Another Second Amendment Conspiracy Theory

Check out my new book

I recently published my first book. It is called "Accessible American History." The link below will take you to a hub that provides more details, including links to where it can be purchased.

The Real Threat to Individual Rights

This hub was originally derived from a comment that I wrote in response to an article here on Hubpages. And since gun rights is one of the few controversial issues that I have yet to address here on Hubpages, I decided to turn my comment into a hub. Unfortunately, I found out the hard way that content on Hubpages is considered to be "duplicate" even when you quote yourself, so this hub was removed a few days after I published it. So the only way to republish this "legally" was to place a link to my blog below that will take you to my conspiracy theory. Sorry for the trouble, but I don't make the rules . . .

More by this Author

Comments 16 comments

Jackwms profile image

Jackwms 5 years ago

This is a good narrative, but it sure doesn't apply to me. I don't own a gun, have never owned a gun, and probably never will. I don't like guns and don't believe they are needed or effective for self protection. I think it is more likely for a wife or husband to shoot their mate or one of their children by mistake late at night because they thought they heard someone in the house. I give a little as far as law enforcement having guns to protect life. While I don't hunt and don't like killing for sport, I'll also give a little as far as licensed hunters taking game for human consumption.

Jackwms profile image

Jackwms 5 years ago

Since this is a volatile subject, I know I will take flack for anything I write . So, I may not continue to follow your hub. I don't like "pissing contests" and won't argue the point.

Freeway Flyer profile image

Freeway Flyer 5 years ago Author

I don't like pissing contests either, and I pretty much share your point of view on guns. It would be interesting to see a comparison between the number of people killed in accidents with the number of incidents of people successfully defending themselves with guns.

christopheranton profile image

christopheranton 5 years ago from Gillingham Kent. United Kingdom

Thanks for that very interesting and, probably argument producing, article.

Has anyone ever done a comprehensive survey on the deaths from gunfire in The United States and a comparable country where gun control is practised?

It might be very enlightening.

This isn't really of direct interest to me because I dont live in your country. But it might help your people make up their minds on this vital issue.

Jackwms profile image

Jackwms 5 years ago

christopheranton. Your question is a good one, but I don't know the answer. From various statistics I've seen over the years, no other western, "civilized" country comes even close to the U.S. in terms of the deaths from gunfire. Yesterday, in Bremerton, Washington (just north of us), a third grade student brought a gun to school and another third grade student was accidentally shot. We don't know how the one student got the gun. At this time, we don't know if the other student will recover. Also, early today, near Bremerton, a police officer was shot and killed when he made a traffic stop.

I'm sure those countries with gun control have some homicides by guns, but I doubt it is even a small percentage of what we are experiencing here.

Freeway Flyer profile image

Freeway Flyer 5 years ago Author

Jackwns, I have heard and read on multiple occasions that the United States leads (by far) the industrial world in gun violence. Part of this may be the result of our society's glorification of violence. But it would also make sense to look around the world for examples of gun regulations that seem to be effective.

Unfortunately, a significant percentage of Americans are so obsessed with the original intent of the Second Amendment that they do not think of practical ways of making modern society safer. In 1790, after all, guns were a very different animal than they are today.

J Elaine profile image

J Elaine 5 years ago from Northern Minnesota

Wow! What an uninformed lot you all are! It's been proven over and over in countries like UK and Australia that when they disarmed their citizenry armed crime went up. When you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns.

You are all the result of the anti-gun liberals insidious and relentless war against the 2nd amendment. Since our country was founded, everyone owned a gun and kids (like me) were raised knowing the uses and dangers of them. That's been bred out of most of the population by now, but there are still many of us who own and use guns for sport and recreation. In Switzerland you're required to own a gun.

My husband and I hunt and eat the game we shoot. It's much healthier than the crap they sell in grocery stores. We also both have carry permits for self defense. Hopefully we will never have to use them.

Do a little research and it won't take you long to find out how important it is to retain our 2nd amendment rights.

Jackwms profile image

Jackwms 5 years ago

As I said early on, I don't like "pissing contests" and the preceding comment by J Elaine is a prime example of why I will no longer follow this blog. The extremist/gun fanatics are always with us. I am 76 and have done a hell of a lot more research than J Elaine and I also have close friends in both the UK and Australia. The U S crime and murder rate involving the use of guns is a hundred fold higher. There is no comparison.

So, this is my last post.

Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 5 years ago from The Midwest

flyer sez: Today, a battle between militia groups and the U.S. military would be a joke. First of all, few individual citizens are likely to take up arms against the United States. Loyalty and a sense of national identity are much stronger today than when our nation first began. But even if a significant number of people did rise up against central authority, they would not stand a chance. My money would be on the $700 billion dollar a year U.S. military to mop up any modern day “minutemen” in short order

Jack replies: As a 26 year veteran of the armed forces the above paragraph is nonsense.

-- Many of the gun owners are former military to begin with. We have not forgotten our skills and training

-- If only 3 percent of the gun owners stand their ground that is still far more than the total number of armed force members in the United States.

-- The assumption here is that every armed force member will be opposed to those who are standing for the traditional freedoms of our country. I won't get into what that says about the author and his apparent willingness to also shoot down a fellow American freedom-fighter, but I can state with certainty that there are many, many in the military who would actively oppose such orders. Once the military loses its cohesiveness from unit level to command structure that "$700 billion dollar a year U.S. military" becomes far less fearsome. What commander is going to give an order to shoot a citizen, knowing that his own men just might decide that that citizen is right and the command is wrong. We are not talking about "gooks" or "krauts" or "ragheads" that are easily demonized. We are discussing shooting brothers, cousins, aunts, grandmothers, and best friends.

[If the author disputes my characterization that he is willing to shoot another American fighting for his right to be a free American let me ask him: Would you push the trigger on a plane to carpet bomb a city knowing that your grandmother lived in the city? If you wouldn't, then why do you assume others will?]

-- We don't have to fight the "military." We just need the command and control. You don't necessarily shoot the policeman or soldier who comes to the door to confiscate the firearms. There are lots of policemen and soldiers, and yes, some few will do what they are ordered. You shoot instead the person who gave the order to the person who gave the order to the person who gave the order to the policeman. Those people are not very many of, and it only takes a few of them to face plant on the ground for the rest to decide that giving such orders is not in their best health.

-- The Revolutionary Army of the Continental United States was by every measure outgunned and outmanned by the British. We know what happened.

Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 5 years ago from The Midwest

Flyer, if you want to see some actual, documented statistics on the issue of guns, who uses them and for what then I recommend the free book at

Jackwms profile image

Jackwms 5 years ago

Gun Deaths - International Comparisons

Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):

Homicide Suicide Other (inc Accident)

USA (2001) 3.98 5.92 0.36

Italy (1997) 0.81 1.1 0.07

Switzerland (1998) 0.50 5.8 0.10

Canada (2002) 0.4 2.0 0.04

Finland (2003) 0.35 4.45 0.10

Australia (2001) 0.24 1.34 0.10

France (2001) 0.21 3.4 0.49

England/Wales (2002) 0.15 0.2 0.03

Scotland (2002) 0.06 0.2 0.02

Japan (2002) 0.02 0.04 0

Data taken from Cukier and Sidel (2006) The Global Gun Epidemic. Praeger Security International. Westport.

See More Data

See also the Website

FYI, although Switzerland requires citizens to have guns, they have very strict gun control, including the weapons and the amount of ammunition allowed.

Freeway Flyer profile image

Freeway Flyer 4 years ago Author

J Elaine,

I'm not sure if you were addressing me or others making comments, but if you were to go back and read my little conspiracy theory, you would see that I am not arguing either for or against gun control. I think that there are common sense gun regulations that could reduce gun violence somewhat, but if law-abiding, mentally competent, properly trained individuals want to own guns for self-defense or hunting, I have no interest in trying to stop them.

What I find strange is that the same people who are concerned about individual rights when it comes to gun ownership are often very supportive of a well-funded, well-armed, powerful security establishment. The fact that the United States leads the industrialized world in prisoners per capita is one indication of where the biggest threat to individual rights may be found.

Freeway Flyer profile image

Freeway Flyer 4 years ago Author

Jack Burton,

You do a good job of pointing out a basic hole in my conspiracy theory. As I stated in the hub, it is based on the assumption that there is some single entity called the "security establishment." But as you say, the military is hardly a monolithic entity. And if Americans were to rise up against their own government, then people in the military might react in a variety of ways. Some might be willing to fight back against the traitors, some might lay down their arms and walk away, and others might join the rebellion. It's a question of whether or not the reasons for the rebellion were seen by many as justified.

Personally, it's difficult for me to imagine a scenario in which either Americans take up arms against their government or soldiers start shooting their fellow Americans. Of course, it did happen in the American Revolution and Civil War, and there are cases every day in which police officers and American citizens get involved in gun battles. Of course, police officers may feel justified in shooting at people who they perceive as criminals, so I imagine that some soldiers would shoot at fellow Americans if they saw them as traitors.

As you said, it is a question of numbers, and if tens of millions rise up in a rebellion, the military will have a problem. But if individual rebels only outnumber the military by two or three to one, and the majority of soldiers perceive the rebels as traitors, then the military will likely succeed due to superior firepower and organization. Most Americans, I imagine, or generally too intimidated by the federal government to rise up in the first place.

Since I don't see any mass rebellion coming any time soon, talk of individual "militiamen" needing to retain guns in order to defend themselves from federal government oppression is just talk, and any analogies to 18th century American revolutionaries are more theory than reality.

Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

FF sez: Since I don't see any mass rebellion coming any time soon, talk of individual "militiamen" needing to retain guns in order to defend themselves from federal government oppression is just talk, and any analogies to 18th century American revolutionaries are more theory than reality.

Jack replies: The reason you don't see and mass rebellion coming any time soon is the prophylactic nature of the 2nd Amendment. It exists as a check on the government, and that check is still active and viable. As long as the check is respected, then there will not need to be a "rebellion."

Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

Jackwms has an unique understand of the concept of "last post." :-)

1) Comparing stats across countries is very misleading as each country accounts for crime stats in different ways, and not always honestly.

2) He is comparing murders by guns. If you look at the TOTAL murder rate you'll find it quite comparable. Guns are just a tool, and can easily be substituted for. As noted in my favorite Bible verse in Genesis when Cain asks his brother, Abel, "Crikey, mate, where did you get that Glock?"

3) Freedom can be a real b1tch sometimes. Japan has about a 98 percent conviction rate when they take an alledged criminal to trail. Of course, they have no 4th or 5th Amendment rights either. If the goal is to get supposed criminals off the streets then perhaps we should repeal the 4th and 5th Amendments, eh. Why allow people we KNOW are bad guys to use the same freedom that we, as good guys, should only have for ourselves?

Freeway Flyer profile image

Freeway Flyer 4 years ago Author

I agree (sort of). By respecting the "check," it creates the (possibly mistaken) notion that rights are being respected and that there is no need for a rebellion. By letting people feel like militiamen, they can be lulled into a false sense of security.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article