Click on banner above to read some of his articles.

Implications to Society

Note: This article is not meant to provide statistical analysis or attempt to convince people to lobby Congress to remove restrictions on firearms.

Congress was prohibited by the Bill of Rights, Article IV to infringe on that right and there is a volume of material already available to provide favorable statistical information. The focus here is to paint a picture of what a free society exercising their right to keep and bear arms will look like and the benefits to society of being armed, as well as the economic benefit to arms manufacturers in a free economy.

I will be exploring a very brief observation of the historic reason for weapons, the utility of firearms over other inferior weapons, as well as their contribution to American life in history without passing ethical judgment on the men who wielded them. My focus in this article is on firearms and our inherent, God-given right of self-defense, which by necessity when you consider what we’re defending against, requires firearms.

This article will deal with what I consider to be the most important right we possess, which if we’re denied the ability to exercise it will make exercising the rest problematic to say the least; the natural right of self-defense, specifically our right to keep and bear arms.

Our Creator endowed us with intellect and reason; substantially setting us apart from the beasts we share this world with. It is through that ability that we’ve learned to make fire and fashion weapons to hunt food and protect us from others that attack either our life or property. The natural right to keep and bear arms of any type is mankind’s resource to protect his other rights from other men, as well as the beasts of the earth, such as lions, bears, poisonous snakes, etc. Without our ability to successfully defend the most basic of rights or our life, we would soon find ourselves extinct as a species or subjects of the most despicable of tyrants.

Our ancestors in America survived primarily using firearms. Yes, they used other implements of war, as well as snares, traps, and other means, but firearms, since their invention, have always been the premier weapon of choice for anyone who could obtain one, since a lead projectile fired at high velocity was more effective than any of the other means of removing a threat or putting meat on the table.

While primarily thought of as an implement of war, firearms were primarily used to put meat on the table and repel threats in defense of natural rights, more than to impose their will on others. Since most people possessed arms in early America it was much more difficult to attack them. Many, if not most people today, owe their existence to the use of firearms by one or more of their ancestors in the defense of life, liberty and property. Had they been unsuccessful by using an inferior weapon, they would have died; and their line, which includes you, would never have existed.

Today most Americans live under governments that wish to remove their arms and are openly attacking their natural right of self-defense in contravention of their oath to support the Constitution. They are seeking to regulate away our ability to exercise that right.

This assault against our arms has been ongoing since shortly after the Civil War, when organizations, such as the KKK and political parties such as the Democrat Party, sought to keep arms out of the hands of freed slaves; specifically blacks.

The problem with denying one group of people the peaceable enjoyment of their natural rights is that the effort ends up denying all of us in the end. What is done out of fear and ignorance more often than not, comes back to harm everyone but is always a benefit to government; especially when it regards our ability to repel their attacks against our rights as individuals.

This is what all government officers are sworn to support and defend with relationship to the right to keep and bear arms:

“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, The Fourth Article of Amendment proposed to Congress.

The rights of the people to arm, organize, and defend their natural rights, which include life, liberty, and property, requires the availability of the arms necessary for that purpose. All governments, both state and Federal, have sworn an oath to abide by the terms of the Constitution, of which the Bill of Rights is a vital part.

By that one sentence in the Bill of Rights, it is clear that government is prohibited from infringing in any manner on our pre-existing right to keep and bear arms of any type or configuration we require, whatsoever. The first Congress slammed the door on any debate on the matter.

An armed society is a polite society

Now let us explore what a free armed society of people might look like. For some of you, that is not a problem, since not all states have made gun ownership as difficult as the Federal Government would like. Criminals flee armed communities because their victims can and will fight back, resulting in a particularly unsafe work environment for their chosen professions. Clerks can shoot armed robbers, women can shoot rapists, everyone can shoot muggers, as well as anyone else who attacks us. Peace officers, after it is established that a murder has been stopped, can merely call the coroner to clean up the mess, fill out some paperwork, and rest easy knowing that the people removed another pest from society by defending themselves. If there is any question regarding motive, an inquest, (CLGJ), can be called to determine the facts.

Since Congress is prohibited from infringing on our right to keep and bear arms, (Fourth Article of Amendment), it exempts the arms industry from many Federal regulatory powers internal as well as external, since those regulations would infringe on the American people’s right. We should have access to any arms required for Militia use, to repel any threat, including threats from arbitrary and criminal government.

As government becomes more sophisticated in their arms the Militia must have the freedom to keep pace, in fact, Congress is required under Article I, Section 8, and clause 16 to facilitate that:

“To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;”

Arms are an integral part of a free society; free men are armed, slaves are not. In an armed society, most people will never have to fire a weapon except to practice and remain proficient. Most ammunition would be expended into targets or wild game, not the body of another human being. Government wouldn’t dare attack the natural rights of the people, since every council meeting or courtroom would be attended by armed spectators jealous of their rights.

Members of Congress wouldn’t be passing or even supporting unconstitutional legislation against our natural rights if they had to face armed people at their next town hall meeting. In short, the freedom to exercise our rights, all of them, would be much more secure.

Today we live under a dictatorship in Washington, D.C. The Office of President has been usurped, with the aid and comfort of all three branches of the Federal Government and with the tacit approval of the states who continue to comply with the Federal government and impose its usurpation and taxation on the people of America.

Barack Obama is attempting to use any device he can conceive to deny us the power to exercise our natural right to defend ourselves from the Islamic and international forces he is bringing into our communities in order to subjugate us and destroy the Republic. I can see no question as to his intent or doubt of the complicity of so many today in government to his criminal and treasonous activity. There is one thing distressing Obama and his loyal subjects though.

Armed Americans who have refused to comply with his demands and have been building their inventories of arms and ammunition in preparation of the conflict to come. Our natural right to keep and bear arms, protected by the Bill of Rights, is the only thing holding off a much greater tyranny than we already have.

When Americans once again exercise their right to not only own, but bear arms throughout their day, government will be much less inclined to reach the state we see today… arm up America.

©2015 by Thomas Mick, All Rights Reserved.
Permission to distribute for non-commercial purposes is hereby granted, in whole or part, provided attribution and a link to this article is included. Commercial distribution without the written permission of the author is prohibited.

Views: 189

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

So, what's your disagreement with me, Bill. Like in a host of other matters, the courts have misapplied, misinterpreted the 14th's original intent and meaning. The original Constitution, and the original14th in particular, have been effectively nullified by renegade, agenda-driven judges. And We the People and our faithless "representatives"have  routinely condoned it. Also, the 14th, as originally intended, is fine. It's what the courts and the People have done that renders the amendment horrible and destructive.

My apologies.  The courts have not misinterpreted the 14th.  They openly lie about the meaning of "United States' when it comes to citizenship and thereby impose it where the constitution forbids.

When it comes to actual physical places and citizenship, the term 'United States' refers exclusively to places exclusively under fed control and people who are first and foremost federal citizens instead of state citizens.  A class of people who attain no protections from any state constitution.

Before the 14th, stating you were a citizen of the United States only meant you were a citizen of a territory or a state since the United States / fed gov, had specifically been forbidden citizens.

After the 14th, it means you are first and foremost a citizen of the fed gov. This is important because the United States has always been under old Roman civil / municipal law where the gov and not the people are sovereign.

Yes. Emancipated slaves were incorporated as US Citizens, a special, distinct class of citizen, quite apart from regular US Citizens. So many simply don't understand that. 

Courts lie about the meaning of the Constitution by faithlessly misinterpreting it.

To the post directly below: No one but whites could be citizens before the 14th.  The 14th created a new citizenship in the fed gov that anyone could take advantage for even though its primary focus was the negro.

Please do not use the terms US or United States in regard to citizenship. US stands for United States and that denotes federal citizenship.  I refer to it in the only way it cannot be misinterpreted by a court. State-only citizen. Meaning you are only a citizen of your state.

"Organizations that lobby and pander to politicians seem more interested in the conflict not winning against usurpation; they get caught up in the act of compromise, which converts the rights they're supposedly defending into privileges. When a right is secure and the government is conducting itself appropriately there is no fight, only peace. As an appropriate example, people don't contribute to gun rights organizations when there is no threat and revenue for those organizations drops proportionately; such organizations thrive on the fight not the end of the usurpation.'

'In my opinion, there has been no real threat to our right to keep and bear arms since December 15, 1791, only perceived threats by those violating their oaths through legislation that is void on its face. Organizations formed for the defense of all our rights are called Militias, which are the very reason the right to keep and bear arms was enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Militias are the people at arms, organized for the defense of the natural rights (life, liberty, and property) of the community. When government attacks our rights, it loses its legitimacy in the American system, which then justifies calling up the Militia to repel such attacks." -- Thomas Mick​, "The Defense of our Natural Rights", 2014-2015, All Rights Reserved.

Read more at:


© 2019   Created by Online Professor.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service