Patriots Manifesto

Posted by hunterunknown 
August 13, 2011 05:36PM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
this which i give to you is most of the infomation i have compiled in my search for freedom. i chose the best subjects to add to this for the current time. i have had help from others in pointing me in the right direction and links. i personally take no credit for this work. It is linked to the A.R.M American Resisitance Movement PA 3% facebook page, please check it out, copy and print to hand out if you feel it needed.
August 13, 2011 11:03PM
#   Quote

Posts: 1,884
preach it!

God, grant me the serenity to accept the knives I cannot buy, the budget to buy ones I can and the wisdom to know the difference.
Support Your Local Outlaw Knifemaker!
August 14, 2011 10:21AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
having some trouble with facebook.. cant put it on there over 636,000 characters.. as soon as i get it linked it will be up.
August 14, 2011 10:24AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
OUR Dying Republic

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation...under God... Indivisiable with Liberty and Justice for all.

To the Republic for which it stands- "the pledge of allegiance to the U.S flag" is made to "the Republic for which it stands"- That flag standing for a Republic, not a Democracy, not a dictatorship and certainly not an empire... which we have become.

When the common people are the all important center of society, you have a Republic- when government power and conquest, the interests of a few elite become the center of that society, society has then degreaded and collapsed into an empire of dictators. Which is were we find ourselves- a slow rot which began as earnest as WWI.

Just as Rome collapsed to corruption, greed, power and immorality, so goes the Republic of America, collapsing into an EMPIRE of crime and the oppression and tyranny of the common people, in order to serve the interests of a few greedy elites.

Please read this and understand.


As we look back on the horrors of the dictatorships and autocracies of the past, one particular question consistently arises; how was it possible for the common men of these eras to NOT notice what was happening around them? How could they have stood as statues unaware or uncaring as their cultures were overrun by fascism, communism, collectivism, and elitism? Of course, we have the advantage of hindsight, and are able to research and examine the misdeeds of the past at our leisure. Unfortunately, such hindsight does not necessarily shield us from the long cast shadow of tyranny in our own day. For that, the increasingly uncommon gift of foresight is required…

At bottom, the success of despotic governments and Big Brother societies hinges upon a certain number of political, financial, and cultural developments. The first of which is an unwillingness in the general populace to secure and defend their own freedoms, making them completely reliant on corrupt establishment leadership. For totalitarianism to take hold, the masses must not only neglect the plight of their country, and the plight of others, but also be completely uninformed of the inherent indirect threats to their personal safety. They must abandon all responsibility for their destinies, and lose all respect for their own humanity. They must, indeed, become domesticated and mindless herd animals without regard for anything except their fleeting momentary desires for entertainment and short term survival. For a lumbering bloodthirsty behemoth to actually sneak up on you, you have to be pretty damnably oblivious.

The prevalence of apathy and ignorance sets the stage for the slow and highly deliberate process of centralization. Once dishonest governments accomplish an atmosphere of inaction and condition a sense of frailty within the citizenry, the sky is truly the limit. However, a murderous power-monger’s day is never quite done. In my recent article ‘The Essential Rules of Liberty’ we explored the fundamentally unassailable actions and mental preparations required to ensure the continuance of a free society. In this article, let’s examine the frequently wielded tools of tyrants in their invariably insane quests for total control…

Rule #1: Keep Them Afraid

People who are easily frightened are easily dominated. This is not just a law of political will, but a law of nature. Many wrongly assume that a tyrant’s power comes purely from the application of force. In fact, despotic regimes that rely solely on extreme violence are often very unsuccessful, and easily overthrown. Brute strength is calculable. It can be analyzed, and thus, eventually confronted and defeated. Thriving tyrants instead utilize not just harm, but the imminent THREAT of harm. They instill apprehension in the public; a fear of the unknown, or a fear of the possible consequences for standing against the state. They let our imaginations run wild until we see death around every corner, whether it’s actually there or not. When the masses are so blinded by the fear of reprisal that they forget their fear of slavery, and take no action whatsoever to undo it, then they have been sufficiently culled.

In other cases, our fear is evoked and directed towards engineered enemies. Another race, another religion, another political ideology, a “hidden” and ominous villain created out of thin air. Autocrats assert that we “need them” in order to remain safe and secure from these illusory monsters bent on our destruction. As always, this development is followed by the claim that all steps taken, even those that dissolve our freedoms, are “for the greater good”. Frightened people tend to shirk their sense of independence and run towards the comfort of the collective, even if that collective is built on immoral and unconscionable foundations. Once a society takes on a hive-mind mentality almost any evil can be rationalized, and any injustice against the individual is simply overlooked for the sake of the group.

Rule #2: Keep Them Isolated

In the past, elitist governments would often legislate and enforce severe penalties for public gatherings, because defusing the ability of the citizenry to organize or to communicate was paramount to control. In our technological era, such isolation is still used, but in far more advanced forms. The bread and circus lifestyle of the average westerner alone is enough to distract us from connecting with each other in any meaningful fashion, but people still sometimes find ways to seek out organized forms of activism.

Through co-option, modern day tyrant’s can direct and manipulate opposition movements. By creating and administrating groups which oppose each other, elites can then micromanage all aspects of a nation on the verge of revolution. These “false paradigms” give us the illusion of proactive organization, and the false hope of changing the system, while at the same time preventing us from seeking understanding in one another. All our energies are then muted and dispersed into meaningless battles over “left and right”, or “Democrat versus Republican”, for example. Only movements that cast aside such empty labels and concern themselves with the ultimate truth of their country, regardless of what that truth might reveal, are able to enact real solutions to the disasters wrought by tyranny.

In more advanced forms of despotism, even fake organizations are disbanded. Curfews are enforced. Normal communications are diminished or monitored. Compulsory paperwork is required. Checkpoints are instituted. Free speech is punished. Existing groups are influenced to distrust each other or to disintegrate entirely out of dread of being discovered. All of these measures are taken by tyrants primarily to prevent ANY citizens from gathering and finding mutual support. People who work together and organize of their own volition are unpredictable, and therefore, a potential risk to the state.

Rule #3: Keep Them Desperate

You’ll find in nearly every instance of cultural descent into autocracy, the offending government gained favor after the onset of economic collapse. Make the necessities of root survival an uncertainty, and people without knowledge of self sustainability and without solid core principles will gladly hand over their freedom, even for mere scraps from the tables of the same men who unleashed famine upon them. Financial calamities are not dangerous because of the poverty they leave in their wake; they are dangerous because of the doors to malevolence that they leave open.

Destitution leads not just to hunger, but also to crime (private and government). Crime leads to anger, hatred, and fear. Fear leads to desperation. Desperation leads to the acceptance of anything resembling a solution, even despotism.

Autocracies pretend to cut through the dilemmas of economic dysfunction (usually while demanding liberties be relinquished), however, behind the scenes they actually seek to maintain a proscribed level of indigence and deprivation. The constant peril of homelessness and starvation keeps the masses thoroughly distracted from such things as protest or dissent, while simultaneously chaining them to the idea that their only chance is to cling to the very government out to end them.

Rule #4: Send Out The Jackboots

This is the main symptom often associated with totalitarianism. So much so that our preconceived notions of what a fascist government looks like prevent us from seeing other forms of tyranny right under our noses. Some Americans believe that if the jackbooted thugs are not knocking on every door, then we MUST still live in a free country. Obviously, this is a rather naïve position. Admittedly, though, goon squads and secret police do eventually become prominent in every failed nation, usually while the public is mesmerized by visions of war, depression, hyperinflation, terrorism, etc.

When law enforcement officials are no longer servants of the people, but agents of a government concerned only with its own supremacy, serious crises emerge. Checks and balances are removed. The guidelines that once reigned in police disappear, and suddenly, a philosophy of superiority emerges; an arrogant exclusivity that breeds separation between law enforcement and the rest of the public. Finally, police no longer see themselves as protectors of citizens, but prison guards out to keep us subdued and docile.

As tyranny grows, this behavior is encouraged. Good men are filtered out of the system, and small (minded and hearted) men are promoted.

At its pinnacle, a police state will hide the identities of most of its agents and officers, behind masks or behind red tape, because their crimes in the name of the state become so numerous and so sadistic that personal vengeance on the part of their victims will become a daily concern.

Rule #5: Blame Everything On The Truth Seekers

Tyrants are generally men who have squelched their own consciences. They have no reservations in using any means at their disposal to wipe out opposition. But, in the early stages of their ascent to power, they must give the populace a reason for their ruthlessness, or risk being exposed, and instigating even more dissent. The propaganda machine thus goes into overdrive, and any person or group that dares to question the authority or the validity of the state is demonized in the minds of the masses.

All disasters, all violent crimes, all the ills of the world, are hoisted upon the shoulders of activist groups and political rivals. They are falsely associated with fringe elements already disliked by society (racists, terrorists, etc). A bogus consensus is created through puppet media in an attempt to make the public believe that “everyone else” must have the same exact views, and those who express contrary positions must be “crazy”, or “extremist”. Events are even engineered by the corrupt system and pinned on those demanding transparency and liberty. The goal is to drive anti-totalitarian organizations into self censorship. That is to say, instead of silencing them directly, the state causes activists to silence themselves.

Tyrannical power structures cannot function without scapegoats. There must always be an elusive boogie man under the bed of every citizen, otherwise, those citizens may turn their attention, and their anger, towards the real culprit behind their troubles. By scapegoating stewards of the truth, such governments are able to kill two birds with one stone.

Rule #6: Encourage Citizen Spies

Ultimately, the life of a totalitarian government is not prolonged by the government itself, but by the very people it subjugates. Citizen spies are the glue of any police state, and our propensity for sticking our noses into other peoples business is highly valued by Big Brother bureaucracies around the globe.

There are a number of reasons why people participate in this repulsive activity. Some are addicted to the feeling of being a part of the collective, and “service” to this collective, sadly, is the only way they are able to give their pathetic lives meaning. Some are vindictive, cold, and soulless, and actually get enjoyment from ruining others. And still, like elites, some long for power, even petty power, and are willing to do anything to fulfill their vile need to dictate the destinies of perfect strangers.

Citizen spying is almost always branded as a civic duty; an act of heroism and bravery. Citizen spies are offered accolades and awards, and showered with praise from the upper echelons of their communities. People who lean towards citizen spying are often outwardly and inwardly unimpressive; physically and mentally inept. For the average moral and emotional weakling with persistent feelings of inadequacy, the allure of finally being given fifteen minutes of fame and a hero’s status (even if that status is based on a lie) is simply too much to resist. They begin to see “extremists” and “terrorists” everywhere. Soon, people afraid of open ears everywhere start to watch what they say at the supermarket, in their own backyards, or even to family members. Free speech is effectively neutralized.

Rule #7: Make Them Accept The Unacceptable

In the end, it is not enough for a government fueled by the putrid sludge of iniquity to lord over us. At some point, it must also influence us to forsake our most valued principles. Tyrannies are less concerned with dominating how we live, so much as dominating how we think. If they can mold our very morality, they can exist unopposed indefinitely. Of course, the elements of conscience are inborn, and not subject to environmental duress as long as a man is self aware. However, conscience can be manipulated if a person has no sense of identity, and has never put in the effort to explore his own strengths and failings. There are many people like this in America today.

Lies become “necessary” in protecting the safety of the state. War becomes a tool for “peace”. Torture becomes an ugly but “useful” method for gleaning important information. Police brutality is sold as a “natural reaction” to increased crime. Rendition becomes normal, but only for those labeled as “terrorists”. Assassination is justified as a means for “saving lives”. Genocide is done discretely, but most everyone knows it is taking place. They simply don’t discuss it.

All tyrannical systems depend on the apathy and moral relativism of the inhabitants within their borders. Without the cooperation of the public, these systems cannot function. The real question is, how many of the above steps will be taken before we finally refuse to conform? At what point will each man and woman decide to break free from the dark path blazed before us and take measures to ensure their independence? Who will have the courage to develop their own communities, their own alternative economies, their own organizations for mutual defense outside of establishment constructs, and who will break under the pressure to bow like cowards? How many will hold the line, and how many will flee?

For every American, for every human being across the planet who chooses to stand immovable in the face of the very worst in mankind, we come that much closer to breathing life once again into the very best in us all.


Food has always been a tool the elite have used to control the masses. When you control the food supply, you control everything, even life and death. A starving man is more likely to sell his soul for a potato then someone with a full tummy. The relatively free market of food production and distribution that has been in place in this nation for a few centuries now has led to unrivaled prosperity. Food can, in fact, be grown for practically nothing if you have the land, the time and can afford to buy just a few heirloom seeds to grow the organic vegetables necessary for good health. This will save you money, is better for you than grocery store vegetables which may be genetically modified or may contain unwanted chemicals, and helps you to become less dependent on the state for your survival.

It is the last part of the above statement that frightens government officials. They want you dependent on them. For some, it makes them feel important. Others may just want to feel needed or helpful. Still others may just want the paycheck. Whatever the case, they don't seem to just want to leave you alone to your own devices. Perhaps that's why they're attempting to pass laws making it illegal to grow your own garden. Perhaps that's why they want to make sure you're a compliant grass farmer just like your neighbors. Perhaps that's why they're trying to control the food necessary for life.

There was much reporting done on the story of Julie Bass from Oak Park, Michigan, who was arrested for growing a garden in her (gasp) front lawn. There was so much reporting on this story, in fact, that the city of Oak Park decided to drop the charges. They had claimed that the citizens of Oak Park were in favor of such ordinances that made it a crime to have anything but nicely manicured, inedible, Kentucky bluegrass lawns (an exaggeration, but you get the idea). I think they were rather surprised when the Bass's neighbors came out decidedly against the arrest. Rather than apologizing and admitting they were wrong like normal people would do, however, they did what you would expect of government control freaks who think they're perfect. They found something else to charge poor Julie Bass with. Things get tough for you once you're on the government's shit list.

As Julie Bass's further adventures in the world of government abuse unfold, I hope she continues to receive the support of her neighbors and things turn out well for her. There are others who are not quite as fortunate as her, however, when it comes to the government's longing for complete control over food. There are other victims of inane policies of local government gangs. The homeless in Orlando are a good example.

Now, you'd think that government officials would want to help the disadvantaged such as people who have lost everything due to the economic downturn. That's what government officials would have us believe in many cases, that they are there to help when one is down and out. Why, then, would they want to make sure the homeless are hungry? Why would they want to arrest people for feeding other people who can't afford to buy a sandwich? Why would they wish to appear so callous about those who they are supposed to be helping? Perhaps they don't like the thought that they aren't the only ones who care about the plight of less fortunate people. Perhaps they simply don't like someone trying to muscle in on their charity monopoly. I'm not sure, but there is something terribly wrong with a system that decides to arrest people for helping.

There is a man, a super activist so to speak, who is trying to rectify this situation. His name is Julian Heicklen. He is a 79 year old activist who is trying to show us all what it means to truly fight tyranny and become free. He is going to Lake Eola Park in Orlando Florida on August 18th to help the "Food not Bombs" people distribute food to anyone who's hungry, including homeless people. Many have already been arrested by the not overly compassionate Orlando police for such acts of kindness. He also plans on engaging in other non violent illegal activities such as distributing Fully Informed Jury Association literature to people at the Orange County Court Complex and taking pictures of police officers doing their work to point out the ridiculousness of tyrannical laws, but it is the distributing of food down there that has really piqued my interest. The other activism is important as it sheds light on practices the controllers would like to keep secret, but one must truly wonder what on earth was going through their heads when they decided to make it illegal to help others who are less fortunate.

So, some local tyrants have decided not to allow the local serfs to grow vegetables in their front yards. They've decided that only they are allowed to help the needy, and they're doing a real poor job of it. If that's not enough to convince you of the immorality of many local governments that the common folk are supposed to be protected against, then I would point out the slew of kids' lemonade stands that have been shut down recently. Many stories of this occurring have been circulating lately and all I've heard about is people shaking their heads and complaining. Recently, however, someone has decided to do something about it.

Robert Fernandes has decided to create a website that promotes an event called Lemonade Freedom Day on August 20th, 2011. The idea is to spread the word that selling lemonade is not a crime and should not be treated as such. Don't you remember being a kid and setting up a lemonade stand? I remember doing so, only I sold Kool-Aid. I'm fairly certain that millions of children across this nation have fond memories of similar experiences. Why would someone want to steal such a valuable activity from modern youth? Why would anyone want to criminalize such a delightful piece of summertime Americana? Could it be that perhaps they wish to suppress the entrepreneurial spirit that helped build America? Could it be that their lust for control is so overwhelming to them that they couldn't care less about the children affected? Could it be that they are simply trying to drill into the heads of our youth the idea of obedience to law, no matter how onerous, bad, or immoral the law is? As I see it, authority has grown so far out of control that it has made itself illegitimate.

There are a couple of things that tie all these news stories together. The first is that none of these laws would matter if it wasn't for the enforcers, the police. All of these so called crimes would not have made the news if the police had simply said "no" when asked to arrest the perpetrators or shut down their operations. But the police in this nation seem to no longer be able to think for themselves. They have become the automatons of the state, excusing their actions because they are "just doing their jobs" just like the German Nazis excused their actions during World War II. I would point out that their job includes upholding the Constitution of the United States of America. I would point out that their job includes saying "no" to enforcing bad laws when ordered to. If things were running properly and the system wasn't so corrupt, perhaps that's what would be happening. In a perfect world, the brave peace officer who stands up to the corrupt government official would become a hero and be rewarded while the corrupt government official would get his comeuppance. Instead, we have a world where any "law enforcement officer" is punished for standing up to the system and lives in fear of losing his job or worse if he does what's right.

The other thing that ties these stories together is the common folk. It is their apathy that has allowed the system to deteriorate to this point. It is their going along to get along and simply not saying anything that has allowed the system to become so corrupt. It is their shrugging their shoulders and keeping their heads down that has allowed evil to win as much as it has, as the proverbial saying goes. Those in government have come to believe they can simply do as they please. They have come to believe that whatever they say is law and the people will grumble and moan, but simply obey and not do anything else about it. Well, that seems to be changing. The people spoke up about the Julie Bass situation and they're taking action to correct the other injustices mentioned above. Methinks that perhaps the government officials have pushed the envelope just a little too far and more than enough people can now see just how much the tyranny has grown. Next month should be an interesting one as the people attempt to trim it back.
August 14, 2011 10:25AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
John Hancock
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

WE are the Constitutions Teeth.

The 2nd Amendment to the U.S Constitution establishes the RIGHT of the states and common people to a "well regulated Militia" whose function it is to protect the individual states from an overbearing and oppressive federal government. Please understand this. The first police state was in Massachusetts in 1865,the last one might be in your living romm...SOON. YOU ARE BEING HERDED AS A NATION OF SHEEP. Right in to a elitist control grid.

Has History really come full circle from the ancient kings of Babylon and the tower of Babel to the corporate elitists and the U.N tower? As long as you keep voting for the same system- Republican/Democrat system- your going to keep getting the same results-THEY WIN YOU LOSE!!!

A.R.M American Resistance Movement

First and foremost: the American Resistance Movement (ARM) is a name and idea which allows many different people to identify themselves under a common banner with common goals and beliefs. ARM is NOT an organization.

The ARM is comprised of independent defensive (citizen militias), political cells, organizations and individuals that operate in cooperation or independently of one another.

The ARM includes patriots from various walks of life and are devoted to the defense of the Constitution, and all our Rights and Liberties.

The American Resistance Movement recognizes equal rights upon all the inhabitants of our Republic. We do not deny membership or participation (association) based on race, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, religion or disability.

Our membership (free association) is open to all freedom loving individuals who seek a government restrained by the constitution and to rid themselves of tyranny, debt and servitude. This is our common goal.

If you are seeking membership in the ARM, the mere fact you are reading this may indicate that you are already a member. All you need to do is associate yourself with the "ARM" name and/or join a website/group.

By and large, ARM members are honest, respectful and decent individuals. Due to our leaderless structure and design, it can be difficult to hold accountable individuals who may act in ways that are disadvantageous to the movement as a whole. Such individuals have not the right to call themselves members of the American Resistance Movement and should be ignored.

Individuals who intentionally use our name disadvantageously aught to be considered counter revolutionaries. They, like the tyrants whom we seek to rid ourselves, are disreputable in every way.

Please note that we are in fact a leaderless resistance movement. Leaderless does not intend to imply reckless, careless or other behavior that works against our goals. The ARM condemns acts of treason, acts of terrorism and other illegal activities. Individual responsibility is key and anyone who conducts themselves in an unlawful manner is NOT part of the ARM.

If the aforementioned information fits your mind set, you are the resistance and your not alone!

WHO ARE THE 3%ers ?

During the American Revolution, the active forces in the field against the King’s tyranny never amounted to more than 3% of the colonists. They were in turn actively supported by perhaps 10% of the population. In addition to these revolutionaries were perhaps another 20% who favored their cause but did little or nothing to support it. Another one-third of the population sided with the King (by the end of the war there were actually more Americans fighting FOR the King than there were in the field against him) and the final third took no side, blew with the wind and took what came.

Three Percenters today do not claim that we represent 3% of the American people, although we might. That theory has not yet been tested. We DO claim that we represent at least 3% of American gun owners, which is still a healthy number somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million people. History, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities. We are one such minority. So too are the current enemies of the Founders’ Republic. What remains, then, is the test of will and skill to determine who shall shape the future of our nation.

The Three Percent today are gun owners who will not disarm, will not compromise and will no longer back up at the passage of the next gun control act. Three Percenters say quite explicitly that we will not obey any further circumscription of our traditional liberties and will defend ourselves if attacked. We intend to maintain our God-given natural rights to liberty and property, and that means most especially the right to keep and bear arms. Thus, we are committed to the restoration of the Founders’ Republic, and are willing to fight, die and, if forced by any would-be oppressor, to kill in the defense of ourselves and the Constitution that we all took an oath to uphold against enemies foreign and domestic.

We are the people that the collectivists who now control the government should leave alone if they wish to continue unfettered oxygen consumption. We are the Three Percent. Attempt to further oppress us at your peril. To put it bluntly, leave us the hell alone. Or, if you feel froggy, go ahead AND WATCH WHAT HAPPENS

The Doctrine of the Three Percent

The Three Percent are the folks the Founders counted on to save the Republic when everyone else abandoned it.

And we will.

There will be no more free Wacos and no more free Katrinas.

For we are the Three Percent.

We will not disarm.

You cannot convince us.

You cannot intimidate us.

You can try to kill us, if you think you can.

But remember, we’ll shoot back .

We are not going away.

We are not backing up another inch.

And there are THREE MILLION OF US.

Your move, Mr. Wannabe Tyrant.

Your move.


I am an American, serving with the unorganized civilian militia which guards my homeland, state, and the constitutions thereof.
I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
I will never surrender of my own free will.
If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they have the means to resist.
If I am captured, I will continue to resist by all means possible.

I will make every effort to escape, and aid others to escape.
I will accept neither parole, leniency, or any special favors by the enemy.
If I become a POW, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners.
I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades.
If in command, I will strive to maintain morale of those under my command.
If not in command, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me.
When questioned as a POW, I am bound to give only name, rank, and date of birth.
I will evade answering any further questions to the best of my ability.
I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my beloved homeland and its citizens, or harmful to their continuing struggle for freedom as prescribed by the Constitution of the United States.
In all cases, I will endeavor to instruct and inform members of the unorganized militia units, seeking to persuade them to join the Patriot struggle; urging them for justice and conscience sake to return America to the Constitutional Republic our forefathers envisioned.
I will never forget that I am an American, a citizen of the greatest nation on Earth, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made this country free.
I will place my trust in God, the Constitution of United States of America, and the loyalty of her people.

To support the United States unorganized militia(s)
To defend the Constitution of the United States of America.
To uphold and defend the Bill of Rights, seen as inalienable by our forefathers, and given by our creator to free men so that they may remain free.
To support the County Sheriff, and those lawfully appointed under him.
To insure that all citizens-regardless of race, gender, religion or nationality- shall have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as established and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.
Ethics- Under no circumstances will criminal behavior or racism be tolerated. We will not support any specific political party or candidate, nor will we espouse any particular religious ideology or doctrine.
Goals- It will be the goals of Unorganized Militia to:

a) PRESENT itself to the citizens of the United States of America as a well-regulated, well-trained, well-equipped, and knowledgeable militia unit consisting of ordinary citizens rather than trained military professionals.

b) ASSIST citizens in the event of natural disaster, civil defense, and in the defense of self and our state.

c) ESTABLISH a cohesive cellular structure able to operate jointly, instruct, and task as needs arise.
d) TRAIN its membership in the many disciplines necessary to the function of the militia as a whole, and its members individually.
e) EDUCATE its members that a knowledge of this nation's early history reveals how the word of God and man's will to be free...played such a powerful role in developing the firm resolve for just laws, a high respect for strict morals, and our divine right of free choice, which becomes the envy of every nation on Earth that yearned for freedom.
f) INFORM its members of local, national, and global events which could imperil the Constitution, and impact the direction of the country.
g) ENCOURAGE its members to stand against all tyranny internal and external which threatens to undermine our Constitutional form of government and these United States of America.
August 14, 2011 10:26AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
Section 1: Justification

1.1 The right to arm and organize

Constitution of the United States, 2nd Amendment:

"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."

Constitution of Pennsylvania, Article I, Declaration of Rights:

Right to Bear Arms:

Section 21. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

1.1.1 The text of the Bill of Rights

To be sure the Declaration of Independence represents a well-nigh universal opinion existent in the American colonies in 1776. The Bill of Rights is the cornerstone of American liberty and the final court of appeal for our personal freedoms. Since many citizens are not familiar with the Bill of Rights, and since our public education system does an inadequate job of expounding upon them, the complete text is reproduced here for reference.

Article I-Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Article II-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.

Article III-No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Article IV-The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Article V-No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Article VI-In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Article VII-In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall otherwise be reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Article VIII-Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Article IX-The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Article X-The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

These are some of the "unalienable rights" we possess as human beings and which must be protected by the state and federal governments. They are not, necessarily, all-inclusive as Article IX indicates and as subsequent amendments (like Article XIII against slavery) have demonstrated. But they are the bare minimum of what we are Constitutionally guaranteed.

Note also that the Constitution provides for the legal amendment of itself (Article V of the main text). But while there are many parts of the Constitution that are subject to debate and amendable, the Bill of Rights are not. The Declaration of Independence rejects the notion that genuine rights can be annulled by any government or any majority.

We may, for instance, proceed on Constitutional grounds to debate whether the President's term should be four or six years, whether Congress should have the power to lay and collect income taxes, and whether the Supreme Court should be appointed or elected. But we cannot ever consider licensing free expression, invading homes without warrants being issued on probable cause, convicting those arrested without trial, or the like.

1.1.2 The meaning of the Bill of Rights

There are three concepts essential to a proper interpretation of the Bill of Rights. These are original intent, the people, and rights.

Original intent

There are basically two ways to interpret any document written by someone else. The wrong way is to interpret it the way we want to interpret it in light of our personal prejudices and cultural pressures. This is routinely the way our present Congress and court system actually do interpret the Constitution. The right way is to interpret it as those who wrote it intended it to be interpreted. This is what is meant by the Constitutional doctrine of original intent. According to this approach, we are not so much interested in the legal precedents handed down in previous court cases as we are in the historical context of drafting and ratifying the Constitution.

Now of course there are situations and issues that have come up in modern times which the Framers could not have known about and therefore had no direct intentions concerning. But their intent should be held to as closely as possible. For instance, the Framers could not have possibly envisioned the advent of radio and television. Yet their intention was for all forms of press to be free and therefore radio and television journalism should remain free even though they are a new technology. The Framers also could not have anticipated the invention of the telephone or wire tapping. But their intention was certainly that such forms of communication to be free from unreasonable surveillance and searches via wire taps. In the same way, automatic weapons were not a reality in the eighteenth century. But that does not mean that they are not protected by the Second Amendment. To say that machine guns are not protected because they were non-existent when the Constitution was drafted would also mean that radio and televisions journalism are not protected forms of press, and that telephone conversations may be recorded without warrant because these are all new technological developments.

This tangent shows that what we mean by original intent is not that we have exactly and only the same circumstances in mind as the Framers but that we have exactly and only the same principles in mind. Circumstances, technology, and culture may change, but Constitutional principles do not and cannot.

Now the reason that seeking original intent is so important to our Constitutional rights is that ignoring this principle inevitably leads to infringing our rights. Rights are routinely violated by the federal government because the courts ignore original intent and interpret the Constitution to suit their whims or to satisfy public pressure.

Now let's say that you and some friends sit down to lay a board game like Monopoly. Perhaps you agree to play by the rules. Or perhaps you unanimously agree to play by "house rules" and modify a few rules here or there. Either way, all of you agree to proceed with the game on the same basis. Now if some of the players, even a majority, choose to reinterpret the rules later in the game this would be viewed as cheating. If such cheating persisted to the point of altering all the rules in the majority's favor and against the minority, then one could hardly blame the minority from quitting the game. Cheating is cheating even if it is done by a vast majority!

Today, the Bill of Rights is being reinterpreted by political officials for the "benefit" of the majority. But such interpretations are clearly contrary to the true meaning of the Bill of Rights. It doesn't matter how strong a majority wants to change these rules, it is cheating nevertheless to change the rules by reinterpretation instead of making legal amendments to the Constitution.

It is clear that our Congress and court system generally reject the doctrine of original intent from the following facts:

The emphasis on Constitutional cases is virtually always on legal precedent rather than on the historical background. What matters to the Supreme Court is what they have previously decided, not what the Framers intended.

Those who assert legal cases on the basis of original intent instead of legal precedent are ridiculed and opposed as dangerous radicals. (A good example of this is the outpouring of opposition to Richard A. Epstein's book, Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain. It is considered subversive because it argues from the Constitution that our present tax structure and welfare programs violate the intended meaning of the Fifth Amendment.)

Congressmen frequently ignore whether or not a pending bill is Constitutional when they consider voter for or against it. What matters to them is the prevailing public opinion, not the Framers' opinions.

Judges who openly hold to the idea of original intent, like Robert Bork, are rejected by the Senate for confirmation to the Supreme Court exactly because of their method of interpreting the Constitution.

It is clear that any approach to interpreting the meaning of the Constitution apart from original intent is futile. Apart from what the Framers meant there is no rule of law. If we can make it mean whatever we want it to mean, then there is no way of coming to agreement over a controversial or divisive issue since controversy means by definition that we disagree on what is right. Apart from original intent, we break faith with those who founded this great nation. How do you like it when people interpret the Bible to suit their fancy instead of as God meant it? How would you like it if your lawyer and heirs simply reinterpreted your will to suit their personal greed? Documents mean what their authors meant!

The only way that the Constitution has any meaning and can serve as the governing document of this country is if we follow its original intent.

"The people" means individuals

The next idea we must examine to understand the Bill of Rights is "the people." The Bill of Rights recognized three entities which are to be governed and united under the Constitution. First, there is the United States which refers to the federal government. Second, there is the states which refers initially to the first thirteen and now to the fifty state governments. Finally, there is the people which refers to individual citizens, not the federal or state governments. It is "the right of the people to peaceably assemble." It is "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms."

It is "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects." And other unmentioned rights are to be "retained by the people."

All the rights of the people, indeed all of the first nine amendments, are rights we have as individuals and are limitations on the state's powers.

This is a very important point. The framers were very clear and consistent in who they attributed certain rights to. "The people always refers to individuals, not groups or governments. Indeed, the first nine amendments are solely rights guarantied to the people. Only the Tenth Amendment guaranties rights to state governments, and none, count them, none, recognize any rights of the federal government. The whole of the Bill of Rights was intended as limitation of government, not an empowering of it.

So we do great violence to the intended meaning whenever we twist "the people" to mean collective groups or state governments.

The concept of rights:

This brings us to the concept and nature of rights. Rights are not a privilege that can be taken away. Nor are they franchise granted by the government. A right is something a human being possesses as a birthright given by God. They cannot be denied, legislated away, or amended into oblivion by any majority short of 100 percent.

The fact that rights are unalienable by any government and cannot be outweighed by the interests of the majority is incontestable.

God is greater than any government. "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God" (Romans 13:1). Therefore, governments and other people have no authority to take away anything &emdash; including rights &emdash; given by God.

God has in fact given human beings certain rights. For instance, following the Ten Commandments, Exodus 21 outlines our right to life and Exodus 22 outlines some of our property rights.

The Declaration of Independence says so. "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. &emdash; That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men ..."

The Ninth Amendment to the Constitution says so. "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." So even the Constitution recognizes that it does not and cannot grant or take away rights but can only recognize and guarantee them.

The common notion of human rights implies as much. We often talk about some foreign government or regime depriving its citizens of basic human rights. This has no meaning if it is the government or the ruling majority that grants rights. If the ruling authorities grant rights, then by definition no government could ever violate them.

We do not have majority rule. The whole Constitution &emdash; with its system of checks and balances as well as the rights of the people &emdash; is designed to prevent personal liberties from being by a tyranny of the majority.

1.1.3 The structure of the Bill of Rights

The primary right of the people is personal liberty. All government functions are designed to insure personal liberties. The Constitution's Preamble states the Constitution's (and thus the government's) purposes:

"PREAMBLE: We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish the Constitution for the United States of America."

All of these purposes serve the final purpose of securing liberty: justice is established so institutions and majorities will not abuse our liberties. Domestic tranquility is secured lest criminal elements trample liberties. The common defense is provided for so foreign powers will not invade and enslave us. The "general welfare" (which benefits everyone, not select groups) must be promoted for the sake of fostering liberty. (Roads and mail, for example, benefit all citizens by allowing free movement, trade, and communication.) These are the sole legal purposes of the federal government and each is subordinate to maintaining the blessings of liberty.

This pattern of subordinating everything to personal liberties is also found in the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment protects freedom of religion, speech, and the press. The remainder of the Bill of Rights is subordinate to free expression, not in the sense of being less important, but in the sense of insuring First Amendment rights. Therefore the Second through Tenth Amendments are designed to protect the First Amendment.

Article II: Gun rights are the "teeth" of the Bill of Rights, meaning that the people are empowered to enforce it against being infringed.

Articles III, IV, and V: Property rights give us a limited sphere of "personal sovereignty" where we can live freely without intervention.

Articles V, VI, VII, and VIII: Legal rights prevent the government from persecuting those who speak out against federal policies or practices.

Article IX: The rights retained by the people are anticipated as a contingency against the government inventing all sorts of new powers.

Article X: State rights divide and dilute the powers of the federal government. The more centralized the power the greater the tyranny.


(the essence of liberty)

GUN RIGHTS: enforce liberty.

PROPERTY RIGHTS: sphere of liberty.

LEGAL RIGHTS: prevent persecution.

UNENUMERATED RIGHTS: limit the expansion of federal powers.

STATE RIGHTS: divide and dilute the federal government's powers.

The Bill of Rights has an integrity that can only be maintained as each of its part remain intact. Eliminate a part, and the whole will crumble.

1.1.4 The meaning of the Second Amendment

Now let's examine the meaning of the Second Amendment as it was originally intended as an integral to the whole of the Bill of Rights.

"Article II: 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."

"A well regulated Militia" does not refer to the regular army. It would be absurd to recognize the federal government's prerogative to raise an army in the Bill of Rights since:

(a) It is presumed that all governments raised armies.

(b) Since Article II amends the Constitution which already recognizes this prerogative.

(c) since the Bill of Rights is in its entirety a limitation upon, not an empowering of the federal government.

Nor does it refer to a state's national guard. Had the Framers meant state militias, they would have not connected the militia with the right of the people to bear arms. It does mean a well-organized army of the people by the people. The word militia originally legally meant (Virginia Bill of Rights, Section 13) and still legally means (U.S. Code, Title 10, Section 31) the whole able-bodied citizenry of the country, not the formal armed forces of the United States. Therefore, "A well regulated Militia" is a well-organized citizens' army, not a well-controlled standing army.

"Being necessary to the security of a free state." It does not say, "being necessary to the security of a crime-free state" nor does it say "being necessary to the security of a free hunting state." Thus, self-defense and hunting are not protected, per se (although these are legitimate derivative activities of gun owners). The reason that the right of the people to bear arms and form militia is protected is to secure a free state. Without the ability of the people to rise up against the growing tyranny of a government, there is nothing to stop the tyranny of the government growing! This intention is made explicit in Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights which clearly influence the development of Article II of the Bill of Rights.

"The right." As we have seen, rights are God-given and governments are formed to protect rights, not to grant them or take them away. Thus the right to bear arms is not something that the government can legitimately legislate away through gun regulation, registration, licensing, taxation, or prohibition.

"Of the people." Consistent with the view that "Militia" refers to an army of the people by the people, the Second Amendment recognizes the right of the people, or private individuals, to keep and bear arms. This right is possessed by people independently of membership in any government-controlled armed force or law enforcement agency.

"To keep and bear." Notice that we have the right both to keep and bear arms. The Framers did not waste words but were very concise in all their texts. So clearly they intended to say that keeping and bearing arms are two different things, both of which are protected. Now the keeping of arms is ownership and possession of arms on your property. The bearing of arms is the carrying of arms with you off of your property. So you have the right to carry weapons with you as well as to own them. Any federal, state, or local law that prohibits bearing firearms on your property or in public is unconstitutional. (Of course, people like business owners may prevent you from bearing arms on their property by exercising their own property rights.)

"Arms." What are these arms that are to be protected? Clearly they are those that are useful and effective in maintaining an armed militia. In other words, it is military-style weapons like assault rifles, submachine guns, and combat shotguns that are explicitly protected, not just hunting and target shooting weapons. Whatever type of firearms are the standard-issue weapons of the armed forces, these are the weapons that you and I have the right to own. The more militarily effective a firearm is, the more it is protected by the Constitution. Just as the citizen and the soldier were armed with the same musket then, so citizens should be able to keep and bear Colt M-16 assault rifles now.

Select-fire assault rifles like the M-16 are the most Constitutionally protected firearms precisely because they are standard infantry weapons.

"Shall not be infringed." "Infringe" means to encroach upon and does not necessarily mean to totally do away with. There are many ways that the right to keep and bear arms can be infringed: regulation limits gun ownership by controlling the production and sales of firearms. Licensing means that an individual is permitted to own or carry weapons. Registration means that an individual's possession of a particular weapon with a serial number is recorded. (Gun businesses are regulated, gun owners are licensed, and guns themselves are registered.) Taxation restricts gun ownership, particularly among the poor, by increasing the cost. Prohibition is either an outright ban of gun possession or the limitation of guns that can be bought.

All of these &emdash; regulation, licensing, registration, taxation, prohibition &emdash; are totally unconstitutional with respect to arms useful to a militia.

Regulation of guns is illegal if it is designed to reduce the supply or availability of them to the public. There is no difference in principle between limiting production and sales of guns and banning possession of guns. Both have the same effect of disarming citizens.

Licensing means the government gives permission to do something like driving a car and is totally contrary to the nature of a right. What would you think about the government "licensing" your religion or free speech? Having permission and having the right are incompatible.

Registration means you must list your gun with the government which is also contrary to a right. How would you feel about Christians having to register Bibles and newspapers having to register printing presses?

Taxation of guns is also illegal if the taxes exceed the normal sales tax because this artificially raises the cost and limits the citizens' ability to purchase guns. The $200 transfer tax on automatic weapons is a good example of an illegal tax intended to restrict ownership.

Prohibition is clearly unconstitutional as the ultimate infringement of gun rights since it absolutely bans their possession and use. Even limiting gun purchases to one gun per month is an infringement of gun rights since it slows the arming of a militia when a crisis develops.

1.1.5 Discussion questions

How much of the Bill of Rights were you familiar with before reading this section? Which of these rights were you unaware of or surprised by? Why are these rights so important?

Describe what we mean by original intent. Why is it critical that we interpret the Bill of Rights this way instead of any way we see fit?

What are some Constitutional limits on majority rule? Why are such limits placed on the majority? Are such limitations justified? Why? When do the interests of the majority outweigh the rights of the individual?

Which one or two rights guarantied by the Constitution are most "near and dear to your heart"? Why? Does the fact that you decide not to exercise some of your rights diminish their importance? Why?

Main ideas of this section

The only way that the Constitution has any meaning and can serve as the governing document of this country is if we follow its original intent.

All the rights of the people, indeed all of the first nine amendments, are rights we have as individuals and are limitations of the state's powers.

We do not have majority rule. The whole Constitution &emdash; with its system of checks and balances as well as the rights of the people &emdash; is designed to prevent personal liberties from being denied by a tyranny of the majority.

The Bill of Rights has an integrity that can only be maintained as each of its parts remain intact. Eliminate a part, and the whole will crumble.

Select-fire assault rifles like the M-16 are the most Constitutionally protected firearms precisely because they are standard industry weapons.

All of these &emdash; regulation, licensing, registration, taxation, prohibition &emdash; are totally unconstitutional with respect to arms useful to a militia.

Further reading

At the very least, you should obtain, read, and absorb a copy of the Constitution of the United States in its entirety.

Barnett, Randy E. (editor). The Rights Retained By the People: The History and Meaning of the Ninth Amendment (Fairfax, Virginia, George Mason, 1989), 416pp.

Cord, Robert L. Separation of Church and State: Historical Fact and Current Fiction (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Book House, 1988) 315pp.

Epstein, Richard A. Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain (Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 1985) 362pp.

The Gun Rights Activist, "The Epistemology of Liberty," contributed by Herb Campbell, Ron Jongeling, Bruce Knodel, and Rev. Steve Lineman (Hermatage, Pennsylvania, 1994).

Norval, Morgan. Take My Gun If You Dare! (El Dorado, Arkansas, Desert Publications, 1979), 103pp.

1.2 The heritage of arming and organizing

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know now what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!" Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

1.2.1 Give me liberty or give me death!

When the second revolutionary convention of Virginia met in March of 1775, the majority of those in attendance favored quiet preparations for war but wanted to continue seeking peace with the king of England and Parliament. So when resolutions were introduced proposing that Virginia formally assume a defensive posture in anticipation of war, the majority cringed at the prospect of war being inevitable. The resolutions were about to be defeated when Patrick Henry rose to address the assembly. It was his speech that changed minds so that the resolutions were carried. It was his speech that first openly advocated war. It was his speech which arguably mobilized the American colonies for eventual victory.

I therefore will quote the speech in its entirety to set the context of the American Revolution and to remind us of the similar perils we face today.

As you read it, keep several things in mind:

First: Patrick Henry was promoting war to a group of informed men who were predisposed to peace. His speech was meant to convince the skeptical rather than to agitate warmongers.

Second: Patrick Henry was promoting war against the greatest military power on the face of the earth, the British Empire. The men in that assembly did not have the benefit of hindsight but were contemplating a war which, from their perspective, was by no means sure to be won.

Third: Patrick Henry was promoting war as a necessary last resort. He was not a "trigger-happy" glory seeker. He was facing facts that peaceful approaches had been impotent for over ten years of struggle.

Keeping these facts in mind will keep us from mistaking Patrick Henry for an impatient, violent man and keep his speech in proper perspective. And now, let Patrick Henry's words speak for themselves. "No man, Mr. President, thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very honorable gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining, as I do, opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I should speak forth my sentiments freely, and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery. And in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of Hope. We are apt to shut out eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my own part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

"I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging the future but by the past. And, judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry, for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparation which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation the last arguments to which kings resort.

"I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy in this quarter of the world, to call for this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging.

"And what have we to oppose them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty, and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not already been exhausted?

"Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrance's have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned with contempt from the foot of the throne.

"In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we are to be free; if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending; if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained we must fight! I repeat sir we must fight! An appeal to arms, and to the God of hosts, is all that is left us.

"They tell us, sir, that we are weak - unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of Hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?

"Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature has placed in our power. Three millions of people armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.

"Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone: it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery. Our chains are forged. Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston. The war is inevitable. And let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!

"It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry peace, peace, but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our the clash of resounding arms. Our brethren are already in the field. Why stand here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

Thus was Patrick Henry's speech. Thus were the resolutions to prepare for war carried. Let me make a few more remarks so you can see the parallels with our situation today and so there is no misunderstanding. Neither Patrick Henry, nor the resolutions he sought to approve advocated attacking the British army. They simply advocated being ready for the inevitable British attack. Neither does the Free Militia propose to attack anyone but only to be prepared to defend.

Just as the colonists sought to alleviate unjust taxation without representation with every possible form of peaceful means, there has been an ongoing attempt with all branches of the federal government to demonstrate how unconstitutional many laws, programs, and taxes are, to no avail. The Constitutional is routinely ignored and petitions to obey it are met with an "insidious smile" but no serious action.

The great danger of Patrick Henry's day was the growing strength of British forces along with the growing measures to disarm the colonies. Today we see the multiplication of police officers, agencies, prisons, and government power simultaneous with attacks on personal gun rights.
August 14, 2011 10:27AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
1.2.2 The beginning of the American Revolution

Contrary to popular belief, the American Revolution was not fought because the colonists were taxed without representation. It is true that for years preceding the revolution, taxes and fair representation were the issues that energized patriots. These were the questions that first caused friction between the colonies and England. But no American patriot took up arms to kill a British soldier because he thought his taxes were too high.

American patriots took up arms against the British and began the revolution only when and precisely because the British attempted to disarm them.

The first incident was when the British tried to confiscate stores of gunpowder and weapons to disarm the militia in New England. Almost at the same time (news travelled slowly in those days) the British confiscated the colonists' gunpowder in Williamsburg. The events in New England resulted n bloodshed; in Virginia the bloodshed was averted. But both historic confrontations took place because the British attempted to disarm citizens.

March 23, 1775. Patrick Henry gave his famous "give me liberty or give me death" speech.

April 18, 1775. British soldiers set out from Boston to confiscate muskets, gunpowder, and cannons from the colonists. Paul Revere rode out of town to warn the Americans.

April 19, 1775. The British encountered their first resistance by minutemen at Lexington Green. After pushing on to Concord, the British were repelled, and then routed, by the American minutemen and sustained casualties.

April 21, 1775. Still unaware of fighting in New England, the governor of Virginia ordered British marines to confiscate all gunpowder held in the public magazine at Williamsburg.

May 2, 1775. Captain Patrick Henry led an armed militia of Virginians on a march to Williamsburg. Soon five thousand men sprang to arms and joined the march.

May 4, 1775. The British agreed to compensate the Virginians for the gunpowder that was confiscated before the armed militia arrived in Williamsburg, thus averting armed conflict.

Two lessons should be noted about these two incidents which really started the American Revolution. First, the British government's attempts to disarm American colonists, even though the colonists had not attacked the British, was considered to be an act of war by the Americans. They knew that if they were successfully disarmed, the British would be unchecked in their attempts to subjugate and enslave them.

Second, when the acts of war were perceived, it was not Americans acting under the authority of the British Crown that opposed them. It was ordinary armed citizens outlaws as the British saw them who fought.

Our country sprang into being and is founded on the principle of ordinary citizens like you and me arming and organizing ourselves to fight tyranny.

1.2.3 The Declaration of Independence

About a year after hostilities broke out at Lexington and Concord, the Continental Congress unanimously adopted the Declaration of Independence. This declaration officially severed political ties with England and established the thirteen American colonies as independent states.

On the one hand, it took quite a long time to finalize and ratify the Declaration of Independence considering that the country had already been at war with Great Britain for a year and there was no real prospect for a peaceful resolution. But what this delay accomplished was a consensus among the delegations from all thirteen colonies about the justification of revolution and independence. It is therefore enlightening to examine their rationale in the Declaration of Independence since it represents the universal position of the leaders of all the colonies as to why America was justified in its revolt against the king and Parliament.

The relevant text is the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence which reads 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 government. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such a form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

What follows is an enumeration of particular abuses by Britain, many of which were particular to that day. I shall not comment on these except to say that one complain rings very literally true today: "He has erected a Multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance." We also are harassed by every conceivable kind of regulatory agency, trivial law, and arrogant official which "eat our substance" through confiscatory taxes that get us coming (income taxes), standing (property taxes), and going (sales taxes).

Now for some relevant thoughts on the second paragraph:

"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." Man is granted certain rights by God. These rights precede the formation of any government. Since governments are established by God and derive their authority from him, they cannot legitimately take away rights that have been graciously given by God.

"That among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." Notice it says, "among these are." This is not a comprehensive list of man's rights. Even the Bill of Rights is not a comprehensive list as indicated by the Ninth Amendment. But our rights can be organized or classified under the headings of life, liberty, and happiness.

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." This demonstrates that governments are formed to protect our rights, not to give them.

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government." This clearly advocates dissolution of any government which does not act to defend the rights of the people. Notice that "the People," that is, individuals, have the right to make this adjustment. In our present case, we do not need to change, abolish, or replace the Constitution; what we need is to change our government so it will conform by force if necessary to the Constitution.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes." No one should be quick to resist minor and isolated abuses of power. These are inevitable in any government staffed by human beings.

"And accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." Americans have indeed suffered evil after evil from the government infractions of free speech, gun restrictions, exorbitant taxes, and violations of property and state rights for a very long time.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to thrown off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." For now we will not consider whether or not such a systematic abuse of power exists in the United States. What is important to note is that when systematic abuses exist it is the people's (remember this means you and me, not elected officials or law enforcement agencies) RIGHT and DUTY to "throw off such Government."

If you become convinced that the federal government is bent on systematic violations of our personal liberties, it is your moral duty and obligation to join with others so convinced to restore true liberty for all Americans.

This is a radical conclusion, but our forefathers were "radicals" and this is the premise upon which our nation was founded and has its being.

1.2.4 Guns are not the problem

Americans have a rich heritage of arming and organizing themselves into militias. We have not even considered the Old West where virtually everyone had a gun for self-defense. Nor have we considered the fact that up until the turn of the century, states required by law that every able-bodied adult male citizen possess a gun and ammunition.

But aren't guns the cause of all kinds of evil? Ostensibly, recent movements to restrict private gun ownership or use have been intended to reduce accidents and violent crime. But facts simply do not support this.

Fewer accidents occur with guns than by many other common things in life.

In 1987, there were only 1,695 accidental deaths involving firearms in the United States (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 59).

It is 26 times more likely that you will die in an auto accident than by a gun accident (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 60). Yet there is no organized movement to ban car ownership like there is for guns which are Constitutionally protected.

Accidents involving firearms have decreased by 42% from 1970 to 1983 (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 60).

There is no basis for the belief that restricting gun ownership or use will significantly reduce violent crime. While it would be stretching the truth to say that gun ownership prevents crime, it certainly does not cause it.

Violent crimes such as murder have not been invented since the advent of firearms but have occurred as long as sinful man has existed. Crime is encouraged by culture and sin, not mechanical instruments.

Florida has the nation's highest violent crime rate and 8.6 gun dealers per 10,000 people. North Dakota has the lowest violent crime rate and 25.8 gun dealers per 10,000 people. This is consistent with crime and gun dealer rates in other states. (U.S. News & World Report, 1/17/94). There is no correlation between gun sales and crime.

Gun control activists point to Great Britain as an example of a country with strict gun control and low crime rates. However, the British murder rate was lower than America's BEFORE the instituted gun control and their rate of increase in murders is FASTER than in the U.S. (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 77-78).

The countries of Switzerland, Israel, Denmark, and Finland have the world's very highest per capita gun ownership and some of the world's lowest rime rates (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 78). Therefore, there is no correlation between gun ownership and crime.

Taiwan, Mexico, and Jamaica have much stricter gun control than the U.S. and much higher murder rates. Since 1974, possession of just a single bullet in Jamaica has been punishable with life imprisonment! Yet Jamaica has six times as many gun deaths per capita as our murder capital, Washington, D.C. (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 78-79). There is no correlation between gun laws and crime.

The National Sheriff's Association, American Federation of Police, and the National Police Officer's Association of America all officially support gun ownership by law-abiding citizens (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 111).

So-called assault rifles are not the weapon of choice among criminals. They are singled out for gun control not because they threaten the law-abiding citizen but because they threaten an unconstitutional government.

One gets the impression from television and newspapers that so-called assault rifles are responsible for most murders since headlines often tell of maniacs shooting masses of people. In fact, only 4% of homicides involve any kind of rifle and less than 1% involve assault weapons (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 150, 154).

The anti-assault rifle craze in the media is analogous to coverage of aircraft crashes. Although many more people are killed in care accidents, it is the isolated case of an airliner crash that gets the publicity because the story is more sensational. Likewise, the coverage of murders with "assault rifles" distorts the truth that assault rifles kill very few people.

In fact, military rifles are designed to wound rather than kill. The .223 caliber cartridge of the M-16 is much lighter than a .30-06 hunting rifle. Moreover, military cartridges have "full metal jackets" to minimize tissue damage because killing the enemy eliminates one soldier while wounding him occupies several to remove him from the field and tend to his wounds.

Furthermore, genuine assault rifles have not been legal for private, unlicensed ownership since 1968. The Department of Defense defines an "assault rifle" as a military rifle that discharges multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger (i.e., a machine gun). Today's focus is on semi-automatic weapons which by definition are not assault rifles.

No legally registered automatic assault weapon has ever been used in a crime in the United States (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 149).

Either such weapons are not used for crime, or those who do use them totally ignore gun control laws.

In Switzerland, every able-bodied adult male trains two or three weeks each year in the army and is required to keep an automatic assault rifle and ammunition in his home (Fodor's Guide to Switzerland, pp. 60-61). Yet violent crime is virtually non- existent in Switzerland.

Do not believe gun control activists who claim they only want to regulate and not eliminate gun ownership and use by law-abiding private citizens.

Nazis in Denmark, the military in Greece, and officials in Hungary have all used pre-existing gun owners lists to confiscate weapons (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 88-89).

The stated purpose of Handgun Control is the elimination of guns in the hands of private citizens. Waiting periods and registration are simply the tactical first step towards disarming the public totally ("Handguns Under Heavy Fire," 3/13/94, p. B-6).

1.2.5 Discussion questions

What were your first impressions of Patrick Henry when you read his speech? Do you think he was a realist or an alarmist? Subversive or patriotic? Principled or power-hungry? Bold or foolhardy?

Read Patrick Henry's speech again in the light of today's situation (substitute America for Great Britain, Congress for Parliament, etc.). Using a highlighter, highlight the statements and ideas that apply now. What are the main parallels between Patrick Henry's day and ours?

Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty or give me death!" Christian theologian Loraine Boettner wrote, "We desire peace, but not the kind that is found in the slave camp or cemetery." What do you say?

Why do you suppose that the American Revolution was ignited over guns instead of taxes, even though taxes had been the main issue for so long?

What is your definition of a "right" and where do rights come from?

What is the purpose of the government and where does it gets its authority?

What is the proper, just, and moral response of an American citizen to a government

which systematically violates the "unalienable rights" of the people? Why?

If a person would publicly advocate the ideas of Patrick Henry or the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence today, how do you think he would be labeled and treated by the federal government? By the news media? By the typical American citizen?

What does this tell you about the direction this nation is headed?

What was your initial reaction when you read the statement, "If you become convinced that the federal government is bent on systematic violations of our personal liberties, it is your moral duty and obligation to join with others so convinced to restore true liberty for all Americans"? What is your reaction after having time to reflect upon it?

Are you ready, willing, and able to join in such a cause provided that you are convinced your personal liberties are in peril? What are your reasons?

Do you believe that wide-spread gun ownership causes crime, prevents crime, or is virtually irrelevant to the issue? Why?

Do you think it is a virtue or a vise to own an "assault rifle"? Why?

The main ideas of this section:

American patriots took up arms against the British and began the revolution only when &emdash; and precisely because &emdash; the British attempted to disarm them.

Our country sprang into being and is founded on the principle of ordinary citizens like you and me arming and organizing ourselves to fight tyranny.

If you become convinced that the federal government is bent on systematic violations of our personal liberties, it is your moral duty and obligation to join with others so convinced to restore true liberty for all Americans.

There is no basis for the belief that restricting gun ownership or use will significantly reduce violent crime. While it would be stretching the truth to say that gun ownership prevents crime, it certainly does not cause it.

So-called assault rifles are not the weapon of choice among criminals. They are singled out for gun control not because they threaten the law-abiding citizen but because they threaten an unconstitutional government.

Further reading:

At the very least, you should obtain, read, and absorb a copy of the Declaration of Independence.

If you desire to read and study these issues in more depth, I recommend the following books available from the Free Militia.

Gottlieb, Alan. Gun Rights Fact Book (Bellevue, Washington, Merrill Press, 1988), 168pp.

Gottlieb, Alan. The Rights of Gun Owners (Bellevue, Washington, Merrill Press, 1981), 235 pp.

Henry, William Wirt. Patrick Henry: Life, Correspondence and Speeches (Harrisonburg, Virginia, Sprinkle Publications, 1993 reprint), 3 volumes, 1946 pp. Written by the patriot's grandson.

Norval, Morgan. Take My Gun If You Dare! (El Dorado, Arkansas, Desert Publications, 1979), 103 pp.

Syrett, Harold C. (editor). American Historical Documents (New York, New York, Barnes & Noble, 1960), 427 pp. Excerpts and complete texts of important legal documents from 1606 through 1962.

Tyler, Moses Coit. Patrick Henry (New York, New York, Bert Franklin, 1898/1970), 454 pp. This is a fantastic and arousing biography of the great patriot. I highly recommend it.
August 14, 2011 10:28AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
1.3 The morality of arming and organizing

"Then said he unto them, 'But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.'" --Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36)

1.3.1 Biblical inspiration and authority

Before we can rightly consider arming and organizing ourselves as a militia, we must consider whether or not doing so is the right thing to do. Later on we will see that we have the historical and constitutional right to form a militia. But ultimately, right and wrong is determined by God's will, and God's will is determined from the Bible. Why turn to the Bible to answer our questions about right and wrong?

If you are a Bible believer, you must be committed to following its moral standards. If you do not believe the Bible, you should still know and weigh what it says and use it to justify your actions to Bible believers.

To answer this question we will briefly look at what the Bible says about its own inspiration, inerrancy, sufficiency, and authority.

First, look at 2 Timothy 3:16-17: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." Here the apostle Paul is teaching us that the Bible (or Scriptures) are inspired by God or God-breathed. Take careful note that Paul says by inspiration of God . He says that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God." Notice here that it is the actual Scriptures themselves, the words of the Bible, that are inspired (God-breathed) and not simply the authors. God gave us the precise wording of the Bible in its original Hebrew and Greek, not just the main ideas. Paul also says that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God." It is not just portions of the Bible that are inspired but all of it. We therefore say that the Bible is the word of God! This testimony that the Bible is the word of God runs throughout the whole Bible. (See, for example, Exodus 34:27, 2 Samuel 23:2, Jeremiah 26:2, John 12:49, John 17:8, 1 Corinthians 14:37, and Revelation 2:18.)

The Bible is word-for-word the word of God. Therefore it is completely true or without any errors. This is what we mean by "inerrancy." Think about it. If God knows everything (1 John 3:20) and cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18), and if the Bible's words are God's words, then there cannot be any mistakes in the Bible. Otherwise, God would either have to be wrong himself or lying to us.

While this line of reasoning is undeniable, the Bible does not leave us to make our own conclusions about its truthfulness. The concept of infallibility or inerrancy is clearly the Bible's own teaching about itself. Jesus said, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:18). In other words, the Bible must be fulfilled in the smallest detail. He also taught that "the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35) and praying to the Father stated, "thy word is truth." (John 17:17). God's word can only be truth if it is free from errors. Remember in school when true or false questions on tests were false if any part of them were wrong? Luke wrote his gospel "That thou mightiest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed." (Luke 1:4). Peter wrote, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy" (2 Peter 1:19). More surer than what? Read 2 Peter 1:16-18. Peters says that the word of the prophets is more sure than his own eyewitness experience of Jesus Christ.

Now the fact that the Bible doesn't have any mistakes is not simply "academic" truth. It is of immense practical importance. Only if it is all true can we know for sure that any particular part of it is true. Do you want to do right by obeying a command in the Bible only to find out later that you were wrong to do what you did? Of course not. We need a Bible that is true throughout to have any real hope of pleasing God.

There is still more you need to know about the Bible. Not only is it God's word, not only is it true, but it contains everything you need to know about God and your relationship with him. The fact that it is everything we need to know is summed up by the word "sufficient" and is clearly taught by Paul the apostle in 2 Timothy 3:15-17. It tells us everything we need to know for salvation (2 Timothy 3:15), truth (2 Timothy 3:16), and good works (2 Timothy 3:17). This is why the Bible tells us over and over again never to add to it or to take away from it (Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6, Revelation 22:18).

Now when we say that the Bible tells us everything we need to know, we need to realize that some things are stated directly and some indirectly. A good algebra textbook, for instance, may not give answers to every algebra problem. Yet is does fully define the rules and principles by which every algebra problem may be solved. The Bible likewise contains all that we need for our relationship with God even if it does not provide direct answers for every problem or question we face. On such indirect issues we must draw valid conclusions based on what Scripture does say.

This leads us to the final point which needs to be made about the Bible: the Bible alone is authoritative meaning that it, and only it, must be completely believed and obeyed. Since all of the Bible is God's word we cannot pick and choose what we want to obey. Since it is all true we cannot neglect a portion of it by raising doubts about its reliability. Since it contains all we need for our Christian walks we cannot appeal to something or someone besides the Bible as our final authority on some issue.

We cannot argue with any part of the Bible any more than we can argue with God himself! God has "commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently." (Psalm 119:4). If we disobey, we will surely fail (Matthew 7:24-25).

We must make sure that whatever we do in any department of life, including the use of force, conforms to the truth and moral principles of the Bible.

1.3.2 The continuity of the Old and New Testaments

If the Bible is the word of God, is it a self-consistent message? Yes! Some sincere Christians believe that the New Testament overturned the Old Testament rendering the Old Testament obsolete. But this is false.

The New Testament did not change or overturn the moral principles of the Old Testament. It simply clarified, developed, added to, or fulfilled them.

Look at what Jesus Christ said: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18). Several things should be noted about these two verses.

First, Jesus did not abolish what the Old Testament said. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus did not contradict anything said by the Old Testament. Rather than abolishing the law against murder, he went beyond it to prohibit hatred (Matthew 5:21-22). He did not abolish the law against adultery but went beyond it to prohibit lust (Matthew 5:27-28). He did not abolish the principle that punishment by the state should be limited to "an eye for an eye" but simply corrected the abuse of this legal principle of justice by forbidding personal vengeance (Matthew 5:38-39) which the Old Testament also forbids (Deuteronomy 32:35). And he did not negate any Old Testament law by telling us not to hate our enemy because this was a tradition of the scribes found nowhere in the Old Testament (Matthew 5:43-44).

Whenever Jesus wanted to justify his actions or establish a truth, he did it by quoting the Old Testament, not by denying it. Even when he said that loving God and loving our neighbor are the greatest commandments, he was quoting Old Testament commandments that were still in effect. The fact is, the law is still in effect and binding today. " For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." (James 2:10).

Second, Jesus did come to fulfill the Old Testament. In Colossians 2:16-17 the apostle Paul says, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.." So it is true that some things in the Old Testament no longer apply to us because Jesus has fulfilled them. But it is only ceremonial aspects of the law that were changed, not the moral aspects. And whatever was finally fulfilled by Jesus Christ was replaced by something better.

The religious festivals of the Old Testament pointed to Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection (1 Corinthians 5:7). The Old Testament priesthood was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, who is our High Priest and replaced by the priesthood of all believers (Hebrews 7:23-24). The Old Testament physical temple was fulled in Jesus Christ and replaced by the spiritual temple of the church. The Old Testament sacrificed were fulfilled once and for all by the death of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 7:27). There is no such thing as something in the Old Testament which was abolished without being substituted by something better in Jesus Christ.

Third, the whole law remains binding until the end of the world. Nowhere did Jesus or the apostles ever change or do away with any moral law or principle of the Old Testament. We have already seen that Jesus based his morals on the Old Testament. Furthermore, the New Testament emphasis on love is not instead of the law but the essence of it.

Paul wrote, "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." (Romans 13:8-10). Just because we are filled with Christian love does not mean that we can now sleep around, murder, steal, and covet. Indeed, our love makes us do what the Old Testament law commands.

The relationship of the Old Testament law to salvation.

This brings us to the question of why Paul deprecates the law and good works (Roman 3:20, Galatians 24, Ephesians 2:8-10, etc.). Nowhere does Paul deny the validity of the moral laws for determining what is right and wrong and for guiding our everyday lives. Like Jesus, his arguments and teaching were always based on the Old Testament itself (Acts 17:2-3, Romans 1:17, Romans 3:10-18, etc.). What Paul denies is the validity of the view that obedience to God's laws can save us. As sinners, we are incapable of full obedience to the law and therefore cannot please God (Romans 3:20, Romans 8:6-8). So we must depend upon the grace of God in Jesus Christ to be forgiven (Romans 6:23).

But this was nothing new! Obeying God's laws did not save anyone in the Old Testament anymore than in the New Testament, and grace did not save anyone any less. No one in the Old Testament was forgiven or saved because they obeyed the law; the law simply made them aware of their sin just as in the New Testament (Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7-8, Galatians 3:24).

The Lord looked with favor or grace on Abel (Genesis 4:4) who made his offering in faith (Hebrews 11:4).

Noah found favor (grace) in the eyes of God (Genesis 6:8) because of his faith (Hebrews 11:7).

Abraham was saved by faith (Genesis 15:6) in the gospel of Jesus (Galatians 3:8) and is a pattern for our faith (Romans 4:1-10).

Moses found favor in the eyes of the Lord because God is gracious, not because Moses obeyed the law (Exodus 34:6-9, Psalm 103:7-8).

David depended on God's mercy for forgiveness (Psalm 51:1-5).

The point of all this is that the Old and New Testaments are equally valid and totally consistent in teaching what is right and wrong. Anyone reading the Old Testament will easily recognize the fact that it does not condemn violence or war when it is justified by biblical principles. Abraham rightly fought to rescue his nephew Lot from invaders (Genesis 14). God gave ground rules for conducting warfare (Deuteronomy 20). The book of Judges is basically a history of heroes and patriots who fought against the tyranny of invading armies and ungodly rulers. David was the greatest king of Israel as well as one of its best soldiers (1 and 2 Samuel). Nothing in the New Testament changes any of these facts.

1.3.3 Jesus Christ was not a pacifist

Of course, Christ's emphasis on love is sometimes perceived to imply that he was a pacifist who condemned all violence and war. But this is a misunderstanding. A close look at the Bible will show that Jesus Christ was not a pacifist and will demonstrate that he approved of the justified use of deadly force. Neither John the Baptist, nor Jesus, nor the apostles condemned soldiering.

" And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages." (Luke 3:14). John the Baptist did not tell soldiers that being soldiers was immoral per se, but simply condemned the abuse of their position as soldiers.

Jesus did not rebuke the centurion for being a soldier, but commended him for the faith that came from his understanding of authority in the military (Matthew 8:5-13; see also Acts 10:1-48).

Jesus Christ both permitted and commanded his followers to be armed.

"Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36). Now that the apostles had learned the lesson of trusting in God (Luke 10:4), they were to be prepared to defend themselves as they travelled through dangerous areas to take the gospel to the whole world.

"Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus. Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" (John 18:10-11). Notice that Jesus allowed Peter to have the sword both before and after this incident. The problem was not that defending someone is wrong; the problem was that it was inappropriate at this time since Jesus wanted to die for our sins (Mark 10:45).

"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." (Matthew 26:52). Again, Jesus did not necessarily condemn using the sword. He told Peter to put it back in its scabbard, not to get rid of it. What Jesus is saying is that anyone who fights risks his life in doing so. This is a matter of fact, not of ethics.

Jesus Christ used just force.

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves," (Matthew 21:12).

"And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;" (John 2:15).

" As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground." He used his divine power against aggressors (John 18:6).

Jesus Christ would have been justified in defending himself.

On several occasions Jesus Christ evaded an angry crowd rather than giving in to their intent to kill him (Luke 4:28-30, John 8:58-59, John 10:35-39). It was not yet the time for him to sacrifice himself for the sins of many. When the time did come, and his disciples tried to defend him, Jesus said, "Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Matthew 26:53). Jesus was quite capable of taking care of himself if he wanted to be defended. And his statement that he could call on the Father did not only mean that he had the ability to defend himself, but that he was morally justified in doing so as well. He was under no inherent obligation to die, although he and the Father did plan for him to die.

Jesus Christ will someday use deadly force on a wide scale.

All through the Bible we read of the day when Jesus will return to set things straight. At his second coming he will throw the wicked into the fiery furnace (Matthew 13:41-43). He will separate the righteous from the wicked and send the latter into the eternal fire (Matthew 25:41). He will bring destruction upon unbelievers (1 Thessalonians 5:1-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10). He will lay waste to the present heavens and the earth (2 Peter 3:10). And with justice he will judge and make war on the evildoers of the earth (Revelation 19:11-21). This all demonstrates that Jesus is not absolutely opposed to the deadly punishment of wrongdoers. Indeed, there will come a day when he brings it about on a universal scale. But for now, he is delaying his just wrath while giving mankind a chance to repent of their wicked deeds (2 Peter 3:9).

Jesus taught that force was a last resort.

Of course, it is true that violence is not always-indeed rarely-justified. "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence." (John 18:36). So Christians should not use force to establish or maintain the kingdom of God or impose their religious beliefs on others. But this does not mean that Christians should never use force. Jesus implies that if the situation was different, if his kingdom was an earthly kingdom, then force would be acceptable.

Jesus also said, " Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9) showing that our goal should always be to seek peaceful resolutions if at all possible (see also Romans 12:17-19). Later he said, "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39). Slapping the right cheek was not a life-threatening attack, but a personal insult similar to spitting on someone. So Jesus was teaching that we should not resort to force when we face minor personal insults and mistreatment. But he was not condemning self-defense when our very lives are threatened as we have already seen.

Finally, Christ tells us, "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?" (Matthew 5:44-47). How can we love our enemies and kill them at the same time? Clearly Jesus is saying we should harbor no hatred towards anyone. Our actions should never be motivated by hatred or vengeance but only by justice. Judges can and do justly sentence criminals to prison while having compassion on them. God can and does desire a sinner's repentance as he condemns him forever. So also it is possible and necessary for us to love our mortal enemies, to pray for their souls and seek to change their minds and behavior, even when we are forced to take up arms against them.

1.3.4 Principles of just war

As we have seen, Jesus Christ was not a pacifist and it is sometimes necessary to respond to evil with force. But why and when is force right and when is it wrong? Through the Bible there are several key principles to answer this question.

The right to life. All through the Bible it is assumed that individuals have the right to life. For instance, Exodus 20:13 says, "Thou shalt not kill." The reasons we cannot murder is because God says so. But the reason he says so is because he has given us the right to live. This right to life implies the right to self-defense. If we should not be murdered, then we are justified in preventing someone from killing us. This is shown throughout the Bible.

Capital punishment. For various terrible crimes and sins, only death is a sufficient punishment. God himself instituted capital punishment. "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." (Genesis 9:6). "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death." (Exodus 21:12). Consistent with the principle of "an eye for an eye" (Exodus 23-25), only a murderer's death can satisfy the demands of justice for murder. Capital punishment is also the just penalty for despising authority (Deuteronomy 17:12), rebellion (Deuteronomy 21:21), and kidnapping (Deuteronomy 24:7). It makes no difference in principle whether an individual, or an army, or political leaders are guilty. If a man is guilty of a capital crime, he should die at the hands of an executioner. If any army is guilty of a wide-scale crime, they too should die, at the hands of an opposing army if necessary. If our leaders are corrupted to the extent of imposing tyranny upon the people, then they should be forcefully overthrown and replaced by a legitimate government.

Resisting tyranny. This idea of resisting tyranny is common in the Bible.

Clearly we should not resort to force when mere possessions are at stake. High taxes and the like can be endured and do not warrant taking lives. But when leaders are responsible for murder, deny civil liberties, and generally impose a draconian regime upon the people, then we should disobey, resist, and rise up to fight. In Exodus 1:15-22 the king of Egypt ordered that all newborn boys be killed. But the Hebrew midwives did right by disobeying and sparing the innocent babies. As we said previously, the book of Judges is full of accounts of leaders raised up by God for express purpose of delivering Israel from the hands of tyranny. Read about Ehud (Judges 3), Deborah (Judges 4), Gideon (Judges 6- 7), and Samson (Judges 13-16). These people are commended for their faith in the New Testament because they responded to God's calling to fight against tyranny (Hebrews 11:32-34).

Justice not revenge, collective not personal. Paul the apostle wrote, "Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men." (Romans 12:17). We must always be motivated to do what is right. "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men." (Romans 12:18). By all means we must seek peaceful resolutions. "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." (Romans 12:19). We are not to get even with an evildoer nor are we to take justice into our own hands. But it is not evil or vengeful for people to individually defend themselves or to collectively exact just punishment.

Obeying authority. Since the Bible is the inspired word of God, we must follow its commands and principles. We must take seriously the concept of just war taught explicitly in the Old Testament and implicitly in the New since the Bible is consistent in its moral precepts. Since Jesus was not a pacifist, we cannot say that Christians renounce all armed conflict. And while force should be a last resort it is sometimes necessary for self-defense and to resist tyranny.

This leads us to the all important idea of authority. Who is in charge. What must we obey? When is resistance justified? "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." (Matthew 28:18). All legitimate authority rests in the Lord Jesus Christ. All earthly authority is therefore derived and limited authority. Christ gives parents the authority to raise children according to his principles (Ephesians 6:1-4). But we have no authority to abuse our children or lead them astray. He gives ordained leaders of the church authority within the church, but they are accountable to Christ (Hebrews 13:17). They also have no authority to abuse or lead astray Christians. Likewise, he gives authority to governments to maintain law and order, not to abuse citizens or to perpetrate evil.

Consider Romans 13:1-5 which is perhaps the most important biblical passage about the authority of governments. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God." (Romans 13:1). In America, the highest governing authority is the Constitution, not elected officials who are sworn to uphold and defend it.

"Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." (Romans 13:2). Violating Constitutional liberties is rebelling against God, whether it is done by a criminal or the politicians. Thus, When elected officials break their oath to uphold the Constitution, it is not the patriotic citizen who is in rebellion, but the governing official!

"For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:" (Romans 13:3). If you do what is Constitutionally right by forming a militia and the government accuses you of wrongdoing, then in fact they have lost all authority because they have turned away from the very thing which legitimizes them.

"For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." (Romans 13:4). God intends the government to do you good by maintaining law, order, and justice. When the government systematically punishes the upright citizen and commends wrongdoing, it is no longer serving God's purpose.

"Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake." (Romans 13:5). Jesus Christ is the ultimate authority and the Constitution is the real governing authority. If we are submitted to Jesus Christ and committed to Constitutional liberties, then our conscience demands the resistance of unconstitutional authority which is no authority at all.

1.3.5 Discussion questions

To determine what is right and wrong in ethical matters, should we follow public opinion, existing laws, our own opinion, or the Bible? Why?

Do you believe that there is any inconsistency in what the Bible has to say about the morality of self-defense and war waged against tyranny? If not, why not? If so, please specify what "inconsistency" you perceive. Is there any way you can see these "inconsistencies" can be reconciled?

Do you believe that Jesus was, or Christians should be, complete pacifists? Why or why not?

How is the idea of just war consistent or inconsistent with loving God? With loving our neighbor? With loving our enemy?

Describe the general continuity of principle among capital punishment, law enforcement by the police, personal self-defense, and just war.

Can you describe the difference between acting out of revenge and acting in behalf of justice? Why is the one right and the other wrong?

What is your definition of authority that must be obeyed?

What are some examples of usurped or illegitimate authority that do not justify armed resistance? Why isn't fighting right in such cases?

What are some examples of usurped or illegitimate authority that do justify armed resistance? Why is fighting right in such cases?

Main ideas of this section

We must make sure that whatever we do in any department of life, including the use of force, conforms to the truth and moral principles of the Bible.

The New Testament did not change or overturn the moral principles of the Old

Testament. It simply clarified, developed, added to, or fulfilled them.

A close look at the Bible will show that Jesus Christ was not a pacifist, and will demonstrate that he approved of the justified use of deadly force.

When elected officials break their oath to uphold the Constitution, it is not the patriotic citizen who is in rebellion, but the governing official!

Further reading

If you desire to read and study these issues in more depth, I recommend the following books:

King James Bible

On the inspiration and authority of the Bible:

Custer, Stewart. Does Inspiration Demand Inerrancy? (Nutley, New Jersey, The Craig Press, 1968), 120pp.

Garrett, Duanne A. and Melick, Richard R., Jr. (editors). Authority and Interpretation: A Baptist Perspective (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Book House, 1987), 220pp.

Giesler, Norman (editor). Inerrancy (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1980), 516pp.

Young, Edward J. Thy Word Is Truth (Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Banner of Truth, 1957), 274pp.

On the morality and ethics of just war:

Boettner, Loraine. The Christian Attitude Toward War (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian & Reformed, 1940/1985), 91pp.

Davis, John Jefferson. Evangelical Ethics: Issues Facing the Church Today (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian & Reformed, 1985), 299pp.

Morey, Robert A. When Is It Right to Fight? (Minneapolis, Minnesota, Bethany House Publishers, 1985), 143pp.

Murray, John. Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishers, 1957), 272pp.

1.4 The reasons to arm and organize

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government."

-- Declaration of Independence

1.4.1 Our civil rights are threatened

The Bible says that you are morally justified to arm yourself and band with others who love liberty. American history shows that you stand in a great tradition if you arm and organize yourself. The Constitution clearly recognizes your legal right to possess firearms and join a militia. But should you want to?

The U.S. Army field manual on Guerrilla Warfare (FM 31-21, September, 1961, page 5) says: "Resistance movements begin to form when dissatisfaction occurs among strongly motivated individuals who cannot further their cause by peaceful or legal means."

So we must ask ourselves: Is there any reason to suspect that my personal liberties are in jeopardy? Is there any indication that the government is systematically threatening my rights? Is there any possibility that a tyranny could be established in the United States?

Affirmative answers to any of these questions should arouse our fervor for liberty and motivate us to spring immediately and effectively to arms.

It will now be demonstrated that our liberties are in jeopardy, that our rights are systematically threatened, and that tyranny can happen in the United States. (I am not saying it will, I'm saying it could happen.) We will demonstrate this by examining the status of our civil, gun, property, and state rights. First, here are some examples of violated civil rights:

The right to life (Fifth Amendment):

For a generation we have had legalized abortion which denies the right of the unborn child to live. While an individual's right to privacy cannot be restricted by the interests of any majority, they are restricted by other individual rights. The Declaration of Independence and Bible both imply that the right to life is superior to privacy.

President Clinton's proposed health care program will include "reproductive services" like abortion (Senator John Glenn, form letter to constituents, 1/5/94). Not only will abortion be legal, but every hospital will be required to perform them and public funds will be used to pay for them. This means we are approaching the situation in communist China where abortions are mandated by the state for all but the firstborn child.

President Clinton's health care program will include built- in euthanasia for "undesirable" patients. If the state determines that you are too old, too disabled, or too mentally ill to lead a "quality" life, medical care can and will be denied. (National Right to Life Committee high priority communication, 1994, p. 2.)

Freedom of religion (First Amendment):

In the city of ----- it is technically illegal to conduct a worship service or church gathering in a private residence. While this is rarely enforced, the fact that it is law says a lot! This is somewhat typical of municipal zoning regulations against churches.

Attempts have recently been made to require state certification of private school teachers and homeschoolers. While the attempts have failed for now, it is incomprehensible that legislators and congressmen even consider such measures in light of the First Amendment. Remember: licensing means state permission and certification means state control!

The American 2000 education program is designed to standardize the curriculum in and centralize control of all public schools by imposing "outcome based" education on all school districts.

J. Gresham Machen wrote, "A public-school system, if it means the providing of free education for those who desire it, is a noteworthy and beneficent achievement of modern times; but when once it becomes monopolistic it is the most perfect instrument of tyranny which has yet been devised" (Christianity & Liberalism, Eerdmans, 1923, p. 14).

It is a well-known communist tenet that if you can control the education of one generation, you will control the government and lives of all subsequent generations.

Freedom of the press (First Amendment)

The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) regulates the radio and television industry. While it is practically necessary to specify which stations can use which frequencies, it is unconstitutional for the FCC to base station licensing on the content of its programming.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a federal agency that funds public television. PBS is by its very nature informational. Thus we have a situation that in principle approaches having a state news agency like foreign dictatorships and autocratic governments have.

At various times it has been required that radio stations and TV networks give equal time to political candidates or views. The present push towards the Fairness Doctrine in broadcasting is a case in point. While this is a sound practice for objective journalism, it violates the First Amendment for the government to mandate which political views are aired and how much coverage they should receive.

Searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment)

At one time when I was in high school, the sheriff's department routinely pulled over and searched any and all cars carrying teenagers between two towns that had rival gangs. No warrants were issued, and the only "probable cause" for criminal intent was the mere fact that occupants happened to look like teenagers. This sort of thing happens all the time in America and is rarely contested in the courts.

The Internal Revenue Service routinely has access to all of your bank records, including microfiche copies of checks identifying who you do business with and what you buy, without a warrant (Mark Skousen, Mark Skousen's Complete Guide to Financial Privacy, chapters 1 and 2, 1979).

It has been alleged &emdash; although I have not confirmed it &emdash; that laws are on the books which permit unlimited and unwarranted wire taps of private telephone lines provided that they are not used in court. But the Fourth Amendment does not concern court- related surveillance but any surveillance at all by any government official or agency!

1.4.2 Our gun rights are threatened

In case you think your right to keep and bear arms is secure, just consider the following (much of this happened just in 1993- 1994).

Historical gun control

Some of the first American gun control laws were intended to keep black slaves and even free blacks from owning guns lest they free themselves (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 129). Many of today's gun control initiatives are veiled attempts by the American elite to keep guns out of the hands of the poor and blacks.

Nazis in Denmark, the military in Greece, and officials in Hungary have all used pre-existing registered gun owners lists to confiscate weapons when they invaded or came to power (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 88-89).

The U.S. 1968 Gun Control Act is a word-for-word translation of Adolf Hitler's German gun control laws of 1938 Nazi Germany (T.C. Fry and Tony Lavinge, "Are You Aware That ...", American Freedom Network).

Gun regulation

The Brady Bill was passed and signed into law by President Clinton requiring a five-day waiting period and criminal background check for all handgun purchases in late November, 1993 and was effective 3/1/94.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen (who oversees the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms or BATF) proposed raising the licensing fee for gun dealers from $66 to $600 per year for the express purpose of putting 200,000 out of 284,000 American gun dealers out of business. (Wall Street Journal, 1/5/94, p. A1).

Gun licensing

The 1968 Gun Control Act outlaws the possession of all automatic weapons and "short-barreled" rifles or shotguns unless they are licensed by and registered with the BATF.

Virtually all municipalities require a person to have a "carry permit" or license to openly carry a loaded gun in his or her car or on the street or to carry any concealed weapons on his or her person.

Gun registration

A yellow federal form must be completed for every purchase of a gun from a dealer. These forms include your name, address, type and serial number of the gun bought, and answers to several questions. While this is not called "registration" because the records are kept by the dealer only, the BATF is allowed to make a warrantless search of these records each year and may "borrow" them for further inspection and perhaps copying (Up to Date, "BATF Abuses of Gun Owners' Rights," The Second Amendment Foundation, 1994).

All guns must be registered in states such as Illinois and New York.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen proposed registration of "street sweeper" semi-automatic shotguns because they have no sporting use (U.S. News & World Report, 3/14/94). What about militia use?

Gun taxation

The 1968 Gun Control Act outlaws the possession of automatic weapons without a $200 transfer tax being paid to the BATF.

It is now seriously being considered that a sharp tax be placed on certain kinds of ammunition to help fund the national health program.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen also proposed a sharp tax increase on "street sweeper" semi-automatic shotguns because they have no sporting use (U.S. News & World Report, 3/14/94).

Gun prohibition

Former Governor Wilder of Virginia proposed that citizens of Virginia be limited to the purchase of one gun per moth. Similar proposals are even now being pressed and considered in the U.S. Congress.

Foreign assault rifles are banned for import and sale in the U.S.

The city of Cleveland passed an outright ban on the sale and ownership of semi-automatic "assault rifles" in 1989 and the Ohio Supreme Court upheld as "Constitutional" this law in 1993. ("Crime Fighters Have a New Tool in Deadly Work," 8/22/93, p. A-1).

Columnist Bob Greene of The Chicago Tribune has proposed abolishing the Second Amendment altogether and enforcing gun bans by sweeping house-to-house police searches and seizures for all guns ("A Gun-Free Nation? Just Think About It," 8/28/93, p. 2).

Sarah Brady of Handgun Control wants national gun control laws, a ban on semi-automatic "assault rifles," and says, "It simply doesn't make any sense at all for private citizens to be permitted to buy military equipment that was designed solely for killing people in combat" (Sarah Brady, Handgun Control newsletter, p. 2, 1993).

The U.S. Senate voted 56-43 to ban "19 specific assault weapons" and all detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds on November 17, 1993 (Wall Street Journal, "Senate, 56-43 Votes," 11/18/93, p. A24).

The House is also debating banning assault weapons and 10+ round magazines ("Reports from Washington," February 1994).

Gun law enforcement abuses

The BATF is known to have routinely and intentionally given false answers to inquiries about gun regulations so they could raid the person's house and arrest them (Up to Date, "BATF Abuses of Gun Owners' Rights," the Second Amendment Foundation, 1994).

The BATF raided the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas although all charges were previously investigated and dropped, using falsified information to obtain a warrant, by shooting first, and by misinforming the public (Waco: The Big Lie, video tape, 1993).

The BATF attempted to entrap Randy Weaver in Idaho. When he refused to become one of their henchmen, his cabin was put under 24-hour BATF surveillance, leading to a surprise confrontation that left Weaver's son and wife dead and Weaver acquitted of any wrongdoing ("It Could Happen to You," by Charlie Reese, 1/11/94, p. 4).

New anti-gun developments as of 3/26/94

In the couple of weeks since printing this material several attacks on gun rights have come to my attention which deserve being mentioned.

First, the Senate-approved ban on semi-automatic weapons which is now pending in the House (a vote is expected around April 1, 1994) actually would ban much more than politicians admit. Supposedly, it would ban only specific models such as the TEC-22, TEC-9, AK-475, Uzi, Galil, AR-70, MAC-10, MAC-11, MAC-12, AR-15, and Steyr AUG to name just a few. However....

The BATF admits that 26 other models of firearms would be banned by the language of this bill. This is 45 firearms, not 19 as claimed.

Furthermore, any semi-automatic with a detachable magazine would also be banned if it has any two additional military features such as a folding stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash suppressor, etc.

If the bill becomes law and you own one of these firearms, you will have 90 days to surrender your rifle or to register it. After that, non-compliance could result in a $1,000 fine, six months in prison, and permanent loss of any right to own any firearm forever!

Second, as if this is not bad enough, on February 28, 1994, Congressman Schumer and Senator Metzenbaum introduced legislation which advocates:

Banning magazines that can hold more than six rounds of ammunition and an outright ban on all "Saturday night specials" or cheap handguns.

Federal registration and licensing of all handguns in the United States and limiting purchases of handguns to only one gun per month.

Making all gun shows and gun sales illegal, requiring gun dealers to sell only at their one licensed place of business, and raising the gun dealers license fee to a staggering $1000 per year.

Imposing a 30 percent tax on all handgun sales and a 50 percent tax on all handgun ammunition sales.

Requiring individuals to obtain an "arsenal license" if they own more than 20 firearms or if they own more than 1000 rounds of ammunition.

These "arsenal licenses" would cost $300, be subject to government approval, and would require BATF inspections (i.e., invasions) of your home three times per year to maintain.

The really subversive thing about these two bills is that they are aimed at limiting militias more than at limiting crime. Military features on rifles like folding stocks, pistol grips, and flash suppressors are useful on a battlefield but immaterial in committing a murder or bank robbery. How many criminals bayonet someone? Moreover, limiting the amount of ammunition we can own to 1000 rounds does not do anything for violent crime. It only takes one loaded magazine holding a few rounds to knock over a bank or blow someone's brains out. But it takes an "arsenal" of thousands of rounds of ammunition to be ready to oppose the government.

1.4.3 Our property rights are threatened

Your property rights are also under attack. Virtually everything possible is being done to take away whatever wealth you have.

Taking property without a trial (Fifth Amendment)

The Fifth Amendment states: "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

The Internal Revenue Service has the power to put a lien on your house, attach your paycheck, and confiscate your property without a trial by jury and without your conviction if they unilaterally determine that you have evaded taxes (Tax Loopholes: Everything the Law Allows, Boardroom Classics, 1993).

Various police departments across the country routinely confiscate homes, cars, and other possessions of those arrested for dealing in drugs and sell these properties to raise funds before the person arrested has been convicted of wrongdoing by a jury and whether or not it is demonstrated that drug money was used to buy the property.

Taking property for public use (Fifth Amendment)

The Fifth Amendment also states: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The use of your property can and is restricted by municipal zoning codes, state and federal environmental laws, and other governmental regulations for "the public good," even if the use of the property that is forbidden does not harm the lives or property of others.

All of these regulations somehow limit the personal use of the property and many limit or reduce the property's commercial productivity or value on the real estate market.

While the courts recognize that these practices reduce the uses and value of private property, they have ruled they are Constitutional because they are only "partial takings" not total takings of property (Richard A. Epstein, Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain, Harvard, 1985). In other words, it is legal for the government to seize your property-without compensation-as long as they don't take all of it!

Income taxes are unconstitutional

Originally income taxes were illegal because the Constitution required all taxes to be apportioned among the states proportional to their populations, not their incomes.

The 16th Amendment, which permits federal income taxes, was not ratified in the same language by three fourths of the United States as required by Article V of the Constitution and is therefore invalid. The approved wording was different in different states and therefore they ratified different amendments! ("Is Income Tax Un-American and Illegal?", July and August, 1993, pp. 14-16).

The courts refuse to cast down the 16th Amendment even though it was not legally ratified.

Progressive taxes are unconstitutional

As we have seen, the Fifth Amendment prohibits taking property for public use without compensation.

State and federal income taxes are "progressive" taxes meaning that the higher your income, the higher the percentage of your income you pay in taxes. The purpose and effect of this progressive tax structure is to redistribute wealth from one group to another. High wage earners are taxed to fund welfare and other entitlements. In other words, their property (money) is taken for the public good without compensation in total violation of the Fifth Amendment.

The fact that this tax structure is propped up by a majority consensus is immaterial. "The Bible says, 'Thou shalt not steal.' It does not say, 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote'" (Gary North, "Free Market Capitalism" in Wealth & Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, edited by Robert G. Clouse, InterVarsity, 1984, p. 41).

Excessive taxes are unconstitutional

At the time of the American Revolution, European-type serfdom was considered a form of slavery and consisted of paying 25% of a peasant's productivity from farming land to the landlord.

For 1993, American tax rates were as follows for a family with a taxable income of $25,000:

Social Security 12.40% of income (Half paid by employer)

Medicare 2.90% of income (Half paid by employer

Federal income tax 15.00% of income (Up to 39.6% for rich)

Income tax 2.67% of income (Up to 7.5% for rich)

State 7% sales tax 2.00% of income (All money isn't spent)

County property taxes 3.00% of income

City income tax 2% of income

This does not include hidden taxes like employer contributions to workers compensation (between 2% and 14%!), gasoline taxes, tariffs on imported goods, "sin" taxes on tobacco and alcoholic beverages, and so on, and so on, and so on. Therefore today's typical American citizen can pay between 40% and 70% of his income or productivity in the form of some kind of tax.

The tax system is thus a subtle form of slavery and violates the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Robert J. Villella, "A New Declaration," July/August 1993, p. 17).

Hotel taxes are unAmerican

States and communities commonly tax hotels, amusement parks, and some restaurants at higher rates than other businesses. Generally this "hotel" tax is two or three times as high as the area's sales tax.

The obvious purpose of such taxes is to make tourists from out of town pay higher taxes than the locals. As the maxim says, "Don't tax you, and don't tax me. Tax that man behind the tree!"

This practice is clearly contrary to the American principle of "no taxation without representation!

1.4.4 State rights are non-existent

The state rights guarantied by the Tenth Amendment are universally ignored by every branch of the federal government.

The way things should be:

Article X of the Bill of Rights states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Unless the Constitution specifically grants a power to a branch of the federal government, or says that states cannot do something, it is presumed that the authority and power rests with the states. In other words, Whenever there is a conflict between the laws of federal and state governments, the state law which should take precedent and prevail over the federal law, not vise versa, unless the Constitution says otherwise.

As we saw previously, the whole Bill of Rights is designed as a limitation on federal powers. The Tenth Amendment serves this purpose by dividing and diluting power among the several states. Indeed, it was state governments that ratified the Constitution and delegated authority to the federal government. This being the case, they only handed over authority to the federal government to do what is specified in the Constitution and nothing more.

The way things really are:

Obviously, the Tenth Amendment is routinely ignored by the president, the Congress, and the courts. In extra-constitutional matters, state laws should override federal laws. But in fact, federal laws always override state laws. National speed limits

supersede state speed limits. Federal environmental rules outweigh similar state rules. In every governmental matter, the only state laws that exist are those compatible with federal laws or which the federal government has seen fit not to address at all.

One of the best examples of the total disregard for state rights is federal mandates. The federal government frequently mandates that states enact certain laws, provide certain services, or fund specific programs that cost millions or billions of dollars without one cent of federal funding to support the mandate.

Don't be fooled by the fact that states are permitted to do things that Washington does not do. Remember, permission and rights are incompatible. In some matters, Congress et al. simply do not want to flex their muscles. For instance, during the Reagan administration, a major shift in power took place away from federal agencies to state agencies. But this was because liberals in Washington recognized that Ronald Reagan sought deregulation. Since state agencies were more active regulators than their federal counterparts, responsibilities were conveniently transferred to the states to sustain strong industry regulation. But this whole scheme is Washington's doing and not the result of any state's right to govern.

The point here is not that state governments are any more noble or benevolent than the federal government. They are not because they consist of the same frail human beings that are susceptible to corruption by power. The point is something that is spelled out clear as day in the Constitution is always and everywhere totally and completely turned on its head!

A call to Assemble!

From every legitimate angle, we are justified in keeping and bearing arms as well as forming or joining a militia independent of government control. The Bible tells us we are morally right. The American Revolution shows we have the historical right. The Constitution protects our legal right. Moreover, our Constitutional liberties are systematically being eroded and denied. The fact that officials are infringing gun rights on every front is simply a manifestation of their inner tendency to empower themselves. Left unchecked, this tendency will lead to genuine tyranny. Remember, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

So this is a pivotal point in American history. If the government is successful in banning semi-automatic paramilitary weapons, then they will be emboldened not only to further infringe gun rights, but to infringe all rights. This is because the Second Amendment is the teeth of the Bill of Rights, and assault rifles are the teeth of the Second Amendment. Without their bite, there is nothing to prevent a draconian state from devouring all of our precious liberties.

Your right and duty is to arm and organize yourself against further federal and state encroachments on your liberties. As a minimum, you should purchase and learn how to effectively use a firearm, preferably a so-called assault rifle. The more citizens that own guns, the less willing the government will be to threaten us. Ideally, you should also join a local militia, committed to constitutional principles. You need to be organized, equipped, trained, and coordinated with other like-minded men to effectively stand up to the growing arrogance of the federal government. It was said during the American Revolution that "united we stand, divided we fall." This is still true today. So arm yourself. Organize yourselves. And prepare to fight if you have to.

We could learn a lot from the Swiss. They are zealously neutral and refuse to meddle in foreign affairs. Neither should we be aggressors or wish to start bloodshed. But Switzerland is also a virtual armed camp of citizen soldiers prepared to fight to the last man for their freedom. Major H. von Dach of the Swiss army put it this way:

"If two enemies fight each other to the last and this is always the case when an ideology is involved (religion is part of it) guerrilla warfare and civilian resistance will inevitably break out in the final phase. "The military expert who undervalues or even disregards guerrilla warfare makes a mistake since he does not take into consideration the strength of the heart.

"The last, and admittedly, most cruel battle will be fought by civilians. It will be conducted under the fear of deportation, of execution, and concentration camps.

"We must and will win this battle since each Swiss [in our case American] male and female in particular believe in the innermost part of their hearts even if they are too shy and sober in everyday life to admit or even speak about it in the old and yet very up-to-date saying: 'Death rather than slavery!'"

Major H. von Dach, Total Resistance: Swiss Army Guide to Guerrilla Warfare and Underground Resistance, Paladin Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1958/1963, p. 173, emphasis added.

1.4.5 Discussion questions

Are you convinced that the cases cited are factual infringements of our rights by the government? If not, which ones are you skeptical of? Are you skeptical that these things actually occur or that they are really unconstitutional? Do you need more substantiation?

Have you ever personally experienced any of these improprieties? Which ones? Do you think you might experience them in the future?

Which of these violations of personal liberties is (are) most alarming, shocking, or ominous to you? Why?

Would you classify the attack on your rights as insignificant or dangerous? As isolated or systematic? As careless or intentional?

On a scale of 1 to 10, how alarmed are you at the present status of your liberty? What else would have to happen to make you alarmed?

Do you believe the present attack on personal liberties is more or less widespread and serious than during the days leading up to the American Revolution? How are things worse? How are they better?

Does it reassure you that these improprieties are done by or with the knowledge of elected officials instead of a military dictator? How is this similar to 1775-1776 when the British Parliament suppressed American liberties? How is it different?

What are your thoughts on joining a militia in your community? What are your reservations?

At this point it would be premature to ask you for your commitment to the PA Militia. You do not yet know who we are, what we stand for, why we exist, when we are willing to fight, or how we are organized. Section 2 of this field manual addresses these issues by explaining:
August 14, 2011 10:29AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
2.1 Who and what is the Militia?

2.2 Equipping yourself for the Militia

2.3 General organization of the Militia

2.4 Secrecy and security in the Militia

Main ideas of this section

Your civil rights to life, free religion, free press, and security from unreasonable searches and seizures are systematically being threatened.

Your right to keep and bear arms is systematically infringed by regulation, licensing, registration, taxation, and prohibition of all kinds of firearms.

Your property rights are systematically violated by having property taken without trial, without compensation, and through confiscatory taxation.

State rights are universally denied since, in principle, state laws should prevail over federal laws while, in practice, the opposite always happens.

Further study

The best way to follow developments related to your Constitutional liberties is to pay attention to newspapers and news magazines (television news is too surface and sensational to give any reliable information).

I might also suggest a couple of video tapes. The video on the massacre in Waco, Texas is very chilling since it presents actual visual images of BATF abuses of power.

America in Peril

Thompson, Linda D. Waco: The Big Lie, American Justice Federation, 3850 S. Emerson Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46203, 1993.

Introduction to the Unorganized Militia

2.1 Who and what is the unorganized Militia?

Militia Act of 1792

That the Militia of the United States shall consist of each and every free, able bodied male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who are or shall be of the age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as hereinafter excepted) who shall severally and respectively be enrolled by the captain or commanding officer of the company within whose bounds such citizen shall reside.... That every citizen so enrolled and notified shall within one Month thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock of a bore not smaller than seventeen balls to the pound, a sufficient bayonet and belt, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball, two spare flints, and a knapsack, and shall appear so armed, accoutered and provided, when called out to exercise or into service as is hereinafter directed...

Per: Charles Bickford and Helen Veit, ed., Documentary History of the First Federal Congress 1789-1791, Vol. 5, (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press: 1986), 1460-1461.

2.1.1 Who, what, when, where, why, and how?

Who is the Militia?

10 U.S.C. 311 Excerpt:

311. Militia: Composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are commissioned officers of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are:

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;


(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

So the "who is the militia" question is answered in paragraph (a).

What is the Militia?

The National Guard Act (1903): Excerpt

The National Guard was established in 1903 when Congress created the NG under its power to "raise and support armies". (see H.R. Report No. 141, 73d Cong., 1st Sess. at 2-5, 1933) It was done in order to create reserve MILITARY units. The NG was specifically intended to avoid status as the constitutional militia, and this distinction is recognized by 10 U.S.C. 311 (quoted above). It was not, nor was it intended to be the Militia as was recognize by the USSC in Presser and reaffirmed again in US v. Miller.

"[T]he militia shall consist of every able-bodied male citizen of the respective States, Territories, and the District of Columbia, and every able-bodied male of foreign birth who has declared his intention to become a citizen, who is more than eighteen and less than forty-five years of age, and shall be divided into two classes -- the organized militia, to be know as the National Guard of the State, Territory, or District of Columbia, or by such other designations as may be given them by the laws of the respective States or Territories, and the remainder to be know as the Reserve Militia." [from "An Act To promote the efficiency of the militia, and for other purposes", January 21, 1903]

And the "what is the militia" question is answered through the National Guard Act of 1903 and paragraph (b) of 10 U.S.C. 311.

When will the Militia activate?

United States Constitution Second Ammendment:

"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."

Constitution of Pennsylvania:

Article I, Declaration of Rights:

Right to Bear Arms:

Section 21. "The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."

The Framers did not intend the militia to supplement the army; they intended it to make the standing army superfluous. In discussing the Second Amendment, Justice Story put it this way:

"The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people."

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story

3 *Commentaries* 1897 (1833)

It is interesting to note that the dispute over the Second Amendment has centered on two phrases, "the right of the people" and "a well regulated militia." It is incumbent on libertarians to remind the world that there is another phrase, perhaps more important than those two. That phrase has serious implications for all of the various interpretations of the Second Amendment. That phrase is "the security of a free State."

The Framers intended to safeguard the right of the people to keep and bear arms, possibly even as an end in itself. But they did not see the militia as an end in itself. They saw it merely as a means to another end: the "security of a free State."

The militia clause is there to remind us that the arms protected by the Second Amendment are "the arms of the militiaman or soldier"* It is there to remind us that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce [the people] under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government and to provide new Guards for their future security."**

*"The word 'arms' in the connection we find it in the Constitution of the United States, refers to the arms of a militiaman or soldier, and the word is used in its military sense. The arms of the infantry soldier are the musket and bayonet; of cavalry and dragoons, the sabre, holster pistols and carbine; of the artillery, the field piece, siege gun, and mortar, with side arms."

*English v State*, ___ Texas 473, 476 (1871-2)

**United States Declaration of Independence

2.1.2 Your duties in the Militia

The oath you will have to take embodies your main duties to the Militia and is worded as follows:

Oath For Noncommissioned Members:

"I, (Name), do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Pennsylvania against all enemies, both foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me, for conscience sake; So Help Me God.

For Commissioned Officers:

"I, (Name), having been appointed an officer in the Pennsylvania1st Brigade, in the grade of (grade), do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Pennsylvania against all enemies, both foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will willing and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So Help Me God."

Now the Pennsylvania Citizen's Militia may go on alert or mobilize under any number of unforeseen scenarios. However, alerts and mobilizations will be called for automatically under any of the following conditions:

We will mobilize if and when there is an invasion of the United States by a foreign power or an attempted overthrow of our constitutional government.

An alert will also go out whenever we discover that there has been an infusion in our community by state or federal law enforcement officers who are working independently of the local police. This alert will be upgraded to mobilization if it is confirmed that the infusion is a precursor to operations against the citizens of the state or the Militia. (i.e., house-to-house searches, gun confiscation, widespread arrests, etc.).

We will mobilize whenever any constitutional right to keep and bear arms, privacy, or fair trial is being infringed by laws that are actively and widely enforced in our area. For instance, house-to-house searches or waiving of all trials by jury in other communities will cause us to prepare for similar measures in our community.

Please be assured that mobilization does not necessarily mean we will fight. It only means that we are ready to fight if we are forced to do so.

2.1.4 Can we win an armed conflict?

Suppose you join us. Suppose we mobilize. Can we win? The enemy police and military forces under the control of a growing autocratic government will have and wield great might. So how can we stand against such a powerful foe? To some extent, whether we win or not is immaterial. If we are right, our duty is to resist whether or not success is likely. But we can win! Initially, the potential enemy will be greater in numbers, have superior firepower, better training, more equipment, and closer coordination. But we have three things in our favor that they do not have: the people, our own advantages, and a cause.

The people

Notice I said initially they will be greater in numbers. This is because most Americans are dull to the things happening around them and don't have a clue to their Constitutional rights and liberties. But there will come a time when the Leviathan State will show its true colors and cross a line that even the average citizen will recognize as threatening. At that time, men willing to fight will come out of the woodwork.

And remember, there are between 100 and 200 million firearms in the hands of private citizens of this country. These are in the hands of people who, almost by definition, would side with the Constitution rather than the government in a struggle. (The possession of firearms tends to either result from or result in a person favoring gun rights as well as a healthy distrust of the federal government when it seeks to take them away.) Moreover, all of the armed forces and local law enforcement agencies are sworn to defend the Constitution and many soldiers and officers love their personal liberties. So it would not be long until we are the ones with superior numbers and perhaps even superior firepower.

The very acts by the government that will cause the Militia to rise up will also arouse the general public to resist and seek skilled leadership.

In the meantime, our inferior numbers do not have to spell defeat. It is said that just prior to World War I, Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany visited Switzerland and reviewed some of its troops. Of course, Germany's army was much larger than little Switzerland's. So while the proud Kaiser was reviewing the troops, he stopped to talk to one of the enlisted men: "I am impressed. You are well disciplined and well trained. But what could you possibly do if Germany attacked you with forces twice yours in number?" The enlisted man boldly replied, "I suppose, sir, that we would have to shoot twice!" Switzerland was never attacked due to its neutrality, mountainous terrain, preparedness, and the confidence to resist exemplified by this one soldier. The fact is that superior numbers can be defeated!

Corresponding advantages

This leads us to the next issue. It is true that the potential enemy will have serious advantages. But they do not have all the advantages. For just about any strength that they have, the Militia will have a corresponding strength. These balancing factors should be sufficient to tide the Militia over until the tables are turned and we have the advantage of numbers. Some of these advantages which will counteract the advantages of the potential enemy are as follows.


Initially the enemy will probably have greater numbers of troops since they can commit whole military units and police forces to the field. But many such men have had exposure to liberties and cannot all be counted on to obey and fight. This will cause division, uncertainty, and poor morale within enemy ranks.


Consisting of patriotic volunteers, the Militia should be able to count on every one of its men. Few men in our ranks will refuse to fight on conscientious grounds, nor are they likely to desert or betray their leaders, comrades, or tactics since they are committed to the cause.


Clearly potential enemy forces will be better prepared technically and have more perfected skills in combat since they are, for the most part, professionals. But, again, it is uncertain how prepared they will be psychologically to turn their weapons on American citizens.


Consisting of volunteers, the Militia must expect to have inferior training since its member also lead private lives. But since the Free Militia consists of patriots we should be able to expect higher motivation to fight and win an armed conflict.


Being equipped by the government, any potential enemy will have tremendous firepower at their disposal. But much of this firepower is useless unless they are willing to inflict great casualties and material destruction on innocent bystanders and their property.


We may not be armed with automatic weapons aircraft, or armored vehicles. But we will have the advantage of being well concealed and fortified within the friendly and familiar territory. They enemy will have to expose themselves to use their firepower.


No doubt an enemy will not only have the capability of moving quickly on the ground in motor vehicles, but they will have and use airplanes and helicopters to quickly insert troops, strike, and leave prior to an effective counterattack by us.

Knowledge of terrain.

We may not be able to move quickly, but we will know where we are and where we're going. The Militia will be intimately familiar with terrain in and out of our town because we will be fighting in our element.


The capability of the enemy to spy on our positions will be enhanced by their technology. They may have night vision equipment, wire-tapping capabilities, infrared scanning viewers, and other means of eavesdropping or looking in on us.


While those of us in the Militia may not have access to or be able to afford expensive technology, we will have the people on our side. Virtually every liberty-loving civilian is a potential spotter, observer, or spy.


A potential enemy will probably have unlimited supplies of ammunition, food, water, and fuel. But they will have to depend on these supplies being transported over long distances since local supplies will be unreliable.


While we may have to live with limited supplies, our supplies and quarters will be close by since we will be fighting close to home. We will also be able to depend on friendly neighbors to supply us with food and water.


The potential enemy will be well outfitted with effective radio equipment and will be able to coordinate most or all of their forces simultaneously. But they will have to have definite targets to coordinate themselves against.


The Militia can thwart the enemy by providing an elusive target that is difficult to trap or systematically attack. Moreover, our units will be organized and trained to improvise and act independently.

We have a cause!

Many people think that "might makes right." In other words, it is presumed that whoever wins a war is justified in dictating the terms of peace. In fact, RIGHT MAKES MIGHT! Being in the right and knowing it energizes resistance and gives a strength of resolve largely absent among those who fight for the selfish motives of mere survival or personal gain.

The drafted soldier is motivated to survive until his tour of duty is up. The career soldier is motivated by promotions in rank and higher salaries. The patriotic volunteer is motivated to win for the sake of a higher cause.

All three types of motivation will cause a man to fight tooth and nail when he has to fight. But one motivated by survival only "has" to fight when he is convinced that fighting is less hazardous than disobeying his superiors. He will hold back to avoid risks. He will not go beyond the call of duty. The career of soldier only "has" to fight to the extent needed to gain recognition. His boldness will be tempered by the desire to live and enjoy the promotions and benefits he seeks. But while the patriot will not desire to risk or sacrifice his life in vain, he "has" to fight to win. He will be willing to go beyond the call of duty because he is energized by an idea, not by self-preservation or selfish ambition.

So the most critical thing on our side is principle. We are right, we are justified, we have a cause. Never underestimate the power of ideology.

Patrick Henry said: "...millions of people armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.... The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone: it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave."

Major H. von Dach of the Swiss Army wrote: "The military expert who undervalues or even disregards guerrilla warfare makes a mistake since he does not take into consideration the strength of the heart" (Total Resistance, Paladin Press, 1965, p. 173).

The U.S. Army field manual on suppressing guerrillas states: "All troops committed to operations against irregular forces must be trained to appreciate the effectiveness of irregular forces.... Troops must be indoctrinated never to underrate guerrillas. To look down on guerrilla forces as inferior, poorly equipped opponents breeds carelessness which can result in severe losses" (FM 31-15, Irregular Forces, 1961, p. 46).

Are you vigilant, active, and brave? Do you have a strong heart? If you do, then join us! Take the oath of office and arm yourself. You will be enlisting with a small but determined group that is resolved to make a difference in protecting our precious liberties. Barry Goldwater was the 1964 Republican nominee for president. As he aptly said, "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vise and let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

2.1.5 Discussion questions

Do you have any questions about what the Militia is or what it stands for? What are they?

Do you have any questions about our strategy of not raising an army but building the structure or framework to organize, train, and lead one?

The Militia oath of office reads as follows:

Oath For Noncommissioned Members:

"I, (Name), do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Pennsylvania against all enemies, both foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me, for conscience sake; So Help Me God.

For Commissioned Officers:

"I, (Name), having been appointed an officer in the Pennsylvania1st Brigade, in the grade of (grade), do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Pennsylvania against all enemies, both foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will willing and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So Help Me God."

Do you have any questions about what this oath means or what might be expected of you if you join the Militia? If so, what are they?

Do you have any reservations about making the commitments outlined in the oath of office? If so, what are they?

In your own words, describe the difference between an alert and a mobilization of the Militia.

Take a look at the reasons given for alert and mobilization in this section. Why do you think it is important to take unusual measures to ready and prepare ourselves under these conditions?

What are your feelings about the "risks" of participating in the Militia either under peaceful circumstances or times of combat?

Do you believe that the Militia will be capable of holding its own during (or even being victorious in) potential armed conflict? Why or why not? What conditions would have to change to make victory possible or probable? How would or could your own participation in the Militia contribute to those favorable conditions and ultimate victory?

One of the rules of warfare is that "anything you do can get you shot, including nothing." If a genuine tyranny was imposed in the United States, you could remain a civilian, minding his own business, or become an armed combatant. Which way would you be more threatened? More of a threat?

Personal questions

Note: Answers to the following questions will help determine your fitness for service in the Militia in terms of loyalty and dependability. No space is given to write answers down because no records should or will be kept on your responses. They are strictly for discussion between you and your sponsor. Any notes he may take are only for discussion with his immediate superior and will be destroyed after said discussion.

How physically fit are you in terms of strength, stamina, and health?

Do you have any disabilities which might hinder your physical ability to serve in the Militia such as epilepsy, asthma, poor eyesight, etc.?

Have you ever been an alcoholic, a heavy drinker, a drug user, or a drug addict? If so, how long have you been free of substance abuse?

Have you ever attempted suicide, battled severe depression, or suffered any other mental illness? Describe the times and circumstances.

Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a crime other than traffic violations? Again, describe the times and the circumstances.

How nosey, talkative, and trustworthy is your spouse? Can she/he keep a secret?

Can you name one or two references, besides your sponsor and known by your sponsor, who can vouch for your integrity, dependability, and stability?

What are your reasons for desiring to enlist in the Militia?

Main ideas of this section

The Militia is an independent, unorganized group of private citizens who are armed and ready to fight for their Constitutional rights and liberties.

For now, our purpose is not to raise a full-scale army but to put things in motion and prepare to readily do so if and when circumstances require it.

An alert is a level of readiness that is not convenient in everyday life.

Mobilization is a level of readiness totally incompatible with daily life.

The very acts by the government that will cause the Militia to rise up will also arouse the general public to resist and seek skilled leadership.

The drafted soldier is motivated to survive until his tour of duty is up.

The career soldier is motivated by promotions in rank and higher salaries.

The patriotic volunteer is motivated to win for the sake of a higher cause.

2.2 Equipping yourself for the unorganized Militia

".... millions of people armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.... The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone: it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." &emdash; Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

2.2.1 Choose your weapon!

As a minuteman in the Militia, you are responsible for arming and equipping yourself. Your first priority, of course, is to effectively arm yourself. All firearms have their place. Some are good for hunting, some for plinking and target shooting, some for self-defense. But only a few are really effective combat weapons.

When selecting a firearm, remember that you are a member of a team, not a loner. It is therefore to your advantage to select a weapon that is more or less standard in your unit. This will facilitate exchanging ammunition, magazines, and even spare parts when supplies are limited. You are also preparing for combat, not hunting or personal defense. Thus, hunting rifles, and shotguns are generally (but not always; see below) undesirable weapons. Ideally your weapon should be a medium to high-power semi-automatic (automatic only if licensed) rifle with a detachable magazine. Also as a back-up sidearm a semi-automatic pistol. The following are suggested firearms with their pros and cons.


The Russian AKM, and AK-47 are somewhat common, reasonable priced, reliable, semi-automatic, and use detachable magazines. But it is unclear how easily the 7.62x39mm Russian ammunition could be obtained in a crisis. However surplus ammunition is very reasonably priced along with spare parts since this (AK-47) is the most widely used rifle in the world. Priced at $300.

The Russian SKS also reasonably priced has 10 round fixed magazine. It also uses the 7.62x39 round. There many accessories available including larger and detachable magazines. Priced at $200

The Ruger Mini-14 is semi-automatic and has a detachable magazine. Although Sturm, Ruger only sells 5-round magazines to the public; larger capacity magazines (10, 20, 30, and 40-round) are available. It uses the .223 caliber cartridge which packs a high muzzle velocity of over 3000 feet per second and is therefore capable of penetrating most Kevlar body armor, and will also be most readily available in a crisis since it is the same that is used in M-16s/AR-15s which are standard weapons of the U.S. military and police. At about $400 to $500, the Mini-14 costs about half or a third as much as an AR-15. However, they don't seem to be very accurate.

The Colt AR-15 is the semi-automatic civilian version of the military M-16. Parts and ammo would be easily obtained in combat since a potential enemy will likely be armed with this weapon. While the army's use of the M-16 shows the usefulness of this weapon, it is expensive at $1000-$1500 each. The Galil 223, AR and Berretta AR-70 are suitable substitutes.

The Springfield M-14 and M-1A are very dependable semi- automatic weapons and their .308 caliber packs a punch that is well-suited for long-range sniping. Their drawbacks are high price (around $1000) and the fact that their ammunition would not be quite as common as the .223 cartridge, but still pretty common.

The Springfield M-1 Carbine is common, inexpensive, semi-automatic, uses detachable 15 or 30-round magazines. The .30 caliber pistol type cartridge is not very adequate. It can, however, be unreliable. Magazines tend to jam in the cold and sometimes a full 30-round magazine puts too much pressure on the bolt to seat and lock for semi-automatic firing. Be sure to avoid Universal- manufactured copies since these do not have fully interchangeable with G.I.carbines. Priced at $300 & up.

The Heckler and Koch rifles in the 9mm, .223, and .308 calibers are top of the line, dependable, effective, and very expensive firearms.


The Ruger P series pistols are the best value. The have all the features of more expensive pistols without the price tag. Available in various calibers I would stay with 9mm or .45ACP since these are the standard military cartridges and widely available.

The Colt 1911 pistols and variants are also excellent pistols. You want to stay as close to standard GI configuration as possible. Avoid compacts and "race" guns with all kinds of bells and whistles. Standard GI parts are widely available along with magazines.

Specialized combat weapons (generally not recommended)

Submachine guns like the TEC-9, MAC-10, Colt 9mm, and UZI are not especially well-suited for the typical minuteman. While the semi-auto versions do provide rapid fire, they are not particularly accurate on a battlefield and their calibers are generally lack the punch of assault rifles since they use pistol ammunition (9mm or .45 ACP). They are, however, excellent commando and policing weapons, especially in close quarters.

The Barrett Model 82A1 is a semi-automatic assault rifle with a 10-round magazine that uses .50 caliber machine gun ammunition. You would not want to carry this on a patrol, nor can many people afford its $2500+ price tag. But as a static defense weapon it packs a punch that is unmatched.

High-power hunting rifles with suitable scopes make excellent sniper weapons. (The .308 caliber M-21 is especially useful but expensive as a standard NATO sniping weapon.) Unfortunately, most hunting rifles are bolt-action and are therefore undesirable as standard weapons for a minuteman.

Shotguns are generally ill-suited for the battlefield since they do not have the precision, range, or velocity needed for typical combat. One exception is the "street sweeper." These are semi-automatic and have a 9- to 12-round magazine capacity. Such shotguns are useful for self-defense in close quarters or for certain types of raids as was proven in Vietnam.

Remember, the potential enemy will be well-trained, heavily armed, and probably protected by Kevlar body armor. Single shot, bolt and lever action, and light caliber rifles are virtually useless against such a foe as is virtually any kind of handgun. Of course, being armed with a less-than-ideal firearm is many times better than being totally unarmed.

2.2.2 Outfitting yourself for combat

While your gun is important, it is useless without magazines and ammunition and virtually useless without other equipment. Consequently the minimum necessary equipment for a Militia rifleman is as follows:

1) semi-automatic rifle (AK-47, SKS, AR-15, Mini-14, M-1 carbine, or M-14). Cost: $350-$1000

1) semi-automatic pistol (ruger p-series, colt 1911 etc.) Cost: $300-$500

7) 30-round rifle magazines (this is minimum, 10 or 12 magazines would be better). Smaller capacity magazines need to be reloaded too often. Larger capacity magazines are more prone to jamming. You must be able to carry at least 200 rounds of ammunition ready to fire. Cost: $100

3) Pistol Magazines (15rd for 9mm) Cost: $50

1000) rounds of full metal jacket ammunition compatible with your rifle and pistol each. The more ammunition the better. It will probably be the hardest thing to supply or replace in a pinch. Cost:$100-$250ea

2) magazine pouches to carry your magazines conveniently. Be sure your pouches are compatible with your magazines and are green or camouflaged so they are inconspicuous. Should have enough to carry all your magazines not leaving any loose to be put in a pocket or knapsack. Cost: $5-$10 ea

Basic Equipment:

1 Rucksack: complete w/ Frame & Straps, G.I. issue Alice pack Med. or Large

1 Pistol belt, complete w/ LBE suspenders, GI issue

1 Double magazine pouch for pistol magazines

2 Canteens: complete w/ cup and cover to attach to pistol belt

1 First Aid kit

1 Compass, Lensatic, GI issue w/ pouch

1 Knife, combat w/ sheath

1 Helmet, Kevlar w/ camo cover, band, and chin strap

1 Buttback

1 Flashlight w/ batteries and red lens

1 case MRE's (check date for freshness)

1 Sleeping bag

1 Blanket Wool or Cotton

1 Cleaning kit for above weapons

1 Protective Mask: N.B.C.: Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, w/ carrier

Basic Clothing:

2 sets Pants/Shirt, BDU, camo: Fatigue, Woodland, Tigerstripe;etc.

1 Coat, Field, M-65 (of Pattern chosen above)

1 Liner, Jacket, Field, M-65

1 Cap, Patrol, w/ earflaps (of Pattern chosen above)

1 Cap, Boonie, (of pattern chosen above)

1 pr Boots, Combat or Jungle

1 pr laces, boot

1 poncho, OD or camo

1 set, raingear, jacket and pants, prefferably Goretex

1 pr rain boots

3 pr socks, OD, cushion sole or equiv.

3 pr T-shirts, OD, Brown, Black, or camo

3 pr underwear

1 pr Shells, gloves, D3A

1 pr Liners, gloves, wool, OD or Gray

1 Sweater, wool ( or acrylic if allergic to wool), OD or Brown

1 Belt, pants

1 set Long Underwear, Polypropolene

I know this may seem like a lot of money. But it is a small price to pay for your liberties and for your life!

The previous list is the bare minimum for outfitting yourself. With this equipment you can basically shoot, hide, move, and take care of your gun. Many desirable items are neglected. No provision is made for survival in the wilderness. Consequently, if you can afford it, the following items are desirable to have. They are listed in their rough order of importance considering the probable enemy and circumstances.

1 Set of spare parts for your rifle. A few dollars invested in the parts that are most likely to fail will extend the life of your gun almost forever! Parts for M-1s, M-14s, M-16s, and AR-15s are readily available at gun shows. For the typical rifle a spare firing pin, extractor, extractor plunger, extractor spring, ejector, ejector spring, recoil spring, and hammer spring are sufficient. $25

1 G.I. kevlar flak jacket. The current issue military kevlar body armor will stop most knife and bayonet thrusts, all shotgun blasts, and most pistol and some submachinegun bullets (velocities under 1300 feet per second). They will also protect you from mortar and hand grenade fragments. In Vietnam, U.S. soldiers would have sustained 40% fewer casualties if they all wore their body armor and helmets (and this was before the advent of the kevlar helmet). Of course, blunt trauma from bullets will leave welts, bruises, and perhaps cracked bones, but this is better than a loss of blood or life! This body armor can even be upgraded to Type III, stopping even .308 rounds with improvised titanium or steel inserts. Small: $75 Medium: $100 Large: $150

For $1000 to $1500 you can outfit yourself for combat fairly well. However, there are some things that your cell will need as a unit even if every cell member does not possess them. To outfit men accordingly, each cell will need the following equipment. The equipment can either be bought by the man assigned to use it or the cell can pool funds to buy it:

1 hand-held CB radio for communication with other nearby cells.

1 pair of binoculars (7x to 10x) for observation and spotting.

1 rifle scope. Note: Scopes are undesirable and too costly for the average minuteman. They are cumbersome in brush and slow the acquisition of targets in quick combat. Contrary to popular belief, they do not make a rifle more accurate! But they are useful for clearly seeing distant targets while sniping.

1 practice rifle. Ruger 10-22. Ammunition is expensive, so the cell should have either a .22 rifle or an air rifle with iron sights (no scope) to use for inexpensive target practice.

1 general first aid kit along with other selected medical supplies.

1 set of gunsmithing tools. This would include a set of pin punches, hammer, screwdrivers, pliers, files, rasps, hacksaw, etc.

2-4 tri-folding shovels for trenching and field fortifications.

Don't go out and buy these yourself. Coordinate purchases with your cell so you avoid unnecessary redundancy and expense.

Of course, there are also some kinds of equipment needed at the platoon, company, and battalion levels. Some examples include:

Electric generators to run equipment during power outages/failures.

Ham/short-wave radios to communicate over longer distances than CBs.

CB radios to communicate over short distances with neighboring cells.

Batteries to power flashlights, radios, other electric equipment.

Portable lights/flares to give light for combat during darkness.

Laptop computers/printers to prepare plans and training materials.

Photocopiers/printing presses for training materials and persuasion.

Shovels/picks/spades for digging and preparing field fortifications.

Chain saws for clearing fields of fire in heavily wooded areas.

Gasoline for powering chain saws, vehicles, and electric generators.

Vehicles (trucks and vans) for transportation in and around our town.

Fire extinguishers for fighting fires that break out during combat.

Office supplies for supplying computers, photocopiers, and so on.

Again, don't go out and buy any of these things on your own. But if you already have any of them, let your cell leader know so they can be put to good use if and when they are ever needed during an actual mobilization.

What you must do is be sure that you are adequately equipped for combat and contribute (time, money, or things) to the equipment needs of your cell.

It is admittedly expensive to adequately equip an individual or team for effective combat. But your Constitutional liberties and life are worth it!

2.2.3 Be careful how you buy

It is just as important how you go about buying the things you need to equip yourself as it is what you equip yourself with for future combat.

The last thing you want to do is to draw attention to yourself when you buy or leave a "trail" after buying. Gun registration records will no doubt be used to track down and confiscate weapons. Even though those yellow forms you fill out for a gun dealer stay with him, they are subject to BATF inspection and also will compromise your guns. The mailing lists and invoices of suppliers for paramilitary books and gear might also be used to hunt down gun owners. And don't forget about your checking account: it is an open book to the government revealing what, when, and where you buy. Consequently, there are several guiding rules you should follow when you begin to outfit yourself for the Militia.

Never sign anything. Never give your name and address. Don't order through the mail since invoices will record your name, address, and what you ordered. Always pay with cash. Don't use your checking account or credit cards since these types of transactions leave a record. Be inconspicuous. Don't go to gun shows or dealers decked out in your camouflaged battle dress uniform and body armor.

You might wonder how you can possibly be outfitted given these four constraints. Actually, it is not that difficult. It just takes some time and patience. You may not have the money to buy everything all at once anyway! Here are some tips on outfitting yourself in a confidential way.

Slowly build up a supply of cash. Large withdrawals of cash from the bank can trigger (and $10,000 transactions automatically trigger) a report to the federal government.

Buy what you can at area gun shows. Your cell leader should have a list of places and dates. Other cell members will be glad to go with you. Virtually everything you need will eventually be found at gun shows, even guns without paperwork! Sometimes private individuals or dealers selling their own personal guns will sell without papers. Look for private individuals carrying around weapons at gun shows and ask if they are selling.

It is alright to buy ammunition and supplies from gun dealers, just be sure you pay in cash and don't give your name. There are also other good sources of the types of things you will need lik sporting goods stores and military surplus stores. Pay cash! Watch the classified ads in the paper, especially for firearms for sale.

Private sales are exempt from paperwork and are confidential.

Check with members of your cell. Perhaps they have extra or redundant guns and ammo that they have stashed just for people like you to buy!

2.2.4 Sources of equipment and supplies

In addition to area gun shows and classified ads in the newspaper, there are several sources of firearms, ammunition, and gear in the area.

Look up "gunsmiths and gun dealers," "sporting goods," "military surplus," etc. in the yellow pages of the phone book. Write down the addresses and phone numbers for each listing in the space provided on the next page. As time permits, check them out to get an idea of what they have available. Shop around since prices can vary quite a bit from store to store. Even if you can't afford something now, this shopping will pay off in the future when you can afford to buy.

In any event, buy the priorities first. Don't spend a lot of money on body armor and high-tech "toys" before you own a rifle and ammunition!

2.2.5 Discussion questions

What, if any, experience have you had in gun safety, cleaning, or shooting (i.e., hunting, target shooting, etc.)? What type(s) of firearm(s) have you used in the past? What type(s) of firearms would you say that you are proficient in? How accurate are you?

What firearms do you own? Are any of them formally registered with a government agency? Informally registered using the yellow forms retained by gun dealers? (You may opt not to write down the answers.)

How familiar are you with the firearms discussed in this section? Are you planning to buy any of the firearms recommended in this section? If so, which one(s)? How do you plan to acquire it (them) without leaving a record of you as the buyer? (You may opt not to write the answers.)

Among the firearms that you currently own or intend to buy, which one is your "weapon of choice"? Why? (You may opt not to write the answers.)

How much of the necessary equipment, if any, do you already own?

Do you intend to buy the remaining necessary equipment in the future? If so, how quickly do you plan to do so? (List in the order of priority.)

How much of the desired equipment, if any, do you already own?

Do you intend to buy any of the remaining desired equipment in the future? Which items (list by priority)? How fast do you plan to get them?

Why is it very important that you be careful not to leave any records of sensitive purchases you make like guns, ammunition, and military gear?

Please list the four principles of outfitting yourself confidentially.

Do you agree to follow these principles in the future?

Personal inventory

Note: The following is intended to assist the Militia commanders in planning. If you have any of the following items, your sponsor will make a note of it and pass it through to his superiors without your name. Thus, the commanders will have an idea of what might be available in a crisis without having any central records of who has what. We trust that you will freely make these items available when the need arises.

Do you possess any binoculars, field glasses, hand-held CB radios, first aid kits, or gunsmithing tools that you would be willing to let your cell use?

Which of the following items do you both own and volunteer to loan to any Militia "war effort" in the event that we must mobilize?

Electric generators

Ham/short-wave radios

Laptop computers/printers


Printing presses


Chain saws

Vehicles (trucks and vans)

Fire extinguishers

Medical supplies

Main ideas of this section:

For a standard, inexpensive, effective, dependable, and versatile rifle, you will be hard-pressed to do much better than the AK-47!

It is admittedly expensive to adequately equip an individual or team for effective combat. But your Constitutional liberties and life are worth it!

It is just as important how you go about buying the things you need to equip yourself as it is what you equipment yourself with for future combat.

2.3 General protocol of the unorganized Militia

"For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it."

--A Roman Centurion talking to Jesus Christ (Matthew 8:9)

2.3.1 The cell structure

In any military organization, there needs to be a clear chain of command to insure effective coordination of smaller units. At the same time, units must be capable of responding to the immediate circumstances without having to ask higher authorities for permission to "go to the bathroom." A good example of a sound balance between these ideas was demonstrated by the U.S. Marines during World War II. The discipline and obedience to authority in the Marine Corps is well known. Yet the Marines retained a degree of initiative and individuality not found in many foreign counterparts, due to their American heritage. An isolated Japanese soldier was not a great threat in the Pacific Theater because he was incapable of functioning without orders. Yet isolated Marines could still be quite effective, cunning, and ingenious in harassing the enemy, by improvising.

Obviously, this kind of loyalty to authority but capability to respond individually is essential to the Militia. However, the necessity for personal and small-group freedom and initiative is compounded by several factors. First, the potential enemy may be superior in numbers, meaning that Militia units could be cut off and isolated from other units. Second, the potential enemy will probably be technologically superior, either eavesdropping on or jamming our communications, leading to a different kind of isolation. Third, Militia commanders of necessity will have some public exposure as a result of living their private lives.

Even with wise precautions, this endangers command elements by exposing them to possible arrest or attack leading to "decapitation" of combat elements. In any of these situations, combat units of the Militia must be capable of carrying on the fight without support from above or beside.

The fundamental rule guiding the organization of the Militia is centralized principles and planning but decentralized tactics and action.

What is meant by this key statement is that the whole Militia must be committed to the same cause and coordinated in their joint defense of the community. Thus, there must be allegiance to a higher command. But specific tactics should be left up to the individual elements so that the compromise of a part does not compromise the whole. Furthermore, all training and combat actions should be up to the smaller elements, again so that isolation or decapitation does not render the smaller units inept.

The way a balance between these competing concerns is achieved in the Militia is to organize all elements into "cells."

A cell is a group of eight men who train and work together to accomplish a particular goal or task important to the broader purposes of the Militia.

We use the term "cell," because a cell is the basic building block in any living organism. Just as all life, growth and reproduction is based on living cells, all Militia "life" is centered around its cells. The identities of cell members are known only within the cell and by their immediate superior. All basic training is done within a cell. all codes, passwords and telephone networks are determined by and held in confidence within the cell. All fortified positions are determined, prepared and concealed by the cell. All combat orders are executed by the cell as the cell sees fit within its own context. So the Militia is its cells.

Why the cell structure?

Military operations must depend on teamwork. But the teams that comprise the larger organization must be small for several reasons:

The small size facilitates camaraderie. For the most part, the men who train, work and fight together in a cell will stick together and the cell will remain intact, even though the cell as a whole may be transferred from unit to unit. This will develop personal closeness, trust and loyalty among its members that is critical to effectiveness.

The small size allows for personalized training. By knowing and having frequent personal contact with each member, a cell leader can train each man at his level and pace simultaneously with developing a strong cohesiveness among the team.

The small size is conducive to secrecy. Since each man knows and trusts everyone else in his group, they can communicate freely and openly while shrouding the particulars of their tactics, positions and signals to everyone outside the group.

The small size means manageable communication and coordination. The cell leader easily conveys clear orders to a small group of men. The higher command elements can give orders to the whole Militia through the chain of command without direct contact with the individual soldier.

Why eight men?

Cells ideally consist of eight men (plus or including their leader), because eight men can effectively and independently accomplish a wide range of military tasks, whether defensive or offensive, rural or urban.

Rural defense. Eight men can occupy four two-man foxholes. With four foxholes, all four directions to a position can be covered. With two men in each foxhole, morale is increased in combat due to a buddy system and each approach remains covered even when some casualties are sustained.

Urban defense. Eight men can occupy a house or small building. Again, all four sides of the house can be covered by two men, allowing for good morale under stress and the integrity of defenses when a casualty is sustained.

Rural offense. Eight men can form an eight-man patrol. A very effective combat or reconnaissance patrol formation is the diamond- shaped patrol. Two men take the point, two are at each flank and two are in the rear. At each corner, one observes the ground and the other for tree snipers. This maintains all-around security as the patrol moves in formation.

Urban offense. Eight men make an effective house assault team. While four men give suppression fire, the other four can advance on and enter a house or small building. Once inside, two men may enter and clear rooms while the other two provide security in the hallway or open areas.
August 14, 2011 10:29AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
2.3.2 Diversification of cells

While the cell is the basic building block of the Militia, there is, of necessity, diversity among the cells just as there is in the human body. One kind of diversity is found in a cell's specialty. For instance, although each combat cell receives basic training for general tasks, each one emphasizes and perfects particular skills needed for different scenarios. (The range of these specialties must remain confidential until you formally join the Militia.)

A second kind of diversity is found in the function for which the particular cell is designed. There are three types or functions of cells in the Militia: (1) command, (2) combat, and (3) support.

Putting it in human terms, some cells in the human body serve the function of a muscle while others form bones, skin and organs. But among those cells dedicated to making muscles, some are specialized as arm muscles, some as leg muscles and others as chest muscles. They do basically the same thing but in somewhat different ways and different places. So, also, Militia cells may function in different ways and specialize in several ways within their function.

Again, there are three types or functions of cells in the Militiasad smiley1)command, (2)combat, (3)support.

Command cells.

Command cells consist of the leadership of the Militia and provide the plans and orders to be implemented or carried out by all other elements. As a headquarters unit, they include their own minimal combat element for self-defense and move frequently to undisclosed locations, often secret even to other command cells. They provide training for future cell and platoon leaders. Command cells consist of bright, capable, and convincing men and women who communicate with and influence the public.They are the "head" of the Militia.

Combat cells.

Combat cells provide the patrolling and fighting capability of the Militia. Each cell consists of about eight able-bodied "minutemen" with its own leader, communications, rendezvous points, staging areas, and standing orders. They execute the orders of their command cells and do all their own training within the combat cell itself.Their duties include fostering resistance, reconnaissance and recruiting among the community. They are the "arms and legs" of the Militia.

Support cells.

Support cells consist of sympathetic men and/or women who are unable, unwilling, or ill-equipped for combat. Their task is to provide whatever non-combatant support is needed by the combat cells. Supply cells acquire ammunition and provisions for other cells. Medical cells set up aid stations for companies and/or battalions. Vehicle maintenance, messengers, construction, etc. are provided by support cells. They are the "arteries" of the Militia.

2.3.3 Companies organized by cells

The cell is the smallest unit of organization within the Militia. All larger units consist of cells organized together under the same command. For instance, four cells comprise a platoon and are led by a lieutenant. Four platoons comprise a company and are led by a captain. This system is illustrated in the following organizational chart.

This chart shows the ideal strengths and organization of units. While all units must be organized into cells, the number of men in any particular cell or platoon may be more or less than the ideal, depending on how many men have joined the Militia at any point in time. Indeed, whenever a new militia is established, it is very unlikely that it will have the strength of a company or even of a platoon. Perhaps only one cell will exist at first. As new recruits join up, seasoned men will be promoted and new cells formed. Eventually platoons, companies, or even battalions (four companies), will form.

Assuming that a full company has developed, the manpower and ranks within the company would break down as follows:

1 Command Platoon and 4 Combat Platoons.

A Combat Platoon would look like this:

Combat Platoon:

Platoon Leader (1 Lieutenant per Platoon)

Platoon Sergeant (1 Plt.Sgt. per Platoon)

1 Command Cell:

Cell Leader (1 Sergeant per Cell)

Riflemen (7 per cell)

4 Combat Cells:

Cell Leader (1 Sergeant per Cell)

Riflemen (7 per cell)

1 Combat Platoon Total Men = 42

Explanation of company organization:

Combat elements:

The combat cell responsibilities include:

Dissemination of constitutional principles and history of the Militia to its rank and file members within the combat cells.

Development and dissemination of training materials and methods to be used within the individual combat cells.

Conducting training, field exercises, and classes.

Command elements:

Development and security of tactical (as well as strategic if this is the highest level of command) contingency plans for implementation by the combat cells when the need arises.

Coordination of the various combat, supply and medical cells during actual combat.

If this is the highest level of command, guide the development and operation of cells within the community.

Within the command platoon (Company HQ's) the Company's second in command oversees the radio and intelligence unit. The radio team maintains contact with the platoon leaders. The mapping team registers the positions and movements of friendly and enemy forces. The intelligence team gathers and distributes information received from civilian spotters, observers and so on.

The company's third in command oversees the security cell for company headquarters. This unit provides the mobile self-defense capability for the company command post. It is also a pool of promising men who are trained and groomed to lead their own combat cells or platoons whenever there is a large influx of fresh recruits that the existing combat cells cannot absorb.

All basic training is done within and by the combat cells with oversight from their platoon lieutenant. This includes training in ideology, individual combat skills and team combat skills. Particular orders or instructions are conveyed through the chain of command and are carried out by the combat cells. In the event the combat cell is isolated from the main group, it is designed to continue to fight on its own, using guerilla tactics.

Non-combatant elements:

The supply cell supports the company by procuring and delivering needed equipment and supplies. They may also be used as messengers between the command and combat units in certain circumstances.

The medical cell supports combat operations by setting up a combat aid station to receive and care for wounded in the event of combat.

Communiqué cells will be isolated and independent of combat companies. It will be the responsibility of the "high command" to develop and control these units. They will serve as the liaison with the civilian population of our community.

These elements would also be responsible for the training of their personnel in their various specialty fields. And the training of all other personnel in the units they're attached to in basic instruction, and in the services provided.

2.3.4 Lines and limits of authority

To avoid complication, the Militia does away with "sub-ranks" or ranks within ranks. Thus, there are not privates and privates first class, just riflemen. There are no first and second lieutenants, just lieutenants. There are no lieutenant colonels and colonels, just colonels.


Colonel: Brigade Commander

Major: Executive Officer

Captain: Company Commander

Lieutenant: Platoon Leader

Sergeant Major: Militia NCO

First Sergeant: Company NCO

Staff Sergeant: Platoon NCO

Sergeant: Cell Leader

Corporal: Asst. Cell leader

Rifleman: Soldier

* A corporal does not lead a particular group. Instead, he is from time to time assigned a part of the cell by the cell leader when it is necessary to split up the cell's assigned duties or promotions are made by superior officers. Any officer may promote men in his unit from two levels to one level of rank below him, provided there is a genuine leadership need for the promotion. Thus a sergeant may select one of his riflemen to be his corporal and a new captain may promote as Platoon sergeants to lieutenants as he needs to command platoons.

Who do you know?

On one hand, there must be the ability to communicate and coordinate within the Militia. This capability must be maintained even when individual leaders are arrested or become casualties. On the other hand, there must be some insulation and isolation among elements of the Militia so that one part being compromised will not compromise the whole. Both needs are maintained with one relatively simple principle:

In the Militia, your contact and exposure to other members will be limited to direct lines of command and two levels of rank above and below.You do not need to know your superior's peers since they have no authority over you. Nor do you need to know your own peers in other cells. You do, however, need to know your superior's superior for the following reasons:

If your superior is somehow eliminated, your contact with the rest of the Militia is preserved through your acquaintance with his superior.

If your superior requires discipline, you must know his superior so you can see to it that higher command will address the problem.

If your superior must be demoted or discharged, your superior's superior will know who will need to be reassigned to other elements.

Thus you must only have contact with those in two levels of direct authority above and below you.

Example #1: A cell member will know his cell, his sergeant and his platoon sergeant.

Example #2: A cell sergeant will know his cell, his Platoon Sergeant and his lieutenant.

Example #3: A platoon sergeant will know all his cells, his four sergeants, his lieutenant and his captain.

Example #4: A platoon lieutenant will know his cell sergeants, his platoon sergeant, his company captain and his major.

This does not mean that you will never have contact with others in the Militia. Perhaps you have served with some of them in the same cell before advancing in rank. Or perhaps you will perform joint maneuvers with them. But you will not normally have regular exposure to them.

With this structure, two entire echelons of officers would have to be wiped out to sever ties between cells and the high command. At the same time, an entire echelon of officers (for instance, all lieutenants) would have to be captured and "spill their guts" in order to compromise the entire organization. If we keep a low profile and keep ourselves spread out, this will be virtually impossible for the potential enemy to do.

The chain of command

Related to who you know is who you must answer to. Clearly, you must obey superior officers. Obviously, you can only obey superior officers you know. However, it is possible that you will know several superior officers through previous service in the same cell or joint maneuvers. What do you do when two lieutenants tell you to do two different things?

In the Militia, you are only responsible to obey those of superior rank who are in direct line of authority over you in the chain of command.

For instance, you are only answerable to your particular cell leader and no other cell leader; to your lieutenant and no other; to your captain and no other. If two superiors tell you two different things, respectfully ignore the one that has no direct authority, even if he has a higher rank. If both have direct authority over you, obey the one higher in rank.

The limits of authority

Assuming that orders come from a superior officer who is in the direct line of command above you, you are expected and required to obey them in all matters pertaining to:


You may request a transfer to a different cell or unit, but it is the final decision of your leaders where you will serve.


You are never allowed to violate printed or verbal orders concerning secrecy and security within the Militia.


It is up to your leaders to determine what methods of training will be done, when, how, where and what you will train for.


In the heat of combat, you must obey your leaders immediately when they issue a directive to move, shoot, or attack certain targets.


You cannot change or reinterpret general tactics or specific field orders in the Militia. You are on a team, not a loner.

Basically, you are obliged to obey any order pertaining to preparations for or conduct in actual combat regardless of how you like or "feel" about it.

You are not expected to obey your superiors concerning how you lead your private life, except as it affects your ability to serve in the Militia. Nor are you expected to obey your superiors when they order you to do something immoral (like shooting unarmed women and children) or unconstitutional (like shooting a criminal without a civil trial), anything that goes against your conscience. And, of course, you may freely make recommendations to your leader when situation permits. But when an order is issued, your own personal preferences and desires are immaterial. You must simply obey. You may withdraw from the Militia at any time for conscience sake.

Discipline in the Militia

You will never be punished for failure in the Militia. You may have to endure further instruction or more training. But you will not be belittled or humiliated for failures assuming you gave it your best effort.

You will, however, be disciplined for defiance or disobedience. We do not, as a Militia, have the right or authority to imprison or physically harm you (that is reserved for the civil court system). We do, however, have the authority to do what any citizen can do.

Therefore, your superior officers have a range of possibilities at their disposal for disciplining your behavior as they see fit:


Demotion in rank and removal from command over some or all troops.

Fines imposed to make restitution for material (not punitive) damages.

Discharge entirely from the Militia with no further support.

Arrest by the local police if you commit a crime and we turn you over.

2.3.5 Discussion questions

Have you had any previous military or law enforcement training or experience? If so, please describe.

Have you ever had any leadership training or experience like starting you own business, supervising a group of workers, holding a political office or church leadership? If so, please describe.

What types of occupational or job experience have you had? Which type(s) of work do you like doing the most? Are you most proficient at?

In your own words, please describe what a cell is. Why is it so important that we be organized into semi-independent cells?

Do you have any questions about the general organization of the Militia?

The Romans often advanced on their enemy with their rectangular shields side-by-side, forming a moving, protective wall. With swords or javelins protruding this wall of shields, the Romans were virtually invincible as long as they stayed together. But if they would break ranks, they would expose themselves to attack, death and defeat. If you were a Roman soldier, would you be more likely to survive if you obeyed a "stupid" order along with everyone else, sowed discord and division among the other troops, or individually followed a "wiser" course of action like attacking a flank? Why?

Why is it better for you today to obey less than ideal orders as a group instead of doing the ideal thing individually?

In your own words describe when you must obey your immediate superior. Describe when you must not obey your immediate superior. In your own words, describe which leaders in the Free Militia you must obey and which leaders you should not obey.

Personal questions Do you have either amateur or trained skills in any of the following areas?

Martial arts/fencing/boxing

Physical education/coaching

First aid/CPR/medic/nursing

Automobile mechanics



Radio operation/repairs

Telephone operation/repairs

Private investigation

Mail or package delivery


Commercial art/graphics


Public office or law

Main ideas of this section

The fundamental rule guiding the organization of the Militia is centralized principles and planning but decentralized tactics and action.

A cell is a group of eight men who train and work together to accomplish a particular goal or task important to the broader purposes of the Militia.

In the Militia, your contact and exposure to other members will be limited to direct lines of command and two levels of rank above and below.

In the Militia, you are only responsible to obey those of superior rank who are in direct line of authority over you in the chain of command.

Basically, you are obliged to obey any order pertaining to preparations for or conduct in actual combat regardless of how you like or "feel" about it.

2.4 Secrecy and security in the unorganized Militia

2.4.1 Enemy capabilities and countermeasures

For now, the Militia membership is largely kept a secret because we are a relatively small organization.

Our personnel and plans must always be kept private. We cannot allow a potential enemy to know the names and addresses of our entire membership nor can we let them know how we intend to defend ourselves. Therefore, our personnel and plans must be kept secret to all those outside the Militia.

Of course, we are faced with a wide array of modern technologies and age-old tactics that any potential enemy may use to spy on us. For convenience, we may classify these methods of spying under the headings of eavesdropping, surveillance, snooping and infiltration.


Telephone wire tapping is probably the most common form of eavesdropping. After tapping your phone line outside your house or at the phone company's facilities everything you say on the phone is recorded.

Countermeasures: The best way to thwart wire tapping is never to say anything sensitive over the phone. Either don't use the phone or make sure you use a prearranged code and speak in vague terms.

Microphones or bugs might be placed in your home, office, or car to record your conversations. These are more difficult to accomplish than phone wire taps since someone must actually enter your home to place microphones.

Countermeasures: Wired bugs may be found simply by following wires. Wireless bugs operate on radio frequencies and may be found using a bug-detector which is basically a specialized radio receiver.

Window vibrations may be monitored from a nearby house or across the street using sophisticated equipment. This is a method used to record whole conversations in rooms without having to bug them with microphones.

Countermeasures: Window vibration eavesdropping may be defeated by talking in rooms that do not have outside windows. You may also just turn the radio or stereo up loud to drown out your conversation.


Visual surveillance by a person simply watching you from another house or car is the simplest form of surveillance.

Countermeasures: Keep your drapes and curtains drawn and make efforts to "lose" people following you.

Night vision technology allows someone watching you or your house to see just as well in the dark as in the daytime. Various scopes, binoculars, and goggles give this capability.

Countermeasures: At home, you can keep curtains closed. In combat, you can use flares to "level the enemy" and at least put you and the enemy on the same level of vision.

Infrared scanning technology is even more sophisticated. By picking up the infrared image your body heat puts on the wall of your house, your location in the house is known to an observer even if all your windows are covered.

Countermeasures: If walls are thick enough, this might thwart attempts to watch you using infrared scans. Space blankets with the silver reflective side can be draped over walls and ceilings to disrupt your heat image. Such scanning also only tells where you are. It does not show what you are doing or saying.

Satellite photography allows someone to see incredible detail from miles above the earth. It is alleged that satellites may photograph and transmit sufficient detail to read a license plate!

Countermeasures: Whatever you do at night, or under heavy cloud cover or indoors, or underground cannot be seen by satellites. A satellite is just as limited in its photography as a camera without a flash.


Access to records like copies of your checks, credit card purchases, loan applications, and tax returns is easy for many agencies like the IRS, often without a warrant.

Countermeasures: Since such records reveal what you buy, where you go, and who you do business with, be sure all sensitive transactions are in cash.

Garbage is searched by "reporters" for tabloid "newspapers" to get dirt on celebrities. Federal agents from the DEA and FBI also routinely sift trash and garbage to obtain evidence.

Countermeasures: Never put anything sensitive in the garbage! Burn or shred Militia materials, your own notes, and personal financial records to keep them secret.


A newcomer may be a plant (someone posing as a sympathizer who is really working for the government). Such infiltrators often gain confidence by exemplifying heroic behavior or by zealously agreeing with your cause.

Countermeasures: The way we attempt to avoid infiltration in the Militia is to have members approach potential recruits rather than vise versa.We also only recruit those who we have known well a long time.

Blackmail and extortion is a more sinister way of infiltration. If the government finds out something they can use against a loyal member of a group, they might be coerced into cooperating with an investigation. Blackmailed persons may inform on friends or even lead them into an ambush.

Countermeasures: The best way to avoid being blackmailed and used by a potential enemy is to lead a spotless and open life. Avoid excessive debt, adultery, alcohol, drugs, and crime. If you have done something wrong, just confess it to those around you. Then it cannot be used against you.

These are just some ways the Militia could be compromised to a potential enemy. Attempting to counter every one of these threats all the time would be expensive, complicated and cumbersome. Yet there are five simple things we can do as individuals and as a group to thwart them:

Keep a low profile.

Keep your mouth shut.

Be as decentralized as is possible.

Be as transient as possible.

Protect all records and information.

If every member of the Militia rigidly follows these five principles of secrecy and security, then the Militia will be secret and secure.

2.4.2 Low profiles and closed mouths

The best thing you can do as an individual and we can do as a group is to maintain the lowest possible profile. If a potential enemy does not even know that we exist or that we are members of a militia they will not bother watching or listening in on us. All the technology in the world is useless unless it is put to use. And it is only used when suspicions about you are somehow aroused that technology will be used against you.

Keep a low profile by not drawing attention to yourself, your actions, or your militia equipment. They can't watch you if they don't know you exist!

Equipping yourself

As we discussed in Section 2.2, never sign anything, never give your name and address, always pay with cash, and be as innocent looking and inconspicuous as you can when you buy guns, ammunition and military gear.

Storing your equipment

Don't openly display your guns, ammunition, uniform and military gear in your home. If people see it they will talk about it.

Ideally your guns, ammunition and gear should be cached somewhere away from your home. We will cover caching in section 3.0.

Do not leave your field manuals or training books out where people can see them. If a book is on your coffee table, people will put two and two together. Do not mark the binding or cover of your field manual so people can tell what it is even if they do see it on a shelf.

Don't put your name or address on your Field Manual or training books. If they should somehow fall into the wrong hands, there should be no way to trace them to you.

Training with your cell

Train only with what you need for training. Don't carry your gun or wear a uniform when you are patrolling. Don't wear your uniform when target shooting. Don't carry a gun when you are digging foxholes.

Train only with the people you need to at the time. Don't allow unnecessary spectators, even from your own cell, since they will only draw attention.

Train in the privacy of your own home. All kinds of things short of actual shooting and field exercises can be done in a house: gun disassembly, gun cleaning, practicing firing positions, detaching and replacing empty magazines, and much more can be done inside.

If you do need to train outside, do so in private or remote places. Shoot where people can't see the style of weapon you are shooting.

Do not advertise your cell meetings to the public! Keep them low-key. Meet only in houses, not apartments where neighbors might overhear what you say.

Don't expose yourself

Don't unnecessarily disclose yourself to the public. During the riots in Los Angeles many store owners used their guns to ward off looters. The problem is that news reports, video tapes and pictures of armed store owners were later used to identify and prosecute people who violated gun registration laws! So don't make a citizens' arrest with your assault rifle and don't try to suppress a riot in your uniform.

Of course, it does you no good at all to hide if you announce your location with a loudspeaker. So also it does you no good to keep a low profile in the Militia if you tell people about it.

Keep your mouth shut and do not tell anyone outside the Free Militia about your membership, actions, equipment, or plans. Loose lips do sink ships!

Recruiting new members

We must be careful who we approach. Make sure that you know someone fairly well and determine that they are sympathetic to our cause before you sound them out or attempt to recruit them.

The procedure for recruiting a new member is to sound them out on things like how they feel about guns, the Second Amendment, the government and warfare in general. Discuss the candidate with your cell leader. Only if he approves, should you take the next step of revealing your membership in the Militia and giving him Section 1 of the Field Manual. Never try to recruit anyone without your cell leader's approval!

Holding your own tongue

Never volunteer anything about the Militia to anyone outside the Militia.

Never boast about the guns you own, the things you do in training, or your membership and rank in the Militia.

Keep your wife and kids out of it

The less your wife and kids know about the Militia and your participation in it, the better. Their knowing about it will not help you much, but will multiply the number of people who might "spill the beans." Moreover, if you love them, you should not want to involve them in any way that might endanger or incriminate them.

Of course you may explain the principles of the Second Amendment to your wife and kids, but don't specifically tell them the details about the Militia, names of others in your cell, and so on. They may put two and two together, but you should never confirm it yourself.

Under no circumstances is the material in your Field Manual to be divulged to or read by your wife and kids unless they have been approved by your cell leader for actual recruiting and membership.

By keeping a low profile and a closed mouth, you may be saving your own life, the lives of others, and the liberties of everyone!

2.4.3 Decentralization and transience

The next best thing we can do is be as decentralized as is practically possible. They can't watch all of us if we aren't all together.

The less any member knows about the whole Militia, the less he can divulge if he is watched, overheard, blackmailed, or arrested by the enemy.

Decentralization among the cells

Recruiting is done by the individual cells instead of a central organization and no central records or lists are kept of membership in the Militia. This way, we cannot all be compromised by one individual or one set of files.

Under no circumstances are you to reveal the identity of any member of your cell or of the Militia to anyone outside your cell except to your cell leader's immediate superior. The only exception to this is if the person whose identity you are going to divulge has given you explicit permission to tell the particular person or persons you are about to tell. Just because someone appears to belong to the Militia does not mean that he is a genuine member or that he has any business knowing certain identities even if he is a member.

Training is done within each individual cell with a view toward fostering itsability to survive, grow and fight even in the event it is separated from the rest of the organization.

Any methods used to communicate within a cell &emdash; such as telephone chains &emdash; will be developed and held in confidence within the cell.

All codes, passwords, recognition codes and signals will be developed and used uniquely within each cell so "breaking a code" for one cell will not compromise all Militia communications.

Decentralization in the Militia

As discussed in Section 2.3, the organization of the Militia is as decentralized as possible.

Some information from recruiting and interviews with cell leaders is passed on to higher command. For instance, the equipment and materials available within the cell but useful to command must be made known. However, the names and addresses of cell members with the skills or equipment are not passed on. All superiors normally know is the capabilities of a cell, not its identities. In the event of a mobilization, a general call will go out for the skills or equipment.

As discussed in Section 2.3.4, you will only know two direct levels of rank above and below you. This will permit continued contact if someone is lost, arrested, or killed, without exposing the whole group to everyone in the group.

A fourth key principle of secrecy and security in the Free Militia is to be transient. Change things and do them differently. Present a "moving target." Even if you are compromised, it will be difficult to track you if you keep changing the circumstances.

Try to avoid patterns. Don't keep doing the same thing the same way at the same time and place. They can't keep watching you if they can't find you.

Within the cell

Every cell will have its own rendezvous point where it will meet in the event of mobilization. Keep changing the rendezvous point so if anyone finds out about it, it will be "old news" and "wrong news" whenever you actually have to meet.

Don't train in the same place and at the same time. Besides the fact that you might draw attention to yourself or even be watched, it is good experience to train under a wide variety of conditions. Vary the time of day, the weather, the terrain and so forth.

In addition to being decentralized, codes, passwords and signals should also be transient. Change them from time to time. This does not mean you have to keep coming up with new ones. Some codes might be reused sometime later on. As long as the code itself does not reveal what code you are using. (If each code has different characteristic words, then certain words will tell a listener which one you are using. If codes use the same words different ways, simply listening in will not disclose which code you are using.)

Within the Militia

Command posts will be moved regularly as will sources of supplies.

When someone leaves the Militia

If someone leaves your cell for any reason, certain measures must be taken to change things so they cannot compromise you. This applies whether someone leaves you voluntarily, is discharged, arrested or taken prisoner.

Whenever someone voluntarily leaves, they will be debriefed by their superior's superior.

Whenever someone voluntarily leaves a cell (either leaving the Militia or joining another cell) the cell's rendezvous points, codes, passwords, arms and ammunition caches should all be changed fairly soon.

Whenever someone forcefully leaves a cell (either by being arrested, captured, or lost) the cell's rendezvous points, codes and passwords must all be changed immediately. Arms and ammunition caches should be moved as soon as it can safely be determined that they are not under surveillance.

Once again, the life and liberties you save by taking these measures may be your own!

2.4.4 Classification of documents

All military organizations must secure their plans if they are to surprise and evadethe enemy. The final principle of secrecy and security is to maintain a system of classifying records, documents, plans and maps. By restricting access to the most sensitive information, it is less likely that it will fall into the wrong hands. This section of the Field Manual will be the last thing you read pertaining to the Militia that does not have some kind of classification or restriction attached to it. They can't read about us if we do not give them reading material.

The U.S. Department of Defense has three levels of classification. These are confidential, secret, and top secret. Anyone having access to classified information must have the appropriate clearance which is granted only after a fairly thorough investigation of the individual. But the right clearance is not sufficient to gain access to the information. A person must also have a "need to know." Thus, someone with a top secret clearance is not necessarily allowed to read a merely confidential report unless the report directly pertains to his work or plans.

The Militia also operates on a need-to-know basis. However, we do not have the resources to do a detailed personal investigation. Nor are the three levels of government clearance suitable to our situation. So for the Militia, your clearance is based upon your rank.

In the Militia, you are only cleared to know or access information which is made available to your rank and only if you need to know it.

Printed and written materials (like this Field Manual and maps) will indicate on the cover which levels of rank are cleared for accessing it. You are never to open or read any document that is classified for ranks higher than yours. Even if you have the rank, you still must not read it unless a superior indicates that you have a need to know. Inadvertent and intentional violations should be reported to your superiors.

As said before, the particulars of a cell's own codes, caches, meeting places, and so on should be restricted to the cell. As far as the Militia as a whole is concerned, the following guidelines regulate the general classification of materials:

Ideology is restricted to potential recruits approved by the cell leader.

Training information is restricted to actual recruits (privates and up).

Positional details such as staging areas are restricted to cell leaders.

Tactical information is restricted to officers (lieutenants and above).

Strategic information is restricted to the two highest echelons of command, depending on the size of the Militia.

When classified material is in your hands it is your responsibility to secure it. Read it only in private. Lock it in a filing cabinet or hide it when you are not using it. When you are done with it, either destroy it or return it to your superior. Never just throw it away! As a standard procedure, you should have a closed box or other secure location &emdash; not an open waste basket &emdash; to discard all Militia materials before burning or shredding.

Remember that information is classified whether it is written or verbal. So treat discussions of sensitive material as you would a document. Do not discuss it over the phone. Do not discuss it in the presence of non-cleared people whether they are in the Militia or not.

Where do you stand?

We have attempted to present everything we can concerning the Militia's purpose and organization as well as what is expected of you should you decide to join us. Of course, much has been left out for security reasons. If you do join us by taking the oath of office in the presence of your cell, there is much more that will be at your disposal in terms of training, plans, assistance and encouragement. But this must be reserved for the committed minuteman who knows and promises to carry out his duties.

So this is the end of the "information highway" for mere inquirers. You are at a crossroads, and must either part company with us or jump in with both feet. You know what the Militia is all about. You know how you will need to equip yourself. You know how we are organized and what authority structure you will be coming into. You know the basics of how you will need to maintain secrecy. Now we need to know something about you. As I asked before, are you vigilant, active and brave? Do you have a strong heart? The Militia is not for the half-hearted, it is for the lion-hearted.

Of course you are free to walk away from us without obligation. We have no physical hold on you. We have no legal authority over you. But I wonder if you can so easily walk away from our cause. Ideas not only can energize and embolden us, they can enthrall and captivate us. The lofty principles of Liberty are not easily forgotten by subjects nor ignored by tyrants once they are first tasted. How much less can they be forgotten or ignored by people like you and me who have lived and breathed them all our lives? How much less can the light of Liberty be forgotten or ignored by people like you and me who are seeing with our own eyes the attempts to snuff it out forever? The Militia is not for the short-sighted, it is for the far-sighted.

Hopefully you see the dangers on the horizon. Indeed, the perils to our liberties are already upon us! But perhaps you are inclined to run away rather than face them. Patrick Henry would tell you, "For my own part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it." Do you know enough truth, if not the whole of it, to cause you anguish of spirit? Can you see the evils of the "best" that can happen, if not the worst? Are you willing to provide for it?

The Militia is committed to providing for the worst. We have the cause in our favor. We have the means at our disposal. Do we have you? Are you ready, willing and able to "march" with us to secure the Blessings of Liberty for yourself and your children? If you are, take the oath and join us now!

We are the few, the free, the Militia!

2.4.5 Discussion questions

Do the technologies and capabilities available to our potential enemy frighten you?

Does the fact that such technologies could be turned against you by a "big brother" government give you a sense of urgency to defend your liberties while you can?

Can you see the importance of maintaining the strictest possible secrecy and security in the Militia? Why are such measures important to your own personal well being, liberties and perhaps life?

What are the five general things the Militia does to keep our existence, membership and plans secret?

Which of these security measures will require the most drastic changes in thinking, behavior and life-style on your part? Why?

Do you think that you are sufficiently motivated to change? If not, how can we help you to change "dangerous" behavior?

Would you say that you tend to be flamboyant or low-key? Talkative or quiet? Boastful or humble? Habitual or spontaneous in your routine? Open or private about personal affairs? If any of the bold adjectives are fitting, these are characteristics you will have to change or temper with respect to the Militia. Do you see the need to make these changes?

How comfortable are you with the idea of a decentralized organization?

Does a degree of independence and initiative among individual cells in the Militia give you a sense of confidence or confusion? Why? A sense of liberty or insecurity? Why?

Do you have any questions about what is expected of you concerning classified information?

What two conditions must be met before you are permitted access to a classified document? How must you guard such information when it is in your possession? How should you dispose of it when you no longer need it?

How do you feel about following orders from a superior officer? Is it hard for you to follow directives that seem unnecessary? Unwise? Risky?

Are you prepared to take the oath for the Militia? If so, what are your reasons for desiring to join? Fame? Fortune? Power? Glory? Adventure? Fear? Survival? A sense of duty? Something else?

Sensitive subjects and words

The following is a partial list of the types of topics and words you should stay away from when talking openly in public or on the phone.




Body armor






Gun show


Machine gun









Main ideas of this section

If every member of the Militia rigidly follows these five principles of secrecy and security, then the Militia will be secret and secure.

Keep a low profile by not drawing attention to yourself, your actions, or your militia equipment. They can't watch you if they don't know you exist!

Keep your mouth shut and do not tell anyone outside the Militia about your membership, actions, equipment, or plans. Loose lips do sink ships!

The less any member knows about the whole Militia, the less he can divulge if he is watched, overheard, blackmailed, or arrested by the enemy.

Try to avoid patterns. Don't keep doing the same thing the same way at the same time and place. They can't keep watching you if they can't find you.

In the Militia, you are only cleared to know or access information which is made available to your rank and only if you need to know it.


To remain seated
Stand and be counted

Your Choice... and choices do have consequences

- A Constitutional Patriot

Side Notes From another Patriot

Added for Tyranny rules
For #3: The other well known purpose for keeping the population on the verge
of starvation is the known fact that inter-generational malnutrition creates a
mildly mentally retarded population that of a perpetual child! This is the strategy
used in the third worlds for centuries!

Here in the First World, they feed us nutritionally devoid and poisonous GMO
food crops for the same effect! That's why the western world has an epidemic
of obesity; the lack of nutrition and assimilateble minerals has caused our bodies
to mistakenly behave as if we're experiencing a famine and to store as much
energy in the form of fat as possible!

For #4: I would also ad that to drive a wedge between LEO's and Troops, they
will stage atrocities on both their enforcers and the public to Balkanize and to
create a sense of tribalism and distrust to compartmentalize every one!

For #5: It's also part of their strategy to make them selves nebulous phantoms
so out of frustration you'll go after any visible scapegoat target that they present
to you!

For #6: Just look at George Soros!

For #7: Glad to see you've included "Relativism"! I've gotten into many arguments
with people on this forum just on that subject alone!

Plus I would point out that they go by the concept that once you get the public
to except the absurd, you can get them to commit atrocities!

Plus the OMUR families are Sociopathic Social Darwinists! and they have a desire
to turn humanity into a reflection of their own depravity!

As far as the problems regarding issues with motivations and conflicting moral
dilemmas with turning our own troops against us, that's why they've already
gotten commitments from other nations and contractors to augment the forces!
August 14, 2011 10:33AM
#   Quote

Posts: 27
Please feel free to copy and print, take into cinsideration i have included the PA constitution please look at your own states and add that in tere for yourself.
February 22, 2014 03:03PM
#   Quote

Posts: 30
I, Sean McCarthy, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Pennsylvania against all enemies, both foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me, for conscience sake; So Help Me God.

God bless America.

As a nation of free men we will live forever, or die by suicide.
April 06, 2014 11:05AM
#   Quote

Posts: 1,624
We need to make sure to direct new members here to have them look through this. I always like coming back and browsing through it. Once I'm done transcribing the U.S. Militia Doctrine I will start on this.

Death becomes us all. Will you die on your feet or chained to a wall?

The price of freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness. – Robert A. Heinlein
April 06, 2014 11:14AM
#   Quote

Posts: 1,884
How is the knife holding up?

God, grant me the serenity to accept the knives I cannot buy, the budget to buy ones I can and the wisdom to know the difference.
Support Your Local Outlaw Knifemaker!
April 06, 2014 11:59AM
#   Quote

Posts: 1,624
Like a fucking Abrams tank brother!

Death becomes us all. Will you die on your feet or chained to a wall?

The price of freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness. – Robert A. Heinlein
April 06, 2014 12:18PM
#   Quote

Posts: 1,884

God, grant me the serenity to accept the knives I cannot buy, the budget to buy ones I can and the wisdom to know the difference.
Support Your Local Outlaw Knifemaker!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

We are not affiliated with, nor do our discussions necessarily imply endorsement by The Sipsy Street Irregulars.
Please Login or Register!