I have read lately that in the wake of such tragic shootings as Sandy Hook, Aurora, and Orlando, many people, including law makers, are calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment as the media funnels their attention again on a specific subject of inquiry. Some say that the Constitution does not apply anymore, that it is just a piece of paper written hundreds of years ago by men that are no longer alive. Some say, that the Constitution does not grant us certain rights, including the right to own fully automatic rifles, high explosives and knives. I say, those people are absolutely correct.
The constitution, has never, and will never grant anyone the right to bear arms. That is because the Constitution is not a piece of paper that grants rights, because rights do not come from the government, but rather a document that places restrictions on the power of the Federal government as well as outline which rights it ought to protect. The United States government was a government that was founded as a Republic form of government, in which the rule of law superseded the will of the majority and was designed to protect the rights of the individual, the smallest minority. Meaning, that the government of the United States was not meant to provide for the group, but rather to serve as a tool to protect the rights of the individual whom he grants himself by merely existing.
Rights do not come from the government, rights come from that which the individual is willing to protect. Rights are not granted by government, because government has no authority to grant them. When you go to the barber and a barber cuts your hair, that barber had to spend more time training for his “license” then a police officer spends training. The government did not “grant” your barber that right, the government nearly threatened him with force that if he/she did not ask for permission first, the government would arrest this man and throw him in a cage. Government can never, and will never grant rights, but government can and always have granted you permission.
Now I ask, what kind of man needs permission from government to exercise a right he/she instinctively has by virtue of existence? An unfree human of course. If you need to ask for permission to grow a plant, to build your patio or to love whom you choose, you are not in any sense free. Freedom would apply autonomy, and autonomy would imply being responsible for one’s own actions and consequences. So in what sense does the government have a legitimate function in society? By acting as an extension of the rights of the individual in order to better protect the individual, their property and their life.
Everything else the government does is a monopoly on force or an outright violation of the sovereignty of the individual.
When speaking about laws, all laws are enforced by violence or the threat of violence. If someone is caught committing crimes, that person will be given an opportunity to pay an extortion agreement (fine), if he refuses to pay the fine, he will be kidnapped (arrested) and thrown into a cage (jail), if he refuses arrest he will be shot and killed. If someone is caught ingesting drugs, selling raw milk, or committing theft, that person will be dealt with in the manner described previously. From fishing without a license to remodeling your home to committing a violent crime, all laws are enforced through violence. When the majority of one group wants to take away the resources, rights or property of another group, in private life that would be called theft, but when the majority of one group votes to take away the resources, rights or property of another group, that is called the law.
The truth is, all governments are institutions built upon the use of force and are nothing more than a middleman to violence. It is said that in WWI, only 10% of soldiers fired their weapons at their targets. It wasn’t until militaries realized that through desensitization and distancing the enemy through means of technology and group mechanics that the rate of fire amongst soldiers rose to 90% by the Vietnam war. It is in the same way that government is a mechanism to inflict legalized plunder and violence on others in ways in which normal civilians would never dream of enforcing themselves. Democracy is only a system in which the majority can also take part in the spoils of government rule, alongside the corporations and the political class.
“The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.” – Frederic Bastiat
The founding fathers of the United States fought a war to overthrow an oppressive regime and instituted a new government by fighting in a violent revolution. It is often brought up by those attempting to use government to usurp the citizenry’s right to defend oneself that the type of firearms one can acquire should be regulated by the State and perhaps even confiscated. Those attempting to defend the right to wield firearms often debate the fine points about the differences between semi-automatic weapons and fully automatic assault weapons of differing lengths and philosophies of use and so on and so forth. These are valid points, and may be more interesting in a firearms study class, but the only discourse that should be taking place is: whether a free man deserves to protect oneself how he chooses, and how that force is necessary to protect oneself from powers ranging from individuals, to gangs, to militaries. Including the military of one’s own government, which as we know does not protect the rights of individual, who is to say it won’t violate yours?
Everyone ought to have the right to own knives, explosives, fully automatic rifles, tanks and fighter craft in any capacity they so choose as long as they do not use it to harm others or their property, and only use these devices to protect their own rights, or as an extension of the rights of others in the event that they are being violated. When a government oversteps its boundaries, as it has done by killing over 250 million people in the 20th century alone in the phenomena known as Genocide, death by government, that government must be reminded by force or the threat of force that it’s only duty is to remain as an extension of the rights of the individual. The degree of freedom by which a man considers himself free may vary, but one thing is for sure, in order to protect oneself, his family and his neighbor, he must be able to meet deadly force with deadly force if needed.
The ability to use deadly force allows more elegant means of revolution to be left on the table. When an individual carries the firearm, he/she holds the great equalizer, whether you are a 100lb woman or an 80-year-old man, with proper training you are on the same physical playing field as an armed opponent. The only thing left at this point is communication, discourse and a chance at resolve. There are many ways to fight a revolution, there is education, activism and political action, as well as hundreds of other ways in which revolutionaries create change. It is the power of deadly force in large numbers that puts individuals on the same physical playing field as militaries. The government only acts to protect itself, you are not your government, and you are not in control of your government.
When someone tells you that they want to confiscate firearms, they are telling you that they want men with guns to come and forcefully remove your guns. They are not against firearms, because it is impossible for them to be, they are only for the government owning them. They are not willing to enforce these measures themselves, therefore the only recourse is having government to do the job for them. Once your right to protect yourself is taken away, there is no way to protect yourself from the power of the majority nor the power of the State. Gun control is only to further the monopoly of force that is owned by the State, not as an extension of your rights, but to usurp more control. There is no such thing as gun control, there is only a government monopoly on guns, and why would anyone give the power of lethal force and revolution to a protected class?
The right to protect oneself as he chooses is the epitome of freedom, a free man takes safety into his own hands, an unfree man asks for permission. Whether it’s an armed robber or an invading army, one’s capacity to defend themselves from forces that mean them harm is an act of liberation in itself. If my preferred method of self-defense is a concealed handgun or an AK-47, no one else ought to be able to take that away from me unless it’s a consensual agreement. For instance, flying a plane or entering a club in which the user must submit to the terms of service of that business. Otherwise, the reality of hiring the government to confiscate the weapons of others is an inherently immoral and atrocious act. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, during the Battle of Thermopylae, Xerxes of Persia demanded that the Greeks lay down their arms and surrender, King Leonidas of Sparta responded “molṑn labé”, which translates to “come and take it”. Outnumbered 10 to 1, the Greeks fought for days in one of the most spectacular last stands of history. It is with the spirit in which the Greeks defended their home soil from invasion in which I hope citizens of the world will defend their rights to be free, and to defend themselves how they wish.
If governments do decide to implement gun laws that are unsavory, technology, innovation and the human spirit will render these measures impotent. With the dawn of 3D printers it is now possible to print the lower receiver of an AR-15, the part that is considered the gun, out of ABS plastics that can handle thousands of rounds of continuous fire. Defense Distributed invented the Ghost Gunner which is currently in its second iteration, a C&C machine that is capable of taking partially finished blocks of metal and milling them into functioning lower receivers to circumvent gun laws. If prohibition has taught us anything, if guns are illegal, people will just start making them in their bath tubs. The days of prohibition are long gone but the spirit of rebellion has always remained strong in American culture. Whether it’s alcohol prohibition, marijuana prohibition or guns, their is a silent nod of approval from the penumbra of civilized society that has always erred in the direction of personal liberty. Amongst us are our follow jury that can with power of jury nullification hold a law mute if we were ever to become victim of an offense. Freedom is inevitable, innovation will not allow government to interfere, and the human spirit will never falter. And to that I say, Molon Labe, and live free.