The Ultimate Goal of the Antigun Movement

By Roger J. Katz, Attoney at Law

The Ultimate Goal of the Antigun Movement
The Ultimate Goal of the Antigun Movement
Arbalest Quarrel
Arbalest Quarrel

New York, NY -( The ultimate goal of the antigun movement is this: the universal elimination of civilian firearms’ ownership and possession.

This is true and incontrovertible. Everything the antigun movement does is directed to the attainment of that goal. Nothing the antigun movement does diverges from the path to that goal. When asked to admit the truth of the assertion, the antigun movement, and its sounding board, the mainstream corporate media, will deny it, curtly and vehemently.

But, the antigun movement’s actions belie its blunt denial.

Realization of the movement’s goal amounts to de facto repeal of the fundamental right of the people to keep and bear arms – a right expressed clearly and cogently, succinctly and indelibly, in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Yet, if there exist any residual doubt as to the import of that right, the U.S. Supreme Court laid such doubt to rest in the 2008 Heller and 2010 McDonald decisions.

In Heller the Supreme Court held;

 “the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” This right, the high Court maintains, operates as a constraint on the federal government. The question subsequently arose, in McDonald, whether the Heller holding applies to the States as well. The high Court held that it did, asserting, clearly, categorically, unequivocally, “the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller. 

Brady Campaign's Dan Gromsman with race baiter Jessie Jackson & Radical-left Catholic Priest Father Pfleger protest your individual right to keep and bear arms.
Brady Campaign's Dan Gromsman with race baiter Jessie Jackson & Radical-left Catholic Priest Father Pfleger protest your individual right to keep and bear arms.

Still, the antigun organizations, and many lower courts amenable to their views, resist Heller and McDonald, and continue to advance strategies altogether inconsistent with the High Court’s holdings. The arguments – actually rationalizations – for more and more restrictive gun measures may be distilled to the following: one, no one needs a gun because the police will protect you; two, curtailing civilian gun ownership precludes gun violence and gun accidents; three, civilized people don’t want guns and are repulsed by them; four,since no one can know who, among the population, will go off “half-cocked” – presenting a danger to self or others – it is best to curtail civilian gun ownership and possession; five, the Second Amendment is obsolete; no other Country has anything like it, and the U.S. shouldn’t either. These five arguments are a ragbag of elements gleaned from utilitarian ethics, psychology, sociology, politics, economics, and even aesthetics. But they all embrace one central tenet: governmental control of the American public.

The antigun movement does not recognize the sanctity and autonomy of the individual, which is the linchpin of the Bill of Rights. Rather, the antigun movement sees each individual American as a random bit of unharmonious energy, running hither and yon – an individual who is likely to harm self or others unless appropriately constrained for his or her own good and for the good of the greater society. A firearm in the hands of a civilian lessens government’s ability to control that individual. Ergo, the government must keep the two – firearm and individual – separated.

What NRA works to keep conjoined, antigun groups wish to sever and keep disjoined.

As the antigun movement works incessantly, inexorably toward its ultimate goal, the movement invariably butts up against the NRA, which the movement routinely and pejoratively refers to as the “gun lobby.” But, the antigun movement refrains from referring to itself as the “antigun lobby.” Now, lobbying activities are protected speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and NRA is open about its lobbying efforts on behalf of its millions of members. Yet the antigun movement cloak’s its own lobbying activities and blatantly panders to the U.S. President. President Obama, for his part, has not shied away from using the power of his Office to further the agenda of the antigun movement through issuance of executive actions, and he has formally announced, in January of 2016, his intention to do so.

Now, Congress, under Article 1 of the Constitution, has sole authority to make law. The question is whether Obama’s antigun measures operate within the framework of existing Congressional firearms laws, as he claims, or operate beyond the boundaries of existing law. That Congress might obtain some resolution of that question, U.S. Senator Richard C. Shelby, R-Ala., Chairman of the Subcommittee On Commerce, Justice and Science, requested Attorney General Loretta Lynch to appear at a hearing, held on January 20, 2016, to discuss the President’s recent executive actions.

Senator Shelby made abundantly clear that the President does not have the authority to tell Congress what it must do. But the President has done just that, using the mechanism of executive directives, crafted by the Attorney General, herself, to conduct an “end-run” around Congress. The President isn’t asking Congress and the American people for permission to do what he wants to do. He is telling Congress and the American people what he’s going to do and cajoling both Congress and the American people to get on board with his game plan. That is extreme hubris.

If the antigun movement is able to harness the Office of the President to craft its own laws to further a personal agenda, in defiance of both Congressional legislation and U.S. Supreme Court decision, then the Constitution is belittled and the Republic is endangered.

You Can Keep Your Guns
You Can Keep Your Guns

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit:

  • 12 thoughts on “The Ultimate Goal of the Antigun Movement

    1. cockroaches like soros,jessie jackson,bk o’bummer nancy plousy harry reid,and most of the REPUBLICRATS without a doubt have been drinking stalin’s kool-aid….the communist media in all its glory has given the american voters the finger. they think that the machine will protect them…the first thing the new president should do is cancel the license of the leftist media broadcast stations..then clean out the vermin that are infesting washington d.c. all of the lobby’s that under-mine the system with all of THE BACKROOM-BEDROOM deals that has been a standard procedure in government for way to long.. IT IS HIGH TIME THE AMERICAN PEOPLE/THE LITTLE GUYS, KICK THESE RATS OUT OF GOVERNMENT FOREVER.

    2. I’ve been waiting for 7 years for Obama to take my guns. But all I got was a job, healthcare, and marriage equality.

    3. It’s much worse than this. If you look at countries like the UK you will understand that the ultimate goal is to dissuade you from any kind of self defence.
      Crime will become solely an administrative matter dealt with by the police and the law abiding citizens will become a nation of Ghandis.

    4. There is more to the anti-gun movement then meets the eye. The goal is not simply the elimination of firearms as that is merely a single part of their plan. They want the government to have total control over our lives. Guns are a big part of that plan and they have been extremely successful on that front. Sure, we have the Heller decision, which still left the door open for regulation of firearms (something not allowed by the Constitution) but it isn’t enough. Just look at how many gun shops have been put out of business and most of the ones left are grimly little establishments. Hard to find a decent gun club as well. 30 years ago people where I lived had gun racks in their trucks, now they would be pulled over and harassed or arrested for doing that. Hell, you can’t even carry a pocket knife in school today, something I did all through my school years. My point is that most Americans are little bitches who want big brother to watch out for them. Many others are war-mongering Christians who get off on the military killing people who they don’t like. Both groups enable and empower the government’s goal of total control.

      The only answer is to reject government and seek to avoid it at all costs. Push it out of your daily lives as much as possible. Accept no benefits from it at all. Stop paying any taxes that you are not liable for. And most of all, convince others to do the same. Once we have enough independent people we can then work to enact real and meaningful changes.

    5. The intent of the 14th Amendment was very narrow in scope. It was never the intent of its authors or ratifiers for it to incorporate the first or second amendments against the states. This is proven conclusively by Raoul Berger in his classic Government by Judiciary. Gun owners go beserk when hearing this because today every jot and tittle regarding firearms is “Second Amendment Rights!” This is the real and ultimate federal trap.
      As late as 1894 in Miller v Texas, SCOTUS correctly reasoned the Second only applied to the federal government and not the states. A full 26 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment. In Heller the court was right in saying this is an individual right, they were dead wrong and in opposition to the intent of the Bill of Rights and the 14th in saying it is incorporated under the Due Process Clause.
      Here is what happens when you incorporate against the States. You take prohibitions specifically written to chain the federal government and remove these chains. Then after removing these chains, you say, okay you are no longer bound by these exclusively AND we are also making you the arbiter of what these chains mean. You may now decide the limits of these prohibitions that once bound you 100%. And, while you set about defining your former chains you may also determine how much of the freedom these chains formerly gave the states and the people, they may have now. In effect, when incorporating the Bill of Rights beyond its intended scope (which by the way are all 20th century legal discoveries, isnt it odd that jurists closer to the period knew nothing of these hidden meanings?) you not only remove the original chains on the federal government, you now emasculate your state legislature and your state constitution. Yes, you now have removed federalism and created government by judiciary. Federal judges can determine at any time your legislature made a “bad” law. The recent sodomite marriage decision is one example of this. Regardless of your state’s position on marriage, if your state said this was between a man and a woman , too bad for you now. Same with removing prayer from schools under incorporating the first amendment.
      You see, these matters were left to the states. CT had a state church into the 19the century after ratification of the Constitution. The old west towns that banned guns in town were never sued over the 2A.
      It isn’t that a state or local government SHOULD legislate firearm possession or ownership, it is under our intended form of government where that legislative power lies. It is easier to replace those state and local politicians, and protect your natural rights at home rather than have to secure them from DC. While cheering Heller, you have lost liberty, not gained it. As sure as Heller squeaked by, it can go against you the next time. Then what? If, as John Marshall opined in Barron v Baltimore, you seek protection in your state constitutions, your right is more preserved and DC cannot alter it in any way shape or form. The day will come when the light will come on for all who look to the national government to preserve liberty via incorporation and it will not be a happy day.

    6. NRA is controlled opposition per the Bolsheviks. Look at what NRA does, not what they say. In Illinois NRA did nothing for 40 years because they were afraid of Mayor Daley. After grassroots activists like Major John Birch and Concealed Carry, Inc. pushed for concealed carry when IL State Rifle Association and NRA sat back, they finally recruited Otis McDonald for the lawsuit against Chicago. A black man made a better face for NRA.

      When the U.S. Federal Appeals Court in Chicago struck down IL’s concealed weapons statute in 2012, NRA state lobbyist Donald Todd Vandermyde fell all over himself to put Duty to Inform w/ criminal penalties in Rep. Brandon Phelps “NRA backed” Hb183 carry bill. NRA hires the worst rat scum they can find to sell out to police unions so armed citizens can be harassed, disarmed, abducted, raped and killed. The worse the guns bills are, the more job security parasites like Vandermyde have to “fix” their own garbage bills.

    7. This is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The NRA is not the whole gun lobby. There are tens of millions of other Americans who belong to other gun groups or no gun groups who own guns or don’t own guns, but are very pro-gun. This is what the democrats, gun grabbers, and liberal press is going to find out when the polls close in 2016. If Trump is out best bet, he is going to get most of these votes no matter if the republicans nominate him or not.

    8. Be sure to view online Curtis Bower’s “Grinding Down America” video. Also, seriously consider what
      The John Birch Society in Appleton, Wisconsin at and, respectively
      has been warning us now for decades. At the JBS web-site you can view both “Overview Of America”
      and “Call him (Mr. Welch) correct.” JPFO, Inc. at also has much vast information available.
      As does the Constitution Party of Oregon at The JBS, JPFO, Inc.
      and CP of Oregon are all NRA affiliated. I agree the majority of the time with the NRA even subscribing
      to their monthly periodical: America’s First Freedom.” I draw the line though when they start begging
      for more money!

    9. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    10. We were warned quite some time ago.
      “Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.” Janet Reno, former Attorney General in the Clinton Administration.
      “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.” Adolph Hitler

    Leave a Comment 12 Comments

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