The Martialist: The Magazine For Those Who Fight Unfairly

“Stay ‘unreasonable.’  If you
don’t like the solutions [available to you], come up with your
own.” 
Dan Webre

The Martialist does not
constitute legal advice.  It is for ENTERTAINMENT
PURPOSES ONLY.

Copyright © 2003-2004 Phil Elmore, all rights
reserved.

The Second Amendment Primer

A Book Review by Phil Elmore

Arguments over civilian disarmament – a policy
euphemistically termed “gun control” and ardently opposed by The
Martialist’s editorial staff –  invariably become wars of
statistics.  Those who rightly oppose rendering the law-abiding less
prepared in the face of violent criminals (whom the state will never
successfully disarm) have the thorough work of
Gary Kleck
and John Lott with
which to bolster their cases.  The “gun grabbers” who actively push for
firearms bans have only the flawed methodologies behind oft-quoted myth and
misinformation, which they ignorantly repeat as gospel.  Despite the
“factual superiority” of pro-gun data, however, statistical arguments are only
part of the picture.

An argument about the benefits or harm of firearms is
ultimately a utilitarian argument – a debate over outcomes.  While
this can be very persuasive, it is also amoral.  It is, in effect, the
argument that a given end justifies the means through which that end was
obtained.

For example, many pragmatic benefits can be derived from
universal conscription.  Preparing society for violence, creating a more
diverse and better-educated pool of military personnel, and fostering a sense
of national pride are only a few of these.  Touting these benefits,
however, does not address the morality of a draft.  It does not
address whether it is wrong to empower the state to force citizens into
government servitude (and possibly into life-threatening situations).

The
right to “keep and bear arms” is the other facet of the gun control
debate, the facet that is not a question of utility.  In order to argue
persuasively that the possession of weapons is a right rather than a
privilege, the martialist requires information – both historical and
contemporary.  One of the most comprehensive volumes of this type is
found in The Second Amendment Primer, written by Les Adams and
published by

Palladium Press.

Subtitled, A Citizen’s Guidebook to the History, Sources,
and Authorities for the Constitutional Guarantee of the Right to Keep and Bear
Arms, the Primer explores the history and traditions that led to
the inclusion of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the United
States Constitution.  It also discusses the implications of the Second
Amendment, dispels the “collective right” myth propagated by firearms
prohibitionists, and quotes colonial discussions regarding the meaning and
purpose of the right to keep and bear arms.

This “little black book” is handily sized, beautifully
printed, and attractively bound.  It delves into ancient and European
expressions of the right to keep and bear arms, as well as support for that
right in England.  A lengthy section on the right to keep and bear arms
in America is followed by an equally lengthy appendix containing excerpts from
“scholarly articles” confirming US citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

Biographical profiles of the Primer‘s quoted
authorities provide some context for the cited statements.  There is also
an extensive set of endnotes and a bibliography.

My favorite component of the Primer is the last item
in the appendix:  Jeffrey R. Snyder’s famous 1993 editorial,
A Nation of
Cowards.  Few essays have so boldly encapsulated the firearms debate
as has Snyder’s scathing piece, which takes all Americans to task for the
folly of “gun control.”  Snyder’s essay passionately excoriates the
scions of the Left as it refutes several gun myths and draws a line in the
ideological sand:  The right to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

The Second Amendment Primer is required reading for martialists and curious fence-sitters alike.  The historical information
and editorial insights it contains will give any reader much to consider.

Those who support gun control are hostile
to human rights.