by Charleston Voice
seen the pictures on CNN. Those piles of AK-47s being crushed
under the treads of our M1A1 Abrams tanks. Another instance
of a soldier or Marine officer gleefully announcing that
they were destroying a captured cache of 4,700 AKs. Even
better was the discovery of over 9,000 Beretta automatics,
new, in the boxes. Wonder if those will be spared from destruction.
Boy, I'd love to have one of those.
Iraqis did not need a Second Amendment; they needed
the wherewithal to exercise it. The wherewithal Americans
still have, but do not exercise."
even before the attack on Iraq, we reported that private
guns shops thrived in Iraq. Probably little different than
the pictures we see of gun stalls in Islamabad or Karachi.
Many of us wondered how a regime so brutal under a Saddam
could even take root in a climate so forged with widespread
civilian gun ownership. I would imagine it's standing the
Second Amendment defenders in America on their heads! How
could it happen? The people - common citizens - had the
means at their disposal to overthrow tyranny, didn't they?
Are we to conclude from the absence of resistance that Saddam
was lauded for his paternal leadership?
We think otherwise,
and should learn some valuable lessons how Iraqis lost their
freedoms, and will have no chance to reclaim their freedom
as we in America envision "freedom" to be understood.
They will truly get the "democracy" they deserve,
a form of government that our Founding Fathers so rightfully
warned us against. Democracy is Mobocracy they knew. It
violates the rights of the individual. That's why it is
so widely touted by collectivists, communists, and internationalists
of all stripes. Why else do you think totalitarian governments
frequently call themselves "peoples democratic
republics", or some other such derivative.
So, if the
Iraqis are to be "free" why did the Marines go
from block to block and room to room throughout Baghdad
to find guns after the fedayeen were quieted? By that time
it was safe enough for informers to come forward without
reprisal, and point out the Saddam holdouts to their liberators.
Are the 'good' and law-abiding Iraqis to get their confiscated
guns returned? What do you think?
We submit that
the reason this large gun ownership population did not overthrow
the Saddam regime is that the civilian spy network was so
extensive and well established it would have meant certain
death after torture had anyone dared to discuss revolution
with their friends, family, or neighbors. In effect, Saddam
had established the advanced version of a homeland security
infrastructure. Tyrannies are excellent mediums to get back
at personal enemies, a business competitors, ex-spouses,
annoying neighbors, or whomever else causes you irritation.
Simply dial-in to a government-furnished 800 number now
so commonly established for whatever grievance or offense
you've perceived. That's it. The government agents will
do the rest. So, you think your boss at work is punishing
his children too severely (or at all!)? Call in the child
protection squad, Child Welfare, Child Protective Services,
or whatever they call it in your state. Wait until that
becomes federalized then we can really go downtown with
child offenses! You suspect a competitor is running an unsafe
workshop, or maybe dumping harmful chemicals in a river?
We've got OSHA and the Environmental Protection Police for
Are you getting
the point? Guns in the hands of the Iraqi people could not
save them from tyranny. Our Second Amendment was added to
ensure Americans had the means, should it ever become necessary,
to overthrow tyranny. But, the Amendment does not give us
the guarantee that we will always be able to exercise it.
No, being able to use it derives its usefulness from a citizenry
sufficiently informed as to halt the other government intrusions
which render the Second Amendment ineffective. Our Founders
could only give to us the Second Amendment guarantee on
paper. How we protected it, was up to us. In fact, we believe
that had there not been a deadly and brutal secret police
network installed, Iraqis could have thrown off their oppressors
without the guarantee of a Second Amendment!
To talk about,
or even plan an overthrow of tyranny in the United States,
is the lazy American's way out. You don't have to be informed
about where your rights come from, who your congressman
is, or even bother to vote on what bothers you. Our enemies
count on you becoming discouraged and giving up. You'll
still be able to make the Stanley Cup Playoffs, sit in your
season ticket third base line seats, and talk revolution
in your spare time. Protecting your freedoms comes after
your earthly pleasures are satisfied. I have not a thing
against hockey or baseball. I so vividly recall the pounding
backchecks of Dallas Smith and Don Aurey in the corners
behind the Bruins goal. I even saw Jim Piersall stomp on
his cap in right field, live and in full living color at
Fenway Park. I know what it is to have fun. But, I also
know what it is to feel oppressed, and to do nothing in
my own defense is even worse. How can you ignore evil and
do nothing when it's right in front of you? Therefore to
him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it
is sin. (James 4.17). If ignorance is bliss why is it that
Americans are not happy?
did not need a Second Amendment; they needed the wherewithal
to exercise it. The wherewithal Americans still have, but
do not exercise.
If, as an American,
you choose to do nothing, you will indeed, have your gun
pried from your cold dead fingers. For those who wish to
avoid the violence and anarchy, we still have the guarantees
of a Constitution, but only if we exercise them.
Ask an Iraqi which guarantee
he'd rather have.........given another chance.