The difference between free government and tyranny is the difference between a servant and a master, and the governments that held sway in Israel during different periods of history help to illustrate that difference. Under the Judges, the people enjoyed freedom because their rulers had no authority to command what God had not commanded or to forbid what God had not forbidden (see the Book of Ruth). However, a time came when the people were no longer willing to shoulder the responsibility that comes with freedom. As a result, they willingly exchanged their freedom for the false promise of security under a king (1Samuel 8).

    In discussing this situation, I have often heard people speak disapprovingly of the freedom that existed under the judges, as if that freedom was contrary to the will of God. However, the Bible makes it clear that such was not the case at all (1Samuel 8). The problems that developed toward the end of the period of the judges stemmed from poor law enforcement coupled with political corruption. It was up to the people to enforce the law, and they were not doing their job. As a result, they thought it would be good to have a king to enforce the law for them, and only learned too late that life under a king was far worse.

OUR GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

 
    While the right of the people to keep and bear arms goes hand in hand with freedom, and godly rulers should find security in the fact that the people are armed, would-be tyrants have always felt intimidated by guns in the hands of the people.

    When Abraham learned that Lot had been taken captive by an invading army, he armed three hundred and eighteen of his servants (who had been trained to use weapons), and then attacked and defeated Lot's captors (Genesis 14:9-16). In doing this Abraham acted according to the will of God, and received a blessing from God's priest, Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18-20).

    David had his own private militia, which Saul wanted to outlaw. Nevertheless, David was doing the will of God, and used his militia to fight the enemies of Israel, suppress crime, and defend himself but never to overthrow the government. [1 Samuel 23:5, 1 Samuel 24, 1 Samuel 25:21, 1 Samuel 26:8-12.]

    When soldiers asked John the Baptist how they should live, he did not tell them to get out of the military. Instead he cautioned them to be content with their wages, not oppressing or falsely accusing any man (Luke 3:14). Furthermore, Jesus commended a Centurion for his great faith, advised His disciples to arm themselves, and pointed out that thieves want to see honest men disarmed (Luke 22:36, Matthew 12:29, Mark 3:27). Therefore, far from condemning weapons, the Bible recognizes them as a necessity in this present world. Nevertheless, even though we have a God-given right to protect ourselves, we need to understand that war, no matter how just, is always a judgement upon the sins of a nation and a visitation of God's wrath on both sides. Therefore, while a nation cannot run away from war, Christians should never desire war, seek war, or glory in war.

    Jesus did not urge His disciples to arm themselves because He wants us to get into fights. On the contrary, He wants us to try to live in peace (Romans 12:18). However, He does realize that arms are often a deterrent to those who might otherwise harm us. In fact, the Spirit may even use the presence of weapons to put fear into the hearts of those who might otherwise attack us. [Deuteronomy 2:25, Psalm 9:20.]

    In ancient Israel, it was the enemies of God' s people who sought to disarm them (1Samuel 13:19-20).  It is no surprise then that there are Jews who oppose gun control. If you visit their web site (jpfo.org), you will find a list of incidences in which gun laws have been a prelude to genocide. For example:


  1- Anti-gun legislation adopted by Guatemala in 1871 and 1964 preceded the murder of an estimated 100,000 Maya Indians.
  2- Anti-gun legislation adopted by China in 1935 and 1957 preceded the murder of an estimated 20 million people.
  3- Anti-gun legislation adopted by Uganda in 1955 and 1970 preceded the murder of an estimated 300,000 Christians and political rivals.
  4- Anti-gun legislation adopted by Cambodia in 1956 preceded the murder of an estimated one million people.


    While many other examples could be given, the sad fact is that since World War Two, more people have been killed by partial or total genocide than have been killed in international warfare. That being the case, we need to realize that governments are the source of tyranny as well as protection. Moreover, since Christ advised us to arm ourselves, and has not forbidden us to keep and bear arms, no ruler should forbid us to do so.

SATAN'S ATTACK ON FREEDOM

    While God wants rulers to serve us by being a terror to evildoers, Satan wants rulers to be a terror to the law abiding, while letting many crimes go unpunished  (1Peter 2:14, Romans 13:1-4, Ecclesiastes 8:11). In fact, Satan hates freedom, and always works to replace it with either license or tyranny. At present, one tactic that he has been using to take away freedom has to do with a redefinition of the role of a servant. He would have rulers claim to be serving us by making themselves our masters. Likewise, he would have rulers regulate the law-abiding in the name of preventing crime, while endorsing and protecting such crimes as abortion (1Timothy 1:9). He also wants rulers to abuse their power by robbing some so that they might appear as benefactors to others — benefactors at someone else's expense (Luke 22:25-26).
    I might also add that Satan likes nothing better than to get Christians involved in this perversion of the role of government. If misguided Christians succeed in making government the master, he gets what he wants, and the people who oppose the abuse of power wind up blaming Christians. Sadly, there are far too many Christians who eagerly do Satan's will in this regard without even realizing it.

THE HIGHEST LAW OF THE LAND

    Our national Constitution does not give us any rights, but instead simply recognizes rights that existed long before it was written. Those rights exist because God, not the earthly rulers, is sovereign, and would-be tyrants hate no right more than the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
 
    Because the men who founded this country knew the importance of that right, they drafted the Second Amendment in order to make certain that it was protected. Nevertheless, the enemies of freedom have tried hard to get around what the Second Amendment says, even though its meaning is perfectly clear. In fact, that amendment was carefully explained to each state legislature during the ratification process, and the discussion was carefully recorded. The intent of the men who drafted that amendment was also explained by Federalist papers 28 and 29. In short, since the word “regulate”, in 18th century usage, meant to train or discipline, the second amendment is saying, “a well trained militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    That amendment consists of only one sentence. The subject of the sentence is the word “right”. The verb is the phrase “shall be infringed” modified by the adverb “not”. It is the right of the people, not the right of the states or the military, which is not to be infringed upon. Therefore, those who deny this fact are either confused or dishonest

THE “LIBERAL” PLAN FOR WORLD TYRANNY

    While the word “liberal” has historically been applied to those who believe in the freedom that comes with moral responsibility. The cult that now dominates American schools and politics has succeeded in identifying that word with the usurpation of freedom and rejection of responsibility known as socialism. As a result, those who claim to be liberal (at least in America) are the promoters of evil and enemies of freedom, thus illustrating George Washington’s warning that “The nation that will not be ruled by God will be ruled by tyrants.”

    Ideologically these false liberals are in the same camp with every brutal socialist tyrant that has cast a shadow of fear over the twentieth century. And like those socialist dictators, the false science of evolution is at the root of their tyranny and its corresponding abandonment of morality. Like such “liberals” as Margaret Sanger, Hitler appealed to the false science of eugenics to justify genocide, and Psychiatrists took the lead in initiating much of that genocide. Stalin, in turn, appealed to Marx's false science of economics to justify his brutality, while American “liberals” are infatuated with the pseudo-science of B. F. Skinner, who called for the abolition of freedom in his book “Beyond Freedom And Dignity.” Furthermore, because liberalism has its roots in atheism, its driving force is a pure hatred for Biblical authority, and it wants to remove every trace of Christianity from our government.

    One continual source of frustration in dealing with these modern enemies of freedom has been their willingness to lie in order to promote their ideology. They will, and do, use false statistics, distorted facts, misleading terminology, and carefully planned deception to promote their secular religion without feeling the least bit of shame. Judges refuse to follow the rule of law, while politicians twist the meaning of the Constitution to suit themselves.
    Many in the media promote legislation subversive to freedom, while suppressing any facts that would expose their campaign of deception. In fact, one of their most commonly repeated lies is the claim that gun control will reduce crime. Yet, the evidence reveals the opposite to be the case, especially in regard to women. The more likely a woman is to be armed, the less likely she is to be attacked. [Could that be one reason that Bill Clinton wants women disarmed?] Furthermore, Switzerland has more guns per capita than any other nation, yet it has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

THE NEED FOR ARMED CITIZENS

    Since the lust for power is all too real, a nation with a professional army and disarmed citizens is ripe for tyranny, and history has shown that rulers are all too willing to use the army to impose their will upon the people. That is why the English Bill of Rights (1689) says:


“Thereupon the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons, pursuant to their respective letters and elections, being now assembled in a full and free representative of this nation… asserting their ancient rights and liberties declare… that the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of parliament, is against law; that the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense.”


    By placing the militia under the authority of congress, our Constitution creates a balance of power that was undermined in 1918, when the National Guard (which is essentially a branch of the Army) replaced the militia. During the English civil was, the English learned the importance of an armed citizenry the hard way, when the militia (under the leadership of Parliament) fought the army of King Charles. If that lesson is forgotten, future generations may be forced to learn it again, suffering unnecessary brutality because of our negligence.

    The Declaration of Rights adopted by Virginia (6/12/1776) acknowledged the importance of an armed citizenry with these words:


 “That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”


    George Washington stated his views concerning the importance of an armed citizenry in a May 2, 1783 draft to Alexander Hamilton, entitled Sentiments On A Peace Establishment:
 

“To prove… the Policy and expediency of resting the protection of the Country on a respectable and well established Militia, we might not only shew the propriety… from our peculiar local situation, but we might have recourse to the Histories of Greece and Rome in their most virtuous and Patriotic ages… we might see, with admiration, the Freedom and Independence of Switzerland supported for Centuries, in the midst of powerful and jealous neighbors, by means of a hardy and well organized Militia… It may be laid down as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every Citizen who enjoys the protection of a free Government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defense of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at a Short Notice.”


    Washington's reference to the Swiss is revealing. Switzerland, where every household has its own military grade weapons, has the lowest crime rate in Europe. The Swiss have also managed to preserve the diverse rights of their 22 Cantons (or States) better than any other Federation in the world, maintaining peace and freedom for almost 400 years without a professional army. Therefore, in order to prevent future bloodshed, preserve freedom, reduce crime, and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity, we should work to:


  1- Defend and preserve our God given right to keep and bear arms.
  2- Reduce the size of our professional army to a minimum, replacing it with a citizen army as the founders of our nation intended, a citizen army such as they have in Switzerland.
  3- Abolish the private armies maintained by unconstitutional regulatory agencies such as the BATF, the IRS, the INS, etc.


Since our constitution calls for a militia, that militia has historically consisted of every able-bodied man between the ages of 18 and 44. Furthermore, although you rarely hear it said, the militia, by that definition, still exists under federal law (10 U.S.C. Section 311). That is why militia groups that are following that law are perfectly legal. Moreover, In article one section eight, our Constitution authorizes the militia (under the direction of congress) to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrection, and repel invasion. In the words of Patrick Henry, “The great object is, that every man be armed… Every one who is able may have a gun.” [Spoken during the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution.]

CONCLUSION

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Thomas Jefferson, “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
 
I recommend the book, “AN ARMED SOCIETY” by Stephen P. Holbrook