000 Americans are in prison right now for violating our 22,000 gun control laws.

The Constitutional right to bear arms is threatened by female voters.

Private ownership of firearms prevented Japan from attacking the US.

Pro gun-control articles in the mainstream media exceed anti gun-control articles by 10 to 50 times.

Three quarters of the mainstream media is owned or controlled by Jews.

	Countries with stricter gun control laws have suicide rates between 2-3 times higher than the US.
	More than 124 million citizens in countries with gun control laws were killed by their own governments in the 20th century alone, many after Jews succeeded in implementing gun control in those countries.
	The child fatality rate of an SMH is 364 times higher than that of a firearm.
	School busses are 369 times as dangerous to children than guns.
	The US SUICIDE rate increased at the SAME time that 22,000 unconstitutional gun control laws were passed.
	The US murder rate almost tripled as the percent of Americans with guns in their homes declined from 49% to 36% http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr990406.asp
	Firearm ownership reduces burglaries ten-fold.
	Gun control in Australia increased homicides by 3.2%.
	The failure of peer review of gun fatalities http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Suter/med-lit.html
	Professor John Lott of the University of Chicago proved statistically that private gun ownership prevents crime.
	Guns reduce crime.
	The real reason for the Second Amendment.
	Kids defend themselves with guns.
	Prosecutor has no response in debate with John Lott.
	Tom Clancy on guns.
	Senator Tom McClintock on the vision of our Forefathers and the STUPID Sheila Kuehl.
	The CDC finds gun control laws don't work.
	Death by government.
	How to protect your money.
	Links to other gun scholars http://www.gunscholar.org/
	FINALLY, Ohio court upholds gun rights.

GUNS & WOMEN VOTERS

The Nineteenth Amendment is a threat to the U. S. Constitution:

From the Gallup Organization http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr990423.asp "Women Particularly Critical of Role of Guns--Women are substantially more likely than men to cite the availability of guns as a significant factor contributing to school shootings. Women are also more likely to express confidence that stricter gun laws for teenagers would be a very effective preventive solution. Only 47% of men, compared to 73% of women, blame gun availability "a great deal" for causing U.S. school shootings like the one in Littleton-a 26-percentage-point difference. Similarly, just 53% of men compared to 70% of women think stricter gun laws would be very effective-a 17-point difference".

Without the female vote, the Constitutional right to bear arms would not be threatened. Because women are 11% more of the vote than men, 60.7% of the voters would vote to "infringe" on the right to bear arms. However, it requires support by two thirds of the voters to amend the constitution:

"The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it
necessary, shall propose amendments to this constitution, or on the
application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states"

By passing a law which INFRINGES on the right to bear arms, without the required amendment to the Constitution necessary to repeal the Second Amendment, Congress is committing treason against the Constitution by violating their following oath http://thomas.loc.gov/

	The SPEAKER. Will the Members who were not sworn in on opening day kindly come to the well of the House and take the oath of office at this time.
	Messrs. Mollohan, Hoyer, Stark and Gallegly appeared at the bar of the House and took the oath of office , as follows:
	Do you solemnly swear that you will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that you will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office in which you are about to enter. So help you God.
	The SPEAKER. Congratulations. You are now Members of the 106th Congress This does not give Congress the authority to react emotionally to the female voter every time there is a national calamity. It does not give them the authority to abandon the Constitution nor its Amendments. It does not give them the authority to ignore the basic law of the land. It does not give them the authority to pass any law at any time. It gives Congress only the responsibility to uphold the EXISTING Constitution OR to ratify it by following a specific easy to understand procedure. Until Congress removes the Second Amendment from the Constitution, they cannot "infringe" on ownership of "arms" of ANY kind. GUNS & GUN CONTROL NUTS Twenty Dumb Things You Must Believe to be a Gun Control Nut Criminals planning murder will disobey murder laws but will not disobey gun control laws. Criminals who obey gun control laws won't think about getting guns from their friends. Criminals who obey gun control laws won't consider stealing guns because robbery is against the law. Criminals won't dare use guns obtained illegally. Gun control laws are free. Gun control laws won't be abused by the world's largest justice/prison system. Criminals who can't get guns won't use knives instead. Criminals who can't get guns won't use bombs instead. Fertilizer used to make much more dangerous bombs can also be outlawed. Bombs used in place of guns won't kill more people than guns would have. Reducing our 230 million guns by 99.9% wouldn't leave plenty left over for the 12,000 gun-related murders each year. Cars don't have an accidental fatality rate 36 times higher than guns. Cars which aren't constitutionally protected won't be outlawed in the same way as guns were, which were constitutionally protected. American citizens can entrust with guns the same government which brought us Vietnam and 36 million abortions, which half the American population views as MURDER. This government won't do to disarmed Americans what numerous other governments around the world did to their 121 million disarmed and now dead citizens. Guns aren't used to protect 400,000 citizens per year from criminals. SMH's aren't 364 times more dangerous to children than guns. SIDs doesn't kill 10x as many children as guns. Outlawing SMHs isn't a better method of crime prevention. The government which imposed by force of law 36 million abortions against the will of its people really cares that guns kill 220 children/year. GUNS & CRIME PREVENTION With 4 million robberies, burglaries, and other personal assaults each year, in a nation with 230 million private firearms, it is not surprising that 10% of these, or 400,000, involved crime victims who used firearms to defend their lives. GUN REFRESHER COURSE a.. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject. b.. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. c.. Colt : The original point and click interface. d.. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control. e.. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords? f.. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words. g.. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms. h.. If you don't know your rights you don't have any. i.. Those who trade liberty for security have neither. j.. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved. k.. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? l.. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others. m.. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday. n.. Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Politicians. o.. Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety. p.. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive. q.. 911 - government sponsored Dial a Prayer. r.. Assault is a behavior, not a device. s.. Criminals love gun control - it makes their jobs safer. t.. If Guns cause Crime, then Matches cause Arson. u.. Only a government that is afraid of it's citizens try to control them. v.. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for. w.. Enforce the "gun control laws" in place, don't make more. x.. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves. y.. The American Revolution would never have happened with Gun Control. z. "...a government by the people, for the people..." From: Swftl@aol.com Subject: 10 Good Reasons to Ban Guns Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 03:00:11 EDT >Ten Good Reasons To Ban Guns >a satire by Bruce Gold > >1.) Guns are used in self-defense over 2 million times a year. >However, this makes the attempted crime a "non-event," which >necessarily complicates the Police investigation. Without civilian >ownership of guns, these Police investigations would not have been >compromised. Civilians should leave crime prevention to the Police, >who are properly equipped to investigate following the crime's >completion. > >2.) Some .004 % (4/1000 of 1%) of guns are used in crime each year. >This is way too high. All guns should be banned > >3.) Guns are unnecessary. In 98% of civilian gun defenses, no shot is >fired. If you are not going to fire a shot, you clearly don't need a >gun. This proves that the guns are unnecessary. Banning guns will >prevent these unnecessary defenses. > >4.) Guns cause criminal migration. In tough gun-law Washington, D.C., >violent crime rates are very high. This high crime rate is caused by >the migration of criminals from gun havens like Virginia. This >migration is caused by the criminal's cowardly avoidance of armed >householders and concealed-carry civilians. This criminal migration is >detrimental to helpless unarmed citizens in no-gun areas and must be >stopped. Guns should be banned everywhere. > >5.) Most gun crimes are committed by inner city gangs and drug >dealers. These relatively small and geographically restricted groups >consistently commit the majority of gun crimes, which usually peak as >turf wars erupt over Drug War changes. The best way to prevent this is >by denying guns to all law abiding people everywhere. > >6.) No woman needs to protect herself from rape, assault or murder. >The Police will protect women by investigating the crime after the >fact. Remember, Police paperwork is all the protection anyone really >needs. > >7.) Guns owners are disrespectful of authority. Good citizens should >completely rely on the authorities. A failure to do so is an >invariable sign of improper and overly independent attitudes. Failure >to completely and absolutely trust and depend on the authorities is >excessive democracy and sends a bad message to children. > >8.) Guns owners engaging in self-defense are taking the law into their >own hands. This is wrong. Only the Police and Criminals have the right >to take the law into their own hands. It should be kept out of the >hands of citizens. > >9.) Children and young people should remain ignorant about guns. Real >guns and real gun knowledge dissipate the fantasies created by violent >video games and TV. Ignorance, once lost, can never be restored and >needs to be protected. Not to mention the lost sales of all the >violent movies, TV shows, video games, etc! > >10.)Guns reduce people's reliance on the Police and Government. This >fosters a mistaken belief in "rights". No person has the right to >question authority. No person should be less than 100% dependent on >authority. This is fundamental to social order. Banning guns will help >to establish the Order the authorities want. This is good. > > >Gun Control - Simple Solutions for Simple Minds More Interesting Data on Guns Ohio State http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/talk-politics-guns/pro-gun-faq/part1/faq.html Right to Keep and Bear Arms http://freeweb.digiweb.com/pages/RKBA/antirkba.htm GUNS & CHILD DEATHS It's questionable that even a 50% reduction in the number of guns, from 230 million to 115 million, is either possible or would have any impact at all on the rate at which children die from guns. On the other hand, voluminous data shows that eliminating SMHs would both reduce the rate at which children die from 36.4 to 0.62, and reduce the rate at which they die by guns from 5.24 to 0.62. This would save 9,607 children's lives each year. The proper method for reducing child deaths, accidental or murder, is to implement laws which reduce the number of SMHs. Outlawing guns which are less dangerous and subjecting citizens to egregious acts by government not only violates the Constitution, but it puts American citizens at as serious a risk as the following citizens, who also didn't have guns GUNS & DEATH BY GOVERNMENT The 20th century's top nine megamurderers, as estimated in the book "Death by Government"

Joseph Stalin [editor's note: it was actually Lenin, not Stalin]	42,672,000	1929-1936
Mao Tse-Tung	37,828,000	1923-1976
Adolph Hitler ��	20,946,000	1933-1945
Chiang Kai-shek	10,214,000	1921-1948
Vladimir Lenin	4,017,000	1917-1924
Hideki Tojo	3,990,000	1937-1945
Pol Pot	2,397,000	1968-1987
Yayha Khan (Pakistan)	1,500,000	1971
Josip Tito (Yugoslavia)	1,172,000	1941-1987
TOTAL	124,736,000

GUNS & NATIONAL DEFENSE

Had it not been for private gun ownership in the US, the Japanese would not have stopped at Pearl Harbor and we would now be trying to speak Japanese to our current jailers. Even IF the number of children killed by guns could be reduced to zero with a 90% reduction of guns, it is just not worth the risk to citizens who have not amended a Constitution which has served us well for more than 2 centuries.

GUNS & AUTOMOBILES

The National Safety Council reports:

181,700,000 licensed drivers killed 43,200 fellow citizens in traffic accidents in 1997, a fatality rate of 23.8 fatalities per 100,000 licensed drivers http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/af78.htm

1,500 fellow citizens died last year at the hands of accidents with our 230 million firearms, a fatality rate of 0.65 fatalities per 100,000 firearms http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/af8.htm#H

220 children below the age of 14 died in firearms accidents.

FARS reports that 344 children died in school bus accidents in 1997 http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov

The accidental death rate of automobiles, which are not constitutionally protected, is 36 times greater than the accidental death rate of guns, which ARE constitutionally protected.

Buses kill 50% more children than guns. The real danger of gun control laws, besides being unconstitutional, besides putting American citizens at risk to "death by government", besides increasing their risk of being maimed or killed by criminals, is that they provide the moral justification for the government to ban automobiles next.

How can we justify a restriction of a constitutionally protected private property when private property which is not constitutionally protected is 36 times more dangerous to human life?

Of course, we cannot.

GUNS & SUICIDE

	The degree of restriction on civilian ownership of firearms does not correlate with the suicide rate.
	Only by carefully selecting data can that appearance be given.
	The Scandinavian Countries all have the same high level of restriction have a suicide rate which varies from 13.3 to 31.6, higher to double that of Australia.
	Japan which has practically no privately owned firearms has a suicide rate of 14.3, higher than Australia, Canada or even the USA.
	Israel on the other hand where any citizen of good character may be permitted to carry a loaded firearm at all times has a suicide rate of 6.0, half that of Australia.
	Switzerland has a standing militia with an automatic weapon in each home, yet has a murder rate half that of the US.

Country/Level of restriction on civilian ownership of firearms	Suicide Rate
Denmark high	31.6
Sweden high	20.5
Norway high	13.3
Scotland high	10.1
England/Wales high	6.7
Ireland high