ATTITUDE CHECK
"Some things are worth fighting for."
President William Jefferson Clinton
Address to the Air Force Academy
Colorado Springs, Colorado
June 2, 1999
Lately, gun owners can’t seem to buy a break. Every few months the public is treated to non-stop media coverage of yet another outrageous act committed by yet another crazed gun owner, followed by yet another chorus of demands for yet another round of gun-control laws that won’t work--hot on the heels of the last round of gun-control laws that didn’t work.
Forget the fact that wacko killers are not representative of gun owners as a whole. Facts aren’t important these days. Perception is. And thanks to the media, there is a growing perception in our country that gun owners are loose cannons on this Ship of State, that they represent both a danger to public safety and a slap in the face of civilized society. Civilian ownership of guns is an anachronism, a symbol of a bygone era, a vestige of the bloody shoot-em-up days of the Wild West. As if it needs to be said: Gun owners, we’re in a war. We’re losing.
Yes, like it or not, we’re in a war. A constitutional war. A war in which the stakes are at least as high as in any that has ever been fought by this nation. Is that the way you see it? Do you wake up mornings with a knot in your stomach because of your vanishing Second Amendment rights? Do gun grabbers make you rivet-spitting mad? Do you feel a deep sense of outrage and betrayal at the thought of your government making you feel like a criminal for owning guns? I hope so. If not, might as well hang ’em up now, pardner, ’cause you ain’t gonna be needing ’em in the brave, new world to come. There’s no place for the "gun culture" in the Age of Aquarius.
As gun owners come under increasing attack from anti-Second Amendment forces, it is essential we understand what we’re fighting for and why we’re fighting for it. Only then can we effectively convey our sense of urgency to others who may not yet comprehend the political and social perils that await us if gun grabbers have their way. Ultimately, this war over gun rights will be won or lost in the hearts and minds of the American people. It’s a matter of truth versus propaganda, fact versus fiction. Admittedly, ours is an uphill fight, but this is one war we simply cannot afford to lose, because if we do, the next one (and there will be a next one) will not be fought with slogans and nasty words.
Time for an attitude check.
Your attitude regarding the Second Amendment and those who are seeking to undermine it is crucial to our success in this war. Have you taken your temperature and pulse lately? If you’re not running a fever, if your blood pressure isn’t raising the roof because of what’s going on, then something’s wrong. You’re either dead, ignorant, or incredibly self-possessed. I’m not saying we should all panic or resort to bloodshed. But I do think it’s time gun owners became very serious about a deadly serious situation. With this in mind, I’ve a few thoughts to share about the way I see things.
WHAT WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT
First, we should understand that the Second Amendment does not grant us the right to keep and bear arms. Rather, the Second Amendment is intended to safeguard a right that, in the minds of the Founding Fathers, predated the amendment itself. Our founders recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and sought to secure this right for reasons made clear in their various writings. Perhaps the most important of these reasons was expressed by Alexander Hamilton, writing in the Federalist, No. 29: ". . . if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens." Liberals poke fun at the notion that a ragtag group of disgruntled gun owners could possibly defeat a government as powerful as ours. Don’t fall for it. Although there is good reason to believe a few million irate gun owners could accomplish quite a lot, that’s beside the point. The point is that the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights at least in part to provide a check upon government infringement and tyranny. That’s a fact.
Second, we must recognize the Second Amendment refers to an individual, not merely a corporate, right. Our liberal opponents point to the wording of the Second Amendment to support their contention that the right to keep and bear arms applies to the militia rather than to individuals. (Would that they were as attentive to the precise wording of the rest of the Constitution!) Since the National Guard now fulfills the role of the militia (they argue), the Second Amendment no longer applies to private citizens. Nice try. Any objective analysis of the writings of our founders will reveal that they not only considered the right to keep and bear arms an individual right, but they also intended the militia to be comprised mainly of private citizens. Everyday folks like you and me. It is the responsibility of government to allow for a well-regulated militia; it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. If the government neglects its responsiblities, are the people obliged to ignore their rights? I think not.
Third, we need to remember that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or sporting "rights." The Constitution recognizes no such rights. If they exist, they do so at the state level. Hunting, skeet shooting, and other such sporting activities are simply outside the scope of the Second Amendment. So, when a gun-grabber assures you that he’s (or she’s) not out to take away your hunting rights, the proper response is, "Who told you the Second Amendment has anything to do with hunting?"
Fourth, consider that those who fought over 200 years ago to free this nation from British tyranny used, what were at that time, military-style weapons. Now imagine, if you can, an effective citizen’s militia that has been forbidden by its government to own military-style weapons. How convenient . . . for the government. The result of the current strategy of gun grabbers to ban so-called assault weapons will be to render the Second Amendment virtually meaningless. This in the sense that law-abiding citizens would be forbidden to possess firearms that are at least somewhat comparable to those belonging to members of the standing army, which, of course, is under the control of the federal government. Despite the fact that assault rifles have historically been used in only a small percentage of civilian crimes involving firearms, our government is leading the effort to rid society of these weapons. Now why do you suppose that is? Good question. Fear the government that fears your guns.
Fifth, when it comes to defending our Second Amendment rights, compromise equals defeat. The liberals’ strategy regarding gun issues is simple: just get gun owners to compromise. The bigger the compromise, the happier liberals are, but even a small compromise enables them to get their foot in the door. And once they’ve got the door propped open, it’s only a matter of time before they squirm their way inside, make themselves at home, and start issuing orders. In the world of politics, compromise breeds compromise. Of course, this isn’t always a bad thing. Compromise is often necessary in order to maintain a reasonably civil society. But there are certain issues--gun ownership, for example--on which we cannot afford to compromise. Not even once. Oh, how gun grabbers will denounce you for taking such a stand! They’ll criticize you, call you bad names, use bullying tactics, scream and rant and jump up and down--anything to intimidate you into compromising . . . just a little, just this once. And when you can’t take it any more, when you finally give in to the pressure and manipulation, they’ll smile, shake your hand, say thanks, and leave you to ponder what you’ve just done. Then they’ll be back, and the process will repeat itself year after year, decade after decade, until your Second Amendment rights are but a fond memory. Never compromise your liberties. Never!
And last, it is essential we realize that as goes the Second Amendment, so goes the Bill of Rights. Without the means to resist tyranny, the people are at the mercy of tyrants. It does not require a particularly keen mind to understand this. If ours is indeed a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, there is no reason for government to fear the people--or their guns. That so many in government today do fear our guns bodes ill for the future. That an increasing number of voters seem inclined to agree with them spells disaster. The political battle over the Second Amendment that currently rages in our national and state capitals will ultimately prove as consequential to the future of this republic as the Revolution did to its founding.
WHAT WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND ABOUT THOSE WHO OPPOSE OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS
First, those who would overregulate or confiscate your guns are not your friends. Nor are they mere political or ideological opponents. They are the enemy. They may be sincere. They may believe with all their hearts that what they are doing is good and right and in the best interest of this country. They may even think that ridding society of guns is a moral imperative. They are still your enemies. They are as much your enemy as an armed intruder who enters your home intent on doing harm to you and yours. The only difference is that while in most places it’s still legal to shoot an armed intruder, it’s not legal to shoot gun grabbers. Pity. This may seem a rather harsh outlook on things, but the stakes are simply too high to look at things otherwise. Gun grabbers are your enemies. Treat them as such.
Second, don’t be fooled by the "reasonable gun control" ruse. To most liberals, any gun-control measure is reasonable. Let’s look at it from another angle. The President announces to a national television audience: "What this country needs is an honest dialogue about how many Jews we’re going to hunt down and kill this year. And since I’m a reasonable person, I’m willing to compromise on the precise number we kill, as long as we kill a reasonable number." Now how do you suppose the public would react if our President were to make such a "reasonable" proposal? Exactly. Why should your response to the various "reasonable" gun-control proposals be any different? Gun grabbers are not reasonable folks. They’re bleeding-heart reactionaries who would confiscate your guns in a heartbeat if it were possible. This makes them dangerous people. Treat them as such.
Third, those who do not respect your Second Amendment rights deserve no respect for their First Amendment rights--or any of their other "rights," for that matter. We must understand that without the Second Amendment, Americans essentially possess no rights--only privileges granted by a government that may restrict or suspend said privileges when circumstances warrant. The government can do this, of course, because there is no one to oppose it’s doing so. And there is no one to oppose it because only the government has guns. Thus, those who would take your guns would in essence take your liberty (or your life), since they would deprive you of the only means you have of defending your liberty (or your life) should it ever come to that. I ask you: Are such people deserving of your respect? Of course not. Don’t be polite to them; be rude to them. In fact, be downright nasty to them. Let them know in no uncertain terms that while they may eventually succeed in outlawing your guns, they will pay a very personal and dear price for subverting the Constitution (let them figure out if that’s a threat or not). If gun owners don’t soon begin considering every piece of gun-control legislation a direct attack upon their very lives, and every gun grabber a serious threat to their liberties, we will lose our Second Amendment rights. Count on it.
Fourth, do not imagine, for even a moment, that the leaders of the anti-Second Amendment movement are being honest about their intentions. "Oh, we’re not out to ban all guns," they say, "we just want to make society safer for our children" (children being the last refuge of scoundrels). "We don’t want to ban hunting weapons, we just want to ban assault weapons" (and "cheap" handguns, and "unsafe" handguns, and "high-capacity" handguns, and "high-powered" rifles, and . . .). Do not give these liars the benefit of the doubt, ever. They can, have, and will use every means at their disposal to manipulate the masses into believing that you, a law-abiding gun owner, are the bad guy simply because you’ve chosen to exercise your Second Amendment rights. Nor should you pay any heed to the pseudo-intellectual legal arguments offered by gun-grabbing lawyers and "constitutional scholars," who explain why the Second Amendment nowadays doesn’t apply to this, that, or the other. Actually, their arguments can be quite persuasive--if you’ve never taken the time to read the Constitution, or the writings of the Founders. How do you combat a lie? With the truth. Gun-grabbers are like cockroaches: shine the light of truth on them, and they’ll usually scurry for the corners.
And last, our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not up for a vote, folks. It’s non-negotiable. Period. The gun grabbers would have a government by the polls rather than the constitutional republic our founders intended. Gun grabbers prefer a government by the polls because they know that people are often willing to trade their liberties for a little more perceived security. As of this writing, there are tens of thousands of law-abiding California gun owners watching their gun rights being legislated out of existence in the name of public safety. Soon, gun owners in other states will join them. More states will follow, and so on, until the only places you’ll see a gun are on the belt of a law-enforcement officer, in the hands of a soldier, or in a museum display case. Time is short. Get angry. Organize, educate, agitate. Change your attitude, change the world.
"I'M FIGHTING MAD RIGHT NOW. SO WHEN DO I FIGHT?"
When you have no option but to fight. That time may come sooner for some than for others. However, while bad gun laws are being passed with increasing frequency, they are also being appealed. Since the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of legal disputes in this country, it only makes sense to await its verdict in a precedent-setting case relating specifically to the individual right to keep and bear arms. In recent years the Court has avoided such cases, but its days of skirting the issue may soon be over. I suggest we wait to hear what our esteemed Court has to say before we take matters into our own hands. If the Court upholds our Second Amendment rights, then we may see many gun-control laws overturned. If it doesn’t . . . time to lock and load. Of course, circumstances may not allow some of us to wait that long. Use your own judgment in the matter, but understand that once you’ve pulled the trigger, there’s no undoing what’s been done.
ATTITUDE-CHANGING PRINCIPLES
Principle one: There are two kinds of government: bad government and necessary government, and not much difference between them.
Principle two: Governments tend to increase in size and power. As they do, they tend to become intolerant of people who don’t like the idea of governments increasing in size and power.
Principle three: Nations do not drift into liberty, but they do drift into tyranny. Liberty must be jealously guarded; tyranny is the reward of those who fall asleep while on guard duty.
Principle four: When government is given free reign, things usually do not change for the better, especially after they’ve changed for the worse. And they WILL change for the worse.
Principle five: The best comedic one-liner ever uttered is, "I’m from the government; I’m here to help." When you’re feeling down, this line is always good for a laugh.
Principle six: It’s easier to keep hold of something than it is to get it back. Keep tight hold of your rights.
Principle seven: Liberty compromised is liberty lost.
Principle eight: If you always do what you always did, you’ll always get what you always got. Don’t like what you’re getting? Do something different for a change.
Principle nine: Guns don’t kill people; governments kill people, mostly.
Principle ten: "Some things are worth fighting for." And that’s a quote.
--Snakebite, September 1999
(This article may be freely copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes.)
SNAKEBITE’S DEN http://www.angelfire.com/ut/snakebite
------------------
Ouch, that hurts.
"Some things are worth fighting for."
President William Jefferson Clinton
Address to the Air Force Academy
Colorado Springs, Colorado
June 2, 1999
Lately, gun owners can’t seem to buy a break. Every few months the public is treated to non-stop media coverage of yet another outrageous act committed by yet another crazed gun owner, followed by yet another chorus of demands for yet another round of gun-control laws that won’t work--hot on the heels of the last round of gun-control laws that didn’t work.
Forget the fact that wacko killers are not representative of gun owners as a whole. Facts aren’t important these days. Perception is. And thanks to the media, there is a growing perception in our country that gun owners are loose cannons on this Ship of State, that they represent both a danger to public safety and a slap in the face of civilized society. Civilian ownership of guns is an anachronism, a symbol of a bygone era, a vestige of the bloody shoot-em-up days of the Wild West. As if it needs to be said: Gun owners, we’re in a war. We’re losing.
Yes, like it or not, we’re in a war. A constitutional war. A war in which the stakes are at least as high as in any that has ever been fought by this nation. Is that the way you see it? Do you wake up mornings with a knot in your stomach because of your vanishing Second Amendment rights? Do gun grabbers make you rivet-spitting mad? Do you feel a deep sense of outrage and betrayal at the thought of your government making you feel like a criminal for owning guns? I hope so. If not, might as well hang ’em up now, pardner, ’cause you ain’t gonna be needing ’em in the brave, new world to come. There’s no place for the "gun culture" in the Age of Aquarius.
As gun owners come under increasing attack from anti-Second Amendment forces, it is essential we understand what we’re fighting for and why we’re fighting for it. Only then can we effectively convey our sense of urgency to others who may not yet comprehend the political and social perils that await us if gun grabbers have their way. Ultimately, this war over gun rights will be won or lost in the hearts and minds of the American people. It’s a matter of truth versus propaganda, fact versus fiction. Admittedly, ours is an uphill fight, but this is one war we simply cannot afford to lose, because if we do, the next one (and there will be a next one) will not be fought with slogans and nasty words.
Time for an attitude check.
Your attitude regarding the Second Amendment and those who are seeking to undermine it is crucial to our success in this war. Have you taken your temperature and pulse lately? If you’re not running a fever, if your blood pressure isn’t raising the roof because of what’s going on, then something’s wrong. You’re either dead, ignorant, or incredibly self-possessed. I’m not saying we should all panic or resort to bloodshed. But I do think it’s time gun owners became very serious about a deadly serious situation. With this in mind, I’ve a few thoughts to share about the way I see things.
WHAT WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT
First, we should understand that the Second Amendment does not grant us the right to keep and bear arms. Rather, the Second Amendment is intended to safeguard a right that, in the minds of the Founding Fathers, predated the amendment itself. Our founders recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and sought to secure this right for reasons made clear in their various writings. Perhaps the most important of these reasons was expressed by Alexander Hamilton, writing in the Federalist, No. 29: ". . . if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens." Liberals poke fun at the notion that a ragtag group of disgruntled gun owners could possibly defeat a government as powerful as ours. Don’t fall for it. Although there is good reason to believe a few million irate gun owners could accomplish quite a lot, that’s beside the point. The point is that the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights at least in part to provide a check upon government infringement and tyranny. That’s a fact.
Second, we must recognize the Second Amendment refers to an individual, not merely a corporate, right. Our liberal opponents point to the wording of the Second Amendment to support their contention that the right to keep and bear arms applies to the militia rather than to individuals. (Would that they were as attentive to the precise wording of the rest of the Constitution!) Since the National Guard now fulfills the role of the militia (they argue), the Second Amendment no longer applies to private citizens. Nice try. Any objective analysis of the writings of our founders will reveal that they not only considered the right to keep and bear arms an individual right, but they also intended the militia to be comprised mainly of private citizens. Everyday folks like you and me. It is the responsibility of government to allow for a well-regulated militia; it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. If the government neglects its responsiblities, are the people obliged to ignore their rights? I think not.
Third, we need to remember that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or sporting "rights." The Constitution recognizes no such rights. If they exist, they do so at the state level. Hunting, skeet shooting, and other such sporting activities are simply outside the scope of the Second Amendment. So, when a gun-grabber assures you that he’s (or she’s) not out to take away your hunting rights, the proper response is, "Who told you the Second Amendment has anything to do with hunting?"
Fourth, consider that those who fought over 200 years ago to free this nation from British tyranny used, what were at that time, military-style weapons. Now imagine, if you can, an effective citizen’s militia that has been forbidden by its government to own military-style weapons. How convenient . . . for the government. The result of the current strategy of gun grabbers to ban so-called assault weapons will be to render the Second Amendment virtually meaningless. This in the sense that law-abiding citizens would be forbidden to possess firearms that are at least somewhat comparable to those belonging to members of the standing army, which, of course, is under the control of the federal government. Despite the fact that assault rifles have historically been used in only a small percentage of civilian crimes involving firearms, our government is leading the effort to rid society of these weapons. Now why do you suppose that is? Good question. Fear the government that fears your guns.
Fifth, when it comes to defending our Second Amendment rights, compromise equals defeat. The liberals’ strategy regarding gun issues is simple: just get gun owners to compromise. The bigger the compromise, the happier liberals are, but even a small compromise enables them to get their foot in the door. And once they’ve got the door propped open, it’s only a matter of time before they squirm their way inside, make themselves at home, and start issuing orders. In the world of politics, compromise breeds compromise. Of course, this isn’t always a bad thing. Compromise is often necessary in order to maintain a reasonably civil society. But there are certain issues--gun ownership, for example--on which we cannot afford to compromise. Not even once. Oh, how gun grabbers will denounce you for taking such a stand! They’ll criticize you, call you bad names, use bullying tactics, scream and rant and jump up and down--anything to intimidate you into compromising . . . just a little, just this once. And when you can’t take it any more, when you finally give in to the pressure and manipulation, they’ll smile, shake your hand, say thanks, and leave you to ponder what you’ve just done. Then they’ll be back, and the process will repeat itself year after year, decade after decade, until your Second Amendment rights are but a fond memory. Never compromise your liberties. Never!
And last, it is essential we realize that as goes the Second Amendment, so goes the Bill of Rights. Without the means to resist tyranny, the people are at the mercy of tyrants. It does not require a particularly keen mind to understand this. If ours is indeed a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, there is no reason for government to fear the people--or their guns. That so many in government today do fear our guns bodes ill for the future. That an increasing number of voters seem inclined to agree with them spells disaster. The political battle over the Second Amendment that currently rages in our national and state capitals will ultimately prove as consequential to the future of this republic as the Revolution did to its founding.
WHAT WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND ABOUT THOSE WHO OPPOSE OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS
First, those who would overregulate or confiscate your guns are not your friends. Nor are they mere political or ideological opponents. They are the enemy. They may be sincere. They may believe with all their hearts that what they are doing is good and right and in the best interest of this country. They may even think that ridding society of guns is a moral imperative. They are still your enemies. They are as much your enemy as an armed intruder who enters your home intent on doing harm to you and yours. The only difference is that while in most places it’s still legal to shoot an armed intruder, it’s not legal to shoot gun grabbers. Pity. This may seem a rather harsh outlook on things, but the stakes are simply too high to look at things otherwise. Gun grabbers are your enemies. Treat them as such.
Second, don’t be fooled by the "reasonable gun control" ruse. To most liberals, any gun-control measure is reasonable. Let’s look at it from another angle. The President announces to a national television audience: "What this country needs is an honest dialogue about how many Jews we’re going to hunt down and kill this year. And since I’m a reasonable person, I’m willing to compromise on the precise number we kill, as long as we kill a reasonable number." Now how do you suppose the public would react if our President were to make such a "reasonable" proposal? Exactly. Why should your response to the various "reasonable" gun-control proposals be any different? Gun grabbers are not reasonable folks. They’re bleeding-heart reactionaries who would confiscate your guns in a heartbeat if it were possible. This makes them dangerous people. Treat them as such.
Third, those who do not respect your Second Amendment rights deserve no respect for their First Amendment rights--or any of their other "rights," for that matter. We must understand that without the Second Amendment, Americans essentially possess no rights--only privileges granted by a government that may restrict or suspend said privileges when circumstances warrant. The government can do this, of course, because there is no one to oppose it’s doing so. And there is no one to oppose it because only the government has guns. Thus, those who would take your guns would in essence take your liberty (or your life), since they would deprive you of the only means you have of defending your liberty (or your life) should it ever come to that. I ask you: Are such people deserving of your respect? Of course not. Don’t be polite to them; be rude to them. In fact, be downright nasty to them. Let them know in no uncertain terms that while they may eventually succeed in outlawing your guns, they will pay a very personal and dear price for subverting the Constitution (let them figure out if that’s a threat or not). If gun owners don’t soon begin considering every piece of gun-control legislation a direct attack upon their very lives, and every gun grabber a serious threat to their liberties, we will lose our Second Amendment rights. Count on it.
Fourth, do not imagine, for even a moment, that the leaders of the anti-Second Amendment movement are being honest about their intentions. "Oh, we’re not out to ban all guns," they say, "we just want to make society safer for our children" (children being the last refuge of scoundrels). "We don’t want to ban hunting weapons, we just want to ban assault weapons" (and "cheap" handguns, and "unsafe" handguns, and "high-capacity" handguns, and "high-powered" rifles, and . . .). Do not give these liars the benefit of the doubt, ever. They can, have, and will use every means at their disposal to manipulate the masses into believing that you, a law-abiding gun owner, are the bad guy simply because you’ve chosen to exercise your Second Amendment rights. Nor should you pay any heed to the pseudo-intellectual legal arguments offered by gun-grabbing lawyers and "constitutional scholars," who explain why the Second Amendment nowadays doesn’t apply to this, that, or the other. Actually, their arguments can be quite persuasive--if you’ve never taken the time to read the Constitution, or the writings of the Founders. How do you combat a lie? With the truth. Gun-grabbers are like cockroaches: shine the light of truth on them, and they’ll usually scurry for the corners.
And last, our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not up for a vote, folks. It’s non-negotiable. Period. The gun grabbers would have a government by the polls rather than the constitutional republic our founders intended. Gun grabbers prefer a government by the polls because they know that people are often willing to trade their liberties for a little more perceived security. As of this writing, there are tens of thousands of law-abiding California gun owners watching their gun rights being legislated out of existence in the name of public safety. Soon, gun owners in other states will join them. More states will follow, and so on, until the only places you’ll see a gun are on the belt of a law-enforcement officer, in the hands of a soldier, or in a museum display case. Time is short. Get angry. Organize, educate, agitate. Change your attitude, change the world.
"I'M FIGHTING MAD RIGHT NOW. SO WHEN DO I FIGHT?"
When you have no option but to fight. That time may come sooner for some than for others. However, while bad gun laws are being passed with increasing frequency, they are also being appealed. Since the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of legal disputes in this country, it only makes sense to await its verdict in a precedent-setting case relating specifically to the individual right to keep and bear arms. In recent years the Court has avoided such cases, but its days of skirting the issue may soon be over. I suggest we wait to hear what our esteemed Court has to say before we take matters into our own hands. If the Court upholds our Second Amendment rights, then we may see many gun-control laws overturned. If it doesn’t . . . time to lock and load. Of course, circumstances may not allow some of us to wait that long. Use your own judgment in the matter, but understand that once you’ve pulled the trigger, there’s no undoing what’s been done.
ATTITUDE-CHANGING PRINCIPLES
Principle one: There are two kinds of government: bad government and necessary government, and not much difference between them.
Principle two: Governments tend to increase in size and power. As they do, they tend to become intolerant of people who don’t like the idea of governments increasing in size and power.
Principle three: Nations do not drift into liberty, but they do drift into tyranny. Liberty must be jealously guarded; tyranny is the reward of those who fall asleep while on guard duty.
Principle four: When government is given free reign, things usually do not change for the better, especially after they’ve changed for the worse. And they WILL change for the worse.
Principle five: The best comedic one-liner ever uttered is, "I’m from the government; I’m here to help." When you’re feeling down, this line is always good for a laugh.
Principle six: It’s easier to keep hold of something than it is to get it back. Keep tight hold of your rights.
Principle seven: Liberty compromised is liberty lost.
Principle eight: If you always do what you always did, you’ll always get what you always got. Don’t like what you’re getting? Do something different for a change.
Principle nine: Guns don’t kill people; governments kill people, mostly.
Principle ten: "Some things are worth fighting for." And that’s a quote.
--Snakebite, September 1999
(This article may be freely copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes.)
SNAKEBITE’S DEN http://www.angelfire.com/ut/snakebite
------------------
Ouch, that hurts.
) first post I cannot recall. Snakebite, welcome to TFL!