Second Amendment Supporters Should Be Faithful and Flexible

Second Amendment Activist Protest Activism Take Action
Second Amendment Activist Protest Activism Take Action

United States – -( Sometimes, defending the Second Amendment is a balancing act. In fact, this is the case far more often than not, and the best techniques are those that hit the right spot in a given situation. After all, we Second Amendment supporters rightly object to being lumped in with those who misuse their rights to commit horrific acts, especially when anti-Second Amendment extremists are pushing to inflict injustices upon us in the form of wrongly diminished liberty. The least we can do is show our fellow Americans the courtesy that anti-Second Amendment extremists are denying us and them.

When people are saying that just pointing to the Second Amendment should end the debate, they are either completely ignorant of nearly 150 years of history that proves otherwise, going back to Southern laws that were used to disarm African-Americans, notably recently-freed slaves, or they are gaslighting Second Amendment supporters. If that technique worked, or was in any way effective, we would not be in our present position, and our freedoms wouldn’t be infringed as badly as they are in some states.

Given that track record, Second Amendment supporters need to tune out the self-appointed commissars who have counseled this strategy in the past and continue to do so today, and who heap abuse on those who suggest alternate paths. What they need to do is to first recognize whether the person is a committed anti-Second Amendment extremist like Michael Bloomberg or Eric Swalwell or if they might be reachable on the issue.

If the person is considering supporting a ban on modern multi-purpose semi-automatic firearms, but is potentially reachable, then it might be better to outline the facts about the issue in a calm, reasonable tone that helps you come across as someone who isn’t just knowledgeable, but trustworthy. This is common sense.

Ask yourself, has Beto O’Rourke’s increasingly strident and condescending tone towards those who don’t immediately accept his push for an unjust Australia/New Zealand-style gun confiscation made you re-think your support of the Second Amendment? Do you feel less willing to defend your rights when Elizabeth Warren labels your defense of our rights corrupt?

Be honest now, the tone of O’Rourke and Warren (not to mention other anti-Second Amendment extremists) actually makes you more inclined to fight for our freedoms as opposed to the effect that they sought: You to give up. If it fails for the likes of O’Rourke and Warren when they have the backing of major media outlets, what chance is there that a similarly dismissive approach to our fellow Americans will work better if we try it without that sort of media backing?

Being flexible enough to tailor your approach to winning over those who are asking question, or who even lean towards supporting restrictions and turning them into new Second Amendment supporters is not betraying any part of the Constitution or your fellow gun owners. It certainly is not being a “Fudd.”

The fact is, being faithful to our ultimate goal of restoring our Second Amendment rights to their proper status is not going to happen overnight. Even if such a shift were to take place, it would be but a fleeting victory unless we are able to persuade our fellow Americans to not try to reverse it. This upcoming Supreme Court term could very well cause such a shift, and it will be incumbent on Second Amendment supporters to be ready to handle whatever ruling emerges. Many of our fellow Americans will have honest questions and legitimate concerns. In this case, flexibility will matter just as much as faithfulness to the Constitution and returning to the vision of the Founders.

Harold Hu, chison

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post,, and other national websites.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Will Flatt

Once again we hear from the Official NRA surrender monkey, Harold. Flexibility is all good and well as long as we realize that: 1) The gun debate WAS REALLY SETTLED IN 1791, PERIOD. Laws and court decisions that infringe on the 2nd Amendment are not the litmus test, the PLAIN LANGUAGE of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” IS. 2) WE THE PEOPLE SAY “NOT ONE INCH MORE”!! No more infringements, THIS IS NON-NEGOTIABLE!!! 3) NEVER TRUST A POLITICIAN THAT INTENDS TO INFRINGE ON THE RIGHT. WARN THEM, THEN VOTE THE SOB’s OUT!!! If they don’t have a primary opponent, RUN AGAINST… Read more »


The Second Amendment is the ONLY Right that has the command “..shall not be infringed.”
The Founding Fathers have written VOLUMES about how the Second Amendment is an absolute Right that no person, group of persons, ‘judge’ or court may deny or limit in any way.
To meekly kneel and obey these unconstitutional ‘gun control laws’ is the epitome of being a slave and antithetical to everything the Founding Fathers have said and done about private firearms ownership and use.


Just who is this fool? He has his head up where the Sun doesn’t shine! The 2nd. Amendment says it all!


No debate. No Compromise.


no flexibility ever. the 2ND is very clear. why give the oppressor anything? you wind up like california full of illegal aliens and no way to arm yourself against them {unless you follow what the govt. says}.


“No flexibility ever.”

Invertebrates are flexible.

Who wants to be a worm?

No one here.

Will Flatt

Those idiots should be arrested for impersonating police. They’re retired which means they have no more authority than any other private citizen.


“Being flexible enough to tailor your approach to winning over those who are asking question[s], …” Look Harold, some questions aren’t worth being flexible. Here is an example from a man who I would never describe as a Commissar. Without providing a link, it comes from right here in Ammoland: [SNIP] I’ll try with a few questions for you to answer. Do you believe that it is moral and just for one person to be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another? And, if that person does not peaceably submit to such use, do you believe that there should… Read more »

Will Flatt

Harold is the official mascot of the NRA (i.e., SURRENDER MONKEY). He won’t answer the question and he will continue peddling his particular brand of Neville Chamberlain appeasement of gun-grabbers (“be reasonable and give them just one more slice of your liberty, so they don’t take all of it all at once”). Harold is a FUDD, and he is PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Talking to him is like talking to a brick wall, the only difference being he’s more dense than the bricks.

Wild Bill

@OV, I like the title. Don’t you just love it when someone tells you how you should be? Apparently he thinks he is the HIMWIC around here.


– I think his pay depends, at least partially, upon number of comments. So I suspect your first option is correct.


“Second Amendment Supporters Should Be Faithful and Flexible”

I/we do not “support” the 2A that’s absurd right away. The 2A is recognition of a natural, god given RIGHT that was codified/recognized as such by the Founders.

“Faithful”? wtf! You mean expect that those who swore an oath KEEP their oath? And folks like me ABIDE BY and RESPECT the constitution.

“Flexible”?????? NO. NO and NO

Would you like a kids copy of the Constitution? I have a spare one


I have to say this article is quite good in comparison to most of Harold’s writing. In this piece, he is not saying to be flexible in terms of surrendering our rights, but to be flexible in how we discuss the 2nd with people who disagree with us or are undecided. He is correct that we need to convince more people that the our rights enshrined in the 2nd are beneficial to all, not just to those who chose to exercise said rights. We need to convince them that we are reasonable, trustworthy people worthy of respect. Yelling at people… Read more »


Go away. You are the most irritating little twit, writing FUDD cr*p over and over. Get a job with Betsy O’wreck, huff post, or something else.

Lets be clear COMPROMISE (now flexible) means both sides get something of benefit, one side benefits in exchange for something the other side benefits from.
Negotiating away some rights so that we may keep others is NOT compromise.
GET IT Harold the FUDD?

Xaun Loc

One look at the headline and I immediately knew who wrote this garbage and that it was another of his screeds about why we should all line up to surrender first our rights then our guns, all the while thanking His Eminence WLP for organizing the surrender.

Operator Z

When I read flexible in the title I knew it would be authored by Harold the Fudd. No thanks. Our right is absolute with or without the 2A.

Autsin Miller III

There Will, I’ll vote it up….


I just love these articles that come across as if I just walked into the middle of a conversation. Harold has so much context he keeps in his head that trying to sort out what he is saying like trying to nail jello to the wall. You think you know the context but then he disproves you.
This is known as “speaking from IN THE KNOW” Unless you know all of the preconceived context and ideas, you are left spinning in the wind.


I know that some here are satisfied to greatly belittle Harold. The fact is, When I saw “flexible” in the title, I knew that this must be from Harold, just as many others did. I won’t fault Harold at all for his effort to try to work things out respectfully with other people. I also won’t fault him for urging patriots to stick together and stand strong for what we share in common, even though we also may have differences. However, when only negotiation is suggested as a “solution” to our current problems, this sounds a lot like Barack Obama,… Read more »

Wild Bill

, Well then allow me to fault Harold! There are limits to respect and working things out. And the state of infringement on our Second Amendment Right to carry and use arms for our defense is way beyond what governments are empowered to do.
Every “gun control” statute is unconstitutional and promulgated through the barrel of a gun. Every city, county, state, and federal government is using our tax money to program, train, and arm people to diminish our Civil Rights by force.

Harold’s fault is that he would give up even more.

Old Bill

This is a War between the American People our Constitution and Bill of Rights and a number of Well funded and organized factions committed to Tyranny, World Serfdom. The attacks on our Bill of Rights are broad and go far beyond the Second Amendment. It easy to show how those who attack the Second Amendment are just as contemptuous of Free Speech, The Right to Peaceably assemble.. Right against Self Incrimination, Right against Illegal Search and Seizure.. It is no longer difficult to patiently explain and for thinking people to grasp that the issue never has been about “Guns’ but… Read more »


As soon as I saw the word flexible in the title I knew who the author was. Son, you need to do some soul searching.


HAROLD!!!! How “flexible” do you think were the MEN under Captain John Parker who stood against the Britsh Regulars at Lexington that April morning? Their “orders” from the British captain were to LAY DOWN YOUR ARMS. (same orders given by the Bolsheviks to the Mencheviks at the Kremlin in 1917, and this time foolilshly obeyed. Learn how THAT worked out for them….. and their nation). Later that same day, the same British Regular soldiers invaded Concord with the same intent.. the disarming of the Colinials resident thereabouts. How flexible were Isaac Davis and Col Barrett as they approached the North… Read more »


@Tionico – My understanding is that the colonists at Concord were quite flexible. My vague understanding is that they would have quite willingly have allowed the British to depart without collecting any of the colonial arms – and that shooting would not have started, had they turned tail first. Once shooting started, the colonists continued to be flexible in their tactics. Adjusting to whatever moves the British attempted. Gather on a hilltop where they could rain fire on the roadway until British charge that gathering – than (flexibly) melt away into the countryside, while a different group sets up the… Read more »

Wild Bill

@OV, If I needed to hire a baby sitter, and only Harold or Sammy were available … I would pay twice as much to hire Sammy.

Wild Bill

@OV, Yep, trash like that has to be worked at, and stupidity like that has to be manufactured.


Anyone who has ever tried to explain 2A rights to someone running with ANTIFA or otherwise, has clearly never stood across from them in real time. I have. All they are interested in is you agreeing with them, or catching their clubs upside your foolish head for thinking otherwise. Why? Because you were just labeled a fascist and a racist, is why: a place where all gun owners hole up. Imagine, if you will, the outcome of WWII, or the even the Revolution, had we adopted that philosophy? The time for discussion has passed. The time to fight is now.


Just another of Harold’s attempts to play patty cake with the liberals. We know from history that if you give them a little they will want the whole thing. Harold’s ideas would get us straight into box cars without any negotiations or compromises.

Wild Bill

@Tcat, That is such a funny visual!

Pastor Roy

This boy is a fool and has written an asinine article proving he is someone who is not as staunch a 2nd Amendment supporter as he would have us believe. After reading many of the other comments, all of which agree with me, I hesitate to jump on the dog pile. But I can’t pass up such an opportunity. Harold ~ There is NO room for “flexibility” when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and to refer to those of us who believe this as “commissars” is offensive in the extreme. If you had titled your article, “2nd Amendment Supporters… Read more »


What makes you so sure he isn’t taking bloombergs money already, but under the table? Half of the so-called ‘journalists’ in the US are, I consider it highly likely that he’s just more of that same “controlled opposition”.


Today this came in on a feed I receive. So this is compromise – get rid of the SAFE act and do away with home made firearms – which has been an American traditions since before the Revolutionary War. This NRA board member should be expelled. he does not believe in freedom or rights he believes the government should own us and tell us what we will be allowed to do with our own time and money. So more of the same from Negotiating our Rights Away. As a life member since 1980 I grow more frustrated and disheartened by… Read more »

Wild Bill

@option, Did you read WLP’s article in the latest American Rifleman? No repentance or apologies there.


Not yet, I rcd last night and did not look through it. If WLP’s article is non repentant no apologies I would like him to speak to Harold and Tom King board member from NY.

Wild Bill

@option, The best article in the Nov issue is on how to clean your rifle properly.

Pastor Roy

Asinine article written by someone who is not as staunch a 2nd Amendment supporter as he would have us believe. There is NO room for “flexibility” when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and to refer to those of us who believe this as “commissars” is offensive in the extreme. If he wanted to call his article, “2nd Amendment Supporters Should Be Civil”, then I’d be in agreement with him. No argument gains ground by being harsh and unpleasant. But civility and flexibility are two entirely different things. I will be civil in defense of my God-given right, endorsed by… Read more »


There is no balancing act when it comes to gun rights, we have been steadily losing ground to anti-Constitution communists and their piles of laws that only affect the law abiding. Your statement of criminals misusing “their rights” as if to say they have evey right to use to a gun but for what? Simply put, my weapons are purely defensive as for criminals it’s offensive and it’s unfortunate that there is no distinction made by the left. It used to be, criminals when convicted were stripped of all rights until they paid their debt to society and yet democrats… Read more »


Harold will negotiate away all his Constitutional rights if he thinks it is a good compromise. But Ben Franklin had it right and said “People who trade Freedom for Safety deserve neither!

Pastor Roy

Agree with you 100%.


Good ol’ Harold once again pleading for political correctness when dealing with anti-gunners in order not to hurt their feelings. NO compromise in defense of the Constitution, any and all parts of it, especially the 2nd Amendment. Compromise, soft soap, back peddling or putting anti-gun people’s feelings above the 2nd Amendment is nothing but FAILURE! You can’t use logic and common sense when dealing with people who have no common sense and logic (Democrats & liberals).

Pastor Roy

Agree with you 100%.

Green Mtn. Boy

Correct, Rrights don’t end where some Leftards feelz begin.


I haven’t read the other comments but here is my take. My stand on the 2nd Amendment is the same as it is on everything else. That is, I will follow the Truth. And, unlike many of our fellow citizens, I am able to discern the truth through knowledge of the past and present.
Harold and his ilk are like leaves in a brook. They are carried along wherever the current carries them.

Pastor Roy

Absolutely right.


“Blessed are the flexible….for they shall be bent over.” Not a good moral stand, buddy. We were flexible with hearing protection, and I don’t see any “flexibility” on the Liberal side to improve gun safety and allow me to protect my hearing. June 26, 1934 was the last day I was flexible.


You don’t really get it, Mr Hutchison. Maybe you’re too young to have understood what’s been happening for the last 100 years.
We will no longer have the conversation with anti gun totalitarians. Decades of debate has resulted in nothing but compromise and loss of rights from our side. It’s only recently we’ve accomplished much in the way of restoring some of our God given rights, and that’s because we’re refusing to compromise anymore.
No more. We’re done. Conversation over.

Pastor Roy

Well said.


Except for the part about “compromise”. No anti gunner ever compromised ANYTHING!….. EVER! Our side never got anything in these so called ‘negotiations’. Never did, and never will. The antis regard ‘negotiating’ a ‘compromise’, as a discussion of how much of what you possess that they can convince you (“you” being the Harold’s out there) to give away for free.
No way is that any kind of compromise… no matter how many idiots, fools, and liars think, and say, that it is.


I do not believe that the author was asking you to be flexible in defending your rights. He is saying to be flexible in your approach to different people depending upon their views on infringing on those rights. I have met people who want to ban “AK 15’s” and I have had to calmly explain to them that they are following the herd. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn’t. I guess it depends on who’s rear end they have their nose stuck up rather or not you will be able to reach them. The author is right about needing to… Read more »


I see your point, but it is not clearly stated. To some degree, we all modify our conversations according to our personality and, I’ll admit it, mood. 😉

Pastor Roy

Then he shouldn’t have used the word “flexible” because it has no place in a discussion about the 2nd Amendment. See my comment in which I said, “civil” would have been a better word.


@Will- — No. He meant what he said – when talking to someone who wants to ban AK 15s. In other words – when talking to someone who is totally clueless, either they are open to being educated – or they are hooked to a dogmatic opposition – the first can be talked down, and maybe taken to the range, the second need to be put downrange.

Some guy

NOT ONE STEP BACK! If you are not prepared to go to war against the traitors, just hand in those guns. The time for talk is passed.


Should we negotiate bullet to the back of the head or front of the head also? WE have been compromising since 1934 and look what it has gotten us. We are now at the point of door to door searches. Harold you could be more wrong but I doubt it. One problem is compromising not only looks weak it is weak. WE and our organizations (NRA) have failed miserably at educating the public as to what is really going on and the source of rights. This idea that the 2nd or any part of the Constitution gives us any right… Read more »

Pastor Roy

Very well said, By the way, what happened in 1934?


National Firearms Act of 1934.

Wild Bill

@PR, The National Firearms Act went into effect. I think that you will want to do a quick (and interesting read) at Wikipedia. Although Wikipedia is not the definitive work on the NFA.


Flexible, you say, Harold? What, so they can bend us over and rape us?! I think not! I will remain rigid!


Wrong-o! We do NOT need to find (or even try to find) any kind of “common ground” with anti-2nd Amendment advocates. Who actually gives a tinker’s damn if they try to reverse the 2nd Amendment? They can go straight to hell. The Constitution says exactly what it says (not just whatever popular “interpretation” happens to be this week’s liberal agenda!). Remember Marbury? Any law that is opposed to the Constitution is NOT enforceable! If the government enacts legislation that outlaws firearms, the firearms do not become illegal… the government becomes illegal!!! It’s about damnable time that patriots stood up and… Read more »

Some guy

Let us reward them with the object of their desire, the civil war they want so badly. They have attempted a coup and failed. They are attempting a second coup now. WE ARE JUSTIFIED!

Wild Bill

@Some, Alright we will have the first formation at your house. There will be three percent of 100 million gun owners for lunch. Please mark the parking clearly.

Pastor Roy

I agree with you and at 67, I’m ready to do what’s necessary. My wife and I have discussed this and have made several purchases in preparation for civil war. But we have adult children and small grandchildren. It’s easier for us with nothing to lose but our own lives than it is for them with little ones in the house. If we are shot and killed at our door for refusing confiscation, that’s one thing. We’re ready and we know we’ll be together for eternity in heaven. But if my sons & their wives are killed, then their children… Read more »

Wild Bill

@PR, You need a better plan for survival. Technology today makes the War between the states look like a one armed snow ball fight.

Wild Bill

@OV, yeah, organ harvesting is the new recommended use for dissidents, by tyrannical governments.

Ansel Hazen

Oh I’m more than flexible Harold. Even though I’m left eye dominant I can still put shots on target with a gun in my right hand.


@AH – Right eye dominant here, only so-so shooting left handed – not nearly as fast or accurate as I am with right hand.
Did you mean you are left-eye and left-hand dominant, or just cross dominant & learned to compensate.
Everyone should practice with both hands. Start early, because it is even more frustrating once you know how easy it is with your strong hand.

jack mac

A person may only have one usesable hand. That is why handguns are not called handsgun.

Ansel Hazen

But I call it my hand gun though…… 🙂

Ansel Hazen

A true lefty in every sense sir. The RO at the competitions I attend does an admirable job of throwing us a curve ball though so I get righty time also. I shoot eyes open so it’s easy to switch.


Mr. Hutchison, pardon my english, but you are so full of bear shit!! Maybe the American Militia should note your na,e as a collaborator to the dummycratic socialist. Myself, I’d hate to be on their list. The 2nd Amendment “IS NOT TO BE INFRINGED!!” what part of this statement do you not understand. You sound like you come from Sweden or Holland or New Zealand. If you are I’d go back!!


Mr. Hutchinson,
The anti gun politicians and anti gun groups have never been flexible when it comes to agreeing with the Pro 2A side. They will listen not that they’re interested what the pro 2A people will say, they will still do what they intend to do.. We should be flexible? Got off it!!

They have been enemies of freedom for a long time and wanting to take away God Given Rights, not just the 2A, but other rights as well. They are SUBVERSIVES , bent on destroying what this country is and stands for.

Wild Bill

, Yes, with Harold’s approach, four years from now, we will be accusing him of being a stooge for the National Slingshot Association.