Skip to comments.The American Revolution against British Gun Control
Posted on 01/02/2013 9:13:50 AM PST by RoosterRedux
This Article reviews the British gun control program that precipitated the American Revolution: the 1774 import ban on firearms and gunpowder; the 1774-75 confiscations of firearms and gunpowder; and the use of violence to effectuate the confiscations. It was these events that changed a situation of political tension into a shooting war. Each of these British abuses provides insights into the scope of the modern Second Amendment.
Furious at the December 1773 Boston Tea Party, Parliament in 1774 passed the Coercive Acts. The particular provisions of the Coercive Acts were offensive to Americans, but it was the possibility that the British might deploy the army to enforce them that primed many colonists for armed resistance. The Patriots of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, resolved: That in the event of Great Britain attempting to force unjust laws upon us by the strength of arms, our cause we leave to heaven and our rifles. A South Carolina newspaper essay, reprinted in Virginia, urged that any law that had to be enforced by the military was necessarily illegitimate.
The Royal Governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, had forbidden town meetings from taking place more than once a year. When he dispatched the Redcoats to break up an illegal town meeting in Salem, 3000 armed Americans appeared in response, and the British retreated. Gages aide John Andrews explained that everyone in the area aged 16 years or older owned a gun and plenty of gunpowder.
Military rule would be difficult to impose on an armed populace. Gage had only 2,000 troops in Boston. There were thousands of armed men in Boston alone, and more in the surrounding area. One response to the problem was to deprive the Americans of gunpowder.
(Excerpt) Read more at davekopel.org ...
From the TEXAS Declaration of Independence from Mexico..
It has demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defence, the rightful property of freemen, and formidable only to tyrannical governments.
THE RIGHTFUL PROPERTY OF FREEMEN! Even Texas understood it!
Cool stuff. Thanks for posting this RR!
“Life, liberty and sacred honor”
Fast forward 100 years
Charley Waite:”You reckon them cows worth getting killed over?”
Boss Spearman:”Cows are one thing, but one man telling another man where he can go in this country is something else.”
“Man’s got a right to protect his property and his life, and we ain’t lettin’ no rancher or his lawman take either.”
Charley Waite: “There are things that gnaw at a man worse than dying.”
Fast forward 100+ years
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Keep your powder dry.
This should be sent to every member of Congress as a reminder of what happens when government tries to disarm a free people. We simply will not put up with it.
Hmmm, the FIRST Revolution was brought on and precipitated by gun control laws.
” One response to the problem was to deprive the Americans of gunpowder. “
Watch for some way “they” come up with to keep us from buying ammunition.
There really isn’t much they can do about the (literally) millions of guns in the hands of the American people, but they can come up with ways to keep those guns from being easily fed.
Thanks to Pookie18 - Todays Toons 1/2/2013
I too thought it was a really fun read.
British Citizens Warn U.S. Don Let Them Disarm You!
But when they take your wife or child, and put a gun to their head and say "turn in your guns", you'll turn them in.
There have been many posts from FReepers stating the same thing. Kinda depressing. I guess because most of them don't have the proper training, to wit:
When they come for your guns, and don't find them, then you ask the "official" who sent them to your house. Then you ask them additional "chain of command," questions. When you find out who it is that is at the top of their chain of command, you reacquire your weapons, ambush the official, and then take out all of his/her family and friends.
If I'm going to die anyway, may as well make a very violent, and bloody statement.
“...you ask the “official” who sent them to your house.”
He’s making a list
And checking it twice;
Gonna find out Who’s naughty and nice
``After the Battle of Lexington, British General Thomas Gage occupied Boston, Massachusetts. After negotiating with the town committee, Gage agreed to let the inhabitants of Boston leave town with their families and effects, if they surrendered all arms. While most of the residents of Boston stayed, those who left under the agreement surrendered 1778 firearms, 634 pistols, 273 bayonets, and only 38 blunderbusses``.
14^ Abiel Holmes (1829). The Annals of America, Volume II. Hillard and Brown. p. 242 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunderbuss
It could be that the Second American Revolution is also caused by gun control. So Congress and team Obama had better think this thing out, and not go off half cocked!
The American serfs have had far more serious reasons, than gun seizure, for an armed revolt this past 100 years...It hasn't happened...
The colonists lived under a minor level of tyranny when compared to that we, as a Nation, have accepted since 1906.
Gun seizures will occur within a couple of years and it will be messy, but there isn't the 10%-15% of the current population required to ignite a revolution as there was in 1775.
No dictator in history has held the mechanisms of total population information and control control that are now in the hands of those who rule us.
Like frogs in increasing hot water, Americans are weak and pliable.
That said (and I certainly don't know), weapons may be the last straw...because when we give them up, we are defenseless at last.
That's the first emotional response.
But there's an intellectual response, as well.
None of us lives forever. Nor do our children.
When faced with a moral dilemma I often take refuge in The Golden Rule; that is, do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Knowing that disarmament will certainly lead to slavery, what do you hope your neighbor does when faced with the threat of losing his family to gun confiscators? We outnumber the confiscators by perhaps 100 to 1 or more.
What did our soldiers do when landed on the beaches of Normandy? Did they hide in the dunes because caring for their families was so important that they personally could not afford to die? Or did they risk the loss of what was probably most important to those families to carry the battle to the enemy?
If there is a Second Civil War, there will be plenty of opportunities to feign cowardice, so that the ultimate sacrifice costs the enemy as much as possible.
If you are so unfortunate as to find yourself beset by confiscators and your death would not diminish their strength, then surrender to fight another day.
But recognize that true cowardice would consist of knowing that the confiscations are taking place and doing nothing when there is a chance of costing the confiscators dearly even at the ultimate cost to yourself.
To paraphrase General Patton, "Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making somebody else die for HIS country."