Warning to gun grabbers: If gun rights are lost, you will soon lose free speech, public protests, art, blogs and the right to a fair trial

Monday, April 08, 2013 by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...) Tags: First Amendment, gun control, Bill of Rights

---

(NaturalNews) All those who value free speech, art, public protests, internet blogs and due process should be waging an all-out information war right now to defend the Second Amendment. Why? Because if the Second Amendment is lost due to unconstitutional legislative and executive actions pursued by the government, then there are no limits to what civil liberties and individual freedoms the government can declare null and void.

All those who are arguing for infringements of Second Amendment liberties (universal registration, banning AR-15s, criminalizing high-capacity magazines, etc.) are effectively arguing to hand the federal government the precedent it needs to criminalize free speech, religion, public protests, internet blogs, Youtube videos and more.

In effect, gun grabbers are arguing for the government to have the power to overturn the Bill of Rights when it is popular to do so. But such power will inevitably end up being used in circumstances never envisioned by the gun grabbers... and often in the hands of someone they hoped would never hold the office of President such as a third member of the Bush regime.

The Bill of Rights isn't optional

You can't have a half-way Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights either means what it says and strictly limits the reach of the federal government, or it means nothing and all the individual rights and liberties enumerated in the Bill of Rights are null and void.

Those include the right to exercise whatever religion you choose and not have the state mandate what church you must attend; the right to speak your mind and even criticize the government without fear of being prosecuted for your opinions; the right to due process and a trial of your peers if charged with a crime; and the right to be safe in your person and effects (your home) without being subjected to illegal searches and seizures.

If the Second Amendment is nullified, then so is your right to remain silent. Without the Fifth Amendment, the government can (and will) torture you until you "admit guilt" for whatever crimes they claim you have committed. This is already being planned for Aurora Colorado shooter James Holmes, who prosecutors now say will be subjected to injections of a "truth serum" so that he will confess to his crimes.

Folks, there is no such thing as a truth serum. It's a science fiction fantasy. What Holmes is being subjected to is torture until he "confesses" to the crime. This is precisely what awaits all Americans if the government is not held to the limits of the Bill of Rights.

If the Second Amendment goes, the First Amendment will soon follow

Once the dismantling of the Bill of Rights is tolerated, there will be no stopping the government's planned destruction of all its provisions, including the First Amendment. With freedom of speech destroyed, all websites, blogs and online videos will be deleted or shut down unless they are approved by the government. All art must be government approved before being published or publicly displayed (First Amendment). Anyone charged with a crime can be held indefinitely, without charge, while the government waits for them to "rot in prison" for the rest of their lives (Sixth Amendment).

Gun control advocates are, almost by definition, ignorant of history. They foolishly believe that the more power government is granted, the more compassionate, fair and just that government will behave. History has shown exactly the opposite: power corrupts, and when power is centralized in the hands of the few, it is almost always exploited in a manner that brings great harm to the People.

America's founders understood this, which is why the Bill of Rights was written and ratified. Power must necessarily be distributed (decentralized) for freedom to flourish, and the primary purpose of the Bill of Rights was to enumerate lines in the sand that the government cannot cross.

Those who are arguing for gun restrictions today are hopeless fools who seem oblivious to the tyranny they are bringing down upon themselves. In order to achieve one limited political goal, they will surrender all rights and freedoms to a government that will then recognize no limits whatsoever to its power. When gun control laws pass, they think they are "winning," but what they're actually doing is constructing unintentional prisons that will enslave their children and grandchildren.

Fortunately, many of us do understand history, and we will not allow the ignorant masses to destroy our fundamental rights and freedoms. We will fight these efforts with every means available, beginning with information and judicial strategies, but progressing to fighting enemies of America with physical force if necessary to defend the Republic.

Curiously, every U.S. Senator, Congressperson, President, police officer, district attorney and other "official" takes a sworn oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Yet in their actions, many of these people prove that they are themselves the very enemies cited in that oath of office. It is the job of the People to force our representatives to keep their oaths of office, first at the ballot box if effective, but then using incrementally more forceful means as necessary to keep government in check. The People are the commanders of their government, but if they refuse to remind government who is in charge, it is they who are soon commanded by government tyrants.

All laws that violate the Bill of Rights are null and void

Any law passed by either state government or the federal government is immediately null and void if it violates the Bill of Rights. This is why the U.S. Supreme Court declared in its landmark 1803 decision of Marbury vs. Madison:

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."

But this truth does not require a Supreme Court to make it so... it is self-evident under common law. Thus, any member of government who attempts to enforce an unconstitutional law is acting in violation of civil rights and the legal protections guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. Importantly, no citizen is obliged to follow unlawful orders even if directed by an apparent "law enforcement" authority.

If a police officer, for example, tells you to "go murder that woman standing on the street corner," you have no obligation to follow such an order because it describes a criminal act. Similarly, a police officer or lawmaker commanding you to surrender your rifle is also an unlawful request, and no citizen has any obligation to follow it.

This is even true if local laws have been passed that violate the Bill of Rights. For example, if the police chief of New York City says you must surrender your rifle because New York has passed a law criminalizing the possession of such a rifle, you are under no legitimate legal obligation to do so because such laws are unconstitutional and illegal. That doesn't mean you still won't be arrested and thrown in prison while your case eventually makes its way to the Supreme Court, of course. Tyrants do not abide by laws unless they are forced to do so by the People... which is precisely the point of having a Second Amendment in the first place. No government can be trusted to remain honest and representative of the People unless the People possess the means of force to overthrow a corrupt, criminal government and replace it with legitimate, constitutional government.

Why gun grabbers are the true "anti-government" extremists

The mainstream media and the White House attempt to twist these ideas by branding anyone who disagrees with the government as an "anti-government" extremist. But that's not the case at all: Most patriots aren't anti-government at all. They are simply anti-corrupt government while being pro Constitutional government.

People who advocate gun control today are actually "anti-constitutional government" extremists because their ideas extremely diverge from the laws of the land (the Constitution and Bill of Rights). What could be more extreme than suggesting the People have no rights and that the government has total power to decide which rights in the Bill of Rights it wishes to recognize?

Gun grabbers are the true anti-government people because they are enemies of the legitimate and lawful government of America. Rather than constitutional government, they wish to see an illegitimate, unlawful government usurp power and run the country as a police state that respects no limits to its power. That's the type of government desired by foolishly dangerous people like Rachel Maddow, Michael Moore, Michael Bloomberg, Joe Biden and others.

Imagine if Bloomberg were given the power to rewrite the Constitution...

Think about it: If people like Bloomberg had their way, there would be no Constitution, no Bill of Rights, no due process, no trial by jury and no free market choices whatsoever. The people would have no rights and freedoms, and the government would simply dictate to them what they could buy, eat, drink, think, speak, write and more. All forms of expression would be tightly regulated by the government, and anyone who was labeled "guilty" by the government would be immediately sentenced without trial or even a requirement of any evidence being presented.

This is the world being created by gun control advocates. Yet, in the end, they owe gun owners a huge debt because it is gun owners who will halt the march of tyranny in America. We will protect the rights and liberties of all Americans -- including those who are seeking to take away our rights. The purpose of the Second Amendment has always been to protect the integrity of all the other amendments, including the First. The only reason people like Jim Carrey can attack gun rights in America is because the Second Amendment has put enough guns in the hands of enough Americans to dissuade the government from destroying the First Amendment.

Finally, I know there are a few readers, mostly younger people, who cannot imagine government ever becoming "evil" or "tyrannical," and they think this talk of the Second Amendment being needed to protect the rights and freedoms of Americans sounds outlandish. To those people I say you are uninformed. You are ignorant of history, and you would be wise to learn history now, lest you inadvertently become part of it in the very near future.