Originally Published 2013/02/11
Note: Conservatives often hurt their own causes by parroting the language and nomenclature of the left and especially when they pass on as fact information that simply is not true.
# # #
After the tragic Newtown, Connecticut shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden indicated that their administration would not only push for more federal gun control but may act unilaterally as well.
Because of this national tragedy many conservative organizations have been conducting polls about President Obama’s dangerous gun grabber agenda. In some cases these polls are simply a facade for fund raising purposes but others are sincere and geared to getting public opinion out to the media, back to elected officials and to low information voters.
However these polls often cause more problems than they solve because of their poor wording or possible blatant misinformation. Either way you can never help the cause of liberty let alone the low information voter make wiser decisions when embedding in their mind the falsehoods that permeate our society about he Constitution and Bill of Rights that so many of us have spent years trying to undo.
Let’s take a look at a real case in point.
Take these four questions from an actual conservative news web site:
1) Should the federal government regulate guns of any type?
[ ] Yes, it should
[ ] No, it should not
The question starts out “Should the federal government…” Should!(?) The question itself is not only incorrect the answers allow the person to find comfort in his own truth, in his own opinions. If we want truth to prevail we must not start off with false premises. In order to answer a legitimate question correctly you must start off with not only a legitimate question but some knowledge and understanding of what the question is talking about.
Shouldn’t we find out first if the federal government has the power and authority to do such things? The assumption of the question is very dangerous to the future of our republic. And oh so frustrating to hear from those who should know better. The fact that this to be coming from conservatives — defenders of the Constitution’s original intent — is baffling. This is astonishing to those of us who are students of American government and understand the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as it was written and intended.
The problem with these kinds of questions is their fundamental misunderstanding that the federal government has no power — no authority — to regulate firearms. Yet the questions themselves assume that it does and thus allows those with whom they have trust to believe that it does. This presumption is as dangerous as telling new teenage drivers that it’s okay to drive on the wrong side of the street at night as long as your lights are off. It’s not only unwise, it is deadly and it’s unlawful. The Second Amendment clearly prohibits those vested with power under the Constitution from “infringing” on our God-given right of the people to self defense, including the defense of their state.
The Second Amendment was an acknowledgment of a self evident truth that the people themselves have a duty — a God-given right — to resist tyranny, to defend the innocent, to seek justice. As colonel Samuel Colt’s slogan clearly conveys, “God created men equal, Sam Colt made them equal…” Sam Colt was the inventor of the revolver and his marketing slogan and self loading guns tamed the Wild West.
Let me put it in simpler language, the Second Amendment is the acknowledgment of the right to defend your life and your liberties to the death, to repel oppression, to hunt down political tyrants who harass and oppress and attempt to enslave or kill. It is to defend against those chipping away at our rights, taking our guns, stealing our ability to live free. It was not written to ensure target practice or the hunting ducks.
The second question on the poll said:
2) Should Congress ban semi-automatic weapons?
[ ] Yes, it should
[ ] No, it should not
Once again, Congress is prohibited from acting in any way when it comes to personal firearms no matter the characteristics of the weapon. Your state might want to regulate those with 50 mm towable canon’s but the federal government has no say so what-so-ever. You want a battle ship — pay for it, build it, it’s yours. As John Jay warned regarding properly interpreting the Constitution: “Silence and blank paper neither grant nor take away anything.” Great advice to an ignorant nation. Where the Constitution is silent, the government is silent and the Tenth Amendment reigns.
The third question on this poll asked:
3) If Congress does not act, should President Obama use an executive order to ban or strictly control the sale of semi-automatic weapons?
[ ] Yes, he should
[ ] No, he should not
The President of the United States has no authority under the Constitution to make law of any kind or infringe on the rights of the citizens of the United States in any way. To do so would make him a dictator and that would most assuredly lead to him or a future president becoming a tyrant over the people he was elected by and entrusted to serve.
The fourth question on this poll continues:
4) Do you agree that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right to own and bear guns without infringement?
[ ] Yes, I agree
[ ] No, I don’t agree
Gives? This may be the most egregious question of all. If you want low information voters to remain ignorant it certainly accomplishes it’s purposes. Neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, grants anything to the people. It acknowledges their rights as supreme and institutes government to protect those rights. As a body dully constituted by the people, government’s power and authority is granted by the consent of the governed to protect those rights, not to act as if they were once given and can now be reduced or taken away.
As the current President, Vice President and many members of Congress move to usurp power by unlawfully expanding their authority and nibbling away at our God-given rights to self protection, free speech, self determination and self-interest, there may come a day when our posterity may have to rise up and live out the proclamation Jefferson gave so many years ago;
“…what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to 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.”
I and most Americans hope it never comes to pass. But how long can those who are not ignorant and finding comfort in our own opinions, who are not easily pacified by the promises of politicians, who are not able to sit still and watch as the country of our ancestors is allowed to rot and erode right before our very eyes.
Our rights are ours and ours alone and existed long before this elected generation, before the birth of this republic. Rights, like love, cannot be forced nor taken away. Rights are the eternal spirit of man rooted in liberty that exists abundantly and in perfect harmony when no power or authority seeks supremacy through external coercion.
Freedom will only continue to ring if we continue to be informed and sound the trumpet that indeed the tyrants are not only coming, they are already here.
In 1994 David S. Whitley self published a 300-page softcover book titled The Conservative Directory — The Little Black Book of the Cultural Counter Revolution. The book praised by the likes of Charlton Heston, Bay Buchanan, and Joseph Farah of WND quickly sold out its first printing. He is currently mulling the idea of a second updated edition that would also be accessible online. David is a long time student of religion and politics, especially America’s founding era. His writings have been printed in many publications, including at AmericanThinker.com. He twice was an in studio guest on the Dennis Prager radio program. David is available (free of charge) to speak to your group or organization on topics of liberty through the prism of ethics, values and religion.