February 16th, 2013

Gun Confiscation For Us; Gun Protection For Them


Chuck Baldwin 2Chuck Baldwin

There is a line from the movie Tombstone (one of my favorite westerns, by the way) in which Val Kilmer’s character, Doc Holliday, says to Wyatt Earp, “My hypocrisy knows no bounds.” (For the record, Kilmer should have won an Oscar for his performance of Doc Holliday in that movie.) Well, my friends, what Doc Holliday said in Tombstone could be said by virtually every prominent gun grabber in the country, because they are the biggest hypocrites the world has ever seen!

Paul Joseph Watson wrote a very enlightening report relative to the way that proponents of gun control are themselves heavily protected BY GUNS. Watson writes:

“The fact that Senator Dianne Feinstein’s gun control bill exempts government officials from the planned semi-auto assault weapons ban illustrates the astounding hypocrisy of gun control advocates who, while working feverishly to disarm the American people, own firearms and surround themselves with armed men.

“As the Washington Times reported last week, ‘Mrs. Feinstein’s measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and WEAPONS USED BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.’ (Emphasis in original)

“Back in 1995, while carrying a concealed weapon for her own protection, Feinstein simultaneously called for Mr. and Mrs. America to ‘turn em all in.’

“Feinstein’s hypocrisy has been matched or surpassed by virtually every other public figure now pushing for the second amendment to be eviscerated.”

The report continued saying:

“-While Obama claims that semi-automatic assault rifles should only be in the hands of members of the military, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased no less than 7,000 fully automatic assault weapons for the purpose of ‘personal defense,’ in addition to more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition over the last 10 months alone.

[Notice that when DHS purchases FULLY AUTOMATIC submachine guns, they are called “personal defense weapons,” but when you and I purchase SEMI-AUTOMATIC rifles, they are called “assault weapons.”]

“-While refusing to even consider the idea of arming teachers and school officials to prevent school shootings, Obama recently signed a law that would give him and all past and future presidents armed Secret Service protection for life.

“-During an ABC Nightline interview broadcast on December 26 yet recorded before the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama said one of the benefits of his re-election was the ability ‘to have men with guns around at all times,’ in order to protect his daughters. In addition, the school attended by Obama’s daughters in Washington D.C. has no less than 11 armed security guards on duty at all times.”

The report also said, “Michael Moore, another vehement proponent for gun control, also has armed bodyguards.” And Moore is not the only gun control hypocrite. Watson notes that “Prominent gun control advocates like Piers Morgan, who base their argument on reducing gun violence, routinely threaten violence against ideological adversaries. Morgan once spoke of his desire to use machine guns to ‘take out’ his critics, while also making jokes with his guests about murdering second amendment advocate Alex Jones with a semi-automatic assault rifle during his CNN show on January 8.”

Watson concludes his report saying, “The agenda-driven and factually bankrupt political arguments of gun control advocates may be somewhat easier to stomach if the people making them were not rampant hypocrites who–while calling for the American people to be stripped of their right to bear arms–are precluding themselves from being subjected to the same treatment.”

See Watson’s report at:

The Hypocrisy Of Gun Control Advocates

The examples of gun control fanatics who either use guns for personal protection or hire guns for their own protection are ubiquitous. Not long ago, a gun-grabbing State senator from North Carolina used his own firearm to shoot intruders. FOX NEWS covers the story:

“Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles (D-NC), 74, shot one of two intruders at his home just outside Tabor City, N.C. about 5 p.m. Sunday, the prosecutor for the politician’s home county said.”

The report continued saying, “The Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn’t hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim.

“In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the ‘Do as I say and not as I do’ Anti-Gun Activist Lawmaker picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was a self-defense shooting. Why hypocritical you may ask?

“It is because his long legislative record shows that the actions that he took to protect his family, his own response to a dangerous life threatening situation, are actions that he feels ordinary citizens should not have if they were faced with an identical situation.”

See the report at:

Anti-Gun Politician Shoots Intruder

Virtually every major proponent of the banning of semi-automatic rifles, from Bob Costas to Joe Scarborough to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, all enjoy varying degrees of ARMED SECURITY–often including semi-automatic, or even fully automatic, rifles. Yet, these same people want to deny you and me the liberty of defending ourselves with a semi-automatic rifle.

And is there anyone reading this so naïve as to think that if they succeed in banning semi-automatic rifles that they would stop there? It has never happened. Disarmament is always accomplished one step at a time. Big-Government toadies will never be content until a population is, for all intents and purposes, totally disarmed. If gun-grabbers get their way, only the privileged few (including them) would be allowed to own their own firearms. The rest of us would be turned into helpless, hapless sheep: unable and incapable of defending ourselves, our homes, or our communities.

Among the thousands of emails I have received over the last few weeks was one written by a professing Christian who rebuked me saying, “The only guns anyone needs to own is a short-barreled shotgun and a large-caliber revolver.”

Does this man truly believe that if the gun-grabbers succeed in banning our semi-automatic rifles that it will stop there? If he does, he is positively delusional! Then, my next question to the gentlemen is, so what will you do when they ban your short-barreled shotgun and large caliber revolver?

The problem with this misguided Christian is that he suffers from the same sickness that many people suffer from: they truly do not understand the purpose of the Second Amendment. It was never about hunting or target shooting or anything of the sort. It was about the ability of the citizenry to be able to withstand government tyranny.

If you don’t think that the government fears an armed citizenry, pay attention to the way virtually any police agency reacts to almost any “dangerous” situation today. With full military garb, military hardware and ordinance, and almost battalion-size numbers, one would think that soldiers were headed to war against an invading army.

And as to the argument that the American people have “no chance” against the US military should the federal government decide to use it to enslave us, one must understand that a significant percentage (if not a majority) of our combat troops love freedom and liberty as much as we do and would use their skills and equipment to fight alongside of their fellow citizens in opposition to a tyrannical government. The hundreds and thousands of combat troops that have written me expressing this exact sentiment is too overwhelming to dismiss. Plus, the sheer number of armed citizens in the U.S. amounts to the largest fighting force in the world. An armed citizenry is anything but helpless.

But the reason so many people today have lost sight of the historical meaning of the Second Amendment is somewhat understandable. In the first place, it has been a long time since the American people have had to use their guns in the defense of their liberties on their own soil. It’s been several generations since the tree of liberty has been watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants (Thomas Jefferson).

In the next place, far, far too many people suffer from the affliction known as the “It Can’t Happen Here” syndrome. Americans today (especially Christians, it seems) are way too trusting of their government. Way too trusting! They seem to have lost all awareness of history–and all rational thought to boot. It is no hyperbole to say that many of today’s Americans are every bit as gullible as were the Germans who rejoiced over the rise of Adolf Hitler, or the Russians and Chinese who still revere the memories of Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung. They seem incapable of believing that there could be wicked people in Washington, D.C., who would, if possible, put the shackles of slavery over our necks. In fact, these would-be tyrants attempt to do just that every day with their onerous and burdensome laws, ordinances, and regulations, which are literally strangling the life out of our liberties piece-by-piece.

I dare say if George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Sam Adams, and Patrick Henry lived today, they would have hoisted the “Don’t Tread On Me” flag a long time ago!

In the third place, pacifist preachers are literally killing America! All over the country, local church pastors and radio and TV preachers keep telling their audiences to “trust the government,” “the government is good,” “don’t resist the government,” “Romans 13 says obey the government no matter what,” ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

But what is so incredible with these “don’t resist the government” preachers is that they are the first ones to lead the cheer for America fighting unlimited undeclared, unprovoked, preemptive wars of aggression against governments all over the world. It is okay for Barack Obama to order the killings of hundreds of people (including American citizens and innocents) with no congressional authorization or oversight; it is okay for America to attack and invade sovereign states without moral or legal justification; it is okay to distrust any and all government leaders throughout the world–but never distrust our own leaders; it is okay to send other people to pick up all kinds of guns and go fight and die in hundreds of nations all around the globe in order to “preserve freedom.” But when it comes to fighting for freedom in our own country, when it comes to distrusting our own government when it proves itself to be dishonest and untrustworthy, when it comes to defending our own lives, homes, and communities with our own guns, we have no right to do so? Hogwash! Balderdash! Poppycock!

At this point, let me remind readers that my constitutional attorney son and I are right now in the process of publishing a brand new book entitled, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns.” This book thoroughly and completely researches both the Old and New Testaments to conclusively show that the right of armed resistance is cemented in both Natural and Revealed Law. The book should be released in a matter of just a few weeks. We are now taking pre-orders for the book. To pre-order “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns,” go to:

Keep Your Arms

There seems to be no doubt that these pacifist preachers and gun-grabbing gasbags could say along with Doc Holliday in the movie Tombstone, “My hypocrisy knows no bounds.”

(c) Chuck Baldwin




SUPPORT OUR BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN
Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath


Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!



 Read More Posts

Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.

5 Responses to “Gun Confiscation For Us; Gun Protection For Them”

  1. 1
    Linda Says:

    Greetings Pastor Baldwin,
    Yes, Val Kilmer definitely deserved the Oscar that year. Amen to that!
    There are two things I don’t understand:
    1) Who is crazier, the politicians who insist that we hand over our guns while they blatantly admit they will keep theirs, or the people that go right along with that insanity?
    2) How can the pacifist preachers sell their congregations out like that?
    Unfortunately, corruption is such a consistent part of the picture in this life that it is a wonder we are able to get anything done at all. I truly and genuinely love God, but Religion itself suffers from a series of consistent corruptions, and it also seems consistently true that malleable Pastors have changed their teachings to meet the needs of the times, and to ensure that their flock didn’t evaporate when a challenge to their beliefs came along.
    Yesterday I provided a hymn which was composed by Desorgues in 1794 for Robespierre’s festival.
    Here are some quotes about Robespierre that you might find interesting. They were taken from
    this web site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximilien_Robespierre

    As an adult, and possibly even as a young man, the greatest influence on Robespierre’s political ideas was Jean Jacques Rousseau. Robespierre’s conception of revolutionary virtue and his program for constructing political sovereignty out of direct democracy came from Rousseau; and, in pursuit of these ideals, he eventually became known during the Jacobin Republic as “the Incorruptible”.[7] Robespierre believed that the people of France were fundamentally good and were therefore capable of advancing the public well-being of the nation.[8]After having completed his law studies, Robespierre was admitted to the Arras bar.
    n 1788, he took part in a discussion of how the French provincial government should be elected, arguing in his Addresse à la nation artésienne that if the former mode of election by the members of the provincial estates were again adopted, the new Estates-General would not represent the people of France. It is possible he addressed this issue so that he could have a chance to take part in the proceedings and thus change the policies of the monarchy. King Louis XVI later announced new elections for all provinces, thus allowing Robespierre to run for the position of deputy for the Third Estate.[6]although the leading members of the corporation were elected, Robespierre, their chief opponent, succeeded in getting elected with them. In the assembly of the bailliage, rivalry ran still higher; but, Robespierre had begun to make his mark in politics with the Avis aux habitants de la campagne (Arras, 1789). With this, he secured the support of the country electors; and, although only thirty, comparatively poor, and lacking patronage, he was elected fifth deputy of the Third Estate of Artois to the Estates-General. When Robespierre arrived at Versailles, he was relatively unknown; but, he soon became part of the representative National Assembly which then transformed into the Constituent Assembly.[6]
    While the Constituent Assembly occupied itself with drawing up a constitution, Robespierre turned from the assembly of provincial lawyers and wealthy bourgeois to the people of Paris. He was a frequent speaker in the Constituent Assembly, voicing many ideas for the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Constitutional Provisions, often with great success.[6] He was eventually recognized as second only to Pétion de Villeneuve – if second he was – as a leader of the small body of the extreme left; “the thirty voices” as Mirabeau contemptuously called them.

    Note that his focus was on the goodness of man and the innate rights of man. It is also interesting that the “Corporation” was formed as a viable entity to elect officers into positions that served as judges and the like in their government. He opposed families sharing the burden of the shame that fell on a family member who had been convicted of a crime, and he opposed going to war with Austria. The flight on 20 June, and subsequent arrest at Varennes of Louis XVI and his family resulted in Robespierre declaring himself at the Jacobin Club to be “ni monarchiste ni républicain” (”neither monarchist nor republican”). But this stance was not unusual; very few at this point were avowed republicans. On 30 September, on the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, the people of Paris named Pétion and Robespierre as the two incorruptible patriots in an attempt to honor their purity of principles, their modest ways of living, and their refusal of bribes and offers.[9]
    If they are Caesars or Cromwells, they seize power for themselves. If they are spineless courtiers, uninterested in doing good yet dangerous when they seek to do harm, they go back to lay their power at their master’s feet, and help him to resume arbitrary power on condition they become his chief servants. ”

    — Maximilien Robespierre, 1791[13]
    Robespierre also argued that force was not an effective or proper way of spreading the ideals of the Revolution:
    “ The most extravagant idea that can arise in a politician’s head is to believe that it is enough for a people to invade a foreign country to make it adopt their laws and their constitution. No one loves armed missionaries . . . The Declaration of the Rights of Man . . . is not a lighting bolt which strikes every throne at the same time . . . I am far from claiming that our Revolution will not eventually influence the fate of the world . . . But I say that it will not be today. ”

    — Maximilien Robespierre, 1792

    There are many threads woven into the American flag, and I believe that these ideas as expressed by Robespierre are among them:
    If we agree to live our lives as voyeurs who watch videos of stars and starlets and rulers having untold wealth and creating grand drama; if we agree to live by watching the stars of Hollywood and politics live a life without morals or the rule of law and we fall down at their feet; if we (as a result) become enamored of those that live this way; if we would rather watch them live than live ourselves, then we have handed our humanity over to those we call rulers on a platter. If we attend church and allow ourselves to have our religious ideas dictated to us, without actually reading what is written and deciding for ourselves the truth of the matter, then we have not merely given up our lives, we have given up our souls. Those pacifist Preachers use the words of the Bible in a corrupt way, and they do so to secure a comfortable life for themselves, not to aid their flock in finding God.
    Here is Robespierre’s statement about God, which Deity he connected directly to liberty for the masses and the limitation of the priests and kings:
    Is it not He whose immortal hand, engraving on the heart of man the code of justice and equality, has written there the death sentence of tyrants? Is it not He who, from the beginning of time, decreed for all the ages and for all peoples liberty, good faith, and justice? He did not create kings to devour the human race. He did not create priests to harness us, like vile animals, to the chariots of kings and to give to the world examples of baseness, pride, perfidy, avarice, debauchery and falsehood. He created the universe to proclaim His power. He created men to help each other, to love each other mutually, and to attain to happiness by the way of virtue. (Here Robespierre fought against “dechristianization” as he called it.)
    I wrote this article to agree with you Pastor Baldwin, and to encourage a deep appraisal of our beliefs, our politics and our level of being enamored with anyone who elevates themselves to the place where they want to tell us how to live, unless they strap on their guns and take up the common defense in times such as these. God Bless You. Linda

  2. 2
    GeorgeW. Says:

    Dec 30, 2009

    Switzerland has the lowest crime rate in the world, because the people are armed,basic military is mandatory for men,and after wards they are required to keep their weapon at home. A crook will think twice about breaking into houses knowing this, people who think the world should get rid of guns should think again.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ufkwTM82e4

  3. 3
    Darin Bowers Says:

    Pastor Baldwin, you sir, are a breath of fresh air. My mother has been a minister since i was about 9 yrs old,(her and i have been round and round about that btw, haha) but she has never really spoken about guns, although i know she likes them, i think she has always been on the fence about their purpose. She has always known my affection for them and has never hindered me from them. As a young teenager i owned a very nice Ithaca Deerslayer shotgun, one of my favorite guns ive ever owned. I have heard alot of other pastors with the Romans 13 sermons, but that never felt right to me. Seemed to go directly against what i personally believe. Its very refreshing to me to hear a pastor stand with freedom and the defense of it. The truth has always felt like cool water washing over me, i know it when i hear it. Thank you sir. -Darin Bowers

    Ps- Her name is Christina, she is unfortunately dying of lung cancer, any prayers sent up out there would be greatly appreciated, Thanks.

  4. 4
    Anon Says:

    @ Linda. You are praising the inspiration of Lenin, Mao and Stalin, the antithesis of true freedom. You are praising the man who brought France “The Reign of Terror”. The Founders of America are not the likes of Robespierre, for we desired TRUE freedom.

    The reign of terror, orchestrated and led by Robespierre would have broken many articles in our bill of rights;
    1) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; – Robespierre forbade the Catholics from exercising their religion. As it was founded, America does not behead you because you worship in an “unapproved” way or because you express your faith in an outward sign that is not approved by the state.
    2) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated – Robespierre had the Catholics and those with ideological differences imprisoned, killed and their property confiscated.
    3) in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury – Robespierre did not allow for a jury of peers, but rather by fiat killed many if they did not renounce their faith or beliefs in “fanaticism”. He summarily executed entire villages, killing every man woman child and beast. He left no living thing. He was merciless and cruel.

    If Robespierre was an American and he had taken an oath to protect OUR constitution (not HIS) and bill of rights, he would have been an OATH BREAKER. The hell that Robespierre unleashed upon France is NOTHING like the American Revolution, where innocents, children, homes and many animals were spared. He has everything to do with STATISM and AUTHORITARIANISM in the guise of a republic. How many times do the statists use the same tricks? No Robespierre…. No….

  5. 5
    Louis Fowlkes Says:

    Psalm 9:15-17. Ezekiel 7:4-9=Jesus word. Jesus=Isaiah43:10-13.180 degree. Pi. 3.14. Exodus 3:14. His word for America Ezekiel 17:2-19 because we broke more than just the constitution but our oath to him. IAM msg for Illuminati in America and all other nations=Jerm. 25:18-26. The heavenly and almighty pops LORD OF HOSTS msg Jerm. 25:26-38. & Jerm. 27:5. LORD OF HOSTS=0 & 360degree. LORD OF HOSTS= CPU of the universe.

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148