by Diane Rufino, June 14, 2022
As we all know, our inalienable rights do not come from government; they come from our Creator, endowed at our creation, and are recognized by nature’s law. Our rights are recognized in our constitutions – “Recognized” and not “granted.” They are recognized and enshrined so that government will always protect and secure them and not violate or burden them.
Liberty is the ability to freely exercise those rights, unencumbered by government authority. Liberty is defined as “the state of being free within society from oppressive and/or arbitrary restriction imposed by government authority or on one’s exercise of fundamental or civil rights and way of life, behavior, or political views.”
The most fundamental and sacred right is the RIGHT TO LIFE. As a corollary to that right is the right to protect and secure that life. And that is where the Second Amendment comes in.
The Second Amendment reads: “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.” (“Shall not” means “Must not”).
The gist of the Second Amendment is that the individual must have the right and ability to protect his or her life against whatever force that might be used, by evil-intended persons, by foreign enemies, and even by their own government, to take their lives. Firearms is not necessarily limited to just muskets and rifles.
In this article, I wish to address the federal government’s latest gun grab – a series of Red Flag laws.
In spite of the “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” language of the Second Amendment, and the Re-assertion of the Reserved Rights of the individual states by the Tenth Amendment, the federal government insists it must take over the Second Amendment, put limits on it, and violate the rights of the American people, in antagonism to the founding purpose of our country. That is what is referred to as government tyranny.
Tyranny, as opposed to constitutionally-limited government, is the result of government abusing and unconstitutionally expanding their authority and imposing such oppressive or arbitrary restrictions on individual liberty. Tyranny is defined as “cruel and oppressive government or rule,” or “cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.” Thomas Jefferson defined it this way: Tyranny is when the government believes it can enact laws and policies legally without regard that they be illegal for the citizenry.
What can citizens do if the government, in general, fails to protect our inalienable and civil rights according to the Declaration of Independence and social contract theory and instead, evinces a desire to violate and prohibit their free exercise? John Locke, an enlightenment philosopher, championed this new government theory and authored his Two Treatises of Government, which provided the foundation for Jefferson’s magnificent Declaration less than 100 years later. Jefferson explained, as according to Locke that if a sovereign violated these rights, the social contract was broken, and the people had the right to revolt and establish a new government.
And in fact, Jefferson wrote as much in the Declaration, in paragraph two: “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” (Declaration of Independence – NOT an outdated or racist founding document)
He also wrote: “The Constitution of the United States and 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.” And in another letter: “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our Will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law because law is often but the tyrant’s will and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”
James Monroe wrote: “Of the Liberty of conscience in matters of religious faith, of speech and of the press, of the trial by jury of the vicinage of civil and criminal cases, of the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus, of the right to keep and bear arms… If these rights are well-defined and secured against encroachment (as articulated in the US Constitution and state constitutions), it is IMPOSSIBLE that government should ever degenerate into tyranny.”
Finally, former US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote: “The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
Fidelity and loyalty to the US Constitution is so important, that an oath is taken by the President of the United States, the representatives in the US Congress, the federal judges, other federal employees, and even state government employees to “uphold, defend, protect, support, and preserve the Constitution of the United States.” (Note that oaths include a variation of such terms).
Every fourth year, on January 20, Inauguration Day, the vice-president-elect is sworn in first, and repeats the same oath of office, in use since 1884, as senators, representatives, and other federal employees: “I _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
Around noon, the president-elect recites the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Notice that the oath for all federal and state officials demands and requires that each “support, preserve, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Everyone in this country is required to attend school during the formative ages – 5 through 18 or 19. English, grammar, and reading are essential core subjects and so the definitions to the following terms should be crystal clear, and most especially to those serving as representatives in government on our behalf:
Uphold – to maintain, make no illegal or material changes (so as not to alter the meaning, intent, substance, or integrity of something)
Defend – to resist an attack made on something; to protect from harm, danger, or transformation
Protect – to keep safe from harm or injury. To preserve or guarantee by means of formal or legal measures
Support – to hold up, to make sure something remains functional and meaningful
Preserve – to maintain something in its original, existing, and intended state
On May 14 of this year, a deadly mass shooting killed 10 innocent persons at a TOPS supermarket in Buffalo, NY and then ten days later, on May 24, the horrific shooting at Robbs Elementary School in Uvalde occurred, killing 17 children and 2 teachers. The call from citizens concerned over the rise in school shootings invigorated Democrats to resume their agenda of gun control.
And so, on June 8, The Democrats in the US House of Representatives, with some willing Republicans, passed a wide-ranging gun control package, 223-204 (federal “Red Flag laws”) in response to the aforementioned mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde. Hopefully, but not certainly, the proposals will have almost no chance of being approved by the Senate and being signed into law by President Biden. The US Senate would need at least 10 Republican Senators to join with the Democrats. Unfortunately, at this point (June 14), there appears to be ten Rinos who would be so willing to do so:
Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) – (202) 224-5721
Richard Burr (R-NC) – (202) 224- 3154
Bill Cassidy (R-LA) – (202) 224-5824
Susan Collins (R-MA) – (202) 224-2523
John Corwyn (R-TX) – (202) 224-2934
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) – (202) 224-5972
Rob Portman (R-Ohio) – (202) 224-3353
Mitt Romney (R-UT) – (202) 224-5251
Patrick Toomey (R-VA) – (202) 224-4254
I urge all those who support and cherish (and depend upon) the rights recognized by the Second Amendment to contact these so-called Republican US Senators.
The bill, a package of eight bills (federal “Red Flag Laws”), in essence, would allow federal courts to temporarily remove a firearm from an individual who is adjudged to pose a threat to themselves or others (the general definition of a “red flag law.” These bills would raise the age limit for buying a semi-automatic rifle, prohibit the sale of ammunition magazines with a capacity of more than 15 rounds, and would build on executive actions banning fast-action “bump stock” devices and “ghost guns” that are assembled without serial numbers. The House bills also include incentives designed to increase the use of safe gun storage devices and creates penalties for violating safe storage requirements, providing for a fine and imprisonment of up to five years if a gun is not properly stored and is subsequently used by a minor to injure or kill themselves or another individual.
Rep. Jim Jordan explains: “The answer is not to destroy the second amendment, but that is exactly where the Democrats want to go.”
Republicans have noted that a US appeals court ruling last month found California’s ban on the sale of semiautomatic weapons to adults under 21 was unconstitutional. “This is unconstitutional and it’s immoral. Why is it immoral? Because we’re telling 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds to register for the draft. You can go die for your country. We expect you to defend us, but we’re not going to give you the tools to defend yourself and your family,” said Thomas Massie of Kentucky.
The legislation passed by a mostly party-line vote of 223-204 (only one Democrat voted against the package). As an aside, there are 19 states, along with the District of Columbia which have such “Red Flag” laws: Washington, Nevada, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois, Indiana, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, and Florida.
Do Guns Kill, or do People Kill? That is the question. Another question is this: Will more federal regulation work; will they prevent such horrendous and senseless killings?
“Guns Don’t kill; People Kill.” People with evil intent, committed to getting a firearm and succeeding in doing so, are the problem. Criminals and killers are who they are because they ignore laws. They find ways around the law. There are always ways for criminals and killers to get guns. Laws can never stop them. They and their evil heart use guns to kill. Good people, trained in firearm safety and committed to the rightful purpose of keeping and bearing arms for their self-protection and the protection of those unable to do so, are the ones who use guns to kill the bad guys. They are the ones that stop the violence. It is not the gun’s fault; it is not the fault of an “outdated” Second Amendment. It is the lack of decency in society, the fault of a culture that minimizes the role of the nuclear family, a general acceptance of crime, the rise of racism, the rise of uncontrolled illegal immigration, an out-of-control welfare system that rewards broken families, and the lack of religion or morality in schools and the vilification of religion generally. In the past decades, the results of all these changes in our society have translated into an increase in societal violence, with the most egregious being school shootings. This is what the statistics show, and here are those statistics:
For each decade, the numbers presented below represent (a) All Combined School Shootings; (b) Adolescent Shootings; (c) Adult Shootings; (d) All Combined Deaths; (e) Students Killed; (f) Adults Killed:
1940’s: (a) 1 (b) 0 (c) 1 (d) 5 (e) 0 (f) 5
1950’s: (a) 0 (b) 0 (c) 0 (d) 0 (e) 0 (f) 0
1960’s: (a) 0 (b) 0 (c) 0 (d) 0 (e) 0 (f) 0
1970’s: (a) 1 (b) 1 (c) 0 (d) 2 (e) 0 (f) 2
1980’s: (a) 7 (b) 2 (c) 5 (d) 12 (e) 10 (f) 2
1990’s: (a) 13 (b) 10 (c) 3 (d) 36 (e) 29 (f) 7
2000’s: (a) 5 (b) 4 (c) 1 (d) 14 (e) 12 (f) 42
2010’a: (a) 8 (b) 6 (c) 2 (d) 51 (e) 42 (f) 9
So far, just in the past two years, 2021 and 2022, there have been 27 school shootings – Uvalde, TX marking the 27th such shooting, where 19 elementary-age children and 2 teachers were killed, and which came only 10 days after a deadly shooting at a TOPS supermarket in Buffalo, NY which senselessly claimed the lives of 10 people.
Before going further, it should be pointed out that prior to the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case (2008, written by Justice Antonin Scalia) and the McDonald v. Chicago case (2010, written by Justice Samuel Alito), the only case in which the US Supreme Court addressed the meaning of the Second Amendment was that of United States v. Miller (1939) in which, in a very limited ruling, the justices concluded that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off double-barrel shotgun. Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice James Clark McReynolds reasoned that because possessing a sawed-off double barrel shotgun does not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of such an instrument. The cases of Heller and McDonald reversed that interpretation and we now have our historic meaning restored – the second amendment confers actually two rights – the right of an individual to keep and bear arms for personal protection and security and the right of protection and security by an armed militia.
With the Heller and McDonald cases, the Supreme Court reiterated and emphasized strongly that “the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense” and that “individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”
The University of Canterbury writes:
“For many people, the gun is a potent symbol of all that is wrong with the American culture. It is considered to represent aggression, violence, male dominance, sexual frustration and a host of other behaviour that is abhorrent in a civilized society. However, for other Americans, the very same gun symbolizes all that is right, independence and self-sufficiency, outdoorsmanship, and the ability to protect oneself and one’s family in an increasingly dangerous world. To these members of ‘the gun culture’, a firearm is the virtual embodiment of much loved traditional American values. Inevitably these two highly divergent viewpoints leave little room for agreement or even constructive debate.
This study considers the arguments put forward by the National Rifle Association of America (the NRA), an organization whose views are seldom articulated, although they are often regarded as the only formidable obstacle that stands before the goal of rational gun control. Clearly something must be done to counter rising crime and violence, yet it is the contention of this study that gun control, no matter how attractive such legislation may initially appear, is simply not the real answer within the American context.”
According to the NRA back in 1994, the organization defended the Second Amendment’s grant of human rights as follows (Remember, this was a time when Miller was the leading Supreme Court case on the subject):
NRA Defense of the Second Amendment
Obviously, the NRA emphatically rejects the Supreme Court’s determination that the Second Amendment ‘right’ of the people to keep and bear arms in merely a collective right which refers to the people only as a common body (See Miller). This, claims the NRA, is unconstitutional. The restrictive interpretation by the Court is regarded by the NRA as spelling dire peril for all of the other rights guaranteed by the constitution. For example, a letter to the editor in the June 1991 issue of the NRA’s American Rifleman lamented: ‘The First Amendment is our highest expression of democracy of the intellect and the spirit. The Second Amendment is the highest expression of the physical and the material foundation of our democracy. The First without the Second would reduce democracy to little more than a ghost haunting reality and praying that it will
not be exorcised by the natural forces of bureaucracy, greed, power, and corruption. History gives that ghost
On the basis of such fears and given the significant number of important court decisions that were going against them, in 1978 the NRA Board of Directors established the Firearms Civil Rights Legal Defense Fund (FCRLDF), a powerful, nonprofit organization created specifically for the purpose of providing assistance in the form of legal advice and financial aid to individuals and groups in order to wage precedent-setting legal battles in defense of the Second Amendment and in favor of gun owners. The Fund also provides sponsorship and research grants for legal research and educational programs in a variety of gun-related areas. In order to finance its efforts, the FCRLDF, like numerous anti-gun organizations, has been awarded tax-exempt status and all donations made to the Fund are tax-deductible for federal tax purposes. However, this also means that the Fund
must be financially supported solely by contributions specifically made by concerned individuals and organizations.”
Despite the NRA’s fears, and even despite several important court decisions which have gone against them, in reality there is very little chance that the Second Amendment will ever be repealed, given the strong historical connection to the right to keep and bear arms enshrined in the English Bill of Rights of 1689, as well as Militia Laws, inherited from our mother country, Great Britain, and the overwhelming support of American patriots.
While the NRA has continued to maintain a deep and abiding fear that recent anti-gun forces and outraged citizens over the rising number of school shootings could successfully push for the Second Amendment to be repealed, they fought hard to push for a traditional, historic interpretation of the Second Amendment and the liberalization of gun laws. The American legacy of firearms, and the right of the people to keep and bear firearms for self-protection and protection of their land (militias) has resulted in countries like Japan deciding not to invade the US homeland in WWII and Mexico not invading the US as well.
Charleton Heston said it best as the president of the NRA (National Rifle Association) – “You can take my gun when you pry it away from my cold dead hands.”
According to The John Birch Society, the Deep State’s war on the gun rights of Americans, especially now in response to the recent deadly mass shootings, has nothing to do with public safety but and everything to do with disarming victims so they can be more effectively oppressed. This is the conclusion and warning given by Alex Newman, a columnist with the John Birch’s The New American magazine. In fact, data and common sense both show that disarming law-abiding citizens worsens public safety, allowing criminals free rein.
A podcast from the John Birch Society, by Mr. Newman (titled “Behind the Deep State”), is available at this link – https://thenewamerican.com/?powerpress_pinw=222452-podcast
We the People MUST NOT allow for the erosion of the Second Amendment – both its meaning and intent and its vital role in our lives and ultimately for the protection of all our freedoms and liberties. We the People MUST NOT allow a government gun grab.
So, what can we do, as American patriots and concerned citizens, to resist and refuse to enforce such federal bills?
First, let’s review our US Constitution, our US Bill of Rights, and our state constitutions.
As codified in law with the 2nd Amendment, the People did not delegate the power to regulate or control the ownership of firearms to the federal government. “The right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” And, as the 10th Amendment makes clear: “All powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the States or to the People themselves.” (Madison’s The Federalist Essay No. 45 goes into great detail about the division of power and especially the States’ reserved powers). The Tenth Amendment is actually a restatement of our essentially and critical form of government – federalism, a federation of sovereign states, each reserving their historic and traditional sovereign powers but delegating common authority to the federal government for common functions and mutual benefit),
State legislation to nullify federal gun laws or regulations focus on these basic and essential principles and propose to enact state law that bans the federal government and its officials within state jurisdiction from effectively enacting and enforcing such regulations. Enforcing an unconstitutional, overbroad and abusive federal law on a free people is the very definition of tyranny.
So, the first remedy is to contact all the traitorous Rino US Senators and demand that they NOT vote for the House “Red Flag laws.”
I. CONTACT THE FOLLOWING RINO US SENATORS.
I urge everyone who supports and wishes to defend and preserve the Second Amendment to contact the following so-called Republican Senators. Their office phone numbers are provided:
Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) – (202) 224-5721
Richard Burr (R-NC) – (202) 224- 3154
Bill Cassidy (R-LA) – (202) 224-5824
Susan Collins (R-MA) – (202) 224-2523
John Corwyn (R-TX) – (202) 224-2934
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) – (202) 224-5972
Rob Portman (R-Ohio) – (202) 224-3353
Mitt Romney (R-UT) – (202) 224-5251
Patrick Toomey (R-VA) – (202) 224-4254
II. STATE NULLIFICATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL FEDERAL LAW:
The second remedy is State Nullification, which Thomas Jefferson termed “the rightful remedy.”
A model State Sovereignty Tenth Amendment Resolution for the independent States has be en proposed by the Tenth Amendment Center. Every citizen should submit this to their state legislators and request that they take the issue up with the legislature, and also take up the issue of federal enforcement of red flag laws with their local sheriff. Sheriffs are the highest-ranking law-enforcement official and closest to the people. It they believe a law to be unconstitutional, arbitrary, or abusive, they have the discretion to refuse to enforce it.
MODEL TENTH AMENDMENT RESOLUTION:
The following is a sample 10th Amendment House Concurrent Resolution approved by the Tenth Amendment Center. To all constitutional activists and concerned patriots, I encourage you to send this to your state senators and representatives and ask them to introduce this resolution in your state legislature.
A RESOLUTION affirming the sovereignty of the People of the State of _________.
WHEREAS, in the American system, sovereignty is defined as final authority, and the People, not government, are sovereign; and
WHEREAS, the people of the State of __________ are not united with the People of the other forty-nine states that comprise the United States of America on a principle of unlimited submission to their federal government; and
WHEREAS, all power not delegated by the people to government is retained; and
WHEREAS, the People of the several States comprising the United States of America created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;” and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States, and also that which is necessary and proper to carry into execution those enumerated powers; with the rest being left to state governments or the people themselves; and
WHEREAS, powers, too numerous to list for the purposes of this resolution, have been exercised, past and present, by federal administrations, under the leadership of both Democrats and Republicans, which infringe on the sovereignty of the people of this state, and may further violate the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, when powers are assumed by the federal government which have not been delegated to it by the People, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy; that without this remedy, the People of this State would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whoever might exercise this right of judgment for them.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE _____ OF THE _______ GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ______, WITH THE SENATE
CONCURRING, that we hereby affirm the sovereignty of the People of the State of _______ under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise delegated to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and, be it further
RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall serve as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist any and all activities outside the scope of their constitutionally-delegated powers; and, it be further
RESOLVED, that a committee of conference be appointed by this legislature, which shall have as its charge to recommend and propose legislation which would have the effect of nullifying specific federal laws and regulations which are outside the scope of the powers delegated by the People to the federal government in the Constitution; and, be it further
RESOLVED, that a committee of correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship as currently exists; that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly those enumerated in the Constitution of the United States, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States; and, be it further
RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker and the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and to each member of this State’s Congressional delegation with the request that this resolution be officially entered in the Congressional Record as a memorial to the Congress of the United States of America.
III. INDIVDUAL NULLIFCATION OF UNCONSTITUTION FEDERAL LAW.
The third Remedy is Individual Nullification. Michael Boldin, founder and director of the Tenth Amendment Center explains in his article (and podcast) of June 8, 2022 four steps to this remedy:
1. The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right. Not a gift from government. It’s not something we get FROM the constitution or the 2nd Amendment. We have this right from our Creator, at birth. This is essential. Because as soon as we take a position that we have “2nd Amendment Rights” rather than a natural right to keep and bear arms, then the people with power – will ALWAYS end up using that power to define the limits of their own power. (as long as the people keep letting them, that is)
2. We the people have to be willing to exercise our rights whether the government wants us to or not. James Otis put it this way: “There is nothing that will destroy liberty more than a prevailing opinion that it is better to tamely submit than nobly assert and vindicate our privileges.” And Thomas Jefferson might have the best reminder on this: “A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as a gift of their chief magistrate”
3. “Refuse to cooperate with officers of the Federal Government.” That was James Madison’s strategy for states and individuals to keep the feds in check without relying on the federal government to magically limit its own power. When the federal government assumes powers not delegated by the US Constitution, it is necessarily taking power and rights from other sovereigns, whether it be the States or We the People. The natural depositories of those rightful powers and rights have the right and the duty to protect them and re-assert them. We the People don’t have to wait for the State to act on our behalf.
However, we’ve seen a small handful of states take this essential step of not complying with unconstitutional federal gun laws. Missouri is the gold standard. Arizona is silver, and Montana takes the bronze. Almost every other state or local “2nd Amendment Sanctuary” creates a sanctuary for nothing.
By the way, the federal government has tried to keep guns out of the hands of individuals who pose a safety threat to themselves and others primarily with its federal firearms registry, and it has not worked to prevent the terrible and astounding rise in gun violence in our society.
4. Get rid of state laws restricting the right to keep and bear arms.Whether it’s state prohibitions that mirror federal ones (like suppressors or bump stocks), We the People MUST remove permit requirements, reciprocity and everything in between.
For more information and details on this option, listen to Michael Boldin’s podcast of June 8 at this link –
IV. BUY AS MANY GUNS & AS MUCH AMMUNITION AS YOU CAN. DEFEND YOURSELF AND THOSE WHO ARE UNABLE TO DO SO
Defy and resist federal gun control regulation by buying as many guns and as much ammunition as you can. There may well come a time when you feel your life and safety are at grave risk, as well as the life and safety of others. Exercise a robust belief in the Second Amendment. The government – NO government – has the right to deny you this fundamental right.
V. INCLUDE MEANINGFUL SAFETY MEASURES AT SCHOOLS
If there is an increase in school shootings, the solution is not to ban guns from good people but rather to tighten security at local schools and universities. There are several viable options, such as:
(1) Keep all school doors and windows locked during the day, while students and teachers are in the facility. Keep classroom doors locked during the day, while classes are in session.
(2) Use only one main door for parents and visitors to enter the school and employ metal detectors.
(3) Allow teachers, administrators, coaches, and school custodians to keep and carry firearms in their classrooms and offices, as well as be officially trained.
(4) Request that veterans volunteer their time to provide school safety, or provide financial resources or other incentives in order to hire them or retired police officers or security officers.
These sensible measures make a whole lot more sense than violating and burdening the rights of American citizens in their fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
In an address to the annual meeting of the Phoenix Chamber of Commerce on March 30, 1961, California Governor Ronald Reagan spoke this prophetic words: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
In his first gubernatorial inauguration address of January 5, 1967, he repeated the same sentiment: “Perhaps you and I have lived too long with this miracle of Liberty to properly be appreciative. Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. And those in world history who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.
Knowing this, it’s hard to explain those among us who even today would question the people’s capacity for self- government. I’ve often wondered if they will answer, those who subscribe to that philosophy: if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? Using the temporary authority granted by the people, in increasing number lately at all levels of government, have sought control even of the means of production as if they could do this without eventually controlling those who produce. And always they explain this as necessary to the people’s welfare. ‘The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principle upon which it was founded.’ This was written in 1748, and it’s as true today as it was then.”
Freedom requires the action and commitment of people who want to live a life of liberty. Only they can preserve it.
Michael Boldin, “Essential Strategy: 4 Steps to Nullify Federal Gun Control,” Tenth Amendment Center, June 8, 2022. Referenced at: https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2022/01/4-essential-steps-to-nullify-federal-gun-control/
Michael Bolding, “Path to Liberty” (podcast), Tenth Amendment Center, January 14, 2022. Referenced at: https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2022/01/4-essential-steps-to-nullify-federal-gun-control/
The Oath of Office – https://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Oath-of-Office/#:~:text=It%20reads%3A%20%E2%80%9CI%2C%20AB,of%20evasion%2C%20and%20that%20I
C. D. Fletcher, “Guns Don’t Kill, People Do: The NRA’S Case Against Gun Control,” University of Canterbury, 1994. Referenced at: file:///C:/Users/Diane%20Rufino%20Surface/Downloads/Fletcher_thesis_1994.pdf
School Shootings – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Number-of-mass-school-shootings-and-deaths-from-1940-early-2018_fig2_324617091
The Guardian, “US House Passes Gun Control Bill, June 9, 2022. Referenced at: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/09/us-house-passes-gun-control-bill-faces-defeat-senate
Alex Newman, “Behind the Deep State” (podcase), The John Birch Society. Referenced at: https://thenewamerican.com/?powerpress_pinw=222452-podcast
Alex Newman, “The Plot Against Guns is Not About Safety But Tyranny,” The New American, June 13, 2022. Referenced at: https://thenewamerican.com/plot-against-guns-is-not-about-safety-but-tyranny/?mc_cid=f9b2612efc&mc_eid=8d4ce7a42a
The Tenth Amendment Center, “A Proposed Model State Sovereignty 10th Amendment Resolution” – https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/10th-amendment-resolution/
State Red Flag Laws, Pew Research – https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2021/10/05/red-flag-laws-are-saving-lives-they-could-save-more
California Governor Ronald Reagan’s First Inaugural Address – https://governors.library.ca.gov/addresses/33-Reagan01.html