No part of any of this material should be used as legal advice. The reader must take full responsibility for the laws regarding firearms and the proper use of firearms in his jurisdiction, as well as proper safety precautions involving every facet of firearms and related materials.
Any and all of this written material may contain errors, especially as time goes by and the laws change. As such, it is the responsibility of the reader to check with local authorities as to the laws which dictate firearm use and ownership, in any situation.
Though I retain all rights to the material I have written here, permission is explicitly given to distribute this material in its entirety via the Internet and other computer networks. Permission is explicitly denied to publish this material in any other medium, including but not limited to CD-ROM, books, and magazines.
In order to gain permission to reproduce any part of this material in such a medium the person/organization wishing to publish said part of the material must obtain written permission from the author.
The opinions expressed in this document, and subsequent quoted documents in this paper are those of the authors of the quoted material, and myself, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Center for Innovative Computer Applications, or Indiana University.
These men knew the repressive power of government first hand, and the subsequent dangers to individual liberty inherent in that power. They knew that government could only be held in check if the people had a last resort, equal in power to the standing armies of the government. They called this, the militia. The militia is made up of all able bodied men of the United States, who are expected to provide their own arms and ammunition, whose duty is to protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic. In fact, according to United States code, every man between 18 and 45 is already a member of the militia, whether he knows it or not.
When they drafted the ideals of the militia, one of the most important duties assigned is to protect the country from our own government's armies, should the government ever try to establish tyrannical rule against the United States Constitution; the Supreme Law of the United States. They understood that government often runs amok from the hands of the people, and they wanted an insurance policy against this very threat.
Great care has been taken by many scholars to define the meaning of the Second Amendment, but perhaps no one has done a better job at this than Congress itself.
In a cosmic sense, this is true. All of reality is theory and philosophy. My contention, however, is that the members of Congress and the President and Vice President have sworn to defend the Constitution and what it represents as it stands now, not how they want to mold it during their term in office.
Philosophical differences and theories aside, I don't see them upholding this oath.
As for "God given", inalienable, or whatever other term you wish to use for this, (I'm not Christian myself,) even the animals of nature will defend themselves violently if need be. What is different about the animal called "human" which should exclude us from this "right" or "natural process" to self-preservation? Is it that the value of human life is of such incalculable worth that to take it is a crime beyond measure?
If this is the case, why is it that we allow our police to carry lethal weapons? If it is not right for us to defend ourselves, why should the police defend us or themselves either? Why is it not "proper" to kill a criminal in defense of your life, but it is "proper" for you to die when attacked, because you have followed this code that the criminal ignores? The government would have us all believe that the only people who should be allowed to defend themselves or others, are those who work for the government. I have a problem with this idea, and I don't know how some people can qualify it, but they do try.
I am not so altruistic to think that if another man is attacking me with intent to seriously harm, maim or kill me, that I should not do everything within my power to protect myself. I will defend myself to what ever level he takes it to. To put it bluntly, my life is worth more than the life of a thug trying to kill me, when I have done nothing to earn such violence.
It angers me that the government constantly tries to find ways to improve the predator's odds against me. Constitutional issues aside, when the government's solution to violent crime is a "revolving door" justice system, which does not keep violent predators off the streets: Who are they to tell me that I cannot protect my own life? I don't feel like giving the government that much power over me, whether they make it "legal" or not.
Those that argue non-lethal defense, such as martial arts, as the best approach against criminal attack are missing a point: Criminals will carry guns whether they are outlawed or not, and a perfect forearm block will not stop a bullet.
But a gun, used in defense, is very effective.
In a conscientious individual, the presence of the gun actually forms an advanced level of self-control and coolness. I can't really put it to words, to be honest, it has to be experienced. I can honestly say it is the most responsibility I have ever taken on and few things in life have had such a dramatic effect on my character, all for the positive. The effects of potentially lethal force in my hands has done nothing but make myself more aware of the heavy responsibility of possible error. In a crisis, this responsibility will be the tempering force which will keep my head clear and focused.
The evidence seems to point to the fact that most if not nearly all of the people who legally carry guns for defense feel the same. Dr. Kleck's studies indicate that citizens use firearms to defend themselves from attack over 2 million times per year in the United States. In 98 percent of these cases, the defender merely shows the weapons or fires a warning shot in the air and scares off the attacker. (I am personally against warning shots. I feel there is too great of a danger to innocent people, even firing in the air. Bullets can have lethal velocity for far greater distances than many would believe. I propose that the only time to fire the weapon is when you've determined that you need to fire on the assailant, this way you are always sure where the bullet is going.) In only 2 percent of the time is the attacker actually shot, and according to another study by criminologist Don B. Kates, only 2 percent of those shootings which occur hit an innocent person by mistake. The error rate for the police is 11 percent.
As Jeffrey Snyder put it, in his article "A Nation of Cowards:"
I guess I just don't see the law-abiding as the problem.
Brady is a sore spot with many, if not for it's improbable value as a crime fighting tool, than simply because of the hypocrisy surrounding it. Sarah Brady and Handgun Control, Inc, (HCI) of which she is their main spokes-person, had been trying to pass the Brady Bill for over 7 years, after the shooting of President Reagan and Mr. Brady. It was supposedly designed to prevent shootings like this.
But the Brady law would not have stopped John Hinckley from getting and using the .22 pistol he shot both men with. Hinckley purchased the gun five months before the assault and his sordid medical records could not have been used to prevent the purchase of the weapon, because such is not kept in public records, nor is the Brady law endowed with such a measure of checking these records.
Many states already had waiting periods and background checks before the Brady Bill was ever drafted. Indiana is such a state, which already had a 10 day waiting period for those who do not have a carry permit, with a police background check. It has been in place long before Brady came along. None of the Brady law even takes effect in Indiana. Our laws were already tougher than Brady, and it hasn't helped our crime prevention efforts one bit. Gary, IN, recently took away Washington D.C.'s seven year running title as "Murder Capital of America." Fortunately, the rest of Indiana is quite calm. As a side note, Gary is one of two cities in Indiana which does not honor Indiana's Concealed Carry Licences.
In spite of many states having existing waiting periods, where none of them showed any reduction in crime for it, Sarah Brady and ilk pushed for the Brady Bill, saying that it would solve all the problems with criminals obtaining guns. Then, on Monday, Feb. 28, the day the Brady Act became effective, Jim and Sarah Brady and Congressman Charles Shumer unveiled "Brady II". This bill consists of a proposal to licence all gun owners based on need, with the only allowable need being hunting or collecting. Self-defense is not allowed nor is it considered to be a valid reason for owning a gun. Sarah Brady came out and stated that the Brady Law I will actually have very little effect on crime, and further, stronger measures are needed, including the eventual ban on all semi-automatic firearms and all handguns. And the press marches right along with it.
NBC has aired many segments on gun-control, always pro-control. Of course it doesn't hurt that the president of NBC is an avid gun-control proponent, hence, news becomes propaganda. They would talk about semi-automatic rifles and show footage of fully automatic guns being fired in the background. When called on this, NBC said they made an honest mistake and would be more careful in the future. They repeated the same footage they had used the first time, less than a week later. When they could not get an assault styled rifle to do anything more than make little holes in a watermelon, the police officer assisting them fired at it with his pistol using a hollowpoint round which caused the melon to explode with the dramatics wanted. NBC showed this footage as the results of the rifle shots. When called on this by people who know ballistics and spotted something amis, NBC apologized to the NRA in a letter, saying it wouldn't happen again, and promptly repeated the footage. Is this serving the public interest to "impartially broadcast the news?" And it's not just NBC: CNN, CNBC, ABC, CBS, all have done similar, misleading broadcasts.
The press and people like Sarah Brady, distort, mislead and out-right lie when it comes to firearms and their effects. The image painted is that the law-abiding gun owner is the problem, and we just need to crack down on all these over-the-counter gun sales. This completely ignores the facts as to where the problem lies, and this infuriates law-abiding gun owners, who are the only people taking the brunt of this nonsense.
I find it difficult to fathom why a criminal who is willing to break laws against theft, rape and murder, is suddenly going to be quaking in their shoes over the fact that the handgun they carry is now illegal. Criminals don't obey the law, any law. The only people being hurt by laws such as this are those who were not a problem to begin with.
It irritates me that there is so much talk and posturing about restricting more and more legal uses and ownership of weapons, (violating the "shall not be infringed," clause of the Second Amendment,) when the government imposes mandatory sentencing on first time drug offenders, who are hurting no one but themselves, while they let out violent offenders to make room for them! According to the Justice Department, the average time served for murder in the US is 8 years. This is like a slap on wrist, and hardly a deterant to crime.
If the government wants to get tough on crime, make laws which directly effect the criminals. Crime cannot be stopped by infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens. How about dropping mandatory sentencing for drug offenders and placing one on violent criminals in that a person guilty of violent crime has to serve at least 80% of their sentence before the option for parole is even open? Taking steps like this will do a hell of a lot more good, in my humble opinion.
I could argue the merits of legalizing drugs in the United States, especially when you take into account that drug users are only abusing themselves, if at all, but many have already made such arguments far better than I can. As the Libertarian party so eloquently stated:
Fortunately, the public has by and large ignored this insubstancial assertation, and gun owners are not associated with criminals, for the most part. But the constant harping by the press of this propaganda is still taking it's toll.
If instead you examine the raw numbers of accidents reported in the United States, the conclusion reached is that Accidental deaths by firearms is NOT high at all, lower than it has ever been in US history, and much lower than other more common accidents.
Accident Stats for 1992
from "Accident Facts", the National Safety Council
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accident Type # Deaths Change (1991-1992) Rate (n/100,000)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Auto 40,300 -7% 15.8
Falls 12,400 +2% 4.9
Poisoning 5,200 0% 2.0
(by solids/liquids)
Drowning 4,300 -7% 1.7
Fires & burns 4,000 -2% 1.6
Suffocation 2,700 -16% 1.1
(by ingested object)
Firearms 1,400 -7% 0.5
Poisoning 700 -13% 0.3
(by gases/vapors)
All others 12,000 -2% 4.7
All accidents 83,000 -5% 32.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And then there is the National Center for Health Statistics (1991 latest
figures) reporting the 12 most common causes of death in the United
States
ALL CAUSES 2,169,518
Heart Disease 720,862
Cancers 514,657
Strokes 143,481
ACCIDENTS 89,347
Motor Vehicle 43,536
Falls 12,662
Poisoning (solid, liquid, gas) 6,434
Drowning (incl. water transport drownings) 4,685
Suffocation (mechanical, ingestion) 4,195
Fires and flames 4,120
Surgical/Medical misadventures* 2,473
Other Transportation (excl. drownings) 2,086
Natural/Environmental factors 1,453
Firearms 1,441
Chronic pulmonary diseases 90,650
Pneumonia and influenza 77,860
Diabetes 48,951
Suicide** 30,810
HIV Infections (AIDS) 29,555
Homicide and legal intervention*** 26,513
Cirrhosis and other liver diseases 25,429
** Approximately 60% involve firearms.
*** Approximately 60% involve firearms. Criminologist Gary Kleck estimates 1,500-2,800 self-defense and justifiable homicides by civilians and 300-600 by police annually.
Accidental discharge of firearms account for 1.68% of all accidental deaths and only 0.066% of deaths attributed to be in the top 12 methods of death in general. This can hardly be called a "crisis of epidemic proportions" as the Center for Disease Control has advocated. (Just what the CDC has to do with firearms to begin with is an interesting question as and of itself, let alone that they would declare "gun deaths" an epidemic.) Automobiles, falling in the shower and swimming look to be far more dangerous. More people are accidentally poisoned than accidentally killed by firearms.
As for the homicide figures, involving 26,513 people in 1991, 1,500-2,800 of these are justifiable homicides by civilians defending themselves, and 300-600 are justifiable homicides by the police. This leaves, at worst, 24,713 homicides in criminal hands, and this includes any method of killing, such as bare hands and feet. Even if we were to falsely attribute ALL homicides to firearms, this is still only 1.14% of all deaths in the top 12. You are over 29 times more likely to die of heart disease than to be a victim of a homicide.
As for the suicide figures, where 60%, or 18,486, involved firearms, who is to say that these people would have been stopped if they had not possessed a firearm? Even if we ignore countries like Japan, with no private firearm ownership, but a suicide rate over twice the United States, why should 0.85% of the top 12 methods of death be considered such a crisis?
Perhaps Congress should stop pestering law abiding citizens about owning firearms, and start spending this money they want to devote to the Crime Bill and other meaningless "crime control" laws into medical research. Considering that 1,651,445 of the 2,169,518 deaths within the top 12 list are disease related, (that's 76.12%,) one could even put a label on these illnesses, such as "crisis." At minimum, it is more valid a statement than what the CDC has issued concerning firearms.
I am opposed to gun control of any kind.
And so is American history..."
"The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops..." - Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principals of the Federal Constitution Proposed by the Late Convention, 1787
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. [...] The great object is that every man be armed" and "everyone who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry, During Virginia's ratification convention, 1788
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own 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
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence." - George Washington, 2nd Session of 1st Congress
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. 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." - Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344
"Arms in the hands of individual citizens may be used at individual discretion...in private self-defense." - John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787-88
"The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." - James Madison, The Federalist #46
"...arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived the use of them." - Thomas Paine, Thoughts on Defensive War, 1775
"The whole of the Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." - Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, 7 October 1789
"A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms...To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms..." - Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters From the Federal Farmer 53, 1788
"The Constitution of the United States shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams, During the Massachusetts U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, during Virginia's ratification convention, 1788
"The right of the people to keep and bear...arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country..." - James Madison, I Annuals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).
"...God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. [...] And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787
"Let therefore every man, that, appealing to his own heart, feels the least spark of virtue or freedom there, think that it is an honor which he owes himself, and a duty which he owes his country, to bear arms." - Thomas Pownall
"Without either the first or second amendment, we would have no liberty; the first allows us to find out what's happening, the second allows us to do something about it! The second will be taken away first, followed by the first and then the rest of our freedoms." - Andrew Ford
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Trench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, 20 February 1788
"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits. ... and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." - St. George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia, I Blackstone COMMENTARIES St. George Tucker Ed., 1803
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it." - Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861
"Our safety, our liberty depends on preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the US are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts - Not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution" - Abraham Lincoln
"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against tyranny which now appears remote in America, that historically has proven to be always possible." - Hubert H. Humphrey
"I also support a ban on semi-automatic assault weapons, which have no legitimate hunting purpose. This will limit access to multiple-round clips like the one used in the tragic killings in Killeen, Texas."
"And we should -- then every community in the country could then start doing major weapon sweeps and then destroying the weapons, not selling them."
"President Clinton said he views passage of the Brady Bill as only the beginning of a much broader effort by his administration to seek sweeping gun control measures...He ordered the Justice Department to begin studying gun licensing, registration and collection proposals." - The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Times (Dec. 10, 1993).
"When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans ... And so a lot of people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom is being abused, you have to move to limit it. That's what we did in the announcement I made last week on the public housing projects about how we're going to have weapons searches and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities." - Interview on MTV's "Enough Is Enough," 4/19/1994
"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come?" - Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, AP, Nov. 18, 1993.
"Handguns are a public health issue." - Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders in USA Today, Nov. 9, 1993.
"My bill establishes a six-month grace period for the turning in of handguns." - Rep. Major Owens, from the Congressional Record, on Nov. 10, 1993.
"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe." - Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Nov. 18, 1993, AP.
"We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true!...We're going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy. We're going to beat guns into submission!" - Rep. Charles Schumer on NBC Nightly News, Nov. 30, 1993.
"The NRA...was right all along in fearing the waiting period was a camel's nose under the tent. Brady has now passed and it is time to reveal the rest of the camel!" - Handgun Control Inc., (HCI) President Richard Aborn (Dec. 8, 1993), Cleveland Plain Dealer.
"If I could've gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban [of semiautomatic firearms], picking up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would've done it." -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein,_60 Minutes,_CBS-TV, 2/5/95
"I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns." - Sen. Howard Metzenbaum
"I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, 'This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strength that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of handguns in the United States - is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of *all* handguns and *all* handgun ammunition - except for the military, policement, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal." - Pete Shields, Chairman, HCI ["A Reporter At Large: Handguns", _The New Yorker_, July 26, 1976, 57-58]
The Second Amendment is not about hunting or competitive shooting. It enumerates an inalienable right held by all, to insure the means of their protection and security. Security from crime and for no better cause than to insure that Congress and the President will not ignore the rest of the Constitution!