This one is for my cousin Bubba

Hell no, we won’t let them go

With all the foolish talk about the issue of gun control going on in America (the land of the
FREE, yeah if freedom were truly present, this would not be an issue for debate).* We all try to
analyze this issue from different perspectives to come up with a logical and sound judgment
based on past experience of nations who attempted this act or based on what we understand
from our own culture and customs. I mean let’s face the facts; guns have been a part of
American culture since the beginning of its existence. Guns themselves are a symbol of
freedom, and they might actually be the only thread of freedom that is left in a country that has
been stripping the freedom of its subjects away piece by piece. The pen of the president
doesn’t touch a piece of paper unless another article of the clothing of freedom is stripped from
the people.

Niccolo Machiavelli stated in his treatise on the Art of War in the first part of his book during the
conversation between Cosimo and Fabrizio.

“As to being apprehensive that such organizations will not deprive you of the State by one
who makes himself a leader, I reply, that the arms carried by his citizens or subjects, given to
them by laws and ordinances, never do him harm, but rather are always of some usefulness,
and preserve the City uncorrupted for a longer time by means of these (arms), than without
(them). Rome remained free four hundred years while armed: Sparta eight hundred: Many
other Cities have been disarmed, and have been free less than forty years; for cities have need
of arms, and if they do not have arms of their own, they hire them from foreigners, and the
arms of foreigners more readily do harm to the public good than their own; for they are easier
to corrupt, and a citizen who becomes powerful can more readily avail himself, and can also
manage the people more readily as he has to oppress men who are disarmed.” End of quote.

(Maybe the politicians skipped the lecture of the professor of Political Science the day that he
spoke about this quote.)

Here Machiavelli is clearly stating that the people with arms will do no harm to the official
government. There was even the fear in those days that an armed populace would later cause
problems for the government; however, he is trying to alleviate the fears of the people and
show them that this is not the case. Moreover, instead of being a source of destruction for the
inhabitants of that country, the carrying of arms, in the end becomes an asset. He further goes
on to give two prime examples from western history. Any historian of the occidentals will agree
that the two strongest empires they had throughout their history were the empires of Rome
and Sparta. Their empires survived through long periods of struggle and opposition.
Machiavelli is also showing that he bears the opinion that the reason of their remaining
powerful for so long is because of the freedom of their citizens to bear arms freely in
accordance with the laws of those countries. Furthermore, if the people are disarmed and they
grow up in a country that is not preparing them to face any type of military challenges, the
country itself can no longer be dependent on its own citizenry to protect the country. How can
these citizens stand in the time of war to protect the people of the country from invasion if they
have no knowledge of war and weapons? This in turn will cause the country to turn to foreign
aid in times of distress.

No good can ever come about from having a foreign force protect your country. This is a
simple fact that I think nobody would be ignorant enough to disagree with. Foreign countries
will only enter or protect another country with their interests in mind; they don’t care about the
people or even the government of the people. Their only goal is to get a foot hold in the
country in an attempt at controlling its economy and resources. It becomes the Dracula effect;
he can only harm you once you have invited him into your home. Therefore, if a foreign power
comes into the country with smiles, then sees an opportunity to change those smiles into anger,
who is going to defend the country?

The final point that Machiavelli makes is that the arms allow the citizenry to protect
themselves against oppressors that might rise from amongst themselves. If one man, in an
unarmed society, was able to procure massive weaponry, he would easily be able to overtake
any formal government and who would be there to defend the country and the government?

Machiavelli then went on to state in another section of the same conversation:

And, because of this, they ought to have seen that arms in the hands of their own citizens
could not create tyrants, but the evil institutions of a government are those which cause a city
to be tyrannized; and, as they had a good government, did not have to fear arms of their own
citizens. They took an imprudent course, therefore, which was the cause of their being
deprived of much glory and happiness.” -End of quote-

In the final excerpt on this topic you can understand that Machiavelli carries the opinion that
the corrupt government itself is the cause of all the tyranny in any society, and not the arms of
the people. This is without doubt the truest statement he made on this subject. If you look at
most ghettoes in America, you will find most of the violence being black on black, Mexican on
Mexican, white on white, etc. Can we blame this violence that goes on amongst the lower class
citizenry of America on guns? Verily, whosoever would answer in the affirmative has clearly
never experienced life as one of the dregs of society. The main cause of the violence that goes
on in impoverished sections of America is caused by the complete negligence of corrupt
government to give the people the education and the standard of living they deserve as a part
of that society. If we see a certain part of our society suffering from violence, drug addiction,
alcohol abuse, criminality, and so forth, we should work diligently to find the causes and
solutions to these problems. Obviously, incarceration is not a good solution because it has
caused increases in all forms of crimes. Moreover, welfare and food stamps are also unable to
solve the problem because they cause the poor people to be more reliant on government
donations instead of trying to work hard to better their situation.
 Therefore, we can understand that the only solution that an already tyrannical government
can do to further their control over the masses is by taking away the people’s last line of
defense; their guns. I say the last line of defense because the first line of defense for any nation
is its mind. If you have a country that is very knowledgeable about history and about their
culture and beliefs, it is nearly impossible for an oppressive government to overtake these
people. However, if you start a dumbing down campaign, and continue to make the people
more ignorant about their rights as humans, it becomes easier for any tyrant to come along later
and pass laws like the ones we are seeing passed these days. We have to keep our weapons and
salvage our minds if we wish to be strong again.

Muhammad James

*Why did I use the phrase ‘foolish talk’? I stated that it is foolish talk because it is an
amendment in their own constitution ‘Every man has the right to bear arms’. If the government
takes that right away, they are now putting the citizens of America in the category of animals.
They have clearly stated that ‘man’ meaning human has the right to bear arms, so if this is a God
given right, either one: they are saying that they are more superior than God, and they have the
right to take these rights away. Or two: they are saying that man is no long man and these rights
must be taken away because he has become animalistic.