The Armed Citizen Corner: Why the 2nd Amendment is Worth Protecting

POPL

By Hammerhead

In a recent blog post in the Times of IsraelRon Kampeas, the Washington Bureau Chief for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, writes about how Israel stays so well armed and protected as a country but yet has no Second Amendment or gun violence to speak of. The reason? Only 4% of the weapons in Israel are owned by Civilians. That means 96% of the weapons in Israel are Issued to Military Personnel. Now at first this may seem like a disproportionate ratio of the population, but what the author neglects to tell you in this article is that Israel has MANDATORY 2 year Military Service period for ALL 18 year olds, thus you basically have a revolving door of young people constantly replenishing  the military ranks.

The author goes on to say that one of the reasons for such little gun violence in Israel is that all of the armed military personnel are answerable “to the Military Tribunal” for their actions while armed and that they have had training to know how to handle their weapons and respond to a crisis situation. He goes on to say that when 96% of the people who own weapons in your country fit in this category, it is a good thing and further expresses the pompous ideal that the United States would do well to copy this model because of our record with gun violence.

Oh Boy, where do I start on this one!

First off, The Second Amendment was created so that CIVILIANS, not MILITARY PERSONNEL could protect themselves from their OWN GOVERNMENT. Our forefathers were well aware that a tyrant most likely would take hold of the military very early on and thus use it as his “muscle” (much like Hitler did in Germany  beginning in 1933) so it is very important that the civilian population be as EQUALLY ARMED as the Military in the most practical respects, namely, small arms and training (the militia). This is one of the many unique “Checks and Balances” within the framework of the American Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Secondly, it seems the author wants to imply from the heavily biased and pompous Bloomberg article he cites that in Israel “necessity” drives the need for Israeli civilians to own firearms (because Israel is so dangerous due to terrorist attacks), while in America is appears that people just want to “exercise” their rights” when it comes to owning firearms (for the hell of it I suppose, not because we too have had some of the worst terrorist attacks in the world). This argument is actually self-defeating. If “necessity” is what truly drives firearm ownership in Israel and there have been to date over 150 stabbing attacks on Israel military and civilians by Palestinian Terrorist, some of them fatal, then why are not more civilians armed? Because the people applying for the licenses were not in the military and you cannot trust them not to shoot themselves or each other? I would argue that in America, necessity also drives firearm ownership. Why? Because people do NOT want to be Victims, just like In Israel I would Imagine. The difference being in America, owning a Firearm is a Right AND a Privilege and it was decided long ago that it was a Right the State could not take away because of some STATE defined “necessity”. Bottom line, in America, the Right to PROTECT ONESELF is INNATE and GOD GIVEN, NOT STATE GIVEN. 

The underlying problem here is a gross misunderstanding of True American Democracy versus the ideal of Socialism and a Military State in my opinion. To prove my point I pose this question.

If 96% of the weapons owned in Israel are owned by Military personnel, what is to stop some General in the Military from staging a coup and taking over your Country? The Civilians?  They only have 4% of the guns. The Government? Accordingly, any armed personnel within the govt would most likely fall within the framework of the Military, so that is also a big NO. As best as I can tell, Israel has had no real “checks and balances” to keep it from becoming a  Military State, which by all intensive purposes, it already is.

The problem is really two-fold in Israel:  Too Much Power has been put in the hands of one group (Military) And TOO MUCH FAITH has been placed in the Military and Police (which by percentage are the largest force that are armed) to “protect” Civilians. The author by and large is pushing the socialist, liberal ideal of “The State knows what is Best For ALL OF US  which is  exactly where AMERICA is headed with this current round of gun control “hysteria” that has emerged since the Orlando shooting.

So ultimately this is why the American Second Amendment is so precious to any FREEDOM Loving American and must be KEPT INTACT and PROTECTED, It guarantees that no one group, not the Government, Not the Military and Not the Police have too much POWER. It keep the phrase “A Government Of the People, By The People and For The People” Honest and True.

Lastly, I want to address the authors ridiculous implication that civilians who are armed in the United States with Concealed or Open Carry Permits do not have “enough” training. Here is a direct quote from the article that I take issue with the most:

“The training Israeli soldiers receive also helps keep gun violence down. When Gabby Giffords, the Jewish congresswoman from Arizona, was shot in 2011, an armed passerby recalled later to his own horror that he nearly opened fire on the folks who were restraining the gunman.”

Firstly, the author is deceptively using an incident that never PHYSICALLY Happened. Notice the word “nearly” in bold. So by the author’s rationale here, because some guy who was armed at the Gabby Gifford rally (where she was shot by a mentally ill man) “nearly” opened fire on a group of guys restraining the actual gunmen, that makes armed Americans “untrained” with firearms? Huh? Did we all fall down a rabbit hole here?

How about instead of dealing in “Nearly’s” we deal in some ABSOLUTES that show a civilian armed with a firearm more times than not will STOP the BAD GUY and SAVE INNOCENT LIVES. Like this incident that happened early this year, where a Concealed Carry Permit Holder stops the Robbery of a Barber Shop.

Why is the Second Amendment Worth protecting? Because it is a foundational cornerstone of American Democracy that ensures no ONE group has too much power. The Communist leader Mao said it best when he said “Political Power Grows out the BARREL of a gun.” An Armed People is a People that retains POWER to not be pushed around and to be self-sufficient when it comes to their own personal security.

To put it simply, the Second Amendment is a “guarantor” of ALL the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. When it falls, America and this Experiment called Democracy will most assuredly fall also.

FF1

Stay Alert, Stay Armed and Stay Dangerous!

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “The Armed Citizen Corner: Why the 2nd Amendment is Worth Protecting

  1. Reblogged this on The way I see things … and commented:
    “… protecting? Because it is a foundational cornerstone of American Democracy that ensures no ONE group has too much power. The Communist leader Mao said it best when he said “Political Power Grows out the BARREL of a gun.” An Armed People is a People that retains POWER to not be pushed around and to be self-sufficient when it comes to their own personal security.

    To put it simply, the Second Amendment is a “guarantor” of ALL the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. When it falls, America and this Experiment called Democracy will most assuredly fall also.”

    • Thanks for you guys support…we ALL gotta stand strong against this attack on our basic liberties if we are ALL going to survive the next 5 years.

      • There has been a lot of lies and non-sense spread around by the libs about semi-auto weapons like the AR-15 or AK-47. I would urge you to dismiss the “evil” black rifle rhetoric non-sense and look at it for what it is…a Semi-Automatic rifle BASED on the military design. It is NOT an “Automatic”, it is NOT a “Machine Gun” it is semi-auto rifle with a high capacity magazine. Now as far as the “need” for one, if you mean self-defense, they are a great choice..why? Because ultimately, the reason for the 2nd Amendment is that citizens are EQUALLY armed as their Govt and Military. I also like AR’s for hunting purposes, (AR-10’s) mainly predator hunting (hogs, coyotes) they are a great multi-use gun.

        There is also the point that citizens in the United States should not have to define WHY they need ANY gun (like they do in Israel for example) If you want a certain gun, go buy it, it is that simple, it is your right! Plus, the way things are going politically you can look at owning AR’s and AK’s as an investment opportunity..they could become VERY valuable soon! That is my 2 cents. I would be glad to go in more detail in an email if you like, just let me know.

      • Thank you for the facts! The NEED for us to have them on the homestead appears to be the largest “issue” with my oldest son — we would all need training/practice and YES the FUTURE is my concern as soon the ability to purchase may not be possible. Thank you again for your time.

      • Yeah Lisa I think you Seriously need to consider arming up. Starting with a solid, reliable Handgun and then an AR or other Semi-Auto type rifle (AK, FAL, etc.) and lastly a 20 gauge or 12 ga Shotgun such as a Remington 870.

        As far as training, there are plenty of worthwhile trainers in your area that could get you up to speed, and most of the good trainers travel and have classes near you. The Manual of Arms for a fighting rifle is very important to drill on…loading, clearing malfunctions, etc.

Comments are closed.