![[PRIDGER]""](images/viking.gif)
Pridger's Comments on Gun Control and the Militia Movement
The first and most important thing to remember is that the militia consists of the whole people. It is the grass-roots "home guard." Though it be unorganized, the militia is the peoples' first and last line of defense of hearth and home as well as against abusive government. The standing army, which consists of the United States armed forces (and the State National Guards), are instruments of the State. Should the State ever abandon Constitutional guarantees and become a tyranny, the standing army can be used against the people. The militia, on the other hand, cannot be turned against the people, simply because it is the people.
The second thing to remember is that an authoritarian or police state, or one aspiring thereto, cannot tolerate an armed populous and will seek to use any and every means, (from persuasion to strong-arm tactics) whereby to deny the peoples' right to arms. An armed populous threatens the state's ability to control, dictate to, or oppress, its subjects. An armed people is a deterrent to such tyranny. All states that control, dictate, and oppress, justify their actions under the guise of "the greater public good", "public safety", "public health," or in the name of some real or contrived national or international threat or crises. The threat of international or domestic terrorism and war on drugs are two excuses used to further empower the state.
The unorganized militia has a triple function. (1) It , of course, acts as a pool of manpower for state and federal authorities to draw upon to man the armed services during times of peace and war; (2) It serves as the defence of last resort, or home guard, of the fatherland in the event of foreign invasion, and; (3) To defend the Constitution and safeguard liberty against the possible encroachment of state tyranny. To be an effective deterrent to foreign invasion or state tyranny, of course, the militia must be armed. Thus it is not only a right, but a duty, for all citizens who would defend freedom to be armed.
So-called progressives are fond of pointing out that the United States is the only major civilized nation that allows its citizens to be armed. The implication is always that there is something wrong and immature in our society's "irrational fixation" with guns. But liberty was won by force of arms, and ultimately it can only be preserved by them. The armed American is very symbolic of American independence. Disarmed, the once sovereign American would stand shorn of his birthright of liberty. This may seem pure symbolism, but its importance cannot be overstated. In fact his armed status is practically the last tangible remaining badge of liberty distinguishing American citizenship from European-like subject status or Latin American poenage. Red-blooded Americans will not give this last vestige up easily. If you think America is plagued with lawlessness now, wait until the public is (officially) disarmed.
Given the media's negative coverage of guns, patriots, and militias, it's no wonder many people are fearful of guns, patriots, and citizen militias. Urban gangs get more favorable press coverage than patriot and militia groups. Yet urban gangs, not patriots or militias, are actually out there causing death and mayhem in the streets on a daily basis. Yes, there is something frightening about the proliferation of fire-arms and the formation of private citizen militias, but much more frightening are the conditions causing the public to arm itself and patriot and militia groups to form in the first place.
GUN CONTROL = PEOPLE CONTROL
The proliferation of fire-arms started in earnest when the Second Amendment first became seriously threatened. The modern anti-gun movement essentially dates from the Kennedy assassination in 1963. At that time there was a clamor against mail-order firearms sales, since Lee Harvey Oswald had purchased a rifle through the mail. Mail-order gun sales were soon restricted. The Gun Control Act of 1968, and each and every federal anti-gun measure since, has caused millions of citizens to arm themselves. (Millions who might not have done so otherwise.) During this period, the National Rifle Association's primary focus changed from hunting and gun sports to defense of the Second Amendment. Threaten a "right" and people will not only hasten to take advantage of it, but many will defend it—and get mad at whoever or whatever is trying to take it away. Want to get more people to vote? Try taking the right to vote away.
Pridger may be a member of the Illinois State Militia, (as are all Illinois residents that are not exempt by law) and a supporter of the NRA, but he is aloof from private militia organizations. Pridger remains only an independent member of the vast unorganized militia "pool"—that sleeping giant known as the American People. Yet he admires those with guts enough to stand up and organize militia groups. They are either courageous or fool-hearty people. Perhaps both. Naturally, there will be some bad grapes in every bunch. Sometimes a whole bunch will be rotten. Most of all, Pridger laments the developments that have made the militia movement inevitable. Militias are forming not only because the Second Amendment is threatened, but because many people are awakening to the fact that the entire Bill of Rights, and even national sovereignty itself, is threatened. Anybody who claims not to have discovered this yet is either asleep or has grown comfortable with the prospect of being a "subject" of the all-powerful federal state. The latter "trust" the state, (and consider it the nearest thing to a heavenly father they have) and bow, with resignation, to its control.
Patriots don't trust the state. They recognize in it an inevitable, and eternal, threat to all they hold dear—a power which must be kept under strict control, (but which is, in fact, out of control). "The price of freedom, is eternal vigilance." They still believe in individual sovereignty, American republican institutions, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. They believe in the concepts of limited government left to us by our founding fathers, rather than government as is now being reinvented in Washington, the boardrooms of giant multi-national corporations, and other halls of international power. The media always characterizes patriots and private militias as being "anti-government." Most aren't anti-government at all. They are anti-abusive government and anti-all-powerful government. And they are against the relinquishment of national sovereignty to any international body or "order." (International peace, friendship, cooperation, and mutually beneficial commerce, yes; but subservience of the national sovereignty as part of the package, No!) True patriots are for equal justice under the law and American republican government according to the dictates of the Constitution and the original intents of the founders of the republic.
All political power still ultimately resides in the people. Yet, for many decades, the federal government has increasingly usurped that power. Republicans and conservatives have been as guilty as Democrats and liberals of underwriting the increased scope of federal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has been equally guilty, by legislating from the bench. Successive administrations have contributed to the process. Until relatively recently, few people noticed. While the great middle class was "moving on up" it seemed that government could do no wrong. But now that the great middle class is beginning to move down a notch or two, people are beginning to take notice. The militia movement is an answer to ongoing and increasing federal arrogance. It makes a powerful statement that our representatives cannot afford to long ignore. That statement is: "This people reserves the right and the will of resistance to tyranny." That's what the Second Amendment was all about in the first place.
THE REAL DANGER CAN STILL BE AVOIDED
The vast unorganized militia, the majority of which is still dozing, won't mobilize until the the government has really got its hackles up by confiscating, or attempted to confiscate, guns. (The British had to confiscate arms before the American colonists were moved to concerted action—in fact that's what they were doing when the "shot was heard round the world" at Concord.) At that point it will begin to organize in serious numbers, seeking the leadership of those who have already had the guts to stand up and organize militia groups. New leaders will also emerge, of course. Many leaders will step forward from the armed forces and various law enforcement agencies. By then there will undoubtedly be a large established domestic black market in sophisticated military weaponry upon which the militia will draw in spite of government gun control efforts. If not, one will develop quickly, as it always does in such cases. There will always be many foreign governments eager to assist in any form of destabilization of the United States. Guns runners will make our free trade and open border policies look like they were made to order for them, just as drug-traffickers do now.
A Gun Prohibition will do for guns and gun-runners what liquor Prohibition once did for alcoholic beverages and organized crime, and what the War on Drugs is now doing for the drug trade—but the stakes will be much higher. Of course, Gun Prohibition will be attempted in slow, small, and apparently "reasonable" increments, as is now happening. But this will not lessen its ultimate effect, which will also be in slow, small, and apparently "reasonable" increments, leading ultimately to a major backlash that will dethrone the representatives of oppression. Government of the people, for the people, and by the people will never again be banished from this earth.
If push ever really comes to shove, under the worst case scenario, the standing army itself will eventually refuse to move against the American people, for most members of the Armed Forces are, first and foremost, loyal Americans. This goes for most members of other federal and state agencies as well. (This would not apply to non-U.S. UN or NATO forces, of course. However, both the UN and NATO would be paralyzed if the United States were to become seriously de-stablized. So Pridger doesn't consider either the UN or NATO to be a serious long-term domestic threat.)
Under worst case scenarios, a few extremist groups will declare race war and may cause considerable mayhem, but most of these splinter groups will undoubtedly quickly join, or succumb to, the more rational majority. This does not mean, however, that Pridger feels anything really constructive can come of any sort or degree of domestic armed conflict. The nation is far too divided for another revolution or civil war to resolve anything constructive. Only chaos, and national disintegration, (perhaps worse than in the former Soviet Empire) would result.
All such scenarios can, and must, be avoided. But not at any cost. If freedom and liberty are to prevail anywhere in this world, patriots must at some point take a firm stand regardless of the consequences. Adopting a "better fed than dead" philosophy would be a certain road to slavery. Pridger fears if our representatives and federal agencies choose to regard patriots and all patriot groups as enemies of the state, future conflict will be as inevitable as it is now avoidable. He hopes that our representatives in Washington, (and in State capitals) will pause in re-inventing government long enough to reread, study, and understand, the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Federalist Papers before it is too late. Dismissing those documents and ideals as anachronistic, as too many do, simply won't wash. The United States of America , in spite of its flaws, is still the world's greatest nation, and its best hope for illuminating and paving the way toward fulfillment of the universal hopes and aspirations of mankind. Let's not continue to undermine that awesome responsibility and opportunity.
Founding
Documents of the United States of America.
Pridger's Personal Stand on Gun Confiscation
Disarming the American people would, of course be the final straw. The American experiment could then be considered a total failure. It would also spell the final failure of our government to become truly a government of, by, and for the people. The America of our forefathers would effectively cease to exist. Unfortunately, that is the long-term goal of global plutocrats and many of our national leaders and so-called representatives. As they say, "It is written." But "not in stone," Pridger would add.
That is why any and every form of gun control legislation should be vigorously resisted by all Americans. This means even the most apparently benign and "reasonable" gun control legislation must be resisted, for any inch given will provide the grip by which a mile will eventually be taken. Measures allegedly designed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children (as good and safe as it may seem) are the camel's head at the tent's door. (Witness what is now happening in the United Kingdom.) The only way to disarm the criminal element of society is to make fire-arms, knives, archery sets, and matches so scarce that there just aren't enough of them to go around to a tenth of of population—and that simply isn't possible.
Many gun-owners are fond of saying that the only way the government will get their guns is from their "Cold, dead hands." Pridger isn't quite that brave. In fact he admits he'll probably stumble all over himself to turn his guns in the first time a contingent of Multi-Jurisdictional Task Force, federal troops, or ninja-uniformed agents, arrive at his door to demand them. (Call him a damned coward if you like.) Of course, this would probably tend to leave him a little bitter, and he hopes it will never happen. If it does, it might move him towards activism.
Pridger is neither a "joiner" nor a natural champion of any organization. He's too much of an individualist for that. That we should need organizations to defend any of our rights from our own "representatives" is an absolute outrage. Yet, the sad truth is that today we do need non-governmental organizations to help defend our Constitutional rights. This is certainly a poor commentary on the state of our so-called representative government, but it's true. In view of this lamentable circumstance, Pridger supports the National Rifleman Association, and urges every red-blooded American do likewise. The NRA is our most effective Second Amendment advocate in Washington and our various state houses. And the Second Amendment is the "insurance policy" we carry on the rest of our God-given Rights.