Against citizen disarmament tyranny, resistance is far from futile

When gun rights advocates point out that the vital importance of the Second Amendment is in protecting the people's right to the means of effectively resisting the tyranny of an out of control government, proponents of oppressive gun laws generally have a quick reply. "But you and your guns stand no chance against a modern, powerful military, especially a superpower like the U.S." Very often, they actually bring up the government's nuclear weapons as a reason that "resistance is futile"--as if a would-be dictator would want to rule a blasted, radioactive charnel house.

This ignores the rather difficult to miss fact that the U.S, superpower or not, has been fought to standstill in counterinsurgency conflicts more than once, including quite recently. Those enemies have no fighter jets, no nuclear submarines (or any other kind of submarines), no helicopter gunships and no tanks (and certainly no nuclear weapons)--and yet they remain undefeated. It also ignores the fact that any resistance will not be limited to guns.

Those still unconvinced that an armed American citizenry can effectively resist a tyrannical government are missing still more critical information, some of which is just now coming to light.

First, the resistance is very unlikely to need to defeat the entire government. The body of those who enforce the government's will--police officers, military service members, etc.--is, after all, not entirely composed of oath breakers, willing to obey unconstitutional (and thus illegal) orders, like confiscating citizens' guns. Some, indeed, have openly reaffirmed their oath to the Constitution, and have publicly vowed to disobey any such orders, specifically listing gun confiscation orders first among those they will disobey.

Recently, a growing number of sheriffs have responded to the government's newly invigorated passion for draconian gun laws by vowing, like the Oath Keepers, to not enforce any new forcible citizen disarmament laws. Some have gone further than that, vowing to actively resist such efforts by the federal government, at the cost of their lives, if need be.

Over the weekend, National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea has observed two more reasons to reject the "resistance is futile" propaganda. First, the manhunt for one former Los Angeles policeman and Naval Reserve officer (and "gun control" advocate) believed to have shot and killed three people, including a policeman, has become so desperate that jumpy cops have been blasting away at trucks that only vaguely resemble the suspect's, wounding two women (who presumably also bore little resemblance to their target). One man's resistance against the government has nearly paralyzed one of America's largest cities, and prompted a $1 million reward offer--at that rate, fighting the Three Percent is going to be pricey.

Secondly, it has now become apparent that President Obama has so little trust in one of America's elite fighting forces that he required that their rifles be disabled for his inaugural parade. If Obama cannot trust them not to shoot him, he presumably cannot trust them to obey any orders he might issue to turn their guns on the American people.

That scenario--Obama ordering the military to kill American citizens--is a great deal less farfetched than it may have seemed even recently, with the White House and Department of "Justice" now claiming to have the legitimate authority to use armed military drones kill citizens, without any court adjudication that the victims are guilty of any crime.

The government appears more and more to be preparing for war here at home, against the American people. That's a war that we the people can win, because to the dismay of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and to Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), there is still no "government monopoly on force." We shall overcome.