Swords, Guns and Fighter Jets in relation to Liberty.





It is not coincidence that Individual Liberty and the wide spread ownership of firearms were born at the same time and in the same place… America.

The key to liberty is that the citizens be on an equal footing with government. This could not have occurred in the the period before guns, because it takes a minimum of two years of consistent training to make a semi-competent swordsman. I know because I train in swordmanship. Farmers and working people do not have to time to devote to this. The American Revolution for freedom and independence began and succeed as a result of the American Colonists being individually armed on an equal level as the  tyrants who oppressed them.

Anybody who has decent vision and a steady hand, can become a competent marksmen with just a few hours of training and practice. The primary difference between American Farmers and European Serfs is that American Farmers had guns and could not be subdued.

It is my opinion that the widespread use of tanks and fighter jets poses a longterm threat to individual liberty because it has created a huge gap between the defense capabilities of individuals and that of government. Even if it was legal for individual to buy tanks and fighter jets, it is simply too expensive and the training takes to long for the average working person. I know it is impossible to turn back the clock, but we should certainly not limit the firearms that people can afford.

At the time of the writing of the Constitution of the United States of America, every individual had the right to own every weapon that was available to government. The Founding Fathers were very comfortable with this balance of power. Any attempts to increase the gap between the defensive capabilities of individuals and that of government is contrary to what the Founding Fathers desired.  Allowing individuals to own large capacity magazines and even machine guns is following the prescription given to us by the Framers of our Constitution of keeping government fearful of the people. The Second Amendment extends to any weapon that an “individual” can carry and operate. This includes historical weapons, current weapons and future weapons. The Founding Fathers of this country had the foresight to look ahead many generations beyond their immediate difficulties, we should do the same.

Freedom comes with a price. It is a price of blood that must be continually paid. The Founding Fathers foresaw this and accepted it as a condition of being free.  This is not only a price that must be paid on  foreign land as we attempt to keep foreign threats at bay… it is also a price that must be paid at home. Freedom requires that we be willing to face the day to day threats in our own neighborhoods that arise out of our own rights. The framers of our constitution had a similar dilemma as they witnessed firearms being sold to Indians by  rogue merchants. In those days Indians were regarded a threat similar to drug cartels today.  Given a choice between armed Indians or future tyrants, they choose the lesser of evils… which was the wide spread availability of firearms to oppose tyrants.

When the threat of a future tyranny on a national level is weighted against the the occasional localized act of violence, the localized threat is by far the lesser of evils. We must have the courage to accept this and reject all attempts of restricting the Second Amendment. There are two possible motivations for any attempts of gun control on the the American people…  either cowardice  or a malicious plot to strip away  freedom from the American people a little at a time.

Rome was a Republic for 500 years before it fell to tyranny. We can not assume that because our republic is stable at the moment that it will always be safe from dictators.  It is a much safer assumption to say that their are always dictators waiting in the shadows for an opportunity to take power.

We should also be fearful of  laws that seem to have the good intention of disarming “only” criminals. Joseph Stalin in particular was very fond of labeling all his political adversaries as criminals… disarming them… and later arresting and  executing them. Adolph Hitler preferred to label his political opponents as insane. Laws that seek to disarm real criminals today will be used in the future to disarm political rivals and patriots.  In order to enslave an individual or a society… they must first be disarmed. No one would ever submit to slavery as long as they have the means to defend themselves. The Right to Bear Arms is the only grantee of individual liberty.

The term “Well Regulated” in the Second Amendment meant “Well Manned and Equipped” in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time. United States v. Miller also determined that the term “Arms” refers to “Ordinary Military Weapons”American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control. The American people still have some work to do with regard to taking back all of their rights.

“When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” -Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)

“Those that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790)

(Note: Permission to reprint, link and otherwise use with credit to Bill Tsafa is hereby granted)

About Bill Tsafa

Swordman, Gunman, Scholar, Accountant, Patriot
Tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Swords, Guns and Fighter Jets in relation to Liberty.

  1. Bill Tsafa says:

    It is interesting to also note that Democracy was founding in Greece, which was composed of citizen armies fighting on foot in Phalanx formations…. men standing shoulder to shoulder with overlapping shields which protected have of their body and half the body of the man to their left. The Roman Republic was also composed of citizen soldiers fighting side by side on foot as equals. By contrast… Persia and Medieval European armies were composed of Calvary. The cavalries were composed of the “elite” members of society who could afford to buy and equip horses. This subtle difference of how armies are composed has a significant impact on how a society develops and how power is distributed.

  2. Bill Tsafa says:

    I wish I could edit my posts :-/

    I meant to say: “men standing shoulder to shoulder with overlapping shields which protected “half” of their body and half the body of the man to their left.”

  3. Andrew Shemo says:

    yeah, I need to figure out a way to have people edit their comments.

  4. Charlie Hause says:

    Yes, one of the comments I hate the radical left saying is that the founding fathers had no idea of pistols being like they are today, semi and full auto rifles, handguns, and shotguns and such… Yet they’re OK with the police and military having their weapons and thats perfectly fine because they are somehow better than everyone else… If George Washington could have gotten his hands on an M16 and a bunch of 5.56, who honestly thinks he wouldn’t have used it? lol They didn’t have cars or reliable electricity back then either, but that doesn’t stop those damn hippies from zooming around in their little hybrid and electric cars…

  5. Bill Tsafa says:

    Tyrants do not come to power over night. This is something happens over a long period of time. Over a period of time, morals, standards and loyalties can change. As person or faction gains power they have more are more of the media at their disposal. Rome did not go from being a Republic to a dictatorship over night. Between the time of the Roman Republic and the First Emperor Augustus… there were three dictators Marius, Sulla and Julius Caesar. Each of them pushed the envelope a little more over a period of 100 years and the people of Rome got use to the idea of a concentration of power in one man.

    The Roman example is a very important because the Founding Fathers based our current republic on the Roman Republic. They were very well aware of how the Republics of Rome, Venice and Florence all fell to dictatorships and how quickly the standards and expectations of the people changed. The Founding Fathers of the USA accepted that all Republics are fated to degenerate into tyrannies without the a constant and vigilant effort on the part of its citizen. One by one, and a little at a time, all of our individual rights will be stripped away unless the majority of the population wakes up and realizes that responsibility of defending the Constitution of the United States from tyranny lies with each and every Individual. Each and every individual must possess the arms and training to pose a credible threat to potential tyrants.

  6. Timothy Havener says:

    I do think the line has to be drawn somewhere though. I don’t want every person walking around with a nuclear bomb. I can defend myself from other types of weapons but how do you defend yourself from a nuclear bomb or a biological weapon? These are weapons of a purely offensive nature.

  7. Bill Tsafa says:

    I think the line is with what I would call “personal weapons”. That is weapons that can be carried, operated and reloaded by a single person. I do think that there is lots of room for exceptions beyond that, like single shot canon.

    The civilian threat to tyranny must be maintained even at the cost of localized violence. If a disturbed person gets his hand on a machine gun and kills a few hundred people it is a local tragedy, but it is not a threat to the Republic. On the other hand if a tyrant takes power, he is a threat to the republic. The cost of a little localized violence is a price worth paying for the greater security of the Republic. It is the lesser of evils.

    Willing to die for your country is not just a mater of going to fight on foreign soil. It also includes willing to face the occasional armed lunatic in your own neighborhood. It is part of the cost of liberty.

    Thomas Jefferson said “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” I believe that his comment extends beyond patriots fighting against tyrants and extends to the risk ordinary people must accept everyday as the price of freedom.

  8. Dan Gillings says:

    Bill, great article! I 100% agree.

    I used to be a European serf so owning a firearm is a right I don’t take for granted.

  9. Pocono Gym says:

    “Those that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790)

  10. Dear Sir,
    I am in complete agreement with all thta you have said. I have recently been thinking along the same lines. In George Washington’s day, all the local people were armed with the equivalent of the Brown Bess Musket, The Army was the same.
    I cannot think of too many citizens in this day and age who could afford to buy an Abrams Tank, or an F-16 Fighting Falcon! In the event of a breakdown in our country, if I survive the initial explosion of society, I intend to hike myself off into the desert, with a horse or two, (Which I shall have to salvage or steal.) and for arms, three .44 Black Powder revolvers of the Remington Persuasion!. The reason for this choice being that I can carry almost 1,500 rounds of ammo, in balls, power and caps in a pair of saddle bags, and I already have 13 cylinders for the three guns, all of which are fully charged and capped,
    “Just In Case!” If I can beg, borrow, or steal the animals before the supermarkets are bare of food, and the hungry mobs begin to look at people’s livestock as food, I think I could make it to a les crowded area of this state. I also hope to move to a more agricultural area before too long, as I am rather long in the tooth, (77) and in a physical confrontation with most people, would not stand much of a chance. I am pretty fair pistol shot, and have tried to develop a “Mindset,” that would enable me to kill a person in a, “Him or Me,” situation!
    I am decidedly NOT politically correct, and am very Anti-
    Obama, who I regard as a Koran Quoting, Muslim, lying, con-iving Nigger! I really wish someone would assassinate the Bastard, as long as they do it by either poisoning him, beating his head in with a blunt object, running him over with a Peterbilt Truck, or dynamiting his car. Just so long as they don’t SHOOT the Son-Of-A-Bitch! That would only give Ugly Hilary more ammo, with which to further assault the Second Amendment!
    Sincerely, Johnnie.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>