Previous Post
Next Post


“…new gun regulations are necessary for many reasons, including the long-term preservation of our Constitution. The widespread availability of high-powered military-grade weaponry does not keep us secure from tyranny — in fact, it increases the probability that one day, our great-grandchildren will live under thuggish warlords and tyrants.” – Ivan Perkins, Armed constitutionalism-why guns don’t actually keep us safe from tyranny [via]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I think “thuggish warlords and tyrants” is a pretty good description of the people in Washington right now, and they have plenty of guns.

    • Anyone ever notice that the 2A doesn’t prevent us from restricting the government from owning certain weapons? Nah, that’s crazy talk…

    • People today believe the Police have the powers depicted in Television shows. That is not true. Many things you see the Police do on television are violations of Civil Rights.

      We have quickly became a police state. Tyranny already exists in the United States. Political differences are now being addressed by the abuse of power of elected officials and other public officials using their office to deny due process and equal access to the Justice System. That is tyranny.

      Jefferson said in order to sustain Liberty and Freedom we must have a revolution ever 20 years. Only 3% of the population took up arms to gain our independence for England. Most of our founding Fathers used the Geneva Bible, not the King James Bible. The Geneva Bible taught that rebellion to tyranny is obedience to God. King James had all such language removed. Just like now, the Living Bible tries to teach that worshiping our Lord is all about Love.

      We are created in God’s image. Both in our appearance, and in our emotions. Did God the Father show anger? Yes, for he said; Jacob have I loved Esau have I hated. God destroyed the Egyptian army are they pursued the Jewish Faithful. David killed Goliath.

      Can God make mistakes? He indeed created man, then as man could not live under the Law, he gave his son to pay for our sins. Mankind was and is God’s greatest mistake.

      Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.

      The right to keep and bear arms does not mean that the Government can legally allow me to have a straw and a spit wad to protect my Liberty, Freedom, and the Constitution I so dearly love and will defend.

      The quote of the day above is just an opinion and in my view, a very flawed opinion.

    • Still more anti second amendment propaganda from the media-government-education alliance. And the beat goes on:

      “18-year-old Andrew Lampart, a senior at Nonnewaug High School, said he made the discovery when he was doing research for a classroom debate on gun control in May. Lampart said he first noticed that he could not get on the web site for the National Rifle Association.

      “So, I went over to the other side. And I went over on sites such as Moms Demand Action or Newtown Action Alliance and I could get on these Web sites but not the others,” Lampart said.

      Read more:

    • On behalf of the people of Washington, please refer to the imperial capital as DC, so as not to tarnish the reputation of our beautiful, gun-friendly, income-tax-free state.

  2. We have waaaaay different definitions of tyranny and tyrants. Oh well, I can take Mr. Perkins two minutes of hate.

    • The Telescreen can’t see you, brother. Please step back in front of it for the Two Minutes’ Hate, then stop by Room 101 for some Victory Gin.

    • Yup. Those Koch Brothers and Faux “News” are doing a helluva job of creating a bunch of ignert cry babies.

      • Sadly, most here can’t see that. They actually think that there’s a difference between the indoctrination of the “Right” (Koch brothers, Fox) and the “Left” (George Soros, MSNBC, CNN, Huffington Post).

        Two wings on the same damn bird.

        • Reminds me of those jokes about conservatives that refused to fly unless the plane had two right wings. (Substitute “liberal” and “left” where appropriate.)

        • @Maineuh

          I wish I could take credit for coming up with that! I heard that last week on a Professor Griff video.

      • Since you and Fler and some others hereabouts see no difference between “left” and “right” politically, and likewise no difference between the two major parties, how exactly do you describe yourselves politically? Are you anarchists, or nihilists or what? I’m thinkng you are garden-variety leftists trying to rationalize your support of liberal gun-grabber politicos like “Hillary!” as you frequent a 2A-supporters forum. But I’m certainly willing to be corrected on that.

        • @Another Robert,

          I can’t speak for anyone else, but your attempted description of me is ridiculous.

          I don’t feel the need to march in lockstep with any political party. I would imagine that some of my views would be considered Republican (actual Republican, not this “Culture War”, so-called “conservative” nonsense), and others Libertarian, by someone needing to find a box in which to neatly fit my worldview.

          You display ignorance and insult me by calling me a Hillary-voting Leftist. You cannot fathom that everyone with whom you don’t agree is not a “liberal”. That’s the last thing I am.

          This left/right polarization has gotten way out of hand.

        • @Another Robert –

          Why don’t you jump in here and tell us about yourself first?

          As far as your contention is concerned, 1) I see a huge difference between the left and the right, so that’s a false comment. 2) I wasn’t aware that this forum was for “2A-supporters”. The forum is for persons with gun interests and 3) your interpretation of 2A isn’t universal.

          So where are you at politically? Fascist wannabe or far right? Or is that redundant?

  3. What gun couldn’t be used in the military as a weapon? I suppose a Nerf gun perhaps….

  4. Of course unarmed liberals will be unable to resist future tyranny. THAT IS WHY WE ARE TRYING TO SELL THEM GUNS. For the children!

    • You’d be surprised at how many armed liberals there are. And most of them worry about hate groups and right wing militias becoming more active.

      • So they worry about “hate groups” and “right wing militias” becoming more active, yet what do they think about those on the left who paint those on the right with just as broad a brush? May they be smothered under their own hypocrisy.

        • Yes, I am worried about all the authoritarians, whether they read the Washington Post or the New York Post.

  5. “As I explained earlier this week and in my new book, Vanishing Coup,”

    Ah, the real reason for the article. Self promoting his new book, in which he will use 349 pages to further explain his delusions.

    • Yup, this ^^^^

      It WAS nice to see that most of the comments to the original article were also negative, some with very well reasoned arguments that the original author could not seem to counter.

  6. I generally appreciate the authors and content over at Volokh. I’d like to see David Kopel dissemble Mr. Perkins goofy screed. What is that guy smoking and what is the color of the sky in his world? You see kids, that what happens when you do drugs.

  7. I read the article. The author equates “Tyranny” with “overthrow of the government”. He also equates civilian disarmament laws with actual civilian disarmament, including criminal gangs.

  8. “high-powered military-grade weaponry”????

    How are we supposed to take these people seriously about anything they say when it’s quite obvious that they have ZERO idea of what they are talking about?

    If someone from the Anti side actually has a clue about firearms, I’m willing to listen.

    But the fact that they espouse such strong opinions of something that they obviously have NO idea about, is frankly ridiculous. (Kinda the same thing with their Foreign policy too apparently).

    They are the experts on all subjects, even ones that they have absolutely no clue about. Brilliant. Just like a liberal. “I know best, even when I have no idea of what I’m speaking about wah wah”

    • “How are we supposed to take these people seriously about anything they say when it’s quite obvious that they have ZERO idea of what they are talking about?”

      I think about this quite a lot. We have multiple generations of people who lack even the most basic mechanical skills. These are people who’ve never changed a tire in their lives and call for help with changing lightbulbs. I could be snarky and point out that these are all city dwellers who also don’t own or drive cars but that’s just confusing symptoms with causes. The real cause is just stunning, willful, ignorance. If you’ve ever tried to explain even basic stuff to these folks you quickly find that they really don’t want to know. Finding somebody to “make it go” is the extent of their problem solving ability. This guy is a poster child for those kinds of attitudes.

  9. Is it just me, or does it seem that recently these op-eds and such are getting kookier and kookier?

    It’s like the bottom of their barrel has been reached and they are scraping it. They are trying to appeal to an extremist base, and the usual screed has not been sticking.

    So, go more kook is the answer. The more kook they go, the fewer “normal” fence sitters they alienate from their side.

    Written pieces like this give great credence to the adage of letting a fool speak. Let them keep publishing stuff like this. I think it actually helps us.

    • I don’t know. I’m not sure that there are really that many people on the fence about gun control. There are just too many people who are apathetic about it, which helps the other side.

    • Oh, it absolutely does. I know of more than a few people who were fence sitters, and then the foaming-at-the-mouth vitriol and total idiocy of Piers Morgan’s antics convinced them to do a little research, and then they saw the light and came to our side.

      • I would also hope that common sense kicks in when people with no dog in the fight hear Shannon Watts, et al, saying that “guns have never been used to stop attackers”, etc.

    • “Is it just me, or does it seem that recently these op-eds and such are getting kookier and kookier?”

      The true believers are going full retard because their witch hunt is faltering. I expect them to start blowing-up gun stores in a little while.

  10. Um is this gentlemen dilutional or just crazy? There not not only no logic to his statement,but, it is also not backed up by any historical fact. In fact history the world over proves him to be wrong. I just can’t imagine anyone including him actually believe this.

    • Neither? I’d guess he’s more along the lines of overly-coddled being an academia for, what, close to 25 years? He doesn’t comprehend the “real world” can be different than the sugar-glazed college campus life (not to dismiss the bad things that go on in campuses, but those are sanitized, too).

  11. This is actually a good example for the mandatory background check argument. With his paranoia combined with a stunning lack of reality a good screening should disqualify him. I wonder if he is scared of rats?
    1984 is still on it’s way.

    • 1984 is already here, bruva:

      Telescreen – smartphones, cameras in laptops, TVs, cable boxes
      Big Brother – US government, NSA, etc.
      INGSOC – Absurdly politically correct language/terms
      Room 101 – police station or even city streets these days
      Doublethink – People who talk about liberty and freedom but cheer on the police state and subjugation
      Masses distracted by sports, celebrity scandal/gossip
      War is Peace – State of pre-emptive, perpetual war

  12. He even seems to believe he has some idea what he’s talking about! Amazing, some people’s delusions.

  13. in the comments for the original article, PersonFromPorlock said:

    “There is a level of argument which makes so little sense that critiquing it is like parsing the utterances of someone speaking in tongues. So I’ll just note that natural rights are not derived from utilitarian analyses. Freedom of speech, for instance, exists whether or not the speaker has anything to say, and persists even when he is speaking nonsense.”

  14. From the article:

    “Rather than focus on the historical purpose or intent behind the Second Amendment, I would like to ask a different question. Does the widespread legal availability of guns actually help prevent tyranny?”

    Or to paraphrase…..

    Rather than use a starting point based in reality I am going to invent a scenario where I can be right about my preconceived opinions.

  15. By golly he’s right….the greatest threat to the Constitution is….the Constitution itself! Therefore, in order to protect the Constitution, we must get rid of it. Why didn’t we think of this sooner!

    • We must destroy freedom / civil society / human dignity / etc. in order to save it.

      At least, that’s what we’re told.

  16. I couldn’t take more than a few sentences of this l##atic. I can’t believe he has a job. Yep…he is a certified inmate walking around. And why did I click on the link?!?

      • Was typing something really nasty. Changed my mind and didn’t use a sexual attack. Also most of my posts are on mobile and very quickly made as I am out & about on business. And I’ve been censored for typing someone is stupid & lazy…

  17. This is nonsense. Coups and warlords occur after a government loses legitimacy in the eyes of it’s citizens due to corruption or incompetence. If the people have privately held weapons, you may get coups, gangs, vigilantes, and warlords. If the people have no weapons, then you still get military coups, only rather sooner, as it lowers the fear of armed insurrection.

    For Perkins’ scenario to come true, the federal govt. would have to have already broken down and lost both control of the military and the trust of the people. In such a scenario, the existence of private small arms is the least of your worries.

    • For Perkins, I do believe unicorns fart rainbows and the world is a happy place just because he wishes it to be true.

      Modern reality or historical fact need not apply. Such is the life of a programmed propagandist.

  18. So much nonsense, first he repeats the president’s canard about ” A river of assault rifles, for example, has been flowing south and bolstering the power of Mexican drug cartels” then specifically calls out “One of their favorite tactics is to send commando teams, armed with AK-47s and the like, to spray individual cops and entire police stations with thousands of bullets at a time.” The cartels aren’t getting full auto AKs from American gun dealers.

    • The antis know that the public believes all of that “the cops are outgunned on the streets” nonsense.

  19. Excerpt from the Preamble to the Bill of Rights:

    “THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.”

    Further declaratory and restrictive clause added in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers as follows:
    Amendment II
    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

  20. “Armed constitutionalism-why guns don’t actually keep us safe from tyranny”

    Bigger lies were never uttered in a single statement. Guns are the only reason why this country is still free, the libprog commies know 85 million people won’t sit by and let a bunch of totalitarian bastards have their way with them. Every single atrocity on the planet was heralded by civilian disarmament.

  21. What I am driven to write
    While sorely needed
    Will stir up a fight…..
    So f@ck this a$$tard

    There…………I feel better.

    That’s about right

  22. I’m currently working an overtime detail to fund the purchase of my next military grade (or better) weapon. In a bizarre twist of fate, none of my personally-owned military grade weapons have killed anyone. Weird, huh?

  23. If riding on the dog’s back and shouting ad hominem attacks were not frowned upon in these parts, boy would I have a few doozy’s for this guy.

    Perhaps he should sit down and talk to some gun owners before he makes such leaps of stupid

  24. I have to agree with anti’s on this one. The Founders were very clear on how they felt about “standing armies in times of peace,” (it was one of the reasons given for rebelling in the Declaration of Independence.) These militias are standing armies outside of the control of civil authorities.

    Virginia Convention 1788:
    “that standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.”
    The Pennsylvania and Maryland conventions match this one almost word-for-word. Several other states were of a similar disposition.

    Do I think we have anything to fear from Joe Blow and his 2 dozen militia men? No. But do I pretend that trying to have an armed standoff with a federal agency is admirable? Hell no.

    • I don’t think the “standing army” they were trying to prevent is a few dozen citizens getting together to play army in their backyard. The goal was to prevent the government from assembling a huge military in peacetime. You know, like the $500-billion-per-year one we have.

    • “These militias are standing armies outside of the control of civil authorities.”

      Says who? Using your definition any collection of individuals with weapons could be defined as a “standing army”. Take away the polemical name “militia” and shooting clubs, the NRA, Civil War reenactors, and Jr. ROTC classes, can all be defined as “standing armies outside the control of civil authorities”. Sorry, but your definition just won’t wash.

  25. “we enjoy a stable democracy because we live under the rule of law, enforced by impartial and independent police, prosecutors, and judges. ”
    I couldn’t stop laughing at this, impartial and independent my ass. Maybe its just living in New Jersey but you hear all the time about cops, politicians and sometimes judges messing up and getting a slap on the wrist. When if you or I did the same thing we would be looking at thousands of dollars in legal costs, fees and fines plus possible jail time but hey our system is impartial and independent when they’re all on the same payroll and working together.

  26. They really are running out of arguments for gun control, aren’t they? I mean, the old arguments they’ve been using for so long are all falling apart as data and facts show that it doesn’t work. So now they’re just flailing, whipping any hare-brained bullshit they can string together at the wall, hoping something sticks. I take this as a sign that we really are winning.

    • Your comment reminds me of Charlie Sheen running around shouting “Winning! Winning!” when everyone knew that he was batcrap crazy.

      Let’s put it this way. You have the anti-s pretty much precisely where they want you to be. Ms. Clinton is overwhelmingly likely to be your next President, and with groups like Open Carry Texas making gun owners look like fools on a national basis more and more urban states will come to see that there is no use for an exotic firearm in their state.

      Trust me, she didn’t come out swinging on the subject of guns without some serious polls and management telling her that was the position to take.

      So I wouldn’t rule out this guy’s reasoning. What he’s saying is that Somalia is the ultimate Libertarian nation and that is the model for the United States if the country allows a bunch of right wingers to run around armed.

      And that’s why I am beginning to aggressively buy a few weapons. Because I don’t see them being around much longer.

      • Somalia is not “libertarian”. It’s chaos.

        As far as Clinton goes, the presidential election is more than two years away. I seem to remember being told with absolute certainty from every corner in 2007 that Rudy Giuliani was going to be the Republican nominee for president in 2008. How’d that work out?

        • Somalia has limited government. Arguably the most gutless government on the planet. Therefore it should serve as the model for what Loonitarians want.

          Name another Loonitarian Utopia.

        • I’d say, since you’ve almost immediately resorted to childish name-calling, that your mind is firmly made up on the topic, and further debate would be a waste of time for both of us.

  27. The people who editorialize about this stuff – the rule of law, impartial police, prosecutors and judges and who see the advocates of gun ownership as backward troglodytes – all live insulated, middle class and upward existences. They are not exposed to same tyrannies and brutalities and harsh realities as the poor and vulnerable. They are protected from the worst of the legal system and from the lawlessness of the inner cities and assume everyone is like them. They have no need to worry. It will not be until the police state begins to inconvenience and harm them that they see how blind and ignorant they are.

  28. You mean like the warlord controlled inner city of Chicago where the honest citizen is disarmed?

  29. I guess this guy has never been on the wrong end of a Brown Bess. High-=powered military weapons my ass.

  30. “The widespread availability of high-powered military-grade weaponry…” BZZZZZT. I count 3 lies in that half sentence. I stopped paying attention right after that half of the utterly absurd sentence.

  31. Reading that quite, seeing that face… I can only imagine that this man is so out of touch with reality, that his job was given to him as charity to the disabled.

  32. Sigh. Much more peaceful here in New Zealand where these arguments no longer rage. WE have gun licenses for owners, but the Government couldn’t give a rat’s ass what we buy, as long as it’s within our license category, something they trust gun shops to enforce. And we have no waiting period (except for the initial gun license, which may take several months to go through the full process). That means we can present our license and walk out the shop with the gun of our choice, and its ammunition.

    There is no requirement to give a list of our weapons to the authorities, and we can trade them online, with Police verification of our license if this involves a courier. Our gun licenses must be renewed every ten years.

    Those with the interest and coin can buy military arms, and play with them at gun ranges, but our guns are costlier than yours.

    Basically, our freedoms haven’t been much restricted, and I think we have a quite sensible system for restricting access to weapons for those whom the Police deem unsuitable, such as those with a criminal or mental health impairment background. Family and neighbours must also be interviewed to ensure no grudges or personality issues come into play. Of course, otherwise sane people can snap given enough pressure, but that happens rarely, and no great controversy has been generated.

    Any public displays of bad behavior or intent with weapons is always going to create a movement to reduce or eliminate weapons. We all owe it to future participants in the sport to make sure the general public sees us as enjoying healthy outdoor recreation, and not harboring dark fantasies amassing arsenals of mass destruction in our basements. There are no hordes of barbarian zombies awaiting the order to attack. WE should all act our (advancing) age.

    • Sounds like a sane system. Of course, you will probably be getting a lot of knee jerk response that you guys sold out, etc. from reichwingers.

  33. Ok… my mind went numb reading this. Does this guy even understand what tyranny is? It has to do with the state of liberty. It has nothing to do with coups or the stability of government. In fact, tyranny can be benevolent — at least initially. No government can “abolish” a right, though they can oppress it. Which is in itself a tyrannical act.

    As far as his connections between guns and crime? I’d suggest he visit Europe and put some empirical testing to his … well … take your choice … we can call it theory or flights of fancy. Yet this is just the tip of the iceberg. It looks like this article is but one of a series where he’s trying to sell a book and looking at the articles, the same kind of weak reasoning pervades his writing.

    Don’t they teach these kids how to use logic any more?

Comments are closed.