The 2nd Amendment and Why It’s Important
In April of 2006, while I was still serving in the Army, I had to go home to Michigan. A friend, and a classmate died from his injuries sustained while doing combat operations in Iraq. I had received word that the “Westboro Baptist Church” which was blasted all over the news for their disgusting protests at soldiers’ funerals, would be at Webber’s funeral. I was prepared to go to jail for punching a protestor in the face if necessary. I was a much different person back then. I was young and dumb. The Supreme Court (SCOTUS), ruled that they had a constitutional right to protest at a funeral, even if what they were saying was vial and disgusting. Back then I didn’t see the big picture of the constitution and the Bill of Rights. I was upset at what they were saying, and where they were saying it. I found it repulsive, but over time, I began to understand. Our rights are given to us by God, not government. Our Bill of Rights is there to tell government what they cannot infringe upon. Even if we don’t like something, that doesn’t change what is.
Colion Noir’s website says this “In 1776 the Musket was the AR-15 of its time, and when a Tyrannical government tried to take those Muskets away from us, we used those muskets to fight a revolutionary war for our freedom as a Country.
The founding fathers understood how vital the rifle was to maintaining this newly found freedom, so they enshrined our right to own it in our constitution in the form of the 2nd Amendment.
Now in 2019, the AR-15 is to us what the Musket was to the founding fathers in 1776.
Recently I have found many are upset surrounding the AR-15 still. But, let us ask ourselves why? I believe it’s quite simple. People are upset because the media and government tell them to be upset. In DBT (Dialectical Behavioral Therapy) we learn a technique called ‘fit the facts’. Do your emotions fit the facts of the situation. In 2024, the most recently compiled data points, only 401 murders were committed by rifles. This is all rifle types, not AR-14 specific. So, we can make a safe assumption, not all 401 deaths were the dreaded AR-15. This is out of the total murders committed of 20,162. Conservative estimates believe there are between 60,000 -70,000 defensive gun uses, meaning guns were used to stop crime or harm. No one likes to talk about these uses. Some broader research shows this number could be anywhere above 500,000. This wide range is because there is no database, and most prevented crime isn’t logged like crime is. Do the benefits outweigh the harm? This author believes it does.
We must be intellectually honest about these things. When the car was made, I don’t think Ford believed iterations of his invention would one day be used to kill many people worldwide in a single year. We believe there have been roughly 294 attacks between 200-2025, 11-12 per/year, killing roughly 100-300 per year. Because countries don’t keep track, it’s difficult to say. What can be seen however is more people are intentionally using vehicles to commit terrorist attacks. Would we take the same approach to vehicles as we do guns? No, obviously people aren’t thinking about banning trucks or vans. We are not looking to ban alcohol to prevent alcohol related fatalities both drunk driving, and other. Those deaths are also in the thousands a year. 11,904 deaths from alcohol impaired driving. There are an estimated 2.6 million deaths worldwide related to alcohol attributed deaths. Yet, we are not considering banning alcohol. The argument falls apart when someone says for guns ‘at least we’re doing something.’ Well, why are we not doing that for vehicles, or alcohol? In England they are looking to ban kitchen knives with points to show they are doing ‘something’. Australia and England have banned ninja swords, and Australia has now banned machetes. I don’t understand the machetes ban because of how useful it is in both camping, and just simple yard work. In reality, the bans that have been made, have made little to no difference.
The question then remains, where is the line? What freedoms is the average person willing to give up in the name of potential safety?
Benjamin Franklin once said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
Now that I’m older I realize my problem during Webber’s funeral was I wanted to pick and choose from the constitution, rather than accepting the good and bad that came from rights.
Let’s think of this in a different way. You’re a police officer. You know someone is a bad guy and you know if you could just search their house, or car, you’ll find the evidence you need. But, you have to have a warrant to search. Sometimes the rules may get in the way of justice, but just because you don’t always like it, you still have to respect it. The constitution is the same.
There are approximately * About 76–83 million American adults own at least one firearm
* About 400–533 million firearms are privately owned in the United States. If guns were truly the problem….. we’d know it. Gun crime is a very small fraction of the total number of guns in the U.S. I have come to believe that firearms are hated, mostly by people who have never felt the fear of danger. Someone said to me recently that to them it seemed I was blaming victims of crime. That could not be further from the truth. In reality, I want no one to be a victim. I feel firmly that criminals do not fear the law. They do not fear jail. They do not fear the police. Because they do not have this fear, they feel they can commit crime at their leisure. I believe your only protection is not 911, but that you protect yourself. By the time 911 gets there the crime has already happened. You are responsible for your own safety, both in the home, and away from it. I want to ensure you have teeth to protect yourself from the predator that may try to hurt you. That being said, the 2nd Amendment isn’t just for self-protection. I firmly believe because we’ve seen it in many places, Germany in the 1930’s, Canada, and England today, that the 1st amendment (freedom of speech) is crumbling. People are being detained and arrested for simply sharing their beliefs and thoughts. You believe abortion is murder, you can now be arrested for offending someone. We saw during the Biden administration social media under the pressure of the government was burying anyone who spoke out against Covid-19 vaccines, or the Hunter Biden laptop. The government was telling social media companies to censure speech it deemed to be ‘fake news’, but would eventually be found out it was all true. So, why do we have the second amendment? It’s there to safeguard against government overreach. It’s not there for hunting, it’s there to keep the government in check. It’s the fourth check n balance. Our government a 3-tiered government each checking one another, and we the militia are the check against the government to ensure our rights are not taken away by those who would do so, likely under the false flag of ‘protection’. This is not new. We saw it happen in Cuba, Germany, Iran, N. Korea. Take away the guns, the government does whatever it wants and the people have no way to fight back.
I think many people who have negative feelings about firearms are generally those who have never been in a situation where they felt unsafe. Growing up, I lived not far from Detroit. I lived in constant fear. Every day on the news was rape, murder, arson, and it seemed never ending. As a young kid I always watched the news. I remember the Gulf War even though I was only 7 years old. I remember the Oklahoma City bombing at 9 years old. Every year at Halloween, the day before was called Devil’s Night, because people would light cars, buildings, and homes on fire. Sometimes they were abandoned, but sometimes they weren’t. We delt with a lot of gang violence, and it seemed the police were outmatched every day. Even though my school weighed heavily towards the Democrat party in its teaching, I had a strong feeling towards guns my whole life. It was the one thing I didn’t agree with Democrats on even in my elementary school years. I wondered growing up, how there could be so much animosity to an inanimate object that so many people relied on to do good with. How could Democrats hate guns, yet employ those with guns to keep them safe? How could democrat presidents have secret service with guns, for their safety, their family’s safety, but we citizens who live in dangerous neighborhoods can’t have anything to protect our families with. As a child this situation never made sense to me. Today, as an adult, I’ve come to understand how much I was lied to as a child. I’ve come to realize how much my school did to indoctrinate me into the liberal ideology. Today, I am a Christian, conservative, free from the lies I once believed to be true. We have seen a surprising uptick in political attacks in this country. Charlie Kirk was killed not by an AR-15, but likely a .30-06 bolt action rifle. The Butner assassination attempt on President Trump was an AR-15. The golf course assassination attempt a SKS 7.62 rifle was found at the scene. The White House Correspondence Dinner, a 12-gauge maverick shotgun which was fired at a secret service agent, a .38 semi-automictic pistol, and multiple knives were found on the suspect. After years of reporting Wolf Blitzer could not identify the weapon used, or even weapon type, but instead said the shooter fired what appeared to be “a very serious weapon.” As a long time reporter, I would expect a seasoned reporter to have even a basic knowledge of the guns he reports so often on. Even in these few examples, only one involved an AR-15. The variety used shows that even if you remove on option, there will many more to choose from. Thankfully the WHCD didn’t end up worse, because if he wanted too, he could have used an explosive device. That would have nearly ensured the entire line of succession would have been removed. A tragedy was subverted once again. We as a society seem to have forgotten the danger of events like the Boston bombing, the world trade center, Oklahoma City, and most recently the pipe bombs thrown in New York City. Guns are not the problem, people no longer respect life. We are using rhetoric that dehumanizes an entire group of people in this country, and attacks against conservatives are on the rise as people view them as Nazi’s, fascist, and evil. One main function of the communist party is to by their own admission making all religions superfluous, and communism supersedes them. Ideological Subversion: It takes 15-20 years to demoralize a people. In an interview with Yuri Bezmenov a former KGB operative, he discusses the process already happening in America. In the communist goals of 1963 we see two goals 26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy as promiscuity as ‘normal, natural, healthy.” “27 Infitrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.” “28 Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29 “Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hinderance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.”
“When certain obstructionists become too irritating, label them after suitable buildups as fascist or Nazi or anti-Semitic, and use the prestige of anti-fascist and tolerance organizations to discredit them. In the public mind constantly associate those who oppose us with those names which already have a bad smell. The association will after enough repetition become fact in the public mind.”
It is typically dated to 1943 and attributed to CPUSA directives or The Communist (their theoretical journal). It gained popularity through G. Edward Griffin (e.g., in his 1969 lecture More Deadly Than War) and has been repeated in conservative circles, John Birch Society materials, and online videos ever since.
When you listen to the manifestos of current assassins, and media, you can hear conservatives being compared to and called things like Nazi, Fascist, and now people are trying to kill conservatives. This is not a coincidence. This is manufactured hate. Destroy the church. Question the constitution. Destroy the patriot mindset. Infiltrate the government, gain power, and with it sew dissention. Abraham Lincoln once said the US would not be destroyed from an enemy abroad, but from within. Our enemy is truly within the walls, hiding in plain sight, or at least they used to be. Now they are no longer hiding, and shouting form the rooftops who they are, and what they want. Global domination, global control. This is not a conspiracy theory, but verifiable and well documented.
So what is the true reason there’s so much animosity towards guns? Control. Just like Iran, N. Korea, Pre-WWII Germany, it’s all about control. When you cannot force your will upon a people because they have guns, the whole mission becomes removing Guns from the hands of those you wish to control. If it were about anything else, say, protecting lives, then the idea would be to train the population to respect human life, and to carry a firearm for protection, but it isn’t. Even today with products like the Byrna Kinetic Launcher, no one is saying to people, “don’t be a victim” own a Byrna. When there are non-lethal ways to self-defense, and yet, it’s not being talked about, of course it’s not about self-defense. 911 is and never will be a preventative measure. Police most of the time respond after a crime has already occurred. Even in the event of a tragic active shooter, or a break-in of your home, police are minutes away. This precious time is unfortunately an eternity when bullets could be flying. No matter what you do bad people will always do bad things. You cannot claim that banning things, items from common usage is truly going to fix anything. Banning Guns in the UK, led to a rise in knife crime, then banning ninja swords, led people to kitchen knives, and now kitchen knives to remove the point because people are still dying. No amount of banning anything will actively fix anything. Murder and battery will still happen, no matter how much banning you do. Both the Office of Justice and National Institute of Justice admitted the 1994 ‘Assault Weapons Ban’ had little to no effect on gun crime in the country for the 10 years it was in place. When we look at the country as a whole, places that have the highest restrictions, often have the higher gun crime rate. Why is this? Victims have no teeth, no way to fight back against a criminal that does not fear the law, does not fear the judge, does not fear the jury, and does not fear jail. As the man of the house, I believe it is my responsibility to protect not only myself, but my family. Not only do I believe banning weapons because of the way they look, or even the arbitrary number of rounds the magazines can hold, is foolish, but goes directly against the reason the second amendment exists to begin with. When we truly offer a thought to why magazine bans happen, it’s a form of control. Someone, somewhere has said, ‘you, homeowner, are limited to 10 rounds to protect your home.’ It does not matter the criminal breaking in has a 30-round magazine, but you cannot. The emotional decision to ban magazine sizes comes from incidents like school shootings, less than 1% of all gun related incidences nationwide. While I firmly believe school shootings are avoidable, we have seen that even in places where guns are banned, mass school attacks still happen. We’ve seen large scale bladed attacks worldwide. We’ve seen terrorist attacks using vehicles as weapons to inflict maximum casualties. In recent months we’ve seen multiple bombs being used to try and inflict casualties but thankfully they did not detonate. Those who use the argument why do you need 30 rounds to kill a dear, either know they are being disingenuous or don’t understand the nature of what the 2nd amendment truly is. 250 years ago, our founders knew the cost of insuring freedom would be high. This great experiment built upon the back of a Righteous and Holy God, would be cemented in the blood of men willing to die for its success. George Washington and other founders said this “”A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”
– George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
– Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”
– Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, son-in-law of John Adams, December 20, 1787
“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
– Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776
“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
– Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
– Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
“To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.”
– George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788
“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”
– George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”
– Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”
– James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
“This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty…. The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”
– St. George Tucker, Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803
“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
– Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
– Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833
“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”
– Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789
“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.”
– Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28
“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
– Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788
“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.”
– Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
– Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833
“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”
– Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789
As we can see, the founders had strong feelings about the necessity for able bodied Americans to be armed. In fact, they felt so strongly about this, that they believed it wasn’t so much as an option, but a responsibility of a male citizen to keep and bear arms, if at all possible. What more can I say, that our founders already established. During the SCOTUS ruling of NYSRPA v. Bruen which forced states to ensure their laws held up to text, history, and tradition of gun laws in the United States. Do modern restrictions hold up to laws around 1791. This forces states to reconsider their magazine capacity sizes, and firearm types. Today, we no longer carry flintlock muskets, but rather more modernized weapons such as the Ar-15, the civilian model designed similarly to the military M4. While the military version of the Armalite rifle has a three round burst selector switch, today, for civilians it is simply a semi-automatic. When you listen to many speak on the side of the Democrats, it’s evident they do not know what they are talking about. I personally find it very disturbing that anyone passing or pushing laws that would restrict the constitutional rights of millions, hasn’t taken the time to actually study the subject they are trying to pass laws on. The things I have heard liberals saying regarding firearms is nothing short of insane.
Mr. Cicilline: refers to a stabilizing brace as a bump stock, making it an automatic weapon. (Note: It does not)
President Biden “If you wanna protect yourself… Get a double-barreled shotgun, fire two blasts outside the house into the air.” (Warning Shots are generally illegal.)
Patricia Eddington; New York Assembly “Some of these bullets have an incendiary device on the end of it making it heat seeking.” (No bullet is heat seeking)
A politician once said, “if you ban high-capacity magazines, that over time they will decrease because they would have all been shot….” (Obviously not realizing a magazine is what bullets go into, and are reusable.)
New York City Mayor Bloomberg once said this “if it can fire a lot of bullets very quickly…. If you haven’t hit the deer with three shots, you’re a pretty lousy shot, that deer deserves to get away.” The interviewer said that most pistols hold more than three. He then replied, but that’s different, you have to pull the trigger each time. An assault weapon you hold and it goes (Sound, breet.)
(He basically believed all AR-15’s are all full automatic rifles. Also, in the interview he made a hunting example. The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting. Former Mayor Bloomberg spent millions of dollars on the fight for gun control.)
This next clip is an unknown politician to me. He said, “this is a ghost gun. This has the ability with a 30. Caliber clip, to disburse with 30 bullets within half a second, 30 magazine clip in half a second.”
Where do I start? There is no such thing as a 30 caliber clip. And it’s not a thing to fire bullets 30 rounds in half a second. This was being said during a press briefing. His knowledge of how firearms work is staggeringly ignorant.
Diane Feinstein “it’s legal to hunt humans with 15, 30 round, even 150 round magazines.” She goes on to talk about hunting ducks. During a photo shoot with Diane, she is seen holding an AK-47. In the photo she can be seen finger on the trigger. No trigger discipline. Obviously hunting humans is not legal.
President Biden “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” (It is absolutely not legal to shoot through the door at an intruder. Bad advice Joe… bad advice. )
Mike Thompson “Federal law prohibits me from having more than three shells in my shotgun when I’m duck hunting. So federal law provides more protection for ducks than it does for it’s citizens.” (Humans can’t be hunted. Why is this even a thing?)
It seems to me that many politicians believe or want you to believe the 2A has anything to do with hunting. It doesn’t. Not only do they not know how the guns work, how magazines work, but they don’t know the basic premise of the 2ndAmendment, or gun safety.
When someone becomes a gun owner, you have skin in the game. When you don’t own them, I wouldn’t expect many to feel strongly about not destroying the rights for people. People often expect police to come save them. That’s not their job. The job of the police is to enforce the law. Until someone is breaking the law, until they’ve shot at you, until they’ve attacked you, until they are already in the midst of violence, police can’t do much. Most people are not vigilant while in public. Most people are not aware of what’s going on around them. Most people who are against guns, have never been attacked. While the average person being attacked would be a rare occurrence, when we look at the random crimes that have been major news in the last year, we can see many of the same category of people. I want to preface this: I am in no way blaming what happened on the victim. This is always the person attacking. HOWEVER, we see a trend in behavior that made the attacks easier. The average person doesn’t think about these things, and therefore make themselves a potential victim. I will start with the death of Bruce Wayne’s family. Traveling down a dark alley, late at night, and outsteps a criminal with a gun. Thomas and Martha are eventually gunned down in cold blood, leaving young Bruce Wayne to grow up into the man that wouldn’t ever be a victim again. Making good choices, and being aware of your surroundings is a major step in not being a victim. Again, the police won’t be there to save you. Iryna Zarutska was killed on a train. She sat there, watching her phone, not paying attention to anyone around her. Sadly, her killer would stand up from behind her and stab her to death. Not only were the police not around, average citizens got up from their seats and put distance between the poor girl, and themselves. I cannot say for sure she would have been safe if she’d been sitting differently, facing a different direction, paying attention, but what we do see is many people today are traveling in public with their faces in their phones completely unaware of the dangers lurking around them.
The Rockford Illinois stabbing spree of March 2024. He went around stabbing people at random including a US postal service worker, leaving four dead.
NYC Subway stabbing trends (2025-2026), these attacks over the last year have resulted in both fatalities and severe critical attacks. These attacks have included the use of machetes, and appeared to be random in nature.
San Antonio machete attack 2026 a man was attacked randomly under the 1-10 bridge. He fled to a shell gas station where he managed to call for help.
Stephanie Minter was stabbed to death at a bus stop in Virginia on Feb 23, 2026.
Then, there are the high-profile cases of illegal aliens attacking and murdering people.
Antonio Martinez Guilty of rape and murder of Rachel Morin on a Maryland hiking trail 2023-2025.
Jose Antonio Ibarra killed Laken Riley on the University of Georgia campus in 2024.
Jose Medina was charged with the murder of Sheridan Gorman in Chicago 2026.
Edwin Antonio confessed of five murders including a dismemberment of an unaccompanied minor.
Savannah, Georgia (Dec 2025/2026): A woman was attacked with sulfuric acid in Forsyth Park while walking. As of April 2026, the attacker is unknown, and the case remains under investigation by local police and the FBI.
Long Island, New York (2021-2026): In March 2021, student Nafiah Ikram was attacked with acid outside her home. Terrell Campbell was arrested in 2026 after a tipster identified him and prosecutors alleged he posted a rap video boasting about the crime.
New Jersey/Florida (2024): A woman in New Jersey suffered 35% body burns from a “highly caustic acid” attack. Three Florida residents were charged with conspiracy to commit the attack, which was found to be a targeted, paid arrangement.
Washington D.C. (2017): A woman was sentenced to 12 years in prison for attacking an ex-boyfriend with a knife and sulfuric acid.
There are far more cases, but I think you get the point. Violence doesn’t always come at the hand of a firearm. Violence comes from anyone who wants to do violent things. The weapon of choice can be anything from household kitchen items, to a machete, to a katana, to a firearm, to a bomb, even acid. The point is, you are your first responder. We have people and politicians who know nothing about firearms, trying to get rid of firearms, not to pass what they call common sense gun control.
“At its core it’s about finishing what we started.” (Rep. Teresa Tanzi)
In 2025 Rhode Island passed an ‘assault’ weapons ban. They included a grandfather clause. However, this year, Rep. Tanzi took the microphone stating that they would be removing the grandfather clause making these weapons illegal.
“last year we as a body, banned the sale, manufacture and transfer of certain assault weapons as defined in that law. That was an important step, but was only a partial one. We should be honest about that.”
She goes on :
“Right now our law draws an arbitrary line. We have said these firearms cannot enter the marketplace going forward. But we continue to allow them to remain in circulation indefinitely. That undermines the very policy we put in place, and makes enforcement more difficult.”
“IF these weapons are too dangerous to be sold in Rhode Island, then we really should have addressed possession at the same time. We didn’t, and this bill corrects that.”
This is the government admitting they are in fact coming for your guns. These politicians aren’t getting rid of their armed security. The police aren’t getting rid of theirs. This is politicians showing their true colors, an unarmed population, is a controlled population. During the covid summer of love, we saw mass riots in the streets. We saw businesses being destroyed. We saw people’s livelihood being torn down to the ground. Not long ago, in my home state, a woman called 911 from home. Someone broke into her house. Before police could respond, when they did, she had been murdered. The short time it took for police to arrive, it was too late. Everyone has an inherent right to self-defense. As a man, I have the responsibility to train, and be prepared to defend my family, people I care about, and the weak in society. No one is coming to save you. It’s easy to scoff at the idea of why someone needs a gun. It’s easy to do this if you have never lived in a place where it was dangerous. If you’ve never felt your life was in danger. If you’ve never truly experienced fear. Our founding fathers understood the need and that’s why they are on the record speaking about gun ownership, and gun carry, on a regular basis. All politicians that claim gun control is for public safety has an agenda, and that agenda is a disarmed society. They are praying on your emotions and naivety, to side with them and push to ban something you may not care anything about. The truth is, every society that has given up their rights to allow the government to take over their security, is now realizing that may have been a mistake. Canada just decided by 95% they are not going to allow the government to take their guns. During the Supreme Court Case DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services in 1989, they decided the government does not have an obligation to protect the citizen from private acts of violence. This is something everyone should consider. If the government has no responsibility to protect you, then who does? You. I have long stated gun free zones should be held as unconstitutional. We’ve seen over and over how criminals ignore that little gun free sign, and commit catastrophic events. If they tell you, you can’t have a gun, is that them saying, we will take responsibility for your safety while you are here? No, of course not. Most of the time, malls do not have armed officers patrolling, or at entrances. Schools often do not have a service officer on duty. Yet, we protect banks with armed guards. Federal buildings have armed guards. But you, you’re not allowed to protect yourself. As we’ve seen, those who wish to do harm don’t have to have a knife, but if they do have a knife, how would you stop them if you didn’t have a gun? No one wins in a knife fight. The only way to true defense is to train in it. You have to train your mind to be vigilant, to pay attention, and to know what to do in the event of an incident. I am not calling for anyone to be a vigilante, just be aware of your surroundings, and have a plan to protect yourself. If you’re out for a jog, have a plan. If you’re out to dinner with family, have a plan. If you are going to and from work, have a plan. You are the Militia. You are your first responder. It’s up to you to protect yourself. While the average person will never be put into a situation where this is necessary, we are all familiar with insurance. You have it in the hopes you’ll never need to use it. We have insurance on our cars, homes, our health, and our pets. A firearm is your insurance policy to protect, potentially your life. We hope you’ll never need to use it, but break-in’s happen nationwide every 25-30 seconds in the U.S. Out of that nearly 28% of all break-in’s happen while someone is home. On average every 26 seconds in America a random violent attack happens in the U.S. The 2nd Amendment is important because I don’t want anyone to be a victim. While I believe our focus should be fixing the heart problem of these attacks on people, I do not believe the answer is to focus on the weapon used, but those using the weapon. In major cities gang-violence is 13% of all annual homicides. The cause to ban AR-15’s are based on 1% of annual homicides are attributed to mass shootings. We must be careful as a society to understand the facts. We accept the risks of allowing people to drive cars. We accept the danger that some people who use a car in the U.S. will die every single day. Because the daily need for a firearm isn’t as pronounced as the need to have a vehicle to get to work, or go places, many deem them irrelevant. The truth is, we don’t talk about the number of crimes prevented by the mere possession of a firearm. If police officers can use them to protect others, the same rule applies to people. There are millions of guns in the united states, and we if we’re honest should understand if gun owners were truly the problem we’d know it. Once again, In 2024 there were 15,795 murders total in the US. Out of those only 11,717 were firearms. Less than 1% of all firearms were rifles, and less than that were the AR-15. There were 11,904 drunk driving deaths in the US. With over 400-533 million firearms, if these were the problem, we’d have far more than 11,000 deaths a year by firearms. If we are truly honest with ourselves, we should be asking, why anti-gun politicians are pushing so hard, but aren’t trying to save the millions who die in abortions, by illegal drugs coming over the border, the deaths caused by illegal aliens. If protecting life were truly the goal, you’d see a stronger stance on these things. Instead, media outlets are quiet about deaths from illegals, and during the latest assassination attempt, the gun debate didn’t happen. This shows us, there is an agenda, not a true moral compass about gun violence. Protect yourself. Protect your family. Learn the history of the 2A and learn how it’s shaped America. Learn how it saved America during WWII. See how other countries have failed and fallen to the left-wing ideology of eliminating guns. Why do socialist countries need to ban guns before they can take control? Learn your rights, and learn how to protect yourself and your family. If you don’t want to own a gun, at least own a Byrna Launcher
Some of the videos I think you should watch, is where some of my information came from.
Byrna Launcher
No One Is Coming To Save You:
AR-15 Gun Ban, Grandfather Claus Being Erased
Communist Goals (1963)
The Communist 1943
For More of the Arrow Preacher follow on YouTube:
https://youtube.com/@thearrowpreacher6920?si=wvVC80iHWsSSkRY1
The Arrow Preacher 