Vets Standing Up for Firearms Freedom

In last night’s Digest, Connecticut-based pundit Tom Condon suggested that President Obama should turn to American combat veterans to bolster his campaign for civilian disarmament. Good luck with that. Our vets are, in the main, four-square in favor of defending and extending Americans’ Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. In fact, I think they invented the word “staunch” to describe their support. You might even say that when it comes to gun control, they’re kicking ass and taking names. Kevin Tully is one of many vets turning-out at town halls, rallies and lectures up and down the land, reminding their fellow countrymen that their firearms freedom remains a bulwark against the type of tyranny they saw up-close-and-personal. The vets are a mighty force to be reckoned with . . .

According to infoplease.com, America is home to more than 21.5 million veterans. Some 15.8 million or 71 percent voted in the 2008 presidential election. And if you had to think of one issue that would energize this demographic, gun rights would be it. To wit: Mr. Tully’s attendance at an anti-gun forum in the Chicago suburbs.

As his YouTube video above indicates, Mr. Tully personifies unabashed, all-American values. [NB: it's got nothing to do with his ethnicity.] And while gun control advocates will see Tully’s appearance on the viral video above as an example of stridency—ignoring the images at the very end which reveal the anti-gunners’ base “humor”—nothing could be further from the truth.

I seem to be getting more vocal and standing my ground, but I don’t want to be thought of as a bully. I genuinely like listening to other people…I listened to what they had to say. Some of it was uninformed, some of it was factual, some of it was factually incorrect. I listened as long as I could. Mr. Goodman was booed off the floor, but he has the right to say what he wants to say. I stood up first and I said no, I want to hear what he has to say. I had just been told the relevance of the Second Amendment was gone. I wanted to hear what he [Goodman] would say if this was happening to the First Amendment….No one seems to realize that the Bill of Rights is not on the table. They are eternal premises that would keep our nation free.”

Not no one. Perhaps more than he’d ever imagine. All I can say about that is click here to check out this gallery of American gun owners and watch this space.

[h/t John Boch]

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

43 Responses to Vets Standing Up for Firearms Freedom

  1. avatarWC says:

    I’d say don’t count all the vets as pro-gun. Both my father and spouse are vets. While my spouse is neutral on guns, my father is anti-gun.

    • avatarEvan says:

      I agree with that. Just like some of the police vets some feel like only they are qualified for firearms use.

  2. avatarblahpony says:

    I would definitely buy that man the beverage of his choice.

  3. avatarjwm says:

    And yet, to hear some of the posters here on TTAG we vets are nothing but thugs. Uniformed thugs. It’s almost as if the people claiming to be gun owners and gun rights supporters aren’t. These guys seem determined to drive away people from the cause because they wore a uniform and served their country. Or even still wear a uniform in the case of active duty GI’s and LEO’s.

    Add to this the diviseness amongst ourselves over political issues, who voted for what party and privacy issues such as gay rights and womens rights and do we have to wonder why the anti’s feel emboldened enough to make a major gun grab now?

    We need to be accepting of all people willing to fight for our gun rights. Or we will surely lose.

    • avatarAnonymous says:

      > to hear some of the posters here on TTAG we
      > vets are nothing but thugs. Uniformed thugs.

      Example(s), please?

      I don’t recall anybody referring to military veterans as thugs.

      Police? Frequently.

      It sounds like you are trying to conflate the two for some reason.

      Are you a police officer?

      • avatarWilliam says:

        NEITHER DO I. This chap may have mistaken criticism of Drone Killa’s nonstop warmongering as criticism of soldiers.

        NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

        If you can’t cite any examples, please withdraw your accusation and APOLOGIZE TO US.

        I’m SERIOUS.

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        I remember reading exactly what jwm was talking about. I do not have the specific article, frankly, because individual comments are difficult to search for. Commenters have bashed military service members on occasion, and they definitely still bash LEOs (dog shooters, welfare queens, etc.)

        We either stand together or allow the antis to destroy our rights.

      • avatarHasdrubal says:

        I don’t know which specific articles they were on, but Ivymike has made multiple complaints about the standing army being unconstitutional, and called me a tyrant for supporting and being a former member of said army.

        Also, I believe matt posted several examples of the US Army attacking civilians in the past, with what I took as a clear implication that the current Army would be willing to do so again. Not sure which matt, I know there are several.

        I take no personal offense to either view, and I would not want either of them silenced even though I disagree. I don’t think they represent the majority view, but they did post here.

        • avatarduke nukem says:

          ivy mike actually posted in a comment i made as something in the lines of “baby killers”

      • avatarRambeast says:

        I am one of those posters. Granted, I have come to accept even people in uniform are just that, people. We are all individuals and all have the “thug” capability. I try not to pre-judge anyone, but anyone in a uniform is suspicious until proven honorable.

        Anyone in politics is indictable until proven ingenuous.

        • avatarjwm says:

          Just got home from work guys. I posted the above comment and then hit the bricks for the job. I came out of retirement this week.

          Rambeast and all else who made comment. We need to find middle ground with one another so we can stand strong against the real and immediate threat to our gun rights.

          I am willing to put my trust in the rank and file, it’s the pols and cheifs I feel contempt for.

      • avatarelnonio says:

        Example? The first one that comes to my mind is Totenglocke.

        Do a google search for: site:thetruthaboutguns.com totenglocke (or any other screen name) plus other keywords to find what you are looking for. example: “I always see this BS that the military doesn’t just follow orders, yet that’s exactly what they do. If you don’t follow orders, you’ll be severely punished and if you keep doing it or ignore a big enough order, you’re looking at life in jail or death. Not to mention anytime they’re called out on obeying illegal / immoral orders they always use the Nuremberg defense and hide behind the “I was just following orders!” excuse.” Sound like hired thugs to me. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/01/daniel-zimmerman/quote-of-the-day-18/

      • avatarelnonio says:

        Or here is another beauty:

        “The military / LEO’s are cowardly. There’s nothing honorable about having overwhelming numbers and superior weapons in a fight.” with “And there’s a world of difference between a warrior and a soldier. Soldiers have far more in common with murderers than they do with warriors.”

        http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/12/daniel-zimmerman/quote-of-the-day-anniversary-edition/

        Guess the screen name again…

    • avatarduke nukem says:

      ill give you two examples which ive seen post something like that.. IVY MIKE and MIKEB2000

    • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

      Sorry JWM, but as I have said, likely ad- nauseam, I’m not getting in bed with the voters who put these little tyrants in office. We will reap what they have sewn. So be it.

    • avatarAnonymous says:

      I am not going to support a Police State, even if the Police State lets me keep my guns.

    • avatarBarstow Cowboy says:

      I hear what you’re saying about bashing the military, and maybe I take it for granted that it goes without saying, so I’ll say it anyways; it’s not the soldiers that I’m bashing specifically, it’s the entire military collectively. The military belongs to and works for the same entity that our constitution and bill of rights seeks to defend us from, that being the (potentially) tyrannical federal government. That’s why US troops aren’t supposed to be involved in law enforcement. When WWI vets camped out and protested for their benefits, the president ordered troops to attack them, and they did attack them, led by Macarthur himself. When the powers that be had a problem at Kent state, it was individual soldiers who shot and killed all those kids. When the powers that be set the military loose in Louisiana after Katrina, individual soldiers went on patrol in neighborhoods with orders to confiscate weapons. It’s really nice that there may be some troops who’re willing to question or maybe even outright defy orders that they consider unconstitutional, but you know, those guys don’t seem to prevail when the military gets orders to suppress peoples’ rights. So, that’s where the whole “eff the military” thing comes from. There are good guys like this guy who spoke up at the town hall, but by and large they don’t seem to be effective in getting the military to refuse orders that are unconstitutional.

  4. avatarIdahoPete says:

    I am a veteran. Two years of active duty with the 1st Cav Division, US Army, at Ft. Hood, TX. Not a combat vet, although 2 members of my unit died in a “training accident” when they flew their Cobra into a transmission line in the dusk. We all signed the blank check, no matter when or where we served.

    When I enlisted, I swore an oath to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The Constitution, not the politicians who are temporarily in charge of the government. That oath did NOT contain an expiration date.

    If you don’t like the 2nd Amendment, go through the legal amendment process described in the Constitution (2/3 vote of each house of Congress, 3/4 of all of the State legislatures), and remove it from the Bill of Rights. Don’t give me that BS about the Constitution being a “living document” – that is just leftspeak for “we don’t like the constraints on our power so we are going to ignore the parts we don’t like”. Without the written guarantees in the Constitution, government is nothing more than unlawful naked force.

    No expiration date on my oath.

    • avatarMy name is Bob says:

      Win!!!!!!!!!

    • avatarWC says:

      The 2A says “regulated”. What does that part mean?

      • avatarPwrserge says:

        It’s a preface, it explains the reason why the amendment is necessary.

      • avatarPyrotek85 says:

        “The phrase “well-regulated” was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people’s arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.”

        http://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

        It didn’t mean ‘laws and regulations’, it meant that the militia was to be well-regulated, as in properly trained and equipped.

      • avatarpk in AZ says:

        The 2nd also states: “Shall not be infringed”

        Know what that means????

      • avatarMilsurp Collector says:

        At the time it was written “regulated” meant well equipped. Like plenty of other words in the English language a lot of meanings got bastardized along the way and have been used to fit peoples’ agendas.

      • avatarjwm says:

        WC, what does the Shall no be Infringed part mean? After all Scotus has ruled that the individual has the right to keep and bear arms, not just the militia, which was the indiviual anyway.

    • avatarTex74 says:

      Drone killas? Really? Fyi most cops are vets.

      • avatarAnonymous says:

        > Fyi most cops are vets.

        And therefore what?

        Most vets are not cops.

        Therefore, criticism of cops does not equal criticism of vets.

      • avatarCarlosT says:

        By “drone killa”, he’s referring to Obama, and his love of killing from the skies using murderbots.

  5. avatarmacgearailt says:

    While I don’t agree with Mr.Condon,I will not deny him his say.He has earned it by virtue of his service.
    People, we need to Stand To,the antis are in the perimeter,we must repel the assault on the 2nd Amendment and by extention all of our rights contained within the Bill of Rights.Pundits are saying that the AWB2013 will never pass.What if we have another Newtown tomorrow,will we be as smug?Write your congressional delegation and state and local elected officials.Let them feel the heat of your displeasure and with it the implicit threat that they take their current position for granted it if they are unable or unwilling to uphold their oaths of office.The time is now.Get busy.

  6. avatarWilliam says:

    It is my opinion that, since they didn’t explain the term, it is intended to mean, “SELF-REGULATED”.

  7. avatarJavier says:

    I am a Veteran and my oath is the same now as it was then. The same oath that the politicians take for their office. No single amendment is any less than another. WE took an oath to defend the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA from ALL enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.
    No expiration until there is no respiration.

    • avatarMark says:

      We have domestic enemies and know who they are. I wrote my senator and congressman weeks ago asking that they make arrangements to take Feinswine and any co-sponsors into custody to await trail on charges of treason and violation of oath of office when this legislation was introduced. They evidently failed.

  8. avatarEric S. says:

    I know a lot of former military that are very anti-2A. It isn’t a guarantee that they’ll support us at all. Many of them will work against us. Even the ones who own guns tend to be Fudds anyway. I know we have a handful who support our cause, but let’s not assume they all do.

  9. avatarSmaj says:

    If this country is to be saved from the statist fanatics, it’s going to be Kevin Tully and millions of Americans just like him who save it.

  10. avatarKCK says:

    As Macgear states above, I do wish that the assaults on the Second Amendment were frontal. If it is no longer relevant then repeal it. It is the tunneling under the constitution to get at it that is so maddening. How in the world could DiFi’s bill not be an infringement.
    Let her try to bring down/repeal a pillar that holds up the arch of this country and we would see the nation say “wait a minute, let’s examine this a little closer”. But to watch her drilling holes in that pillar and the Supremes letting her do it is astounding.
    With insurrection in the air ala Concord and Lexington, the Supreme Court needs to affirm the definition of “Shall not be infringed” and tell the congress and the people if you don’t like it, repeal it if you can, otherwise, STFU! I think we need put the burden of amending the constitution on them to really expose the seriousness of this issue. I have confidence that put in that light, the American people will not want to mess with the Law of the Land that has worked for 221 years. Passing a law about fore grips and flash-hiders, obscures her insidious intent and its consequences. Trivializing the document which produced the greatest advancement in the history of human civilization by trying to bring it down with a THUMBHOLE. A THUMBHOLE???
    I’m an atheist, but please, GOD save us.

  11. avatarRon Jones says:

    Been in for 17 years and still going. I am gald we are getting heard. If you really want to pass a bill figure out how to identify mental cases and leave the law abiding people alone. Made me proud to see that vet up there speaking up. He earned it and he got to say what was on his mind! Rock on.

  12. avatarLarry says:

    That guy rocks. The one in uniform of course. I’m really starting to get sick of these little weasels wining about why we don’t need guns, etc. Can we throw down yet and kick some A$$? Let’s just get this party started already.

  13. avatarRalph says:

    The vets are a mighty force to be reckoned with . . .

    I’m not so sure that there’s much unity among veterans. They are not all the same. They come from disparate socio-economic groups. They go home to different states, communities, jobs. They are Republicans, Democrats, independents and some are completely uninvolved. For every two veterans, there are three opinions.

    John Kerry is a veteran, and a decorated one to boot. Fat lot of good that’s going to do us. Nah, vets are not a force to be reckoned with. They’re pretty much exactly like everyone else.

  14. avatarmacgearailt says:

    Ralph, well said.We veterans are all individuals with the demographics you aptly describe.Just don’t piss us off.We’ve seen good and bad and if the elected start modifying what we served to fit some personal agenda then you’ll be hearing from us. We are not monolithic ,but we know how to organize when pushed.
    Interestingly,cops of which I am one are( believe it or not) growing in their vocal opposition to anymore ineffectual gun laws. We are citizens serving citizens period.

  15. avatarJoke & Dagger says:

    I applaud the vet’s stance against the little weasels at the table. But, does anybody really think he changed their gun grabbing little minds? Not a chance. The weasels in the video are the weasels in charge. They will not change their minds.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.