Skip to content

Guns are Not for Hunting

April 20, 2012

I don’t know who wrote this, not all of it.  I found it in my collection of unfinished essays and it does not sound completely familiar any longer.  Please let me know if you recognize the source, and I apologize for stealing your words if some of this is yours.

Here is “Guns are Not for Hunting”.


Guns were mentioned in the second amendment to the US constitution.  They were not mentioned for hunting.  They weren’t mentioned for sport or target shooting.  They were not mentioned to defend our homes from robbery.  Guns in civilian hands are there to protect us from government.  They always were.  The second amendment exists to protect the black man from the toxic collusion between the Klu Klux Klan and the corrupt sheriff.  Guns are there to protect the local ballot box from the corrupt local politician and his appointed deputies.  Guns are there to protect the recent immigrant from the gang of thugs who think he is the wrong color, votes the wrong way, and is walking home on the wrong side of the tracks.  The second amendment isn’t about deer hunting.  It never was.

Guns in civilian hands do more than protect the country from a foreign invasion.  Guns in civilian hands protect the sovereign citizen from his own government.  Firearms are the ultimate protection against a corrupt power, be it elected, appointed, or usurped.  They keep us talking to each other because the government is reluctant to use police power to enforce its will.  Look around the world and see what happens when that dialogue fails.  The failure is ugly, not orderly.  Tyranny is extremely orderly for the tyrant.  Not so much for the victims.

Weapons have always been demonized by the government in power, be it feudal Japan, India under British occupation, or by military or communist dictatorships.  Those are foreign examples.  We have the same history here in the United States with the antebellum south or our current administrations.  The sheriff has much less to do once armed citizens largely protected themselves.  Why, much of the government’s power and prestige would be gone!  Most of the government’s control would be gone once the population protects itself.  That sounds good to me if it works.

It is trickle down tyranny when government grows.  The sheriff is the supreme law enforcement officer of the land.  The State needs to control the Sheriff.  The Federal bureaucrats need to control the State.  They all want to control you and me.  It all comes down to us, and some people are a little harder to control than others.  Let me give you an example.

There was an NRA convention this month.  Some 74 thousand members traveled to Saint Louis, Missouri.  Think about that for a minute.  The NRA is a bunch of overweight, overmonied, overaged men from out of town.  They should be a robber’s dream come true, but they aren’t.  They are a criminal’s nightmare.  We can’t have it both ways.  On one hand, gun control advocates claim that guns are meaningless affectations or worse, that they are dangerous objects and should be removed from society because guns cause violence.  On the other hand, we laugh at the fact that not even a crazy shooter like Jared Lee Loughner would be crazy enough to try and shoot up an NRA convention.  Maybe a shopping center in Tucson, but not an NRA convention or a gun show.   We laugh at a thief who would try to rob these aging convention goers.  Laugh all you want, but violence of all kinds drops when the NRA comes to town.  So which is it?

Are NRA members crazy gun owners, or are they responsible and involved citizens?  Data shows that licensed concealed carry holders are more scrupulous about obeying the law than are sworn law enforcement officers.  The comparison isn’t even close when you look at the data.  Think of that the next time you’re in a convention city or at an airport and see an extra police presence.  Would it surprise you that the NRA is not really about hunting?

People who resist tyranny are willing to be uncomfortable.  They would rather stand painfully alone than live on their knees as subjects.  Yes, you will be ridiculed if you oppose the status quo.  You will be called radical and irrelevant if you question the existing government in even the smallest way.  Your ideas will be called unworkable unless they are modeled precisely after those bodies already in power.  Not everyone thinks that way.  Not all men are the same.

Not all governments are the same either.  Some states have vouchers for education.  Some towns contract out city services to carefully husband their tax dollars.  Some sheriffs encourage their citizens to protect themselves.  Some states are not out to build a tower of government where civil servants are our rulers.  Some states want a prosperous workforce and a vibrant civil society.  Thank them and the liberty-loving people who made them.

It isn’t about hunting.  It never was.

The battle of Lexington and Concord started on April 19, 1775 when the lawfully constituted government started the use of force against its citizens.  Today I am Robert the Libertarian.

Please rate, share and comment.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: