Defeating the Narrative: Gun Control

America today suffers from a problem. It is the intentional use of a narrative to push for more and more federal control over the people. No one has the courage to stand up to them to tell the truth. I’m no longer afraid to speak up and fulfill my oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. In this article I will explore the truth behind the law on gun control and use it to defeat the arguments that we need it.

The Second Amendment protects a pre-existing right of the people to keep and bear arms. The right existed before the Constitution was written and the founding fathers knew it to be true. The establishment forgets that there were two other federal governments prior to the ratification in 1789 of the Constitution. The first was Continental Congress that was in power from 1774-1789 and was three incarnations. The first two sessions of the Continental Congress met and created the Articles of Confederation. Under the Confederation, the federal government was a legislative body with no real authority over the individual states.

During that fifteen year span, the people had the right to keep and bear arms. This is important because it was this right that lead directly to the War of Independence. The first shots of that war was in Lexington and Concord in response to the British Army’s intention to seize the armory there. This was in 1775 and the armory was operated by the citizens of each town. The British government was trying to seize the weapons from the people to subjugate them in order to enforce the prior tax acts.

At the Philadelphia Convention, all of the delegates there knew and understood that the people had the right to keep and bear arms. They wouldn’t touch that right since it was because of that right they were free of the British Empire. Due to the lack of a Bill of Rights, many states refused to ratify the Constitution until they received assurances that the first act of the new Congress of the United States would pass one.

The delegates knew and understood that the War of Independence was not just to put a new central government in place of the old one. On the contrary, they knew that by winning the war that they had elevated themselves to the position of a king/queen. The people are the rulers now and the government derives its powers from the people. It is not the government gives people’s rights. This turns the people from being free to being government slaves to live and die at its whim. The government has no authority other than what was grated to it by the state governments under the Constitution on behalf of the people of their state.

Now the most common argument used by the left, and ignored by most everyone in the media, is that the founding fathers could not have known where firearms technology would lead. This is a false claim since Continental Congress/Congress of the Confederation passed bills that were in the realm of firearm research. This research was for multiple barrel and other multi-shot firearms to be used during the War of Independence. They were fully aware of where firearms technology would lead. This is why they used the word “Arms” in the Second Amendment. The word as they defined it meant weapons of war and armor for defense. It mentions nothing about flintlocks or percussion cap weapons. It just says weapons of war.

The next argument is that the people should not be able to have access to military hardware. This is also incorrect, because from the earliest times as a colony till the passage of the Dick Act of 1903 that established the National Guard there was always a militia. The militia is comprised of all male citizens between the ages of 17 to 45. Today, it would be all citizens. These citizens were to be armed with military hardware and they were up until the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1932. Full automatic weapons were not banned until 1984. Between 1932 and 1984, the federal government used tax stamps and licensing on the sale of firearms to prevent people from buying them. Even today, a law abiding citizen with a Class C Federal Firearms License and pay the tax stamp on each full automatic, destructive device, etc… can own them. They still do. In 1984, the federal government banned the sale of new full automatic weapons to citizens.

This ban runs contrary to what the Second Amendment says. The right to keep and bear military hardware is not to be restricted or removed from law abiding citizens. Under Article 1 Section 8 Clause 16, it states that Congress is responsible for setting the training standards of the militia and for arming them. Yes, you heard that right. This clause mandates that Congress must appropriate money to arm the law abiding citizens with military hardware.

The militia is defined as the Organized and the Unorganized under Title 10 Section 331. The Organized militia is the National Guard and Militia. It must be pointed out that in Perpich v. Department of Defense (1990) that the court held that the National Guard is part of the federal military system and is not a militia. Their reasoning was that because the National Guard is trained and funded by the federal government they are not part of the state militia.

Now the Unorganized militia is defined as all males between the ages of 17 and 45. This leaves it open for the states to define their individual militias. The majority of states do have laws on the books that defines the militia that is different than the federal law. In any case, the militia is all law abiding citizens between the ages set by the individual states. Since law abiding citizens are the militia then they have a right to purchase firearms, including military hardware. In 1934, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Miller v. United States that the militia must have access and use the same weapons and armor that the military does. This has been repeatedly upheld since then.

Another argument used, is that the police are there to protect you. This is false. Starting with South v. Maryland (1856), the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the police are not legally obligated to protect the individual citizen. It is up to the citizen to do that themselves. The counter to this argument is that we have the right to self defense to protect our right to life. The police are not legally obligated or required to protect a citizen from criminals. By pushing their gun control agenda, they are ignoring the laws in the states and court rulings. It is a fantasy that they believe in.

Two more classic arguments the left uses is that it is common sense to have gun control and we must show a need. Common sense is that only criminals who have been tried and convicted can have their rights removed. This is consistent with the Fifth Amendment’s protection against the government taking away the rights of the people without a criminal trial. Hammer at them about the real common sense using the defenses listed.

For the “need” argument, it’s easy to turn that around. Substitute the right to keep and bear arms with another protected right listed in the Bill of Rights. My favorites are the right to a trial, right to own property, right to have an attorney for a criminal case, and the right to demand the government show probable cause to have committed a crime. I ask them if they truly need those rights? They cannot defeat the argument since the law abiding citizen does not have to show a need to exercise their rights. It does show that the government must show a need to have an abiding interest in proving a criminal act will be committed by all law abiding citizens.

The final argument to debunk is that firearms are for hunting and sport. This is also incorrect. One of the first acts of the Congress of the United States was to pass the Organic Act. The Organic Act contains three things and is part of the law of the United States. They are the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, and the Northwest Territory Act. Under the Declaration of Independence, it lists a very unique right which is the right to alter and abolish the government. This right is protected by the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution where it says that the rights not listed are not to be used to restrict or remove others held by the people. If we are disarmed how are we to protect ourselves from criminals and a tyrannical government? We can’t and it forces the people to live under “absolute despotism”.

The points defeats any argument for gun control and forces the left to defend its narrative. We, the people, need to begin doing this and hold the left, the media, and the politicians to the supreme law of the land. We have to turn the narrative on its head and put out the truth. No more hiding and no more deflections that run contrary to the Constitution of the United States.

God Bless You and Yours,

Rev. Richard L. Littles


One thought on “Defeating the Narrative: Gun Control

  1. Pingback: Defeating the Narrative: Gun Control | christian restoration

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s