Korwin: Should America Subarm its Citizens?

Alan Korwin, a very knowledgable gun-rights activist.  Check out his website, gunlaws.com.

Alan Korwin, a very knowledgable gun-rights activist. Check out his website, gunlaws.com.

(Editor’s note: The following was syndicated with the permission of Alan Korwin, the author of the article. Mr. Korwin is the author of 14 books, has been invited by the U.S. Supreme Court twice to observe oral arguments and runs the website GunLaws.com. He is also a friend of GunsAmerica.)

There’s a point between fully armed and disarmed that is subarmed. Being subarmed is dangerous. Officials would never stand for it themselves. It’s the point where you don’t have a very good gun, or certainly not the type you’d prefer, or not the type your police prefer for their own safety, and not the right ammo, or certainly not enough of it. It isn’t the caliber you want, and the magazine is too small. You’re subarmed.

It seems there are people at work in the government and the euphemistic gun-control movement who have figured out if they can’t disarm the public — because the public will not stand for it and put up intense opposition — they can subarm the public (that’s you) a little at a time. If you’re subarmed, and they’re fully armed, that’s pretty much victory for them and a shift in control.

Because it happens by bits, the big picture is obscured. Little by little the power shifts from the public to the authorities. We used to have parity with government, and this kept government in check, made America the liberty capital on Earth. We the people were equal with our hired hands. Both sides were in a state of stasis, equilibrium. They had matchlocks, we had matchlocks.

They had flintlocks, we had flintlocks. They got cap and ball, we all had it. We grew up together, we were partners in this, developed the field together. Self-contained cartridges, rifled barrels, bolt action, revolvers, semi-auto, improvements to everything, optics, full auto… the story starts to rag out right there.

Two Gun Laws: Tectonic Shift in American Freedom

In 1968 our employees in government decided it was time for us to fill out paperwork for any gun purchased from any manufacturer. It’s been that way ever since, despite the enormous trash piles generated by “news” media to the contrary. It’s no big deal — maybe — but every gun made and sold legally to an American since then comes with government paperwork.

Twenty-two years later, in 1986, the scales of equality tipped over. The Gun Control Act basically said members of the state could have machine guns but the peasants (that’s us) could not — only one-shot guns for us. Matching firepower was no longer for the masses — it was for the hired help only. Two centuries of Gun Equality between government and the public was over. Now that’s a big deal.

Oh, the few full autos in public hands at the time could remain, but this was subarming on a grand scale, an order of magnitude, it made the two sides totally unequal. The miniscule number of now collectible machine guns people owned could be cherished, lost to wear-and-tear and jealously safeguarded — thanks to five-figure price tags instantly springing upon a closed finite market.

Say Goodbye to Officer Friendly

The rapid decline in freedom everyone has been noticing was catalyzed. The rise of the police state became more intense. SWAT raids (multiple battle-equipped specialists with machine guns and overwhelming power) have gone from 3,000 per year in 1980 to as many as 80,000 per year now. The Andy Griffith Show was solidly in the past. Officer Friendly was on his way out.

We weren’t a police state then and we’re not one now, we’ve just started looking more like one than anyone would like — and toe the line, pal. Not to worry, our morals are still intact. Or are they.

You’re overwhelmed when a dynamic entry team of eight masked, body-armored men storm through your door with flash-bang grenades at two in the morning, like the state does these days. You’ve been subarmed to the point of being gunless when they have MP-5 machine guns and you have the civilian single-pull-of-the-trigger AR-15 you’re so proud to own. It’s the gun you insist is OK because it’s the one-shot model, not the machine gun it looks like, which ignorant gun haters fear it really is. And they want to confiscate that too.

The seven-round magazine New York got saddled with is a subarmament joke and the people responsible should be brought up on charges for infringement and violation of oath of office. They swore to uphold the Second Amendment, not to find workarounds. Small magazines endanger the innocent when peril lurks. Ask police if they would stand for that.

Of Course Ammunition Is Dangerous

Meanwhile, BATFE bureaucrats are deciding some ammunition is more dangerous than other types, so it should be banned. How utterly preposterous! What needs to be banned is the BATFE. Ammunition cannot be banned based on the fact that it is dangerous! And a government agency cannot exercise power that Congress has no legitimate delegated authority to give it.

Everyone knows that ammunition is dangerous — because that’s its purpose! Not just dangerous, deadly dangerous. It is supposed to be. If it’s not dangerous, it’s flawed. What BATFE is really seeking is to have some ammo removed because it might be used against them, making them bulletproof — but they won’t ban it for themselves, and it could be used against you. Judging ammo — which is beyond the delegated power an agency can have because it infringes on our rights — is like judging which words are too dangerous to say. BATFE doesn’t want you to think about the logical angle:

Using any type of ammunition at all in any unjustifiably dangerous way is already grossly illegal many times over at every level and can carry the death penalty. Murder is illegal. Attempted murder is illegal. Planning a murder is illegal.

Using any kind of gun and any kind of ammo for any of that is criminal at the state and federal level with no wiggle room. That’s enough for this rogue agency or any other. Banning ammo is an infringement ploy.

If authorities can justify subarming the public based on ammo type, the Second Amendment will have been eviscerated, and this is intolerable. All subarmament efforts should be spotted, called out for what they are, and summarily halted. There are no excuses, no saturation “news” stories about crazed maniacs that justify taking action against the public. The responsible parties should be reprimanded, discharged from or voted out of office and publicly ostracized for acting against the interests of the United States. The jig is up.

About the author: Alan Korwin is an American writer, author and civil- and political-rights activist whose work serves the business, legal, news and firearms industries. In 1988, Korwin founded Bloomfield Press, which has grown into the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the nation

Leave a Reply

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

  • Forest April 27, 2018, 7:48 pm

    AR 15 vs MP5 is subarmed? I expect this kind of ignorance from libs, but seriously? Most people in LE don’t even use full auto, because it doesn’t work. It works on the MP5 because it’s an anemic pistol round. The AR is VASTLY superior to the MP5……which is why so many in LE have mothballed the MP5 for the AR platform. Get the facts straight, lies are for libs.

  • Steve November 24, 2017, 7:39 am

    A disarming of citizens would cause revolution and the “grabbers” are well aware of this. But yes, They know they can sneak legislation in, little by little, and trim our rights away. Maybe legislation that even “real Americans” think harmless, like bump stock bans. Then ammo many of us wouldn’t consider buying. A strong counter push to revoke every gun law on the books needs be the counter strategy. By right no one should need special permits for any ordinance the military possess. Sarcastic “grabbers” will say how about tanks? and howitzers? We need to say yes. If someone can afford it, YES. They’ve pushed us beyond reason, I’m sorry to say. Donate to your preferred organization before it’s too late.

  • walt January 17, 2016, 8:54 am

    our fake president is a man whose parents were socialists/communists, his grand parents who took over the parenting when his mother abandoned him, after marrying a second time, to another socialist/communist. he went to Hawaii to live with his grand parents, more socialist/communists, and me a man who was to become his closest mentor, frank marshall davis who was a radical member of the communist party, u.s.a. who had been kept under the close eye of the FBI. at one point obama’s mother was moved from the midwest to mercer island high school, near seattle, because they had found out that the school administrator was a communist. the net result to all this was that obama was surrounded his entire life by an unending collection of socialists / communists. it isn’t any wonder that this has become his agenda as well. all tyrants know that they cannot take over a country as long as the public has the right to keep and bear arms. this my friend is why obama is so determined to take away our 2nd amendment rights. you have got to give him credit no one person has ever hurt our country as much as obama in the entire history of our country!!! his next term should be served in the terminal island federal penitentury in long beach, ca.

  • Kivaari August 3, 2015, 11:48 am

    Excellent remarks. While a police officer I carried an MP5 (around 10-12 years) and an M4 for about 2 years. I ALWAYS said, “If we cops can have them, so should all good people”. There is no reason why private citizens should be denied the guns as our police. After all they are civilian law officers. Police are not superior to the people they serve. Sure the new generation police think that way, but they are just one of us. In some states, like NY, NJ, CT, IL and CA, they are overly empowered. Screw ’em, we are the masters and guidance counselors to local police. SWAT is used way too often. They send a SWAT team to make arrests, I used to do on my own, while wearing a standard dark blue uniform. I remember when police in King County served a search warrant on another deputies home. The deputies brother lived there and was a suspected druggie. So, while his deuty brother I off doing police work, the drug cops busted in the door, without proper uniforms of ID. The brother shoots and kills a deputy and ended up in prison for murder. It could all have been solved with having the sergeant communicate with his fellow deputy, explaining what’s up, and driving over there with a search warrant. Then the brother would have been told what’s up and the detectives would search and make an arrest, all without multiple disasters. I went back into police work after that. We just needed some cool heads to think this crap out to minimize the disasters. I could only impact a few as we only had a few officers. But, it needs to be done on a wide scale. Washington’s (state) police academy has started the officer friendly approach to policing. It is working out better than the tough guy approach. That God at least one state is trying to stop the rush to hurt. Yet, Washington voters just imposed strict gun laws on themselves. Idiots.

    • Damon August 3, 2015, 8:41 pm

      Good post. As a resident of King and Pierce counties over the last 20 years, my experience with law enforcement has shown that the WA State Patrol is an outstanding LE organization, composed of dedicated professionals. Tacoma and Lakewood PD, not so much, and Seattle PD needs to purge some seriously dangerous individuals from their midst. Tough job, though, and not one I’m willing to do myself.

      As a side note to your last sentence, Seattle voters saddled the entire state with I-594. Myself and many others tried to raise awareness of the pitfalls written into that legislation, but the Mukilteo shooting and the conspicuous absence of any NRA support meant we were, if you’ll pardon a pun, outgunned.

  • Chief August 3, 2015, 11:29 am

    What a fantastic read .Thanks

  • Capn Stefano August 3, 2015, 11:11 am

    The beginning of the end of the 2nd Amendment was 1934.. the government has no Constitutional authority to decide what ARMS we can possess, OR the authority to hinder their acquisition. This does not stop at mere firearms! The Amendment states “ARMS” which is a very broad term, indeed. The Colonists had:






    ALL without government control. Lexington and Concord happened because the British expedition was looking for cannons, as well as lesser arms. Wake up, people, we live in a tightening totalitarian matrix with the same end goals as the powers behind King George had back then (In case you didn’t know, that power was the same banksters who created the US Federal Reserve)

  • Jeffrey Reuter August 3, 2015, 11:01 am

    Interesting insight. It’s no wonder many of those who originated from outside the US chastise Americans for wanting to own firearms. I once worked with British lady who referred to anyone who dared own a gun as a “sicko”. Your detailing of brainwashing techniques and information control by governments pretty well explains these attitudes.

  • Larry August 3, 2015, 10:58 am

    God gave us the right to defend ourselves, our loved ones, our friends & our neighbors from Evil. The US Constitution then reiterated that God given right. Don’t allow any politician the right to change, modify or curtail that God given right.
    A sure fire way to eliminate lots of our problems in this country including this one is to vow to never ever vote for anyone with a “D” behind their name every again. Also, try like crazy to weed out the Rinos while you’re at it. Be safe out there, everyone.

    • Rich February 2, 2016, 10:02 am

      God given? The constitution was written by agnostics at best.

      • Paraprakrti August 20, 2017, 7:06 pm

        That’s neither here nor there; the Founders’ writings derive rights from a Creator.

  • Mike August 3, 2015, 8:57 am

    Amen brother.

  • Colin Vance August 3, 2015, 8:56 am

    I grew up in Australia and it took living outside of Australia for a years to finally lift the veil of brainwashing and misinformation that that been so carefully installed in my mind by the Government and Police with the unlimited help of the media. Australians like the think of themselves and like everyone else to think of them as free spirited, rebellious and smarter than average. The truth is unfortunately almost the opposite in many regards.
    We never fought for our independence, we never had independence, and when it was finally offered in some small and watered down version we were too afraid to even vote for it!
    Fact is that Australia started it existence as a Penal colony, an island prison where the people on the street were largely prisoners, the police were prison wardens and the government was a prison administration. This is what our constitution evolved from and I do not know one Australian who can quote a single word from it because we are not meant to- it wasn’t written for us! There is no “bill of individual rights”, only a mass of legal jargon designed to protect the government and administration against any perceived threat and “keep the peace”.
    Australia is a benevolent police state. Sure we have great welfare and a world class national health system- really outstanding in fact, but these were all hard fought for by generations of working class Australians.
    But police in Australia do not spend their time looking for gang members, monitoring known criminals or seeking to prevent violent crime, that’s not their job. The role of police in Australia is make sure that Joe citizen does what he is told to do. Most Australians will baulk at this, but ask them, where are the police and what are they doing? The answer is simple, they are standing on the city corners watching the citizens or busy collecting revenue from incredibly minor speeding infringements, they are watching you, yes you citizen!
    Firearms ownership in Australia has always been heavily restricted because, obviously, to the police firearms empower the citizens and that is unacceptable. Sometime back in the 1970’s the government bureaucracy decided to start a progressive disarmament of the public by a continuous process of misinformation designed to demonize firearms, ostracize firearms owners and promote the pending stricter control laws. This has been a resounding success for the government and the government’s security wing- the police. A particularly effective tactic has been to use any “shooting” incident in America to point out how gun crazy and dangerous that place is and how much “we don’t want to be like them”! Of course, having lived in the US for 10 years I know how ridiculous and untrue this is- but trust me, most Australians think that the average American is a gun crazed lunatic and it’s not safe to walk on the streets anywhere. It’s not their fault, 40 years of brainwashing and social engineering has created a pervasive intolerance against firearms combined with a self righteousness of that opinion- particularly among the majority of Australian women. To admit forearms ownership in public is to invite derision and comments such as “are you a psycho”, while they shepherd their children away from you to safety.
    The Australian government bureaucracy and the police administration can be justifiably proud of their program of public disarmament and control of public opinion, they have done it with uncharacteristic subtlety and finesse. Control of the Australian public collective consciousness is so complete that Australians no longer baulk when the police announce new powers to search person, car or home on the whim of a police officer, their typical response if you complain about this is “well, do you have something to hide”! It is heart breaking and frankly embarrassing for me to see the level of paranoia and complete subservience that the average Australian has been lowered to, and all without them ever realizing it was being done, or why.
    There is rude awakening in store for Australians one day, and it’s going to be a very difficult and divisive one when it happens.
    American citizens should look carefully at the strategies and methods employed in Australia and take note, here is an example of how you can really could be disarmed and loose the unique, rare and precious right as a free, law abiding citizen to stand tall with the means to protect yourself if that became necessary.

    • Fake Mel Fischer August 3, 2015, 10:40 am

      I went to undergrad and grad in Australia in the ’70s. It was a whole other world, even then. I’d casually mention any individual liberty and my fellow students, who thought themselves quite the free thinkers (in frame of reference of Australian political views), really didn’t understand. I never thought about it then, but when the subject of second amendment rights came up, things got even weirder.

      I don’t think it was the ‘rights’ that were distressing to them. It was that I considered myself to have an irrevocable absolute ‘right’ NOT granted and conditioned by the government.

    • Larry August 3, 2015, 11:31 am

      Colin, thanks so very much for your post. Some months ago, on a different site, I had a running verbal battle with a guy in his 50s (my junior) about gun control. He thought we were absolutely insane with out conceal carry law & other God given gun rights.
      Turned out he was from Australia. That, in & of itself, pissed me off as who the hell was he to insinuate himself & his leftist attitude into the day to day operation of my country! I certainly wish I had your current post to fall back on. Incidentally, this fool was so financially well off that he & his “mates” come to America on a regular basis in order to play our finer golf courses!
      Anyway, thanks for the wonderful post & be safe out there in the heathen lands of America! (HAR!)

  • Jay August 3, 2015, 8:14 am

    All I can say to this fine article is AMEN!!

  • Keith Brockmiller August 3, 2015, 7:18 am

    Good article.

  • miles August 3, 2015, 6:46 am


Send this to a friend