David Pringle
3,035 words
Americans like to think that theirs is the greatest country in the world. And there was indeed a time when one could have made a fairly good case for that. But in looking at America today, it’s difficult to discern ways in which it could be called better than other developed nations. Most people incarcerated? Highest number of immigrants? Worst wealth distribution among advanced nations? (Granted, China has us beaten there, although the US is still near the bottom of the list.) The US leads in all of those areas.
One of the few manners in which America positively excels in the world today, however, is in guaranteeing — in most parts of the country, that is — the sanctity of the right of its people to keep and bear arms. Virtually no other nation extends its ordinary citizens the same level of freedom when it comes to weapons that America does; in the West, only Switzerland and Czechia have comparable rights in this area. Some other nations, such as the United Kingdom and Australia, possessed similar gun freedoms at one time, but lost them in recent years after authoritarian political factions exploited mass shooting tragedies in order to deprive their law-abiding citizens of their rights.
For the last half-century, similar groups have attempted to achieve the same result in the United States. You can be certain that our elites aren’t happy about the fact that Americans still possess this freedom. After all, as Mao understood, “power grows out of the barrel of a gun,” and the fact of tens of millions of mostly white Americans owning and knowing how to use firearms is a wildcard that keeps the establishment’s power in check. It’s one of the few genuine ways in which Americans can exercise freedom today — you know, apart from choosing between a dozen brands of ketchup at the supermarket.
The only reason the gun-grabbers haven’t succeeded — yet — is because of the willingness of American gun owners to step up and organize in defense of their rights, through the National Rifle Association and other groups. Indeed, the pro-gun movement has become so large and well-funded as a result of ordinary Americans’ initiatives since the 1970s that it has become an integral force in our political process. Republicans have known for decades — and some Democrats in rural areas are mindful of this as well — that it’s political suicide to go against the gun lobby. That’s real grassroots political action bearing fruit, friends. Imagine what could be achieved in other areas using similar tactics.
I’ve had some people on the Dissident Right tell me that the issue of gun rights is a fixation of the conservative movement and that we have other priorities. While I agree that gun rights should not become our primary concern, I nevertheless do think that it’s important for us as well. First of all, it’s part of our heritage. The right of the members of the community to keep and bear arms is a concept which has a long history in Western civilization. Indeed, prior to the twentieth century, when Western governments came to be expected to continuously maintain large militaries and to provide universal security for their citizens through the police and other agencies, private citizens owning weapons was seen as an essential part of the social fabric, since such people could be called up to defend their homes, their communities, or even their nation when an emergency arose and the agents of law enforcement were far away. This is in fact what the term “well-regulated Militia” actually means in the Second Amendment. (I was intrigued to learn that, in medieval Iceland, it was in fact illegal for a man to be unarmed at any time.)
But most importantly, whatever you think about individualism and the concept of “rights,” the fact remains that, in this age and given the direction things are heading in, it’s better for people like us to be armed than unarmed. Losing the Second Amendment gives us nothing. Having the Second Amendment isn’t everything, but it gives us a greater range of possible actions. For example, many Europeans I’ve spoken with or read about have talked of an impending civil war if Europe’s mass immigration problems and other radical liberal policies are not addressed. My response is always, what are Europeans going to fight with? If you look at Western Europe today, it’s the immigrants who are armed, not the indigenous peoples. Most of them have never even held a weapon in their lives. Thus, if an actual war were to break out, the outcome likely wouldn’t be a good one for Europeans.
This is one of the few advantages Americans still retain, and it’s one of the few truly Right-wing causes that still possesses vitality rather than merely symbolic value in our current climate of radical neoliberalism.
David Pringle is one white American who understands this. Pringle, a US Army veteran, is the General Manager of DE Guns gun shop in Lincoln, Nebraska. He has taken the lead in protests against new gun restrictions that are being proposed in the Nebraska legislature. How he stands out, however, is in that Pringle has a long history of involvement with white advocacy, having been the Membership Coordinator for the National Alliance during the early 2000s, and he has also been publicly associated with David Duke. The mainstream media, naturally, has chosen to focus on this rather than on the substance of Pringle’s arguments.
The controversial legislation consists of two bills. The first, LB-816, proposes that Nebraskans who wish to purchase a semi-automatic rifle or a shotgun should first have to apply for a permit. Nebraska, like most states, presently allows anyone with valid ID who has no criminal convictions or documented mental health issues to acquire a long gun (i.e., rifles and shotguns) without a permit, only a background check. This new requirement would also extend to gun shows, where at present private citizens can buy and sell long guns to each other without a permit or background check. Additionally, the law would increase the waiting period both for the background checks and the “cooling-off period” for anyone wishing to purchase a handgun. Legislators who back the law claim that its intent is to reduce suicide risk.
The second, LB-58, would introduce Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO) in Nebraska. A committee, which would meet without the accused’s presence, would be empowered to issue an ERPO (a so-called “red flag”) against anyone who has been convicted of domestic violence or who has a protection order against him. This would make it illegal for the citizen in question to purchase or own any firearm; law enforcement would have the right to search such individuals’ homes and seize any weapons pursuant to this restriction. Similar laws have already been passed in many other states.
Gun rights advocates have always been wary of new regulations which increase the government’s ability to deprive citizens of their Second Amendment rights. While such laws are always claimed to be in the interests of public safety and security, in practice they give the authorities much wider discretion to decide who can and cannot own guns. Opponents of the bills have pointed out that it’s already illegal to sell a firearm to someone with documented mental health issues, so how would the new law further help to prevent suicides? Likewise, the ERPO would give law enforcement a rather arbitrary method by which they could not only disarm citizens but even enter and search their homes.
A committee hearing that was open to the public was called on the issue in Nebraska’s State Capitol on February 22. Gun rights advocates mobilized in strength, and several hundred (the local media reported four hundred) people came to the Capitol to make their opposition to the bills heard. David Pringle was one of the protest’s organizers and gave a short speech to the committee calling for gun owners to handle the problem of mental health and firearms themselves, advocating the work done by a group called Walk the Talk America, a non-profit which states its goal as
. . . to raise awareness and create a change in the misunderstandings regarding mental illness and firearms by bringing together industry leaders to reduce gun violence, negligence, suicide and the trauma created by these events. Develop programs for suicide prevention, firearms negligence, trauma mitigation, and child safety. . . . Walk The Talk America funds research and development for outreach and promotion of mental health to reduce the misconceptions and prejudices that exist when it comes to mental illness and firearms. We believe we can be a catalyst for change by working with experts in the mental health industry.
Pringle’s short speech was filmed by someone in the crowd. His history of white activism was already known and had been widely publicized prior to the event; some gun advocacy groups refused to work with Pringle or to hold events at his shop when his past affiliation became known. Protesters against him had also appeared at the hearing itself. Following his speech, one of the senators asked him if he had anything to say about his prior political activism. He responded:
I know David Duke. I was the Membership Coordinator for the National Alliance. I love my race more than any other race, just like I love my family more than any other family, and my children more than any other children. I don’t hate races that aren’t my own, I don’t hate families that aren’t my own, and I don’t hate children that aren’t my own.
What happens is that I am the recipient of hate. I just was attacked by a group that had the demographics of a Klan rally [it’s interesting to note that in the video there is at least one black man among the pro-gun crowd], that came in here. There was no diversity. I am attacked like that constantly. Those kinds of attacks stop suicide prevention from coming to DE Guns, and what happened? We had a suicide. One of our customers. They would have been there that day.
This kind of toxic culture war that’s being waged against us through the media and through the antis is what divides us. My customers come from every single walk of life. We have people who, when they get their Resident Alien card and they can come to our store, they are burning up to exercise freedom, because where they lived, they didn’t have it. And they have it here.
And the reason that I testified today, that got me burning about this thing, is limiting purchases to 18-to-21-year-old Nebraskan-Americans. That’s toxic. Those men and women and people, however they identify, we can call on them to protect us and give them access to million-dollar weapons systems, and they can’t come and buy a Ruger 10/22 from me? The minute that they turn 18, they’re there to buy guns, and they’re happy about it, because they’re exercising freedom. They’re an adult. And so please don’t take that away. I make money at it, yes, but what I do is I enable and I empower people, and I sell freedom.
Pringle offered a simple yet effective defense, both of his own political activism as well as of gun rights. But the media, of course, chose only to focus on his involvement with the National Alliance. In particular, they discovered an internal message that he had sent out during his time with the Alliance in the early 2000s in which he had praised Timothy McVeigh. Since I thought that this statement was at variance with his much more moderate statement in the State Capitol, I contacted Pringle by e-mail to find out what he had to say about it, and his impressions of what has been going on more generally. When I thanked him for standing up for the Second Amendment, he responded with a quip from the Starship Troopers film: “Just doing my part.”
Regarding his old McVeigh e-mail, Pringle wrote:
No. I don’t feel like that now. Back then I was a fire breathing dragon of right-wing extremism. Too many hours spent reading Siege and Essays. Our current situation cannot be solved through that type of violence. It didn’t work then, it won’t work now. It can’t be solved by violence at all.
Homicidal fantasies and violent iterations are poison and only serve to undermine our efforts.
That reality began to sink in as I drove across the country holding meetings and meeting the NA membership as the NA membership coordinator. As I became more pragmatic this special email became a hammer to be used against me or anyone who is around me.
It’s unfortunate that this email shapes my narrative in the controlled corporate media. They never mention the Love Your Race campaign. Or the New Orleans Protocol. Or all the peaceful, legal political activities I’ve organized, or participated in over two decades.
Obviously I am capable of violence at the highest levels. I am a US Army Infantryman, after all. I’ve been trained to kill since I was 19 years old. I train people to use firearms. I train people how to deal with the police after the worst possible circumstances. But that skill set is for making things better — not worse.
There’s an important lesson in that: Everyone who chooses to become publicly active should be careful not to let his passion or temporary lack of judgment cause him to say or do things that will result in problems that might haunt him for decades to come. Of course, in the mainstream media’s eyes, a person of the Right who commits some excess is guilty forever; no matter how much you renounce your earlier statements or actions, the establishment will always insist that those remain your real beliefs and that everything else is merely a disguise for your awful Nazi interior. This doesn’t apply to the Left, of course, where we are expected to believe that confessed former terrorists helping to launch the political career of a future President of the United States and former Maoist revolutionaries who have expressed hatred of whites and who are then appointed to Presidential cabinet posts are fine, upstanding citizens who just temporarily went astray before realizing that democracy and peace are the right way after all.
Concerning the accusations of racism against him, Pringle wrote:
I feel like the response I gave to the attacks against me during my testimony might be the best thing that I’ve ever said on the record. I am completely happy with it.
I asked him about his impressions of the Nebraska protests so far.
The vast majority of Nebraska gun owners have seen through the blatant lies told by state Senators and legacy media about my testimony, about how we do business and about the makeup of those who stood with us. The Nebraska Firearm Owners Association, the group that pulled their event from our store because of the original ANTIFA story about me and the NRA-ILA who also cancelled a similar event a year later were both incapable of stopping LB-58 the Nebraska “Red Flag” law or any of the other proposed legislation. They were busy playing lobbyist and old-style culture war politics with the gun owners of the state to be effective. That is the old way. We showed them the new way.
The idea behind the #wearethegunlobby movement is to forget about culture war when it comes to protecting universal rights. The fat cats and lobbyists failed — once again. . . .
I figured maybe 50 people [would show up at the protest] — at the most . . . Our customers deserve it. Gun owners deserve it. So coming through with the resources was a no-brainer. And, we’re better than politicians and gun rights groups because when we make a promise it’s like money in the bank. We had the credibility and the resources to make big things happen and we used it all. This was a major personal and professional risk for me and our company. We simply charged into the abyss. . . . We coordinated with local businesses who are pro 2 A. What happened on Feb 21st is a model for other businesses like ours to follow. We owe it to our customers to protect their rights when everyone who is supposed to fails.
When asked about how he planned to continue the fight, Pringle wrote:
We are teamed up with the best industry people possible to bring mental health, suicide prevention, firearms safety training and legal training to the people in our area. We need to provide all these services before the government does. We know what is needed better than they do.
We plan to push the agenda next session towards Constitutional carry and state-level preemption. In other words — we are going on the offense. . . . I have lawyers working on demand letters. One goes to the governor.
In a separate e-mail to his private list, Pringle said the response from his community has been supportive. “I can’t go anywhere since last week,” he wrote. “I can’t walk through the store because it takes an hour. Shaking hands.” The controversy over Pringle’s involvement did no harm to his cause, however, as the bills were tabled for this year, and it’s unlikely that any action will be taken to further them in the near future.
David Pringle has provided an excellent example of how people who wish to defend their people can do so in the real world: through community activism, and by never apologizing for it. Pringle’s cause today isn’t directly related to the survival of white America, but it is certainly a corollary cause, and he has taken the lead in standing up to the establishment. Such an achievement might very well lead people to take his other viewpoints more seriously as well. “This guy’s an evil neo-Nazi? His arguments make sense to me!” And moreover, by refusing to assume a contritionary attitude in response to the accusations against him, and in fact articulating his positions in a reasonable manner that is at odds with how the media is trying to depict him, Pringle shows that he has nothing to hide or to be ashamed about.
There’s certainly lessons for all activists in this.
24 Comments
Good for David Pringle and for John Morgan for seeking him out! If the white identity movement indeed makes us whole and unites head and heart, body and mind, then we need to know how to use firearms to fight, and not only how to argue, for our cause, should that day come (and I hope it does not). We need articulate spokesmen-soldiers like Mr. Pringle.
While it is true that we should not attack where the enemy is strong and we are weak, privately owned firearms are one area in which we enjoy an enormous advantage over the woke left. We have not only truth, but millions of guns and people who know how to use them, potentially on our side.
Does anyone really think it’s getting safer for whites and white advocates? Predation is increasing; lawfare is increasing; censorship is increasing. Repression in all forms is increasing. The power used against us gets harder all the time. We need to get organized.
They want our guns so they can render whites defenseless. Molon labe!
It’s true that there are millions of guns in private hands in this country, but unfortunately our primary enemy, ZOG, controls the miitary, and they have all of the BIGGER and MOST POWERFUL “guns” (ie, weapons so advanced and destructive that one can’t really even conceive how much greater devastation they can cause compared to the kinds of weapons the general public has). Not trying to rain on anybody’s parade here, just wanting to make our people understand what the reality of the situation is.
This is a frequent refrain one hears. First, there are many reasons other than taking on the US government for owning and knowing how to use firearms, unless you like having to depend on the authorities for everything. Second, it’s highly doubtful, given present trends, that the US military is going to be as powerful as it is now in the future. Third, it’s illegal for the US military to be deployed within the United States, unless they change the law. Fourth, even if there is an uprising in the future and the US military is still as strong as it is now and it is deployed against Americans, I think it’s highly questionable whether American military personnel will be willing to use force against other Americans. Some might but many would probably not, and that would spread chaos throughout the ranks. Fifth, putting everything else aside, I think Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq have shown that even lightly-armed militias can win wars of attrition with the vaunted US military, given that the US hasn’t decisively won a war since 1945. So massive firepower isn’t everything.
It is possible, indeed probable, that a certain percentage of US military personnel would refuse to fight against their own citizens. However, even with such defections, there would still be more than enough individuals remaining to be able to operate the weapons I am referring to, which-I note-you managed to totally avoid mentioning in your response. To restate: these weapons are ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE above the kind and destructive power which are currently in the hands of private citizens. Put plainly, ONE of these devices would quickly and decisively render all the millions of automatic and semi-automatic rifles worthless in an armed conflict. 100 years ago there was parity between the weapons American citizens has and the weapons American military personnel had. In a prolonged combat situation, had there been a large enough army of motivated and dedicated citizenry intent on taking our nation back from the already-visible but much less entrenched (compared to now) forces that were then just beginning their takeover of America, I absolutely believe that, within a few years, our side and our people would have emerged victorious. Alas, that situation is no longer the case. It pains me to say it, but facts are facts. That does not mean our side could not, somehow, still manage to prevail, but because we allowed our enemy, over the course of this last century, to accumulate and refine the kinds of vastly superior weaponry that they now possess, it has to be honestly admitted what,exactly, the kinds of odds we are facing really are.
If you’re referring to nuclear weapons, there’s no chance that the United States would employ those on its own soil. That’s getting into tinfoil hat territory. The US never used nuclear weapons in conflicts like Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan; it certainly won’t do that at home, where it would have catastrophic long-term effects on the country. You also seem to be imagining a full-on civil war between the American people and the government. More than likely there wouldn’t be any identifiable areas to target, just as there aren’t in any guerrilla struggle, since the rebels are widely dispersed and blend in with the population (as Mao understood). Naturally ordinary citizens couldn’t take on the US military in a head-to-head battle, but that’s why you would use other tactics.
But as I said in my last comment, even if you don’t see private gun ownership as a check on government power, there are plenty of other reasons to have and know how to use them.
D.M.,
I’m also a member of the National Alliance, NA for short, and say so for the following reason:
You mentioned, “Predation is increasing; lawfare is increasing; censorship is increasing. Repression in all forms is increasing. The power used against us gets harder all the time. We need to get organized. ” and said so with respect to Whites.
I allied myself with the NA because I believed we needed to be organized on racial grounds for our people’s survival interests and our goals to put us on a higher, progressive path. Those self-appointed enemies of Whites use the power of organization to give cover to those who predate upon our men, women, and children. They use it to put their own people through law school to teach them lawfare, which is then used upon us. The media they own does censor our views and voices, and have for a long time now. They’ve used their power of organization to infiltrate governments at all levels to instigate repressive acts against us. Those self-appointed enemies call themselves Jews.
For too long we’ve allowed them to outmaneuver us, keep us atomized, unorganized, on the defensive, de-spirited, and defeated in every sort of battle. You’re right, their acts are getting harder, perhaps edging closer to move in for the final kill.
We are organizing effectively to make our voices heard, to pool resources into legal defense funds, to educate ourselves in schools only we operate, to do so many other things that need doing. Yet the hour is late, too much time has been wasted. A lot of Whites can and should step up to assist all of us in our last chance to save ourselves.
Very interesting. Thank you, JM! Metapolitics is very important, but we must also organize and engage in community building if we are to have a chance of success–and “success” here means survival.
Metapolitics? Is that what JM/Iowa was discussing, D.M.? I don’t use that term myself, and not knowing exactly what metapolitics are, I looked the word up to find this definition: noun – metalinguistic talk about the analytic, synthetic, and normative language of politics.
So, I still don’t know what metapolitics are. I do know what community building is, however, and that our Alliance promotes real world community-building. See here, for example: https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/01/progress-the-william-luther-pierce-memorial-library-and-research-center/
I’m very interested in any and all community building that other racial nationalists are engaged in. I know this is veering off the topic of 2d Amendment advocacy in Nebraska, but will you please tell us a little about the one(s) you are affiliated with?
I’m just a reader and supporter of sites and organizations such as Counter-Currents, American Renaissance, VDARE and Occidental Observer.
I love my race more than any other race, just like I love my family more than any other family, and my children more than any other children. I don’t hate races that aren’t my own, I don’t hate families that aren’t my own, and I don’t hate children that aren’t my own. Brilliant. Simple, concise, reasonable.
Most of the guns in the US are owned by Whites. An attack against guns is an attack against White culture and White well-being.
Notice how the Nebraska legislator seem overwhelmingly concerned about the use of guns to commit suicide, but don’t seem to particularly care why people (Whites) are committing suicide.
David Pringle is very smart to attack the suicide aspect of the issue, thereby taking away the rationale for the taking of guns and/or rights.
Great essay!
Great Article John.
My own belief, which is extremely radical, and I understand has no chance of being realized in the contemporary political scene, is that only whites should be allowed to own guns. I cannot believe that the framers of the 2nd Amendment would have allowed blacks to have guns.
I had a good friend whose sister was murdered by a black in her Oak Park, Illinois apartment. If she had a gun, she could have defended herself.
So, I believe a law, which will unfortunately never be passed, is to make it illegal for any blacks to own guns and to give subsidies to white women to buy guns for self-defense.
Back when the Bill of Rights was ratified more than two centuries ago, all those amendments (including the Second) only limited the Federal government, not the states. States could pass laws limiting gun-ownership to certain persons, and some did.
Gun ownership keeps with the very European tradition of weapon training and ownership. It shows that our race is different from others, who are wary of arming the common folk. It shows that our race is a race of spiritual warrior-aristocrats.
This is always my argument when I engage with antigun people, especially the midwit white ones. Europeans are descended from warrior aristocrats who banded together to form larger societies. Warriors and aristocrats didn’t arise from our hoi poloi as with other races. That is partly why it infuriates me so that white liberals are so adamantly opposed to weapons ownership – they are afraid of putting on the “mantle of strength” and being a real European in that sense.
It’s not exclusively the preserve of the West, though. Many Arab states have gun laws that are as permissive, if not more so, than America’s. But they have a similar warrior tradition to the West’s.
You are absolutely correct. Under Saddam Hussein Iraqis could buy “assault riles” over the counter, no ID, no nothing. Handguns they had to get a permit, which was not hard to do.
Arabs in Lebanon and Syria have fully-automatic rifles and MUCH more.
When it comes to real life, Arabs, both Christian and Muslim, GET IT!
Kevin MacDonald and William Joyce both GET IT on who is pushing White Disarmament:
Kevin MacDonald
William Joyce
Untill a mass shooting event , apparently real , at the Montreal Politech in ’88 ,Canada had similiar rates of gun ownership as the United States. Untill the late 70’s ,one could buy firearms at a wide bariety of retailers with simple proof of age , 18 yrs old minimum. The pussification of our no-longer -Great , not-very- White , still-(too)North proceeded apace..American “gun nuts” bare what hope the entire West has upon their shoulders . Theres a great deal riding on your retaining your 2nd Amendment
Please don’t fail us all . We were largely unconscious when they took ours . Our balls withered with….
Regarding some of the comments above, check out this analysis by John Mark on who would likely win a civil war in this country. I find the results encouraging.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJh7Ye1Qvc8
[T]he media, of course, chose only to focus on [Mr. Pringle’s] involvement with the National Alliance. In particular, they discovered an internal message that he had sent out during his time with the Alliance in the early 2000s in which he had praised Timothy McVeigh…
Regarding his old McVeigh e-mail, Pringle wrote: “No. I don’t feel like that now. Back then I was a fire breathing dragon of right-wing extremism…”
—
It is unfortunate that the National Alliance has somehow been associated with “fire-breathing dragons of right-wing extremism,” like this. The Alliance wishes Mr. Pringle well in his campaign, organizing all Nebraskans to fight for their Second Amendment rights. Our Alliance, as an racial nationalist/separatist organization, advocates exclusively for the rights and interests of White Americans. Exercising our prerogative to associate exclusively with our own kind is hardly an extremist position, and the Alliance is neither fire-breathing nor right wing, thank you. We do not advocate for non-White “Resident Aliens” to own and bear arms in our living space; neither did the National-Socialists, contrary to what those at JFPO claim: //cosmotheistchurch.org/product/gun-control-in-germany-1928-1945-foreword-and-translation-by-william-pierce/
No one was a more forceful advocate for gun rights and for exposing enemies of those rights, to include the controlled media that misrepresented Mr. Pringle’s activism, than the founder of the Alliance, William Pierce. See our flier: https://www.natall.com/printable/Pierce_Gun_control_flier03.pdf
The NRA doesn’t give a whit about racial preservation. Witness its inter-racial Eddie Eagle gun safety program: http://www.ravishly.com/sites/default/files/eddie.JPG
People like David Pringle were some of the best of the Alliance. I’d certainly rather be on his side when the shit hits the fan. Blowhards are really worthless. Especially when they expend all thier energy attacking other people because they never had children and thus now no grandchildren, great grandchildren etc. Sad.
1000%
Only erudite, intellectually masterbatory fools ridicule Men standing for their arms. Only such a self-absorbed fool fails to seethe multiple dimensions of power. Sure, power is political, power is meta-political, power is economic- but power has always been and will never cease to be physical. Physical power precludes all others and will always be a part of all others. You only have the freedom, autonomy and rights that you can defend and enforce. Pretty simple shit.
Salute all those Men who stand and fight tirelessly to retain the two most fundamental rights, that enable all the others to exist- SPEECH and mother fucking WEAPONS.
Why does Jewish media ridicule and slander them so intensely and incessantly. Precisely because they are over the target.
“The fact of tens of millions of mostly white Americans owning and knowing how to use firearms is a wildcard that keeps the establishment’s power in check.”
Bingo. Observe that über-plutocrat Michael Bloomberg and his (((cohorts))) are dedicated to disarming the American people. Anyone here thinks that they give a rat’s ass about white people committing suicide? Of course not. As George Mason once observed, disarming the people is “the best most effectual way to enslave them.”
It’s true that the militia have no chance in a head-to-head battle with the US military, but consider that 30% of the American population are armed. In a country of 330 million people, that comes out to just about 100 million people. If even one third of the gun owners decide that the ballot box is useless, that’s still more than enough desperate pissed off gun owners to make vast regions of the country completely ungovernable from Washington, DC. In a future constitutional crisis, the military and police establishments might themselves very well be as divided as the rest of the country. Enter the militia to tip the balance. The wildcard, as it were.
George Washington lost just about every battle against the British except Yorktown, but in the end his army won the war. In Vietnam the communists lost every battle – including the Tet offensive – in head-to-head combat with the US military, and still in the end they drove the US out. In Afghanistan the locals have fought the soon-to-be-departed US military to a standstill just as they drove out the Russians and the British (twice!).
And as a side note to the feds reading this, I hasten to add that I absolutely do not advocate violence. I’m an old man who will probably not even live long enough to see the inevitable unraveling of the USA. Even the name of our country – the United States – is a lie. We’re not in the last bit united about anything. There’s no consensus about who is an American. Hell, after eight years of Obango we don’t even know which bathroom to use.
I lived in Europe just before the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was widely known that communism would collapse over the long term since it was not sustainable, but almost no one realized how soon it would fall. In public in the US, we’re pretty much forced to mouth the slogan “diversity if our strength,” but who really believes it? Our system is built on obvious lies and a central bank that can inflate the currency supply at will. Is this really sustainable?
I am old enough to remember the D.C. sniper attacks of 2002 when a two-man terrorist hit squad (John Allen Mohammad and Lee Boyd Malvo) drove around the District of Corruption, Maryland, and northern Virginia shooting people at random. In ten months, they killed 17 people and wounded 10 others. One guy drove while the other lay in the modified trunk with a Bushmaster XM-15, a hole cut out of the back of the trunk through which he could poke the barrel. Their crime spree generated immense panic.
Now imagine 1000 such two-man hit teams driving around with names and addresses of various traitors and minions of the NWO. Now imagine 10,000 or even 100,000 decentralized two-man hit teams driving around at night with lists of names and addresses. Men who have been pushed to their limit, who are mad as hell and just won’t take it anymore.
Yeah, there’s a reason that the Democrats are so eager to disarm us, and if you think it has anything to do with suicide prevention, you’re kidding yourself.
Indeed the right to posses firearms is the best thing about current America. Even freedom is speech has been greatly compromised.
In Czechia they tried to grab our rights to own guns a few years back and I have to say it’s the biggest achievement of our otherwise complete human scum MP Milan Chovanec that this law hasn’t been changed. I believe common citizens can’t own machine guns and such, but a pistol and shotgun are all one needs to protect his family and property.
And I feel like Switzerland has the best laws in that regards. Not only do they have the right to own firearms, they are also required to undergo regular training, both men and women alike.
In any case, criminals will always get weapons, whether legally or illegally. The only difference between being a sitting duck and being able to fight for yourself is the right to own weapons!
Something to consider is a transnational activist movement to promote the right to bear arms. Call it the Global Second Amendment.
Gun rights are an issue around which nationalists can organize, recruiting from across the board – hunters, firearms collectors, historical re-enactors, people with an interest in self-defense, and even those of a (small “l”) libertarian bent. Effectively, gun rights can be a front for building a wider movement and from there getting dissidents to see the common stake in opposing globalism. Consider how the Yellow Vests went from tax protests in the streets of Paris to become a trans-national populist movement.
One agitprop line is to raise the failure of globalist controlled governments to protect their own citizens from criminal attacks, from Rotherham to Portland to the South African veldt. When governments abdicate their authority it is incumbent on the citizenry to take up arms in their own defense. And while this may sound radical to many, it can be based on the traditions of the warrior peoples of Europe, the principles of the Enlightenment, and the frontier (the American West, the Australian Outback, the Voortrekkers).
Firearms, being symbols of power and individual independence, can radicalize people. You see more Americans buying guns and ammo in response to the vague dissatisfaction created by globalism (collapse of borders, economic insecurity, obvious hostility of too many elites). The trick is to convert that dissatisfaction into a wider nationalist-populist movement. i.e., the reason your gun rights are under attack is because globalist elites want a disarmed and atomized mass of consumer-producers…so if you want to defend your rights get with nationalism-populism! There’s the value-add that an armed citizenry creates a degree of nervousness among hostile elites without a single shot ever being fired!
Firearms activism places nationalists on the side of freedom against repressive state power. Gun rights can be tied in to other rights, such as Free Speech which is under fire from managerial-technocratic censorship and IT de-platformings. Speech rights, gun rights, national rights – all part of the same platform.
The Global Second Amendment – the Real Resistance!