. . . this time to Gun Digest, in an article entitled The Three Percent Solution by Charlie Cutshaw.
The Three Percent Solution
June 22, 2009
by Charlie Cutshaw
Summary: We are pretty sure where you stand on the debate surrounding gun control, but what are you prepared to do about it?
How many of you are “Three-Percenters?” If you are reading this, you probably should be. OK, what’s a Three-Percenter? The term goes all the way back to the American Revolution. During the war for our independence, only approximately a third of the colonists supported the independence cause. Another third didn’t care one way or the other and the last third wanted to remain under British rule. Out of those that supported independence and revolution, only some three percent were actively engaged on the battlefield with the full active support of only about 10 percent of those who were pro-independence. Twenty percent of the pro-independence faction did nothing to actively support the cause. This is the root of today’s Three Percenter term.
Those of us who currently proclaim ourselves to be Three Percenters make no claim that we actually represent three percent of the population, although we might – nobody knows for certain how many of us there are, but we stand for the Second Amendment, and our support goes far beyond mere words. Three Percenters today are American gun owners who have taken a stand. We WILL NOT disarm. We WILL NOT obey further anti-gun legislation, regardless of its source. We WILL NOT stand for further circumscription of our God-given rights and we WILL defend ourselves if we are attacked. Since our guns are the most effective means of defending ourselves, we WILL NOT surrender them. We are committed to restoring the Republic as envisioned by the Founders and are wiling to fight and to die in defense of ourselves and the Constitution.
I know that these are strong words, but in the words of Thomas Paine, “These are the times that try men’s souls.” As I wrote a few months ago, what I am currently witnessing is unprecedented in my lifetime, which has spanned more than 65 years. I noted then that Barack Obama was the most anti-gun president in the history of our Republic, but since then, things have gotten worse – much worse. Obama clearly wishes nothing so much as the destruction of our Republic. Don’t believe me? Read on. Incidentally, we DO NOT live in a “democracy” as so many in the “lamestream media” would have us believe. A “democracy” is two wolves and a lamb sitting down and taking a vote on what’s for dinner. The United States is a Constitutional Republic!
Barack Obama and his far-left cronies are attacking the entire Bill of Rights, not just the Second Amendment. In this essay, I will focus primarily on that aspect of the Obama Administration's anti-liberty attacks, although the entire Bill of Rights is under attack by Obama. There are several anti-gun measures proposed in the House of Representatives, the most draconian of which are HR45, the Blair Holt Firearms Licensing and Record of Sale act of 2009 and HR 2159, described below. You can look at the entire text of HR 45 Here.
Here are the high points:
-A federal license for all handguns and semiautomatics, including those currently owned.
-All handgun and semiautomatic owners must have their thumbprint taken by law enforcement and the owner’s signature on a certificate to the effect that the firearms will be stored in an inaccessible location, essentially where they cannot be readily accessed for self-defense.
But wait – we’re only getting started! Next is HR 2159, introduced by a REPUBLICAN!
HR 2159 was introduced by Rep Peter King (R-NY) and is titled The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009. Read the full text HERE.
Here is a summary:
- In a nutshell, HR 2159 enables the Attorney General to designate anyone he desires to be a “Dangerous Terrorist” and deny him or her the right to possess firearms. (Note that the DHS Assessment on “Right Wing Extremism” defines almost anyone as a potential “terrorist,” especially veterans.) If you attended a “Tea Party” last month or plan to in the future, you can count on being labeled a “terrorist.” But as the TV commercials say, “Wait – there’s more!”
HR 45 and 2159 are clearly unconstitutional, but that hasn’t stopped the Obama Administration from its anti-American activities thus far. Besides, by the time these unconstitutional “laws” were challenged and overturned, they would have been fully implemented, although enforcement might be difficult as we will presently see. Obama and his left-wing cronies are well aware of the unconstitutional nature of their proposed “laws” and are seeking to circumvent the Constitution via international treaty. Obama has recently been bringing pressure on the Senate to ratify the “Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing and Trafficking in Firearms,” also known as “The Curb Illicit Small Arms Trafficking (CIFTA) Treaty.” This treaty was signed by Bill Clinton in 1997 and mandates a national database of firearms owners and registration of all firearms. This database would be accessible to any other signatory nation to the treaty and would essentially allow the government to confiscate guns from those to whom they were registered.
Obama tells us that ratifying the treaty is “the right thing to do” because 29 other countries have ratified it. But as Lou Dobbs commented in a CNN feature on the treaty, “Those countries don’t have a Constitution and a Second Amendment.” Dobbs’ coverage, by the way, was very pro-gun. The good news is that a number of senators are prepared to fight ratification of this egregious treaty.
Another component of The Bill of Rights that Obama and his cronies are attacking is the First Amendment, which recognizes our right to free speech. Obama is attempting to resurrect the “Fairness Doctrine” and make it permanent. Not only will this shut down his critics like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage and others, but will also severely restrict Internet communication that is critical of government. I never imagined that anything like these proposed unconstitutional laws and actions would occur, but they all took place during
Obama’s first 100 days.
I suspect that neither the legislation I have described, nor CIFTA will become law, but the fact is that Obama and the left will never give up trying to deny us our God-given, inalienable rights that are protected by the Constitution. What this means is, as Thomas Jefferson said, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” In present-day America we must therefore all be aware of what our enemies are doing and make no mistake, Obama and the left ARE our enemies, just as they are enemies to the Republic and the Constitution.
What can you do? Get out to the “Tea Parties” in your communities. Join the NRA if you haven’t already. Be vigilant, be informed and perhaps most important, be vocal! Contact your representatives and let them know your beliefs. (You DO know who they are, don’t you?) You don’t have to write a letter and mail it – they all can be contacted online and they will respond. I know because I make it a point of contacting my representatives on issues that concern me. Speak in defense of America’s values, culture and Christian foundation.
It isn’t all bad news, though – there are positive straws in the wind. One is Oath Keepers (http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/) a fast-growing organization of law enforcement and military personnel who, like me, swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of The United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. I took that oath when I joined the US Army and swore a similar one when I signed on at the police department where I am a reserve police officer. I did not take an oath to uphold the president, the congress, the governor of my state, the mayor of my city or any other politician. My loyalty is to the Constitution and neither I nor any other police officer of my acquaintance will obey or enforce unconstitutional laws. I suggest that you go to the Oath Keepers web site above and read the “10 Laws We Will Not Enforce” section. I have discussed this with officers in my small department and with officers in adjoining jurisdictions and we are all of a single mind – we are in lock step with Oath Keepers and WILL NOT enforce unconstitutional laws, although this leads to another cause for concern.
Obama probably knows that the majority of serving military and law enforcement personnel apparently will not enforce unconstitutional laws and edicts, and so for some time he has been calling for a national police force that he envisions being as well armed and equipped as the military. Why does Obama want a national police force whose loyalty is to him rather than the Constitution? Go back and study history! The last time something like this took place was Germany in the 1930s, the police force was called the Sturm Abteilung (SA) or just “Brown shirts” and the leader of Germany was a guy named Adolph Hitler. The Brown Shirts were his personal enforcers. Don’t think Obama is similar to Hitler in his actions?
Compare the similarities between him and Hitler and see for yourself.
Another positive indicator is the “nullification resolutions" that have been passed by some 25 states as of the time this was written in May 2009. The list of states is growing and it appears that we may be headed for a situation similar to that which led to the Civil War of 1861-65. Nullification resolutions state in essence that if the federal government infringes on the Bill of Rights, especially the 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments, the compact established between the state and the federal government by the Constitution is nullified and the state will secede. Nullification resolutions were passed by all eleven states that eventually became the Confederacy. The modern ones are virtually identical and the governors of several states, including Texas, are openly using the “S” word!
If you are in the military or law enforcement, I urge you to remember your oath to the Constitution and reflect on your willingness to enforce orders that clearly violate that oath. I also encourage you to join Oath Keepers. If you are a gun owner who believes in the Second Amendment, the Bill of Rights and our Constitutional Rule of Law, there are two things you should do: First get a copy of the Constitution and read it, especially the first ten amendments – The Bill of Rights, which you should commit to memory. Second, go to the following web site and learn what it means to be a Three Percenter. Click Here
Finally remember the words of Patrick Henry: “Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me: Give me Liberty, or give me death!"
I agree with much in the article but he lost credibility when he says that joining the nra is one of the solutions. They are part of the problem, a major part of the problem.
And when they come here to learn about being a "Threeper", they might want to go to the ordering page at www.ravenswoodenterprises.com and send for a few!
Be sure to specify whether you want Woodland or 3 color Desert.
$4 each, post paid; USPS Money Order, Cashier's or Certified Checks ship when received; all others wait until the instrument clears; NO credit card or Paypal!
Send orders to:
Raven's Wood Enterprises, LLC.
PO Box 962
Birmingham, MI 48012
I wouldn't say the writer lost credibility; remember that many, many three per centers got started on the right path with a membership in the NRA. It is often a natural progression, IMHO, from an initial involvement with the NRA to looking more closely at the second amendment issue and then finding themselves drawn more and more to the three per cent circle.
I thought it was a great Op-Ed. Though I do think the NRA is a trojan horse.
I got my Threeper patches just the other day. Thanks RWE!!
Some believe that the Constitution permits treaties to supersede the Constitution. That belief is not supported by the Constitution however.
Here is the relevant Constitutional text:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Breaking this down we can read that the supreme law of the land is:
All laws in pursuance of (in accordance with) the Constitution
All treaties made under the Authority of the United States
Since the authority of the United States is clearly defined and limited by the Constitution all treaties made MUST be in accordance with the Constitution.
Limitations include but are not limited to the scope of government as presented by the preamble:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
And by the 10th Amendment to the Bill of Rights:
“Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People.
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.”
Note that there is no authority whatsoever to subject American citizens to foreign governments or treaties.
Further, some are confused by the phrase:
… Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Mistakenly believing that this confers absolute supremacy to treaties is an inaccurate understanding of the text. What is written is that individual state laws or state constitutions may not be used to overrule the Constitution, laws, or treaties made in pursuance of the Constitution. The phrase DOES NOT confer supremacy on treaties.
Treaties by nature are agreements between nations. As such they are always external acting and define how each nation shall treat the other nation(s). Treaties cannot be used to circumvent internal laws or constitutions. For example, few would argue that nation A may legitimately enter into a treaty with nation B, whereby nation A agrees to enslave 75% of its citizens if nation B will murder 50% of its citizens. Unfortunately a larger group is somehow convinced that a treaty may permit all types of lesser mayhem upon a populace, that if passed a treaty enables anything. The Constitution simply does not contain this flaw, nor does it permit foreign influence to control US citizens.
Please note that the above in no way glosses over the impact of treaties, I only wish to point out that a treaty which would be un-Constitional as a law is as valid as any un-Constitutional law, which is to say that it only has the validity we permit. A treaty has no validity in shaping our laws, and cannot legitimately supercede the Constitution.
Impeach the Kenyan bastard.
1] Sorry guys maybe I missed it, but after reading through Mr. Cutshaw's article twice, I find nowhere does he recommend joining the gun-control capitulators of the NRA.
2] "unprecendented", Mr. Cupshaw? Certainly you were around when Nixon, Reagan, Papa Bush, Clinton, and Dubyah were doing their best to undermine, invalidate and/or destroy the Constitution and negate the Bill of Rights. Obama is certainly picking up the tempo, but his actions are hardly unprecendented.
I am a three percenter, but the NRA isn't the answer. There are better organizations that are far more agressive when fighting for gun rights.
It’s a good editorial but when he decided to say join the NRA if you haven’t already that’s when he lost me.
The NRA is part of the problem just like the SAF and their management of the KABA comment section is an example of the problem with so called pro-gun groups, they compromise to damn easy!
A handful of Brady trolls and anti-freedom drones complain about a couple of posters and SAF kowtows to their demands and changes the forum policy.
NO more checks from me until the policy is changed!
Can I buy a three percent flag or must I make my own???
Liberty and Tyranny should be a mandatory read for EVERY PERSON over the age of sixteen. From what obama has already done IMPEACHMENT seems to be the answer, And yes, November is just around the corner, lest us not forget to "Change" our representation, whosoever is in office needs to be voted O U T ! Change is what we can give back. Herb
Post a Comment