SELF DEFENSE and the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

The right to defend yourself and the right to come to the defense of another are deeply embedded in natural rights of all people.

By stripping you of the right to defend yourself, the government requires you to take a beating or even forfeit your life.

By depriving you of the right to defend another person who is being assaulted, the government requires you to stand by and do nothing while another person is beaten or killed as you watch.

In either case, human dignity is subordinated to the power of the state. The state has made a determination that its power to protect the public is supreme and exclusive so that no individual citizen has the right to defend himself or his neighbor. In such a society, no one is free, and everyone is dependent on the 911 call.

The debate surrounding the right to bear arms cannot be divorced from the bedrock rights to defend oneself and to defend others. Depriving the people of the means of self defense makes them totally dependent on the government to keep them safe. A government police state that would be strong enough to keep its citizens safe would be strong enough to stamp out freedom of speech, strong enough to silence those who challenge its policies, and strong enough to violate every human right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In short, the deprivation of the right to self defense and the defense of others is giant step toward total state control of your life; the arrival of totalitarianism.

Two short historic examples shed light on the relationship between the deprivation of arms and the establishment of a totalitarian regime.

First, when England set out to finally and completely subjugate Scotland and destroy its culture, the English passed a law making it illegal for any Scott to own or possess a gun or a sword. It was 1745. Here is the oath that the Scotts were required to take:

"I, (name), do swear as I shall answer to God at the great day of judgement, I have not, nor shall have in my possession any gun, sword, pistol or arm whatever, and never use tartan, plaid, or any part of the highland garb; and if I do so, may I be cursed, may I never see my wife and children, father, mother or relations, and lie without a Christian burial in a strange land, far from the graves of my forefathers and my kindred; may all this come across me if I break my oath."

For the oppressor, it worked well. Scotland never again fought for her freedom. Would have the Maryland militia withstood the British invasion of Baltimore in 1814 had those farmers and fishermen been armed with hoes and oars instead of guns and swords?

Second, after the Nazis rose to power in 1933, they soon began adopting laws to control the population and eliminate dissent. On the night of November 9-10, 1938, the Nazis unleashed hell on the Jews, smashing homes, businesses, and synagogues in what was called Kristallnacht, the Night of Broken Glass. The next day, the Nazis imposed a total ban on possession of guns and knives by Jews, forcing them to turn in their weapons. Ultimately, the German law was expanded to prohibit anyone other than state approved police forces to possess arms, making the public completely and finally dependent on the Nazi government for their care and protection. All local militias were abolished.

The results were catastrophic as the people were deprived of all means to throw off the brutal Nazi regime once its bloodthirst became obvious. Within a few short years, millions of Slavic people, Jews, and Gypsies, physically and mentally handicapped men, women, and children, along with other unworthy political and social deviants, were murdered in the name of genetic engineering. Would have things turned out differently if the state did not have a monopoly on firepower? Before you answer, take note that the Nazis came to power with the support of only 32% of the vote. Most Germans voted against Hitler, but the Nazis were wicked and determined to stamp out all those who dared to disagree, and their opponents who preferred civility and preached tolerance were no match for them.

The point is clear: abandonment of the right to bear arms is abandonment of the right to self defense and the right to defend others. Historically, loss of those liberties has paved the way for total state control. Stand now for your natural right to defend yourself and your family.

Vote for Jim Rutledge, a Marylander dedicated to preserving your right to defend yourself, your right to defend others, and your right to bear arms.

Source of quoted Oath of the Scottish ban on arms: www.scottishweb.net