The Second Amendment Vs A Police State

The Second Amendment Vs. A Police State Essay, Research Paper The Second Amendment vs. A Police State The United States of America has taken drastic steps in taking away the American peoples God given rights and Constitutional rights. The United States government is supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, for the people.

The Second Amendment Vs. A Police State Essay, Research Paper

The Second Amendment vs. A Police State

The United States of America has taken drastic steps in taking away the American peoples God given rights and Constitutional rights. The United States government is supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, for the people. There are very clear signs of a cancerous growth within our government and the citizens of America need to take preventative measures to ensure the freedom for which our founding fathers fought and died.

I am speaking of numerous issues that have arisen in the United States that clearly demonstrate that our government is taking away our rights. I will hopefully be able to show a brief description of the government, as it is today and what it was designed to be. I will also describe our rights and the reasons for keeping those rights, such as the gun control laws that have been passed restricting our rights to bear arms. History serves us well in that it provides us with the facts that show increases in crime, poverty, injustice and overall social unrest is the result of Democracy as defined by our current administration. The fact is that the governments idea of a democracy and our idea of a democracy are two different meanings entirely. I speak about this because it directly affects the way that the United States government has taken away not only your Constitutional rights but also your God given ones.

I have quoted below an excerpt from a military manual that I once read that struck me as very profound. In order to understand the true meaning of the word democracy, examine the definition of the word as provided by the 1928 American Military Training Manual and then compare it with the definition of the word Republic, taken from the same manual. Now remember these definitions the next time you see a public official or anyone else for that matter, standing before the camera talking about democracy:


A government of the masses. Authority is derived through mass meeting or any other form of direct expression. Results in a mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic, negating property rights. Attitude towards law is that the will of the majority shall regulate whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice and impulse without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagoguism, license, agitation, discontent, and anarchy.


Authority is derived through the election of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude for property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress. (1928 American Military Training Manual)

While our government was formed as a republic, we have lost that form and exchanged it for a democracy. The fact that our forefathers had set up a Republic and not a Democracy is a key to understanding the present government. Ours will be a democracy so long as our elected officials will vote which ever way the powerful winds of special interests blow, as long as they do not “administer justice in accordance with fixed principles”, those principles being set forth in the Bill of Rights. The vast majority of representatives need to be removed from office and replaced with those that will do a correct and honest job without thought of personal gain. We need to set term limits to keep career politicians out of office and elect citizen politicians who are true patriots to our great nation that are trying to uphold what our forefathers had original set forth in their sacrifices as the god given rights and Constitutional rights. There are few great patriots in positions of power today.

The end of the line, and I reiterate, is that we are losing all of our constitutional rights, as well as our God given rights. On a daily basis, the government is trying to take away our Second Amendment rights as well countless other rights. Only a constant vigil will keep those that usurp power and control from doing so.

The Second Amendment states, and I quote:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. (Bill of Rights)

In the Second Amendment it does not state that you can own this type of gun or that type of gun, but it does state that you have the right to keep and bear arms. The opposition would state that legislation is needed to keep records of who can purchase guns legally. This is a fair idea and I agree with it to an extent but now they are trying to legislate every type of firearm and regulate gun shows. This is a fair point but let me state that gun control laws have not shown a difference in the amount of violence and killings. A gun does not kill people; people kill people. If the gun control measures were working then we would not need to keep passing further laws. The opposition continues to pass more and more legislation on gun control. If you take away an honest citizens right to bear arms, then only the criminals will have weapons and they do not care for the laws. The legal system in the United States has apparently failed on most areas of concerns within our society. The laws that are passed are very biased most of the time. The legal system needs to be examined closely. The lawmakers do not need to pass more laws and have so many on the books that it requires you to have to hire an attorney to be able to understand them. The laws on the books need to be reviewed and if they do not hold up or are outdated then take them off of our law books. There are laws on the books that very few people even know they exist and are hence not applicable.

The following statistics are taken from Congressmen s Ron Paul s current legislation, HR407, Second Amendment Restoration Act. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year–or 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. Of the 2.5-million self-defense cases, more than 200,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse. And as many as one-half million times every year, somebody carrying a gun away from home defends himself or herself. Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8 percent of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.

The police cannot possibly protect every individual citizen. Currently, there are about 150,000 police officers on duty at any one time to protect a population of more than 250 million Americans–or almost 1,700 citizens per officer. (H.R. 407) These are staggering statistics that cannot be ignored. Some will say that Representative Ron Paul is a proponent of the Second Amendment and that these statistics would be expected from him but you have to look beyond the fact that he is proponent Second Amendment and see just the fact that it has shown a good for society. Let me further testify that the city and state police have no statement or requirement in their doctrine to serve the public and protect it. The police are there to enforce the laws of the municipality, state, and federal government. The opposition will argue that is why we have police and we also have the ability to call 911. In California thousands of 911 calls went unanswered because the caller received a message that all operators were busy. California Senator Feinstein wants to have severe gun control laws. The Senator has armed bodyguards and I would ask her why does she need armed bodyguards when all she has to do is call 911 for any help.

An examination of policies and statistics by John R. Lott Jr., a professor at the University of Chicago, shows that areas of the country that had right to carry laws saw the number of multiple-victim shootings decline on average of 84 percent and deaths from these incidents plummeted by 90 percent, injuries by 82 percent. (3) American citizens who are law abiding, conscientious, and carry a concealed weapon or own a weapon provide a significant social service by making a criminal think twice about who might have a weapon and would the crime be worth it.

Results from an interview conducted by Ginny Simone with Keith Tidswell of Australia’s Sporting Shooters Association show that one year after Australian gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, including semi-automatic .22 rifles and shotguns, and a program costing the government over 500 million dollars a year was introduced and a dramatic increase in criminal activity has been experienced. Gun control advocates responded, “Just wait, we’ll be safer, you’ll see.” The observable facts after 12 months of data compilation shows that Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2%, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6%, Australia-wide, armed-robberies are up 44%, and in the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300%. The figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in homicides-with- firearms and the figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in armed-robbery- with-firearms. From 1910 to present, homicides in Australia had averaged about 1.8-per-100, 000 or lower which shows a safe society by any standard. The Australian politicians are on the spot and at a loss to explain how no improvement in “safety “has been observed after such monumental effort and expense was successfully expended in “ridding society of guns”. Their response has been to “wait longer”. (Australia: The Results Are In)

I quote Senator Hubert H. Humphrey to further show that the Second Amendment does give a citizen the right to bear arms and not to be regulated by the United States government:

“Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms…. The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.”(Americans on Self-Defense)

All of the great dictators of this era, Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin, were democratically elected and then confiscated the constituent s weapons and passed laws to keep them from owning a weapon. We do not need for this to happen in our country.

Gun control laws are a negative type of approach to controlling violence with firearms. Guns are used for defensive purposes about five times as often as they are used for crimes. John R. Lott, Jr. states that after examining a range of different policies that higher arrest and conviction rates, longer prison sentences, and death penalty generally reduce murders. But neither gun laws nor the severity of a punishment has any significant effects on public shootings. (2) A multivariate statistical analysis by Ik-Whan G. Kwon, et al, states that while the background checks do provide a small amount of results, the overall result showed that major firearm fatalities were associated with socioeconomic factors such as poverty levels and alcohol consumption. Unless the country directs itself to curing these ills, which have the greatest influence upon violent deaths by firearms, we shall continue to see people abuse their Second Amendment rights. (Kwon et al. 8) If the citizen cannot be responsible then he should lose his Second Amendment rights to bear arms.

Let us take for example the incident at Waco, Texas. The Branch Davidian complex was destroyed in a joint Federal Police (FBI, BATF, and Local Law Enforcement) and United States Military (Special Operations: Delta Force) coup. The United States law enforcement agencies and the Delta Force went out to Mount Carmel on an illegal weapons suspicion. The original reason for proceeding to Mount Carmel has been hidden by the federal government. The have stated, different reasons at different times, that they where out there for illegal weapons, child abuse, and drugs. The federal government has lied continuously about Waco to keep the public from becoming angered and not permitting a police state to develop in our country. The FBI has shown recently that they manufacture evidence and falsify reports used in criminal cases. The FBI s own official has stepped down amid the lies and manufacturing of evidence. Frederic Whitehurst, the FBI forensic chemist and lab supervisor, states that he was and is tired of the FBI falsifying his signature and manufacturing evidence. (FBI) Given such actions can we trust the United States government to be truthful and honest to American citizens? Do we not have freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the United States anymore? If you do not believe the information that I provide here, then do a search for Operation Urban Warrior on the Internet and read it for yourself. You will be shocked at what you find available. The Branch Davidians were all law abiding citizens and had the proper permits for the weapons that they owned. The United States government went to the Davidian church without a warrant in possession and the resulting massacre ensued.

The United States of America needs to wake up and take a long hard look at what has been transpiring behind closed doors at our nation s capital. Our society has lost the values and patriotism that our history provides. The average 16 year old high school student cannot tell you who Betsy Ross or Patrick Henry were or why they were famous. A person need only look into an American history book to understand what America really stands for or ask a military veteran. If our citizens and their children cannot believe in the ideals of what our country stands for, then we are truly lost. We need to take stock in America and bring back the idealism that made our country what it was and what it can be again. A person who forsakes their freedom for safety is a cowardly American citizen. We need to stand up for rights, both God given and Constitutional. It takes citizens who care about their liberty and country to do so. In the words of one of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, Either we all hang together or we will surely swing separately.

Works Cited

United States. Department of Defense. American Military Training Manual.

Washington: 1928

United States. United States National Archives. Bill of Rights. Washington: 1776

United States. House of Representatives 106th Congress. House resolution 407:


Lott, John R. Jr. Gun Show. National Review 31 May. 1999. Infotrack. Oct

1999. Saint Edward s U. 2 Oct 1999.

Infowars. 19 Sep 1999. 24 Oct 1999. NRA Live.

Americans on Self Defense. 23 Oct 1999.

Kwon, Ik-Whan G., et al. The effectiveness of gun control laws: multivariate

statistical analysis. American Journal of Economics and Sociology.

Jan. 1997 v56 n1 p41(10). Infotrack. Oct 1999. Saint Edward s U. 2 Oct


Friedan, Terry. FBI Whistle-blower leaves, gets $1.6 million. CNN. 14 Oct.

1999. A1-2.