How Do We End the Constant Fight for Our 2nd Amendment Civil Right?

The Short Answer:

  1. Pass Federal law to remove State power over Civil Rights. The law would function to safeguard the Bill of Rights from both the Federal and State governments. The law would insure that every American Citizen has Equal Rights in all 50 States. Crossing a State border should not alter anyone’s Civil Rights. This would address the root of the problem, while what we’ve been doing – fighting one single gun law at a time – has resulted in a permanent game of Whack-A-Mole. Therefore, removing the government’s ABILITY to create anti-Civil Rights laws would remedy the core problem. Both State and Federal law should only serve to safeguard the Bill of Rights. The goal here is not to affect the rights States have to pass other types of laws.
  2. Push politicians to work on reducing the size of the government in total and thereby reducing taxes. Currently, middle class working homeowners pay over 50% of their income in taxes, registrations, and fees. We are now working for the government, rather than it working for us. I believe this is the underlying reason behind the government’s coordinated legal and media attack on our Civil Right to Bear Arms and our Freedom of Speech.
  3. Redefine the government’s purpose/function to better serve the people. What do we need the government to do FOR us? Regarding Civil Rights, their only function should be to safeguard them. The constant fight for our own Civil Rights against a government we finance needs to end. We pay the government in taxes, we pay rights organizations and attorneys to fight it – so essentially we’re paying to fight ourselves.
  4. If all else fails – do what they’ve been doing, what Bloomberg does – BUY Politicians, Judges, and District Attorneys. If you have the finances to pay off these people, they will pass whatever laws you’d like. This is actually the way it works. For us to pretend otherwise with all we’ve seen, is pure naivety. If Bloomberg wanted pro-2nd Amendment laws, he’d have them.

Notes on these proposed solutions: In proposing these solutions, I am trying to think outside of the box that has been drawn for us. We’ve been told to wait, to vote, to plea and beg, and to depend on gun organizations for solutions. Doing all that, we’ve been incrementally losing our rights and have come to the point where we have more gun laws than any reasonable person can be expected to know.

I believe a new approach is required, and that we must be flexible in our thinking.

This page will keep evolving and if anyone ever has anything deeper or better to add to this short list – please send me an email and I will modify these thoughts to reflect the best possible approach. We need a new roadmap to secure our rights, that much I know for sure.

Yvette Bronx lays out the perspective from which we should view our government, and from which it should view us, during a Virginia 2nd Amendment Sanctuary hearing.

For Longer Discussion and More Thought on this, Continue Here...
  1. The US Constitution does not protect our rights. This is evidenced by the fact that State governments have already passed laws that severely curtail or all together remove 2nd Amendment rights. Residents of CA, HI, NY, NJ, IL, MA, MD, & CT are clearly experiencing a curtailment or deletion of rights through various laws.
  2. The structure of the Judicial system creates an imbalance of power in the government’s favor regarding passage of State laws that effect 2nd Amendment rights. State governments can swiftly pass laws which curtail civil rights; however for taxpayers to contest such laws, places an enormous burden of time and financial expenditure on taxpayers. Lack of a path for the people to address legal issues, specifically those related to Civil Rights, in both a timely and cost effective manner; arguably places an unjust burden upon the people.  An expedient and cost effective approach are unavailable.
  3. Police are not bearing their burden of the responsibility to uphold the U.S. Constitution. By passing laws that directly violate the 2nd Amendment, a basic civil right, State governments are placing law enforcement in the precarious position of having to decide between upholding an unjust law or questioning it according to the oath they took. Thus far, the majority police are choosing the former, with a handful of sheriffs in rural/suburban areas speaking out and stating that they will not enforce laws that undermine civil rights. Police have an obligation to uphold the U.S. Constitution and many are ignoring it.
  4. Single Issue Voting. The fact that the 2nd Amendment is being used by politicians as a polarizing talking point is giving rise to many single issue voters.  I am one of them.  I may not share a candidate’s overall views, but I would never vote for a candidate that is anti-2nd Amendment.  Why?  Because I and many other people, do not consider the 2nd Amendment to be a single issue.  We consider it to be the freedom upon which every other Civil Right rests. This also works in reverse, many people will not vote for PRO-2nd Amendment politicians, regardless of how good their other positions may be.  It is unfair to society that their very rights are being used as bargaining chips.  Civil Rights should be carved in stone.
  5. Incrementalism: This is the technique that politicians are using to slowly strip the American gun owner of every firearm he or she owns. Politicians package their legislation as “common sense”, and through the use of “feel good” laws they purport to “solve” problems that truly don’t exist. This is so politicians can tell their constituents that they “did” something without actually doing anything.
  6. Gun Rights Organizations.  What???  How can gun rights organizations be part of our problem? Gun rights organizations work in a manner that is uncoordinated, divided, and greatly dispersed.  Their techniques for reaching people are outdated as they do not use modern/aggressive marketing and advertising techniques, and all too often they appeal only to middle aged and older white males.  It is important to realize that we are up against Bloomberg money.  He is a multi-billionaire, a strong leader, and a businessman.  He finances organizations who do conduct coordinated attacks on the 2nd Amendment such as EVERYTOWN for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action.  Visit their websites, see what we need to match.
The government is actively EXPANDING its own rights while incrementally and continually LIMITING ours.

Let’s Stimulate Thinking by Asking a Few Questions:

  1. Do our individual rights exist because our government mandates them or gives us permission to have them?
  2. Do our rights exist because of the Bill of Rights?  Or, is every free human being born with innate rights?
  3. Civil Rights – do they belong to the people, or to the government?
  4. Is it not dangerous for a government to have the power to turn a citizen who has committed no crime into a felon via legislation alone, as it does with many new firearm laws?  Currently, crossing certain State borders with a firearm will make you an instant felon.
  5. How and when did the government get the power to edit our rights?  How do we remove or limit that power?
  6. Many Americans say the solution is voting.  Are your rights up for a VOTE?  Should any Civil Right be decided by a vote?
  7. What happens if the majority in this nation is comprised of those who are poorly educated, or those who are easy to manipulate?  Should everyone else suffer and potentially lose their civil rights due to this?
  8. Do you believe that every American, or even every person, is born FREE – with all the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights, regardless of the existence of this nation and this government?  More specifically – are we not all born with the right to arm and defend ourselves?
  9. Why do we allow freedom which was won with the blood and suffering of many soldiers throughout history, to be taken by corrupt men in suits who use pens and money to undo that work?  Is it not disrespectful to the memory of those who sacrificed everything for us?
  10. How can our government continue to exist and to serve us – without restricting or violating Civil Rights?

The Solution Addresses the Problems Outlined Above.

  1. The U.S. Constitution does not protect our rights – An American should be able to travel across the entire nation and have equal rights in every state.  Civil Rights currently vary per state, and crossing a border can mean you become a criminal without committing a crime.  To solve this, Pro-2nd Amendment legal actions must begin to attack the very ability States currently possess to create laws that specifically target any Civil Right outlined in the Bill of Rights.  In the long run this will prevent us from constantly playing the game of “whack-a-mole” by ending the necessity of fighting one illegal anti-2nd Amendment law at a time.  Magazine laws, carry laws, storage laws, licensing laws, make-model restrictions, feature restrictions, the list goes on…  Individual freedom and Civil Rights should be uniform in every State within the United States.
  2. The structure of the Judicial system creates an imbalance of power in the government’s favor regarding passage of State laws that effect 2nd Amendment rights.  No one is asking the question – why is it that the State has the power to quickly pass laws that remove 2nd Amendment rights, but for the people to contest those laws is excessively burdensome from both a financial perspective and due to the length of time it takes to have grievances addressed.  This is a gross imbalance of power.  The people paid taxes to finance the government, and so the people should have equal power in contesting laws made against their civil rights.  Legally, we need to go after the process in place to insure that taxpayers may address anti-2nd Amendment legislation in both a timely AND cost effective manner.  At a minimum, we should be able to contest unjust laws with the same speed in which they are passed.  Ideally, States should be legally restricted from ever passing such laws as outlined in point 1.
  3. Police are not bearing their burden of the responsibility to uphold the U.S. Constitution.  Police need to start speaking up and speaking out, much like Colorado Weld County’s Sheriff Steve Reams or this Federal Officer in Virginia.  It is time for police to bear their burden of the responsibility in all of this.  If you as a police officer enforce laws that directly violate Civil Rights and the U.S. Constitution – you are no longer “just doing your job”, and you have ceased working for the taxpayer.  Police aren’t like us – they are US, and I hope they realize that. They work, raise families, and pay taxes. They live under the same web of unjust laws that we do, and they are our neighbors, family, and friends in many cases.  To help police speak out, we must aggressively and passionately support the ones that have the will to step up, and we must encourage every police to do so by speaking to them.  They know firsthand what real criminals look like, and with that knowledge they realize that the average American citizen is not their enemy.  However, if they consciously choose to work for an authoritarian government instead of the people, they actively become our violent oppressors.
  4. Single Issue Voting.  Lawyers should attack campaign legislation in a way that would prevent candidates from using Civil Rights outlined on the Bill of Rights as campaign talking points. Politicians should not have the ability to use civil rights as bargaining chips against taxpayers, as it inherently undermines the Bill of Rights and the purpose of the U.S. Constitution.
  5. Incrementalism.  The first step in solving the problem of incrementalism is recognizing and understanding it.  In our current environment you can follow the creation and progression of gun legislation in places like NY and NJ on a timeline, and come to the logical conclusion that within 2-3 generations those states will have effectively repealed the 2nd Amendment.  To solve the problem we must change the way we mount our legal battles against laws that violate 2nd Amendment Rights.  We must use law to dissect the process which gives States the power to pass legislation that undermines the 2nd Amendment, and we must also legally scrutinize the process that is in place for taxpayers to contest such laws with regard to lack of timely appeals and the financial burden placed on the taxpayer.  Any historic laws which violate our 2nd Amendment Civil Rights currently on State law books, should be removed.  The goal is to restore the 2nd Amendment so that Americans have equal rights nationwide.
  6. Gun Rights Organizations.  Perhaps the most difficult item on the list to address, but with the simplest solution.  Dear local and national Gun Rights Organizations: SPEAK TO EACH OTHER AND WORK TOGETHER.  You are going up against Bloomberg level coordination and money with Charlie Brown funding and efficiency.  Pool your resources, communicate often and aggressively, and set up common goals.  There is no reason, for example, why every gun organization doesn’t file an Amicus Brief for every single gun rights case in the court’s system.  Why is it surprising when an out of state gun organization files an Amicus Brief for one of our NJ cases?  This small item should be common practice.  A greater effort would be coordinated nationwide, multi-state legal attacks which pool the resources of multiple organizations for a common goal.  How about creating a current court case database/directory?  Widen your appeal and membership by hiring modern marketing/PR/advertising firms to increase your appeal across the full spectrum of gun owners.  There is strength in numbers.

Laws written by politicians should NEVER turn innocent taxpayers into criminals. A crime requires an ACT. Currently our government is legislating us into criminals, though we’ve committed NO crime.

The ELEPHANT in the Room

Is Civil War or Armed Resistance EVER the Answer?

  1. Civil War.  People calling for or stating that there will be a Civil War really don’t understand what WAR is.  War is not anything like the movies or television, and it is more horrible a prospect than most people can accurately imagine.  Civil War might occur if we experienced a near complete or complete breakdown of our entire societal, governmental, and legal system after attempting to peacefully solve our problems through the means currently available to us through the court system.  A lot of lines would have to be crossed for something like this to happen, and it is not something most logical, sane, Americans would wish to take part in.  So, short answer – NO, Civil War is NOT the answer!
  2. Armed Resistance. In general, the same rules apply to Armed Resistance as do to Civil War.  For any Armed Resistance to truly be merited, there would need to be either a breakdown or failure of our entire legal and governmental system.  However, in recent history we’ve witnessed 2 instances in which Armed Resistance might be the appropriate response:  a) The comments made by Beto O’Rourke regarding sending armed men to the homes of innocent taxpayers to collect their AR15’s and AK47’s highlight such an instance, and b) The recent laws proposed in the State of Virginia and comments made by lawmakers there. If the government would actually send armed men to confiscate the private property of American citizens over a Civil Right, I’d say that Armed Resistance would be an appropriate response. When Government threatens basic civil rights with violence, it puts average people in a corner. Outside of that EXTREME case, any violence perpetrated in an attempt to help maintain our 2nd Amendment rights would be counter-productive, if not outright destructive.