How Do Lawful Gun Owners Help Public Safety?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights guarantee to the freedom to keep and bear arms. Groups pushing gun control are lamenting mourning the results of the 2024 presidential election because they recognize that their greatest supporter – President Joe Biden – is losing his bully pulpit. Law-abiding gun owners will no longer be one of the main targets of the federal government.

Amy Swearer shared her thoughts about the reverse fortunes of gun owners in her article posted at The Daily Signal. 

But ordinary lawful owners of firearms never have been the driving force behind violent crime.

Not only that, but they regularly rely on their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms to protect themselves and their loved ones from violent criminals when the government can’t or won’t be there to ensure their safety.

Almost every major study has found that Americans use their firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times annually, according to the most recent report on the subject by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2021, the most comprehensive study ever conducted on the issue concluded that roughly 1.6 million comprehensive study ever conducted on the issue concluded that roughly 1.6 million defensive gun uses occur in the United States every year.

For this reason, The Daily Signal publishes a monthly article highlighting some of the previous month’s many news stories on defensive gun use that you may have missed – or that might not have made it to the national spotlight in the first place….

The examples below represent only a small portion of the news stories on defensive gun use during crimes that we found in October. You may explore more by using The Heritage Foundation’s interactive Defensive Gun Use Database.

·         Oct. 1, Seattle: A woman came out the front door of her residence and pointed a shotgun at two process servers, police said. One of them, drawing his own gun, shot and killed the woman.

·         Oct. 7, Hubert, North Carolina: Police said a woman fatally shot her ex-boyfriend after he showed up at her home in violation of a protection order and climbed through a window. Local officials said the man had a lengthy history of domestic violence and was wearing a court-ordered ankle monitor after having violated protection orders at least twice before. He allegedly called the woman 26 times and sent her dozens of text messages in the hours before the deadly encounter.

·         Oct. 10, Sioux Fall, South Dakota: Several people wielding baseball bats confronted a group of motorcyclists at a gas station, mistakenly believing that they had jumped a friend earlier that night. After ducking to avoid a blow from a bat, one motorcyclist drew a gun and fatally shot two of the assailants. He also shot and wounded a woman who pointed a gun at him. Police confirmed that the motorcyclists weren’t involved in the original assault, calling it a case of mistaken identity.

·         Oct. 11, Cut Bank, Montana: Two juveniles broke into a car and stole a handgun before a resident confronted them, police said. One juvenile shot the resident in the leg with the handgun before another resident arrived  and, armed with his own firearm, held the shooter at gunpoint until police arrived. Both juveniles were taken into custody; the wounded resident was expected to recover.

·         Oct. 12, Poplar Bluff, Missouri: A woman shot and wounded a man as he illegally entered her home through her bedroom window early in the morning, police said. The suspect – who police said was caught on camera in 2022 trying to enter other homes – faced unspecified charges.

·         Oct. 16, Columbus, Ohio: When a newsstand employee caught a man trying to steal an item from a cooler, police said, the would-be thief drew a handgun and pointed it at him. The employee called for his nearby brother, who drew his own gun and shot and wounded the thief. He was charged with felony aggravated robbery.

·         Oct. 20, Upper Darby, Pennsylvania: After being kicked out of his girlfriend’s house during a dispute earlier in the day, a man returned, pinned her to the floor, and held a knife to her throat in front of her children. One of the children, a teenager, grabbed a firearm and fatally shot the man, police said.

·         Oct. 25, Chicago: When a bystander tried to intervene in a quarrel between a man and a woman on a public sidewalk, the man pointed a gun at him. The bystander – a concealed carry permit holder – drew his own gun and fatally shot his assailant. The incident occurred a day after two other Chicago gun owners successfully defended themselves against violent criminals.

·         Oct. 29, Stratford, Connecticut: Police said an armed resident confronted two would-be car thieves who he discovered breaking into his car, exchanging gunfire with them until they fled. The resident wasn’t hurt.

·         Oct. 31, New Iberia, Louisiana: A man broke into two residences and stabbed two victims – one in each home – before an armed resident in the second home shot and wounded him, police said. All three were taken to a hospital for treatment; the suspect was charged with attempted first-degree murder.

All of these lawful gun owners highlight just how important the right to keep and bear arms is to ordinary Americans.

Swearer explained that Second Amendment protections do not threaten public safety, as claimed by gun control activists. Good people bearing arms “will only threaten the safety of violent criminals” as “lawful gun owners want to defend themselves.”

Right to Bear Arms

            The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is the Second Amendment – again. As you most likely know, the Second Amendment states: “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.”

            I assume that you are as well versed on the wording of the Second Amendment as I am, and maybe you can quote it better. However, you may be interested in looking at this amendment in a slightly different light. I learned something today that I would like to share with you. It is something that I had never previously considered. I found it in an article published at The American Thinker in which Patrick Jakeway writes the following: 

In speaking with many fellow gun-owners, I have come to realize that most people don’t know that the Second Amendment does not give us the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment states that the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed”; it does not confer that right. The Second Amendment is an admonition to government that it may not take away your right to bear arms, which is inherent….

… It is our inherent, inborn right to protect ourselves and our families, bequeathed to us from our forefather’s blood and sacrifice in the many battles for liberty. It may not be legislated or interpreted away. It is not in the purview of the Supreme Court (or Congress, for that matter) to abolish the right to bear arms.

            Did you see it? Jakeway points out that the right to “keep and bear arms” is that same inherent right as protecting ourselves and our families. It was written in the Bill of Rights to tell the government to leave this right to self-protection alone. By stating that it is an inherent right, the Founders placed it in the same category as the rights outlined in the Declaration of Independence as follows.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed….

            Jakeway used inherent while the Declaration of Independence used unalienable, so I did a quick Google search to discern the meanings of the two words. Inherent means “existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute.” Its synonyms are: intrinsic, innate, immanent, built-in, indwelling, inborn, ingrained, deep-rooted. Unalienable "(or inalienable – they are interchangeable) means “unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.” So both definitions state that something that is inherent or unalienable is permanent and unable to be taken away.

            In other words, the government cannot take the right to keep and bear arms away from law-abiding Americans because it did not bestow the right in the first place. The Bill of Rights merely says that the government does not have the power to infringe on this inherent right.

Second Amendment

                The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday is the importance of the right to keep and bear arms, which is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  This right has been threatened since 1976 when the National Council to Control Handguns, later known as the Brady Campaign, activated their three-part plan to make handguns illegal.  Part one of the plans was to slow down the number of handguns produced and purchased in our nation.   The Brady Campaign has worked diligently for the past thirty-eight years to stop Americans from owning handguns.  The fight against those who desire to take our guns continues, and the NRA continues to stand in their way.  The following information comes from their legislative activity report.

                    In 2007, then-Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, signed a bill that restricted the sale of semi-automatic handguns.  The bill was passed and signed even though there is evidence that “microstamping” is ineffective in solving or reducing crime.  “In January, America’s two largest handgun manufacturers – Smith & Wesson and Sturm, Ruger & Co. – announced that they will stop selling new semi-automatic handguns in California, rather than comply with the state’s `microstamping’ law.  The law applies not only to entirely new models of handguns, but also to any current production handgun approved by the state’s Roster Board, if such handguns are modified with any new feature or characteristic, however minor.”  (See “California’s Most Ambitious Handgun Ban Now Underway,” America’s First Freedom, April 2014, p. 58.)

                All is not lost – yet – because we have some judges who actually know what the Constitution says and rules by it.  New York recently enacted a gun control law known as “SAFE Act.”  The Act was taken to court by plaintiffs who were led by the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) and backed by the NRA.  The case “launched a focused attack on the highest-priority targets.  Three provisions were challenged as violating the Second Amendment.  These included the Act’s expanded bans on what it termed `assault weapons’ and `large capacity ammunition feeding devices,’ and its requirement that magazines contain no more than seven rounds, whatever their capacity.  Various aspects of the law were also challenged as being so vague as to violate constitutional due process.  Finally, the Act’s ban on direct Internet sales of ammunition was said to violate Congress’ preeminent role under the Constitution in regulating interstate commerce.”

                U.S. District Judge William M. Skretny, Western District of New York, issued his decision in the case in the “closing hours of 2013.”  “Several aspects of Judge Skretny’s decision represent victories for the Second Amendment.  Yet the decision let stand other offending aspects of the law, ensuring the fight will continue to vindicate the rights of competent, peaceable New Yorkers to own and use some of America’s most common and popular arms.  The story contains important lessons for gun owners in every state.”  (See Chris W. Cox, “Neither `SAFE’ Nor Sorry,” First Freedom, p. 52.)

                Chicago instituted “a ban on firearm sales and transfers within the city.”  The law went to court, courtesy of the “Illinois Association of Firearms Retailers and three individuals, with the backing of the NRA.”  On January 6, U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang of the Northern District of Illinois invalidated the ban. (See “Chicago’s Firearm Transfer Ban Falls to Second Amendment Ruling,” First Freedom, p. 59.)

                Detroit, long under Democrat control, has seen more than its share of crime.  In fact, it had the” highest murder rate of any major U.S. city” in 2012.  “In early January, the Detroit News reported that the city’s police chief, James Craig, offered a solution by suggesting that law-abiding citizens obtain concealed carry permits.  That’s not a position typically espoused by big-city police chiefs.  And Chief Craig didn’t always think that way either.

                “According to the article, Craig had worked for nearly 30 years in the Los Angeles Police Department, before moving east to become the police chief in Portland, Maine.  It was there that he started believing that law-abiding gun owners could deter crime.”  (See “Detroit Police Chief Agrees:  More Guns, Less Crime,” First Freedom, p. 59.)

                The importance of defending the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms cannot be stressed too much.  It is this right that protects all other rights.  History has proven time and time again that when citizens lose this right, their own governments kill them.  It happened in Germany, Russia, and numerous other places.  We do not want it to happen here!

Right to Keep and Bear Arms

                The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday comes from the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:  “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.”  This Amendment gives the American people the right to own and carry guns without inference from the government.

                W. Cleon Skousen explained, “… In the early history of the country the state militia was made up of private citizens, who usually furnished their own arms.  Thus, during the Revolutionary War, the Minutemen could be assembled on very short notice and arrayed into a formidable military force because each man had his own weapons.

                “Today the state militia is that body of citizens which, under law, can be called up by the governor or Congress to protect the rights and security of the people, or enforce the law.

                “Many Americans do not even realize that they belong to the militia of their state.  They confuse their state militia with the National Guard, which is a specialized reserve corps in each state trained at federal expense for immediate service.

                “Under Title 10, section 31 of the U.S. Code, the militia of each state includes `all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and under 45 years of age who are or have [made] a declaration of intent to become citizens.

                “If the Equal Rights Amendment had been adopted, this provision would also include all females between those ages.”  (See The Making of America – The Substance and Meaning of the Constitution, p. 694.)

                Nelson Lund at The Heritage Foundation explained further, “Modern debates about the meaning of the Second Amendment have focused on whether it protects a right of individuals to keep and bear arms or, instead, a right of the states to maintain militia organizations like the National Guard.  This question, however, was apparently never even discussed for a long time after the Bill of Rights was framed.  The early discussions took the basic meaning of the amendment largely for granted and focused instead on whether it actually added anything significant to the original Constitution.  The debate has shifted primarily because of subsequent developments in the Constitution and in constitutional law.

                “The Founding generation mistrusted standing armies.  Many Americans believed, on the basis of English history and their colonial experience, that central governments are prone to use armies to oppress the people.  One way to reduce that danger would be to permit the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries.  For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or similar emergencies, the government might be restricted to using a militia, consisting of ordinary civilians who supply their own weapons and receive a bit of part-time, unpaid military training.”  (See The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, pp. 318-319.)

History Lesson

                The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America was written to protect American citizens from tyranny.  The Framers of our Constitution understood the importance of citizens having the right to keep and bear arms.  During the Revolutionary War American rebels had similar fire power to that used by the British soldiers.  It only makes sense for modern citizens to have the same firing power that the government might use against them. 

The American Revolution would not have taken place if guns were controlled.  Britain’s soldiers confiscated all firearms possible in order to control the American rebels.  The Battles of Lexington and Concord took place because the Americans were unwilling to let the British soldiers take their stores of gun powder, etc.  Americans won those battles because they used guerilla tactics:  they made quick strikes and then faded into the trees only to come out again in another place to do more damage.

Some people consider it silly for American gun owners to think they can wage war against the most powerful nation on earth today.  I suppose it would be silly if they planned to meet on a battlefield, but I do not suppose that any modern revolutionary would consider doing that!

The United States – and France before them – lost a war in Vietnam because the Viet Cong used guerilla tactics.  Russia lost the war in Afghanistan against villagers who were defending their homes.  Last year Libya was taken over by revolutionaries, and today the Syrian government is having a difficult time putting down revolutionaries in their country.  

All these revolutionaries were/are fighting against stronger firepower, but none were fighting on a battlefield.  They used and still use guerilla tactics – a quick strike here and a quick strike there.  They attack when and where they choose and then evade; they force the stronger side to defend everything.  Unless today’s stronger force is willing to bomb entire towns – think of the urban warfare in Iraq – the aircraft and tanks are useless.  If “the people” support the revolutionaries, it is almost impossible to discern the “guilty” from the “innocent.”  The revolutionaries might not win, but they could force a dictator to bring the international community over to their side and against the dictator.  This kind of warfare has been proven successful time and again.

There is another part of gun history that should be included here.  Gun control is not about guns; it is about governments trying to control citizens. Only a government that is afraid of its own citizens tries to control them; some examples of how governments “controlled” their citizens are as follow.  The dates and the numbers may be wrong, but the general idea is correct.  I know because much of this tyranny occurred in my lifetime, and I have heard the news reports on bodies being found.

Turkey established gun control in 1911.  Between 1915 and 1917, the government exterminated 1.5 million unarmed Armenians who were unable to defend themselves.

 The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929.  Between 1929 and 1953, the government exterminated 20 million unarmed dissidents who were unable to defend themselves.

China established gun control in 1935.  Between 1948 and 1952, the government exterminated 20 million political dissidents who were unarmed and unable to defend themselves.

Germany established gun control in 1938.  Between 1939 and 1945, the government exterminated 13 million unarmed Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956.  Between 1975 and 1977, the government exterminated 1,000,000 educated people who were unarmed and unable to defend themselves.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964.  Between 1964 and 1981, the government exterminated 100,000 Mayan Indians who were unarmed and unable to defend themselves.

Uganda established gun control in 1970.  Between 1971 and 1979, the government exterminated 300,000 Christians who were unarmed and unable to defend themselves.

This makes a grand total of 56 million people who were rounded up and exterminated in the 20^th Century – people who were unarmed and unable to defend themselves. 

The Second Amendment states that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed, and the Supreme Court has ruled that Americans have the right to keep and bear arms.  I believe that this means we can keep any gun that we can carry. 

The Second Amendment to the Constitution is in place just in case politicians ignore our other rights.  Only people who are free have the right to keep and bear arms; they do not ask permission to bear arms.  This makes them citizens; when this right is taken away, the citizen becomes a subject or a slave.  Wise and prudent citizens understand that the day may come when they have to fight to protect their rights.  They know that honest, law-abiding citizens do not shoot to kill but to stay alive.  They understand that citizens who know guns also know peace and safety, but citizens with no guns also have no peace or safety.  They understand that there are millions of firearm owners who never kill anyone but provide peace and security for everyone.

Two quotes attributed to two famous Founders should be remembered by all Americans.  “Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.”  (Thomas Jefferson)  “Those who trade liberty for security have neither.”  (John Adams)

Americans should be applauding and thanking gun owners instead of trying to disarm them.  It is the honest, law-abiding gun owners who are protecting the freedoms and liberties that we enjoy.  Remember that the Constitution of the United States of America was copyrighted in 1791 and all Rights are preserved by it.  

Save the Second Amendment

                    The liberty principle for this Free Friday is the need to oust President Obama in order to save our Right to Keep and Bear Arms - Second Amendment Rights.  The Obama Administration, like the fine liberals/progressives that they are, wants to take away our right to own and use firearms.  If you believe that Americans should continue to have these rights, make sure that you are registered to vote in the November 2012 election and then go vote for the Republican candidate.

                    In an article in the May 2012 issue of America's 1st Freedom magazine, David A. Keene wrote, "Americans have the Second Amendment, but one wonders how long it will survive in the face of continual assaults on our rights envisioned by a president with a lifelong antipathy to firearms.  Neither the reminder from the Supreme Court that the founders did indeed intend to guarantee the right of Americans to `keep and bear arms' when they adopted the Bill of Rights, nor the empirical evidence that gun bands, gun registries and the like cost billions to establish and have virtually no impact on criminals, will dissuade Obama from his ideological commitment to disarm law-abiding Americans and abolish the shooting sports.

                    "Those of us who are both committed supporters of the Second Amendment and involved in the political process know just what we have to do between now and Nov. 6, but did you know that as many as 25 million gun owners in this country aren't even registered to vote?  The next time you take to the field, visit the range or visit a gun shop or show, ask those you run into if they are registered and intend to vote this fall.  If they aren't, urge them to register immediately.

                    "Go to www.triggerthevote.com to register to vote today.  If all of us register and vote we can secure our rights.  If we don't, who will we have to blame when our Second Amendment rights, along with other freedoms, vanish?"  [This site has a cute video worth watching.]

                    It is an old but still true statement that "when guns are banned, only criminals will have guns."  I often think about London during the riots last summer and how homeowners and law-abiding citizens had no way to protect their homes and families from the mobs that vandalized them.  Citizens bearing arms is our last defense.  Please help us protect the right to own and bear guns by voting Obama out of office! 

Could You Shoot An Intruder?

                    If someone forced themselves into your home, could you shoot them?  A recent news article by Rene Lynch in the Los Angeles Times and the story in it presented great evidence of why being an armed citizen is necessary.  Sarah McKinley, an 18-year-old widow and mother of a 3-month-old baby, used a shotgun to defend herself and her son against two men who broke into her home on New Year's Eve.  She will not face charges in connection with the shooting because she acted in self-defense. 

                    McKinley's husband died on Christmas Day of lung cancer.  Less than a week later, Justin Shane Martin (24) and Dustin Louis Stewart (29), reportedly high on prescription drugs, forced themselves into her home looking for more drugs.  One of them knew that someone in that home had recently died of cancer and suspected that narcotics might still be in the residence.  When the men began pounding on the door of her mobile home, McKinley wedged a sofa up against the front door to stop the intruders.  She moved her infant into the bedroom and called 9-1-1 to ask permission to shoot if necessary.

                    Twenty-one minutes later she was still on the line with the dispatcher when Martin broke through the door and past the couch.  McKinley was standing in the door of her bedroom with her shotgun.  No law enforcement officers were in sight.  Martin died with a knife in his gloved hand, and Stewart later turned himself in to the police and confessed.  He is facing first-degree murder charges.

                    There appears to be little confusion about what happened in the home because much of the ordeal was captured on the 9-1-1 recording.  McKinley told the dispatcher that there was a guy at her door and that she was alone with her infant.  She asked permission to shoot if the guy came through the door.  The dispatcher, Diane Graham, told her that she couldn't give her permission to shoot but told her to "do what you have to do to protect your baby."

                    McKinley held off as long as she could in an attempt to wait for police to arrive.  It was only when Martin came through the door that she blasted him.  She "feels bad" that she shot him, but she has "no regrets" about defending herself and her son.

 

                    I thought a lot about McKinley's experience and wondered if I could do the same thing.  A mother's love for her child is very strong, and yet life itself is very dear.  I wondered if I really could pull the trigger and kill another human being or would I be too concerned about legal and eternal consequences.  I am in no way judging McKinley and what she did because I understand that she was in a position where she had to defend herself or possibly suffer horrible results.  We will never know what would have happened to McKinley and her son, Justin, if she had not shot the intruder, but we do know that the men were on drugs and had at least one knife when they broke into her home.

                    I also thought, she is only 18 years old and look at the hard life she faces.  She is a widow with an infant son to rear and now has to have this shooting on her conscience.  I thought of myself, my daughters, and other young women at age eighteen and realize that we were all very naïve and sheltered.  This poor woman!

                    Then I thought of the 21 minutes of terror, 21 minutes waiting for police to arrive.  What if it was only five or ten minutes?  The terror would have been just as great and the result would have been the same.  How long would it be before police could arrive at my home?

                    Maybe McKinley could have prevented the forced entry if she had shouted "I have a shotgun, and I will shoot you if you come through my door!"  Maybe she did warn them.  Maybe she didn't.  It is a horrible dilemma for anyone to face! 

The fact remains that McKinley was prepared to defend herself and she lived through the ordeal.  She is not the only American prepared for defense.  Every month when my Freedom Magazine arrives from the National Rifle Association (NRA) I read true stories of other armed citizens who used their Right to Keep and Bear Arms to protect themselves and their families.  Not all of them have to kill the attackers or intruders, but the fact that they had guns loaded and available protected them and their property.

I understand that gun and ammunition sales increased greatly upon the election of Barack Obama.  I also understand that there was another increase in sales in recent months when Americans saw mobs in Europe attacking and robbing unarmed people who could not defend themselves and recognized that the same thing could happen here.  More and more Americans are arming themselves and preparing to protect themselves, their families, and their property.  How about you?  Could you shoot an intruder? 

                    

Voter Apathy

Do you or do you not want to be free? Every issue concerning Americans at this time is about freedom: bailouts, buyouts, backroom deals in Washington, out-of-control spending, illegal immigration, drug cartel violence, or government takeover of everything. It is all about lessening the freedoms that Americans enjoy.

Election day will be November 2. These elections will have consequences about the freedoms we enjoy and will affect generations yet to come. The Obama Administration and their cohorts in Congress have been taking freedoms away from Americans for more than a year and half. Poll after poll has shown that there are far more conservatives and independents in the United States that liberals and progressives. We can "take our country back" if we all go to the polls and vote for conservatives.

We must not fall for the stories coming from mainstream media. They are telling us that Americans are angry enough to vote all incumbents out of office. They are trying to lull us into apathy in order to keep us from going to the polls to vote. They want us to think that we don't need to worry about voting because "everyone else" will be there. They want us to believe that we don't need to worry or pay attention because the angry citizens are coming. Freedom-loving Americans must not fall for their siren song.

Gun owners may be one group of Americans that may be feeling safe. There were razor-thin victories in the U.S. Supreme Court in two different cases concerning the Second Amendment. Both District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago were decided in favor of freedom by a margin of one vote. Since Heller was decided two years ago, President Obama has appointed two liberal justices to the Supreme Court. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is constantly under attack.

I encourage all Americans - not just those who own guns - to join the National Rifle Association (NRA) in order to add more voices and votes for freedom. "From the birth of our nation at Lexington and Concord, right up until today, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is the single most important safeguard and symbol of freedom in the American experience.
"The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is what secures the sovereignty of `We the People.'"

Remember to "Vote Freedom First" on November 2!

Ideas and quotes for this post are from an article by Wayne LaPierre and Chris W. Cox in America's First Freedom, October 2010, pp 32-36).