reasons to arm and organize
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends,
it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new
Government." — Declaration of Independence
civil rights are threatened
Bible says that you are morally justified to arm yourself and band with
others who love liberty. American history shows that you stand in a great
tradition if you arm and organize yourself. The Constitution clearly
recognizes your legal right to possess firearms and join a militia. But
should you want to?
U.S. Army field manual on Guerrilla Warfare (FM 31-21, September, 1961, page
5) says: "Resistance movements begin to form when dissatisfaction occurs
among strongly motivated individuals who cannot further their cause by
peaceful or legal means."
must ask ourselves: Is there any reason to suspect that my personal
liberties are in jeopardy? Is there any indication that the government is
systematically threatening my rights? Is there any possibility that a
tyranny could be established in the United States?
Affirmative answers to any of these questions should arouse our fervor for
liberty and motivate us to spring immediately and effectively to arms.
will now be demonstrated that our liberties are in jeopardy, that our rights
are systematically threatened, and that tyranny can happen in the United
States. (I am not saying it will, I'm saying it could happen.) We will
demonstrate this by examining the status of our civil, gun, property, and
state rights. First, here are some examples of violated civil rights:
to life (Fifth Amendment):
For a generation we have had legalized abortion which denies the right
of the unborn child to live. While an individual's right to privacy
cannot be restricted by the interests of any majority, they are
restricted by other individual rights. The Declaration of Independence
and Bible both imply that the right to life is superior to privacy.
President Clinton's proposed health care program will include
"reproductive services" like abortion (Senator John Glenn, form letter
to constituents, 1/5/94). Not only will abortion be legal, but every
hospital will be required to perform them and public funds will be used
to pay for them.
This means we are approaching the situation in communist China where
abortions are mandated by the state for all but the firstborn child.
President Clinton's health care program will include built- in
euthanasia for "undesirable" patients. If the state determines that you
are too old, too disabled, or too mentally ill to lead a "quality" life,
medical care can and will be denied. (National Right to Life Committee
high priority communication, 1994, p. 2.)
Freedom of religion (First Amendment):
the city of ----- it is technically illegal to conduct a worship service
or church gathering in a private residence. While this is rarely
enforced, the fact that it is law says a lot! This is somewhat typical
of municipal zoning regulations against churches.
Attempts have recently been made to require state certification of
private school teachers and homeschoolers. While the attempts have
failed for now, it is incomprehensible that legislators and congressmen
even consider such measures in light of the First Amendment. Remember:
licensing means state permission and certification means state control!
The American 2000 education program is designed to standardize the
curriculum in and centralize control of all public schools by imposing
"outcome based" education on all school districts.
Gresham Machen wrote, "A public-school system, if it means the providing
of free education for those who desire it, is a noteworthy and
beneficent achievement of modern times; but when once it becomes
monopolistic it is the most perfect instrument of tyranny which has yet
been devised" (Christianity & Liberalism, Eerdmans, 1923, p. 14).
is a well-known communist tenet that if you can control the education of
one generation, you will control the government and lives of all
Freedom of the press (First Amendment)
The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) regulates the radio and
television industry. While it is practically necessary to specify which
stations can use which frequencies, it is unconstitutional for the FCC
to base station licensing on the content of its programming.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a federal agency that funds
public television. PBS is by its very nature informational. Thus we have
a situation that in principle approaches having a state news agency like
foreign dictatorships and autocratic governments have.
various times it has been required that radio stations and TV networks
give equal time to political candidates or views. The present push
towards the Fairness Doctrine in broadcasting is a case in point. While
this is a sound practice for objective journalism, it violates the First
Amendment for the government to mandate which political views are aired
and how much coverage they should receive.
Searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment)
one time when I was in high school, the sheriff's department routinely
pulled over and searched any and all cars carrying teenagers between two
towns that had rival gangs. No warrants were issued, and the only
"probable cause" for criminal intent was the mere fact that occupants
happened to look like teenagers. This sort of thing happens all the time
in America and is rarely contested in the courts.
The Internal Revenue Service routinely has access to all of your bank
records, including microfiche copies of checks identifying who you do
business with and what you buy, without a warrant (Mark Skousen, Mark
Skousen's Complete Guide to Financial Privacy, chapters 1 and 2,
has been alleged — although I have not confirmed it — that laws are on
the books which permit unlimited and unwarranted wire taps of private
telephone lines provided that they are not used in court. But the Fourth
Amendment does not concern court- related surveillance but any
surveillance at all by any government official or agency!
1.4.2 Our gun rights are threatened
case you think your right to keep and bear arms is secure, just consider the
following (much of this happened just in 1993- 1994).
Historical gun control
Some of the first American gun control laws were intended to keep black
slaves and even free blacks from owning guns lest they free themselves
(Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, p. 129). Many of
today's gun control initiatives are veiled attempts by the American
elite to keep guns out of the hands of the poor and blacks.
Nazis in Denmark, the military in Greece, and officials in Hungary have
all used pre-existing registered gun owners lists to confiscate weapons
when they invaded or came to power (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact
Book, 1988, pp. 88-89).
The U.S. 1968 Gun Control Act is a word-for-word translation of Adolf
Hitler's German gun control laws of 1938 Nazi Germany (T.C. Fry and Tony
Lavinge, "Are You Aware That ...", American Freedom Network).
The Brady Bill was passed and signed into law by President Clinton
requiring a five-day waiting period and criminal background check for
all handgun purchases in late November, 1993 and was effective 3/1/94.
Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen (who oversees the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms or BATF) proposed raising the licensing fee for
gun dealers from $66 to $600 per year for the express purpose of putting
200,000 out of 284,000 American gun dealers out of business. (Wall
Street Journal, 1/5/94, p. A1).
The 1968 Gun Control Act outlaws the possession of all automatic weapons
and "short-barreled" rifles or shotguns unless they are licensed by and
registered with the BATF.
Virtually all municipalities require a person to have a "carry permit"
or license to openly carry a loaded gun in his or her car or on the
street or to carry any concealed weapons on his or her person.
yellow federal form must be completed for every purchase of a gun from a
dealer. These forms include your name, address, type and serial number
of the gun bought, and answers to several questions. While this is not
called "registration" because the records are kept by the dealer only,
the BATF is allowed to make a warrantless search of these records each
year and may "borrow" them for further inspection and perhaps copying
(Up to Date, "BATF Abuses of Gun Owners' Rights," The Second Amendment
All guns must be registered in states such as Illinois and New York.
Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen proposed registration of "street
sweeper" semi-automatic shotguns because they have no sporting use (U.S.
News & World Report, 3/14/94). What about militia use?
The 1968 Gun Control Act outlaws the possession of automatic weapons
without a $200 transfer tax being paid to the BATF.
is now seriously being considered that a sharp tax be placed on certain
kinds of ammunition to help fund the national health program.
Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen also proposed a sharp tax increase on
"street sweeper" semi-automatic shotguns because they have no sporting
use (U.S. News & World Report, 3/14/94).
Former Governor Wilder of Virginia proposed that citizens of Virginia be
limited to the purchase of one gun per moth. Similar proposals are even
now being pressed and considered in the U.S. Congress.
Foreign assault rifles are banned for import and sale in the U.S.
The city of Cleveland passed an outright ban on the sale and ownership
of semi-automatic "assault rifles" in 1989 and the Ohio Supreme Court
upheld as "Constitutional" this law in 1993. ("Crime Fighters Have a New
Tool in Deadly Work," 8/22/93, p. A-1).
Columnist Bob Greene of The Chicago Tribune has proposed
abolishing the Second Amendment altogether and enforcing gun bans by
sweeping house-to-house police searches and seizures for all guns ("A
Gun-Free Nation? Just Think About It," 8/28/93, p. 2).
Sarah Brady of Handgun Control wants national gun control laws, a ban on
semi-automatic "assault rifles," and says, "It simply doesn't make any
sense at all for private citizens to be permitted to buy military
equipment that was designed solely for killing people in combat" (Sarah
Brady, Handgun Control newsletter, p. 2, 1993).
The U.S. Senate voted 56-43 to ban "19 specific assault weapons" and all
detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds on November 17, 1993
(Wall Street Journal, "Senate, 56-43 Votes," 11/18/93, p. A24).
The House is also debating banning assault weapons and 10+ round
magazines ("Reports from Washington," February 1994).
Gun law enforcement abuses
The BATF is known to have routinely and intentionally given false
answers to inquiries about gun regulations so they could raid the
person's house and arrest them (Up to Date, "BATF Abuses of Gun Owners'
Rights," the Second Amendment Foundation, 1994).
The BATF raided the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas although all
charges were previously investigated and dropped, using falsified
information to obtain a warrant, by shooting first, and by misinforming
the public (Waco: The Big Lie, video tape, 1993).
The BATF attempted to entrap Randy Weaver in Idaho. When he refused to
become one of their henchmen, his cabin was put under 24-hour BATF
surveillance, leading to a surprise confrontation that left Weaver's son
and wife dead and Weaver acquitted of any wrongdoing ("It Could Happen
to You," by Charlie Reese, 1/11/94, p. 4).
New anti-gun developments as of 3/26/94
couple of weeks since printing this material several attacks on gun rights
have come to my attention which deserve being mentioned.
the Senate-approved ban on semi-automatic weapons which is now pending in
the House (a vote is expected around April 1, 1994) actually would ban much
more than politicians admit. Supposedly, it would ban only specific models
such as the TEC-22, TEC-9, AK-475, Uzi, Galil, AR-70, MAC-10, MAC-11,
MAC-12, AR-15, and Steyr AUG to name just a few. However....
The BATF admits that 26 other models of firearms would be banned by the
language of this bill. This is 45 firearms, not 19 as claimed.
Furthermore, any semi-automatic with a detachable magazine would also be
banned if it has any two additional military features such as a folding
stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash suppressor, etc.
the bill becomes law and you own one of these firearms, you will have 90
days to surrender your rifle or to register it. After that,
non-compliance could result in a $1,000 fine, six months in prison, and
permanent loss of any right to own any firearm forever!
Second, as if this is not bad enough, on February 28, 1994, Congressman
Schumer and Senator Metzenbaum introduced legislation which advocates:
Banning magazines that can hold more than six rounds of ammunition and
an outright ban on all "Saturday night specials" or cheap handguns.
Federal registration and licensing of all handguns in the United States
and limiting purchases of handguns to only one gun per month.
Making all gun shows and gun sales illegal, requiring gun dealers to
sell only at their one licensed place of business, and raising the gun
dealers license fee to a staggering $1000 per year.
Imposing a 30 percent tax on all handgun sales and a 50 percent tax on
all handgun ammunition sales.
Requiring individuals to obtain an "arsenal license" if they own more
than 20 firearms or if they own more than 1000 rounds of ammunition.
These "arsenal licenses" would cost $300, be subject to government
approval, and would require BATF inspections (i.e., invasions) of your
home three times per year to maintain.
The really subversive thing about these two bills is that they are aimed at
limiting militias more than at limiting crime. Military features on rifles
like folding stocks, pistol grips, and flash suppressors are useful on a
battlefield but immaterial in committing a murder or bank robbery. How many
criminals bayonet someone? Moreover, limiting the amount of ammunition we
can own to 1000 rounds does not do anything for violent crime. It only takes
one loaded magazine holding a few rounds to knock over a bank or blow
someone's brains out. But it takes an "arsenal" of thousands of rounds of
ammunition to be ready to oppose the government.
property rights are threatened
property rights are also under attack. Virtually everything possible is
being done to take away whatever wealth you have.
property without a trial (Fifth Amendment)
The Fifth Amendment states: "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law."
The Internal Revenue Service has the power to put a lien on your house,
attach your paycheck, and confiscate your property without a trial by
jury and without your conviction if they unilaterally determine that you
have evaded taxes (Tax Loopholes: Everything the Law Allows,
Boardroom Classics, 1993).
Various police departments across the country routinely confiscate
homes, cars, and other possessions of those arrested for dealing in
drugs and sell these properties to raise funds before the person
arrested has been convicted of wrongdoing by a jury and whether or not
it is demonstrated that drug money was used to buy the property.
Taking property for public use (Fifth Amendment)
The Fifth Amendment also states: "nor shall private property be taken
for public use, without just compensation."
The use of your property can and is restricted by municipal zoning
codes, state and federal environmental laws, and other governmental
regulations for "the public good," even if the use of the property that
is forbidden does not harm the lives or property of others.
All of these regulations somehow limit the personal use of the property
and many limit or reduce the property's commercial productivity or value
on the real estate market.
While the courts recognize that these practices reduce the uses and
value of private property, they have ruled they are Constitutional
because they are only "partial takings" not total takings of property
(Richard A. Epstein, Takings: Private Property and the Power of
Eminent Domain, Harvard, 1985). In other words, it is legal for the
government to seize your property — without compensation — as long as
they don't take all of it!
Income taxes are unconstitutional
Originally income taxes were illegal because the Constitution required
all taxes to be apportioned among the states proportional to their
populations, not their incomes.
The 16th Amendment, which permits federal income taxes, was not ratified
in the same language by three fourths of the United States as required
by Article V of the Constitution and is therefore invalid. The approved
wording was different in different states and therefore they ratified
different amendments! ("Is Income Tax Un-American and Illegal?", July
and August, 1993, pp. 14-16).
The courts refuse to cast down the 16th Amendment even though it was not
Progressive taxes are unconstitutional
we have seen, the Fifth Amendment prohibits taking property for public
use without compensation.
State and federal income taxes are "progressive" taxes meaning that the
higher your income, the higher the percentage of your income you pay in
taxes. The purpose and effect of this progressive tax structure is to
redistribute wealth from one group to another. High wage earners are
taxed to fund welfare and other entitlements. In other words, their
property (money) is taken for the public good without compensation in
total violation of the Fifth Amendment.
The fact that this tax structure is propped up by a majority consensus
is immaterial. "The Bible says, 'Thou shalt not steal.' It does not say,
'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote'" (Gary North, "Free
Market Capitalism" in Wealth & Poverty: Four Christian Views of
Economics, edited by Robert G. Clouse, InterVarsity, 1984, p. 41).
Excessive taxes are unconstitutional
the time of the American Revolution, European-type serfdom was
considered a form of slavery and consisted of paying 25% of a peasant's
productivity from farming land to the landlord.
For 1993, American tax rates were as follows for a family with a taxable
income of $25,000:
12.40% of income
(Half paid by employer)
2.90% of income
(Half paid by employer
Federal income tax
15.00% of income
(Up to 39.6% for rich)
2.67% of income
(Up to 7.5% for rich)
County 5% sales tax
2.00% of income
(All money isn't spent)
County property taxes
3.00% of income
City income tax
1.75% of income
39.72% of income
(Up to 69.15% on rich)
This does not include hidden taxes like employer contributions to
workers compensation (between 2% and 14%!), gasoline taxes, tariffs on
imported goods, "sin" taxes on tobacco and alcoholic beverages, and so
on, and so on, and so on. Therefore today's typical American citizen can
pay between 40% and 70% of his income or productivity in the form of
some kind of tax.
The tax system is thus a subtle form of slavery and violates the 13th
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Robert J. Villella,
"A New Declaration," July/August 1993, p. 17).
Hotel taxes are unAmerican
States and communities commonly tax hotels, amusement parks, and some
restaurants at higher rates than other businesses. Generally this
"hotel" tax is two or three times as high as the area's sales tax.
The obvious purpose of such taxes is to make tourists from out of town
pay higher taxes than the locals. As the maxim says, "Don't tax you, and
don't tax me. Tax that man behind the tree!"
This practice is clearly contrary to the American principle of "no
taxation without representation!
1.4.4 State rights are non-existent
state rights guarantied by the Tenth Amendment are universally ignored by
every branch of the federal government.
things should be
Article X of the Bill of Rights states: "The powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Unless the
Constitution specifically grants a power to a branch of the federal
government, or says that states cannot do something, it is presumed that the
authority and power rests with the states. In other words,
Whenever there is a conflict between the laws of federal and state
governments, the state law which should take precedent and prevail over the
federal law, not vise versa, unless the Constitution says otherwise.
saw previously, the whole Bill of Rights is designed as a limitation on
federal powers. The Tenth Amendment serves this purpose by dividing and
diluting power among the several states. Indeed, it was state governments
that ratified the Constitution and delegated authority to the federal
government. This being the case, they only handed over authority to the
federal government to do what is specified in the Constitution and nothing
things really are
Obviously, the Tenth Amendment is routinely ignored by the president, the
Congress, and the courts. In extra-constitutional matters, state laws should
override federal laws. But in fact, federal laws always override state laws.
National speed limits supersede state speed limits. Federal environmental
rules outweigh similar state rules. In every governmental matter, the only
state laws that exist are those compatible with federal laws or which the
federal government has seen fit not to address at all.
the best examples of the total disregard for state rights is federal
mandates. The federal government frequently mandates that states enact
certain laws, provide certain services, or fund specific programs that cost
millions or billions of dollars without one cent of federal funding to
support the mandate.
be fooled by the fact that states are permitted to do things that Washington
does not do. Remember, permission and rights are incompatible. In some
matters, Congress et al. simply do not want to flex their muscles. For
instance, during the Reagan administration, a major shift in power took
place away from federal agencies to state agencies. But this was because
liberals in Washington recognized that Ronald Reagan sought deregulation.
Since state agencies were more active regulators than their federal
counterparts, responsibilities were conveniently transferred to the states
to sustain strong industry regulation. But this whole scheme is Washington's
doing and not the result of any state's right to govern.
point here is not that state governments are any more noble or benevolent
than the federal government. They are not because they consist of the same
frail human beings that are susceptible to corruption by power. The point is
something that is spelled out clear as day in the Constitution is always and
everywhere totally and completely turned on its head!
A call to
every legitimate angle, we are justified in keeping and bearing arms as well
as forming or joining a militia independent of government control. The Bible
tells us we are morally right. The American Revolution shows we have the
historical right. The Constitution protects our legal right. Moreover, our
Constitutional liberties are systematically being eroded and denied. The
fact that officials are infringing gun rights on every front is simply a
manifestation of their inner tendency to empower themselves. Left unchecked,
this tendency will lead to genuine tyranny. Remember, "Power corrupts and
absolute power corrupts absolutely."
this is a pivotal point in American history. If the government is successful
in banning semi-automatic paramilitary weapons, then they will be emboldened
not only to further infringe gun rights, but to infringe all rights. This is
because the Second Amendment is the teeth of the Bill of Rights, and assault
rifles are the teeth of the Second Amendment. Without their bite, there is
nothing to prevent a draconian state from devouring all of our precious
right and duty is to arm and organize yourself against further federal and
state encroachments on your liberties. As a minimum, you should purchase and
learn how to effectively use a firearm, preferably a so-called assault
rifle. The more citizens that own guns, the less willing the government will
be to threaten us. Ideally, you should also join a local militia, committed
to constitutional principles. You need to be organized, equipped, trained,
and coordinated with other like-minded men to effectively stand up to the
growing arrogance of the federal government. It was said during the American
Revolution that "united we stand, divided we fall." This is still true
today. So arm yourself. Organize yourselves. And prepare to fight if you
could learn a lot from the Swiss. They are zealously neutral and refuse to
meddle in foreign affairs. Neither should we be aggressors or wish to start
bloodshed. But Switzerland is also a virtual armed camp of citizen soldiers
prepared to fight to the last man for their freedom. Major H. von Dach of
the Swiss army put it this way:
two enemies fight each other to the last — and this is always the case when
an ideology is involved (religion is part of it) — guerrilla warfare and
civilian resistance will inevitably break out in the final phase.
military expert who undervalues or even disregards guerrilla warfare makes a
mistake since he does not take into consideration the strength of the heart.
last, and admittedly, most cruel battle will be fought by civilians. It will
be conducted under the fear of deportation, of execution, and concentration
must and will win this battle since each Swiss [in our case American] male
and female in particular believe in the innermost part of their hearts —
even if they are too shy and sober in everyday life to admit or even speak
about it — in the old and yet very up-to-date saying: 'Death rather than
Major H. von Dach, Total Resistance: Swiss Army Guide to Guerrilla
Warfare and Underground Resistance, Paladin Press, Boulder, Colorado,
1958/1963, p. 173, emphasis added.
you convinced that the cases cited are factual infringements of our rights
by the government? If not, which ones are you skeptical of? Are you
skeptical that these things actually occur or that they are really
unconstitutional? Do you need more substantiation?
you ever personally experienced any of these improprieties? Which ones? Do
you think you might experience them in the future?
of these violations of personal liberties is (are) most alarming, shocking,
or ominous to you? Why?
you classify the attack on your rights as insignificant or dangerous? As
isolated or systematic? As careless or intentional?
scale of 1 to 10, how alarmed are you at the present status of your liberty?
What else would have to happen to make you alarmed?
believe the present attack on personal liberties is more or less widespread
and serious than during the days leading up to the American Revolution? How
are things worse? How are they better?
it reassure you that these improprieties are done by or with the knowledge
of elected officials instead of a military dictator? How is this similar to
1775-1776 when the British Parliament suppressed American liberties? How is
are your thoughts on joining a militia in your community? What are your
this point it would be premature to ask you for your commitment to the Free
Militia. You do not yet know who we are, what we stand for, why we exist,
when we are willing to fight, or how we are organized. Section 2 of this
field manual addresses these issues by explaining:
2.1 Who and what is the Free Militia?
2.2 Equipping yourself for the Free Militia
2.3 General organization of the Free Militia
2.4 Secrecy and security in the Free Militia
Would you like to read this section and consider joining us? Yes___ No___
ideas of this section
civil rights to life, free religion, free press, and security from
unreasonable searches and seizures are systematically being threatened.
right to keep and bear arms is systematically infringed by regulation,
licensing, registration, taxation, and prohibition of all kinds of firearms.
property rights are systematically violated by having property taken without
trial, without compensation, and through confiscatory taxation.
rights are universally denied since, in principle, state laws should prevail
over federal laws while, in practice, the opposite always happens.
best way to follow developments related to your Constitutional liberties is
to pay attention to newspapers and news magazines (television news is too
surface and sensational to give any reliable information).
might also suggest a couple of video tapes. The video on the massacre in
Waco, Texas is very chilling since it presents actual visual images of BATF
abuses of power.
America in Peril
Thompson, Linda D. Waco: The Big Lie, American Justice Federation,
3850 S. Emerson Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46203, 1993.
Unless otherwise noted,
all materials contained in
this Site are copyrighted and may not be used except
as provided in these terms and conditions or in the
copyright notice or other proprietary notice
provided with the relevant material.
This Web Site is owned &
operated totally by independent proprietorship and
all content material is
the responsibility of the
author or entity of
This Web Page last
26-Feb-2009 07:17 PM -0700
WEB Page Created by James Mark
Enterprises. ® Shasta Lake, California