taxation without representation is what brought about the revolution. gun control was a side effect.
This is a discussion on 2A - The British Banned Guns On Our Founding Fathers & It Brought About A Revolution within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Real Title: The British Banned Guns On Our Founding Fathers & It Brought About A Revolution Freedomoutpost.com January 22, 2013 by Tim Brown ......Many today ...
Real Title: The British Banned Guns On Our Founding Fathers & It Brought About A Revolution
January 22, 2013 by Tim Brown
......Many today don't realize that we are facing the same sort of tactics by our own Federal government that our forefathers faced from the British just prior to the War for Independence. In fact, I'll venture to guess that most people never were taught in school what follows in this article. That's right, gun control is nothing new now, nor was it even new in the twentieth century. It was very much alive in the eighteenth century. So when someone comes along telling you "the founding fathers wouldn't have envisioned this or that" with regards to arms, just remind them of what they faced during their lifetimes when the primary weapons were single shot muskets and cannons.
......Patriots the heard of the Acts determined that they would fight and die rather than see such laws enforced upon them by the British Army. The Patriots of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, resolved: “That in the event of Great Britain attempting to force unjust laws upon us by the strength of arms, our cause we leave to heaven and our rifles.” Interestingly enough, a South Carolina newspaper essay, which was reprinted in Virginia at the time, recorded that any law that required the military to enforce it was "necessarily illegitimate," according to David B. Kopel.
......Ultimately, do you know what started America's War for Independence? That's right, it was a tyrannical government that soft peddled "self-defense" while banning firearms and gunpowder.
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/th...icPWHTjylPx.99
taxation without representation is what brought about the revolution. gun control was a side effect.
“Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.” Winston Churchill
For a whole host of reasons, actually, including those mentioned.
The Declaration of Independence<snip>
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 British 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 ...
Taxation without representation was the powder keg that started it.taxation without representation is what brought about the revolution. gun control was a side effect.
When the British Troops marched to seize the armory's, (gun control) that's when the first shots were fired.
That when some people "woke up" and figured out that the British Rule needed to go.
Although taxation without representation already had many free thinking men in an uproar, it was the realization that the Brits didn't want them to have guns that started the killing, so it could be argued that gun control was the reason. The first shots were fired when the Brits were on route to the Armory. I wouldn't call that a "side effect".
Taxation without representation was not the primary reason, but only part of the whole problem. Corrupt government and lack of representation in general seem to be the main problem addressed in the DoI.
That sounds a lot like today...........
Vietnam Veteran - 1966-1970 USASA
Carry Pistol. FNS 9, 9mm.
Carry Pistol. FNX 40, .40 Cal.
Bersa Thunder 9 UC Pro, 9mm. Gave To Daughter To Carry.
Self Defense Stories
Give me a minute before I post again.
Have to disagree with the premise of the article, the Revolutionary war was not started by those acts, more those acts were brought into being because of the existing threat of the colonies declaring independence.
.Have to disagree with the premise of the article, the Revolutionary war was not started by those acts, more those acts were brought into being because of the existing threat of the colonies declaring independence
That doesn't even make any sense.
Declaring Independence wasn't a threat to any one except the King. Like every other tyrant that has lived, they cant stand the thought of losing control.
The Revolutionary War, technically wasn't a war until the first man was killed. Troops shooting at each other, some living trough the engagement and some not...that is what constitutes a war. Up until then, everything else is just talk.
When blood spills, then its on.
Perhaps, but the Englishmen may have continued to try peaceful petitioning and official protest had not the Crown tipped its hand. By attempting to disarm the colonists they were essentially saying not only aren't we going to change, and we'll do to you whatever we like, but we know how much you are going to revile our policies that you will probably rebel, so we'll just take that off the table now by disarming you. A government disarming its people can be for no other purpose other than it knows it isn't a just government that derives it's power from the people, and that it's deprivations have risen to the point where there is a reasonable or probable likelihood that the people are ready to fight. Soooo, it think you're splitting hairs, and I'll refer to the list of tyrannies as all being pertinent to the decision that violence was the only recourse...
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." C.S. Lewis
It might have been a huge threat to the wallets of some of Britian's "finest", but most people living in England at that time couldn't even show you where the colonies were on a map.
So it was about money. Loss of tax revenue. Its always about money.
The people were tired of getting taxed into oblivion and just to show that he could, he (the King) started taxing tea. That was one of the final straws. It was about breaking loose from rulers that were so arrogant that they refused to show common sense or compassion. A ruling class that was so far removed from the people that they were fed up with it. Sound familiar?
And when pressed, and when they grew weary of talk that was mostly BS, they started shooting.
The rest it history. It all comes around full circle eventually.
Good luck fighting the standing armies our president has at his disposal today. You'll have better chance ousting your representatives than starting and winning a modern civil war.
The first thing the govt will do is kill the power grid.............. the plans get ugly after that.
If you are worried about FEMA Camps, you have not got a clue. Those will end up being supposed safe havens for the ruling class................................... (man, do I sound like a tin foil hat warrior.......... LOL at me).
The general disparity of arms between the government and the rest of us is always a worry for me. In my other thread, I had wondered why we ever diverged from the original intent of the 2A which would have done away with standing armies and kept to well maintained State run militia armies. With that system there would be no infringements and falsities from an all powerful central government.
Right now, my only hope is to peacefully campaign against infringements with our congressmen and senators. If outright civil war broke out, I fear that even with the weapons we privately own, we'd never match the firepower of our standing armies.
Through clever manipulation of the non thinking populous, any group of people can be made to look like domestic terrorists and militants. If you observe closely, gun owners at already being treated as pariahs and the NRA called a terrorist organization. With enough coercion of the voting sheep, it would not be unfathomable for our very government to turn our military men and women against certain groups at a time as they are branded domestic terrorists.
One doesn't need to look far to find out what happened during our first civil war: the standing armies and superiority of firepower of the north vs the peasant and militia armies of the south. Eventually, the standing armies always win. And all that would be left is a futile guerrilla war that has no end where a previously free people will be branded traitors, rebels and radicals.
Don't discount the fact that our military is made up of individual people who have opinions of their own and who have the ability to see what is right and what is wrong.
If ordered to open fire on American Citizens, a good number will refuse and some might actually revolt against their command.
I doubt it will be most, but once it starts to happen more will find the courage to join.
I hope never to see it get to that point.
The Evils are still sufferable.