Your 2A Rights are in danger!
The following is a copy of a letter I sent to many U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives. Our rights are constantly under attack from the left leaning politicians. We have to let our elected officials know how we feel about our 2A rights.
_______________________________________________________________________________
America is and always has been a unique country. We are the last experiment for true freedom. As a soldier I was able to travel to many other countries and observe how governments force their citizens into submission. The liberties that Americans enjoy are not present in other countries. In many countries you can be prosecuted for merely speaking negatively about the government or saying something that may be an unpopular opinion. Some liberties such as the right to assemble peacefully, speak freely and the right to bear arms have been used to keep the government in check.
The recent gun control announcements from the Biden administration have raised concerns among many Americans. Various concepts are being emphasized for public safety or to stop crime. The fact is that these new measures would only affect law abiding citizens if enacted. To put it simply the proposals recently introduced show blatant disrespect for the American people and the United States Constitution. We the People believe the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution is clear.
“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.”
Americans have been using firearms in this country for a host of reasons which include recreation, self-protection, hunting, collecting, competition, and exercising our constitutional right.
The leftist agenda is to ultimately disarm the American citizens. Many politicians know that it would be too obvious to attack firearms directly therefore they attempt to create backdoor laws “for our safety”. In some instances, law makers attempt to attack firearm accessories or components to stop the use of certain firearms. The very same politicians and some citizens think that the 2nd Amendment only applies to muskets and maybe hunting rifles. However, the 2A was not written to protect the right of people to hunt. Also, the second amendment does not give the right to bear arms to the American people. The Second Amendment, just like the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, restricts the Federal Government from taking rights from Americans.
While restricting the power of the federal government, the second amendment ensures the people of this country always have the ability to protect themselves from a potentially tyrannical government. The second amendment was written shortly after our ancestors fought and won a war against a tyrannical monarch. The founders wanted to ensure that future Americans were well equipped to do the same thing in the future. Many people think that idea is laughable. We see many examples worldwide where seemingly weak people fight against an invader and win. These examples include Vietnam and Afghanistan. The firearm is a great tool and has been called the “great equalizer”. This is true for citizens fighting an overreaching government or a private citizen defending themselves from a violent attack.
One common argument coming from the gun control advocates is the “militia” refers to the Army Reserves or National Guard. On the contrary, the militia is made up of The People, otherwise the authors of the document would have said the Militia has the right to bear arms. The best way to keep society free from an overreaching government is allowing the citizens the ability to defend themselves. George Mason was quoted as saying “I ask, Sir, who is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials”.
The second amendment was not specific as to what firearms citizens should be allowed to own for a particularly good reason. The founding fathers knew that technology was going to advance. The Puckle Gun and Pepper Box revolvers are examples of more advanced guns than muskets. Additionally, James Madison wrote a letter of “Marque and Reprisal”. In that letter he authorized private citizens to own cannons for their merchant ships to protect against piracy. For one to say that the second amendment is limited to muskets would have to be followed by saying the first amendment is limited to the writings done by a quill pen.
While the second amendment protects our rights to keep and bear arms, it is a profoundly serious responsibility to take on. Many people feel the need to bear arms to protect themselves and their family. Many states have enacted laws that force citizens to go through training to purchase and carry a defensive firearm. As a trainer, I do advocate for people to seek out training, I also understand that forcing requirements on a right makes it a privilege. Some less fortunate people that need a firearm to protect themselves may not have the time or money to attend classes. This further restricts certain groups of people from purchasing firearms. Obviously, we do not want uneducated people running around with guns, but this is still a version of infringement on the second amendment.
The many changes that were recently proposed by the Biden administration are not new. These ideas have been suggested and tried many times before. Some of these ideas include magazine capacity restrictions, AR-15 rifle bans, removing liability protections from gun manufacturers and Red Flag Law models. None of these ideas would stop crime or make the American people safer.
The magazine capacity restrictions come with no true evidence as to what “magic” number would be helpful to strop crime. It is laughable to think that criminals would abide by the magazine ban in the first place. Yet again, the only ones profoundly affected would be law-abiding citizens.
The AR-15 platform is one of the most popular sporting rifles in the U.S. today. It is an extremely easy to use platform and can be used for self-defense, recreation, and hunting in some states. This platform is not typically used by criminals because it is not easily concealed. Why would a sound-minded person want to ban a rifle that can be used by the public for self-protection purposes? The answer is that the ban is not for added safety, it is for added control by the government.
Removing liability protections from gun manufacturers is completely illogical. It is not the fault of a manufacturing company if a person uses a product in a criminal act. That would bankrupt most manufacturers and companies that rely on the firearm industry. If that is a serious consideration, Congress would need to consider doing the same the automobile manufacturers for the same reasons.
Gun control advocates are constantly saying they want “common sense” gun laws to stop crime or make America safer. The main problem with that is that many anti-gun law makers are uneducated about basic firearm concepts. It is difficult to make laws regarding ideas that a person has little to no knowledge thereof. Often, anti-firearm law makers try to tell the public that there are loopholes in the current laws such as online sales and purchases from gun shows. These are both falsehoods. Anyone purchasing a firearm online must have that firearm sent to a licensed dealer to take procession of their purchase. Any firearms dealer (FFL) that sets up a booth at a gun show must do a background check on the buyer(s). If they choose not to, they are violating current laws and there is no need to add more the complicated system of firearm related laws.
The left leaning politicians and media often fabricate terms to instill fear in other uneducated people. Those terms include but are not limited to “weapons of war”, “ghost guns” and “assault weapons”. These terms are typically used by those that have limited knowledge of firearms concepts to sound educated. When pro-gun advocates engage in civil discourse, we typically demand that proper terms and definitions are used. Some see this as arguing semantics, but it is important for those making laws understand exactly what they are trying to legislate. There are many examples on websites like Youtube.com that show anti-gun politicians making ridiculous comments and arguments about firearms. One of the most famous, uneducated, anti-gunner is President Joe Biden himself. He is famous for telling Americans to just buy a double-barreled shotgun and shoot indiscriminately to scare off any attackers. This idea violates many of the firearms safety rules. Another example of Biden’s lack of education was demonstrated during the recent press conference. He consistently referred to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) as the AFT.
The biggest threat to America’s gun rights recently came with the nomination of the ATF’s leader. David Chipman was Biden’s new choice as the leader of the ATF and he is no friend to the Second Amendment or the American people. The AFT itself is a huge hinderance to American’s right to bear arms. They are constantly making arbitrary laws and flip-flopping on their own legal decisions. The ATF is a law making and law enforcing agency. That fact should be extremely disturbing to freedom loving American’s. David Chipman is the same man that posed for picture atop the corpses of dead women and children in WACO Texas. He has no regard for American’s freedoms and is very against individuals owning firearms. David Chipman cannot be allowed to get confirmed or the firearms industry and American people will suffer dearly.
Another concern many people have is the ATF’s interest in banning “Ghost Guns”. This term is commonly used to describe firearm frames that are 80% complete and not serialized. These are legally purchased, and the end user will buy parts to finish the gun. Many people do not realize it is completely legal to make your own firearms. The catch is that those firearms cannot be sold. The Biden administration wants to use this concept to ultimately ban the sale of all gun parts because they could be used to make “ghost guns”. This would lead to everyday gun owners not being able to perform any customization on their firearms or repairing any broken parts. The ATF and media are using disingenuous statistics to drum up fear of these types of guns. It is being reported that a significant number of guns that are recovered after crimes are un-serialized. “Un-serialized” is the key word. They lump 80% lower builds and guns that have had their serial numbers removed together.
If law makers were truly worried about stopping crimes such as mass shootings, they would be more concerned with eliminating gun free zones. Those areas designated as “gun free” are the same places in which most mass shootings occur. Most mass shooters are not looking for a gun fight, they are looking for easy targets. Also, most crimes are committed with handguns and yet anti-gunners are constantly attacking the AR-15 style rifles. More gun laws do not correlate to less crime. We see the exact opposite in many large American cities. Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington DC have very restrictive gun laws and yet see a high level of violent crimes. The truth is that firearms are used to save lives constantly but are not publicized in the mainstream media because it does not follow the prescribed narrative. There are many examples of a righteous person using a firearm in defense of others. The gun in the hands of Stephen Willeford was nothing less than a God send. The Sutherland Springs Church Shooting was stopped when Mr. Willeford used an AR-15 in defense of the church attendees. There are many more examples, but we do not see them in the daily news.
What new laws could have stopped the Vegas shooting? What additional laws could have stopped the Sutherland Springs Church Shooting? The answer is no new laws could have stopped them. Those that have intent to cause harm will always find a way. Many people have been able to cause mass carnage with vehicles, homemade explosives, and airplanes. Restricting access to firearms will only reduce the ability of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves. Criminals will not scoff at new laws nor will they think twice about the consequences if they are set on committing crimes.
Criminals do not have to think of potential consequences of obtaining and using illegal firearms because the criminal justice system often drops those charges. The best way to stop violence and prevent future crimes would be to use the legal system to its full extent. We have a high number of gun laws already on the books. The criminal justice system fails when it comes to fully prosecuting those that violate the current laws. Many criminals that are caught with illegal firearms are often offered a plea deal in order speed up the process and avoid costly court proceedings. If the criminal justice system would prosecute criminals for firearm laws violations, we would send more criminals to prison and not allow them to commit future crimes against society. The government is not going after gangs, which use firearms to intimidate and eliminate competition. If gang violence were a target for the criminal justice system, we would see less violence and death in big cities.
One example of an extremely danger set of laws, Red Flag Laws, were also mentioned during the recent press conference. These types of laws would allow a friend, family member or law enforcement officer to file a petition with the court to confiscate a citizen’s firearms without a trial or even a formal charge against that person. This is a clear violation of a citizen’s right to Due Process. Divorce or marital separation could be able to strip citizens of their firearms and second amendment rights by merely making an unfounded claim. Due process is a valuable right that Americans have and should not be so easily overlooked. While these laws are being proposed to stop the mentally unfit from obtaining firearms, there are already laws in place to do exactly that. It is already illegal to purchase a firearm if a person is a felon, convicted domestic abuser or adjudicated mentally defective. Even though the Red Flag laws may be created with good intentions, they lay the pathway for firearm confiscation from citizens for absolutely no reason. Yet another way to disarm Americans and insert more governmental control.
As a firearms instructor and someone that works in the firearms retail industry, I view the second amendment with high importance. Within the last few years, we have seen many issues in this country that raise concerns for safety. 2020 saw a tremendous rise in gun sales, due to the political climate and societal issues. Many people that would have never considered buying a firearm flocked to gun stores nationwide. Riots, lockdowns, and overall uncertainty opened our citizen’s eyes as to the need to take their own protection seriously.
The right to bear arms is only second to the right to free speech, freedom of religion and the freedom of the press. Citizens having and knowing how to use those firearms is the only thing protecting our true freedom. Joe Biden and his left leaning followers cannot be allowed to win on these issues. If we ever allow our citizens to be disarmed it will only be matter of time before we lose other rights and we will not be able to defend them. “You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to fight your way out of it”.
Lastly, I hope you take this issue as seriously as I do. It is the job of an elected official to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, not create new laws to tighten the leash on the American citizenry. It is very hypocritical for some elected officials to advocate for disarming Americans while being surrounded and protected by those carrying guns. I will end by saying, as an American and a gun owner, I expect that no law shall be passed to further restrict the access to firearms.
