U.S. Gun Banner Tells UK Paper ‘Traitors’ Think 2nd Amendment is to Fight Tyranny

Look who the people who tell Brits that Second Amendment-defending gun owners are traitors want Americans to vote for. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence/Facebook)

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “The idea that individuals have the right to fight against tyranny is as old as the republic,” Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Executive Director Josh Horwitz tells the UK’s The Guardian in another segment of the paper’s aptly titled “Guns and Lies” series of anti-gun propaganda pieces masked as “news.”

“This year-long project investigates what works to reduce the daily toll of gun violence in America, exploring how California’s Bay Area has defied expectations and seen a dramatic decline in gun homicides,” the series launch” page declares. Don’t tell the ace “reporters,” but East Oakland is in the Bay area, and it “has emerged as the epicenter in a wave of shootings and homicides in a city that has logged more than 80 slayings in 2020, up from 58 at this time last year.”

“The project is funded in part by a grant to theguardian.org from the California Wellness Foundation,” The Guardian tells us about its anti-gun project. “All of our journalism is editorially independent and follows GNM’s published editorial code.”

Forgive me if I get a Michael Bloomberg/The Trace vibe off that assurance, particularly since the foundation benefactor makes a point of promoting gun-grab groups and demanding disarmament edicts under the guise of “public health.” And The Guardian doesn’t do itself any favors by linking to its “editorial code,” where we learn:

“Fairness ‘The voice of opponents no less than of friends has a right to be heard…’ [and] If you are employed as a columnist — with your views openly on display — you may have more latitude than a staff reporter, who would be expected to bring qualities of objectivity to their work.”

The Horwitz puff piece did not present opposing viewpoints, which would be pathetically easy to find and/or solicit. And writer Lois Beckett identifies as a “senior reporter,” not a columnist – but one who has pinned to her Twitter feed:

“I am sick of media outlets making a case for hopelessness and stalemate after the latest mass shooting. There are ways to prevent some of these shootings. But people don’t know about them because WE DON’T COVER THEM.”

Isn’t that exactly what she’s doing in her Horwitz ad?

As for Horwitz’s contention that fighting tyranny has been a key component of our understanding of the Second Amendment since the founding, some of us have been saying that all along. That, along with being necessary to the security of a free State, putting down real insurrections, and being a bulwark of societal and personal defense are all part and parcel of a right its advocates have long argued for. Contrary to CSGV accusations, some of us don’t avoid the first thirteen words — we chastise those who do.

But that’s not the point he’s trying to make. He thinks there is no individual right. Or at least that’s the line CSGV wants those who don’t know any better to swallow:

Heller ‘reads an ambiguous constitutional provision as creating a substantive right that the Court had never acknowledged in the more than two hundred years since the amendment’s enactment.’”

Three lies in one brief assertion must qualify as some sort of gun grab trifecta.

There is nothing ambiguous about “shall not be infringed.”

The Heller court, citing Cruikshank specifically acknowledged:

“This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.”

And, of course, the Court acknowledged the individual right to keep and bear arms in the otherwise shameful Dredd Scott decision back in 1856 when it fretted that if blacks “were entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens … it would give them the full liberty … to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”

Horwitz has had a thing about screaming “Insurrectionist!” at Second Amendment founding intent “fundamentalists” for years, and like all his kind, with all his exposure and all his opportunities to promulgate his message, he and they have never once manned up to the simplest of challenges: Provide evidence, based on their writings and speeches, that the leaders of the United States’ founding era, men who had just risen up to throw off the shackles of British tyranny, did not intend to protect the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms from government infringement.

Instead, he resorts to personal attacks on individual rights advocates, saying this about me:

“Quotes from David Codrea: Careful … You’re talking about testing the ultimate last-resort purpose behind the Second Amendment. Some of us armed Americans take our Bill of Rights seriously and will not go gentle into that good night, bundled or by ourselves. You and your fellow travelers are playing a most dangerous game. Source: Codrea responding to a columnist who suggested that Anyone who shows up armed at a forum where a public official or political candidate is due to appear ought to be detained-and possibly prosecuted.  Guns Magazine, “The Most Dangerous Game,” January 2010”

As anyone who has actually read that article will see, that is a deliberately deceptive mischaracterization of what I actually wrote. As I explained in my rebuttal (‘Gun grab group lies about … me’):

I was responding directly to these lines from “The Guns of August” by statist cheerleader Ted Rall, and my article made that clear: “These town hall terrorists could be declared enemy combatants and bundled off to Bagram with the stroke of a pen. If ever there were a reason for suspending civil rights, this is it.”

Just in case we’re still not clear, Rall is saying he wants government enforcers to take gun owners who have committed no violation of any law, but who have peaceably assembled in protest as per our First Amendment-recognized right—to a torture camp, without due process, without trial…

So you’re damn right, Josh. What kind of devoid-of-principles coward wouldn’t fight stormtroopers trying to do that to free Americans? And what kind of subversive traitor to every precept of the Republic, not to mention common decency, would hold that against a man and view it as an opportunity for his public condemnation?

In typical Orwellian projection fashion, here’s Horwitz’s bottom line that he feeds The Guardian:

“Number one: there needs to be a clear public response, that people who exercise this ‘right’ are not patriots, but traitors.”

And we know what happens to traitors, that is, what he wants to see armed enforcers for his dreamed-of Monopoly of Violence do to us.

He tried hanging the “insurrectionist” tag on me again in our New York Times “debate” a year after the Virginia Tech “gun-free zone” massacre (where the paper deliberately pitted me against half-a-dozen antis, just to keep the odds fair) when he wrote:

“Mr. Codrea writes a blog titled, ‘The War on Guns, Notes from the Resistance’ (who is he resisting?)”

Why, I’m resisting you, Mr. Horwitz. And everyone who believes as you do, and particularly those who finance your subversions. If that makes me deserving of a traitor’s fate in your eyes, you and your fellow gun-grabbers get the same response I gave Ted Rall. At least that’s all I can post here.

And as for the UK and it’s happily disarmed subjects of the Queen, I weigh in firmly on the side of “No” to a question I’ve been asking for years.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Hopefully we finally start seeing SCOTUS smack down the unconstitutional gun grabbing laws (basically ALL OF THEM), their proponents in the media and the politicos who espouse such nonsense. All gun laws are infringements.

The government did the NFA as a tax because it knew it was illegal to regulate firearms but figured they could tax anything, even prohibitively.

Time to challenge and get rid of the GCA, NFA, Hughes amendment, et al.


Agreed. And in our Republic, we need to see our state legislators and our governor do same. It is not the primary duty of the courts to confront offenses to the Constitution and state constitutions. Executives and legislators have that duty. They have just dodged it like cowards and have punted to the courts to settle contentious issues. I blame the Republican party for that. Instead of fighting the fight as a conservative party they have been compliant progressives trying to negotiate favorable terms of surrender with the Progressives and now the New Left. Picture John Boehner in the fetal… Read more »


The so called establishment Republicans, Lincoln Project type RINOs, are wimpy John Boehner clones. Thank God for Trump!


This is why they fear Trump. I speak as a life long libertarian who voted for Gary Johnson in 2016. I gladly tell people that I was wrong and have been pleasantly amazed by what Trump has been able to do to confront the wanna-be totalitarians in government. Four more years of winning against progressive tyranny will set up a conservative dynasty for decades.


I believe, Will, that was John Roberts that set that up with Barry’s Blessing.


Americans have the RIGHT & DUTY to ignore all unconstitutional laws.
Unfortunately, cowardice has a very tight grip on Americans and they find it easier to kneel than to stand.
Just as you stated, you want someone else to do the heavy lifting while you go about your life.
Good thing the Founding Fathers were not cowards as so many Americans are today.


Americans are chicken shit of a “virus” that doesn’t even exist. Just watch them cower behind their face diapers everywhere you go! I’d like to leave the planet for somewhere that has people with BACKBONES. It sure isn’t in this country.


we shall see.


Youre mistaken. We still believe in the rule of law. Until that law becomes to heavy. Its getting there.Even a mouse will fight the cat.It has everything to lose and knows it. So do we.


That’s exactly what the 2nd Amendment is for! It sure as hell isn’t for hunting!


But hunting is great training. Stalking, hiding, patience, making each shot count…


Any decrease in Bay Area crime has been due to poor people being priced out of the region. All they did was move crime to outlying areas. As far as the notion that the 2nd amendment exists to enable us to resist tyranny, that and resisting an invasion are the only reasons for the 2nd amendment. Not one of the founders discussed hunting or sport shooting, nor even self defense (those were so obvious they didn’t need mentioning). The founders had just been through a revolution, and they did not think it was traitorous to throw off an oppressive regime.… Read more »


AND it’s why the word NECESSARY is used in that amendment. No where else in the Constitution can you find that word being used. The problem lies in the FACT that those 13 words it is embodied in have been IGNORED for the past 100+ years. WE NEED the MILITIAS. THEY ARE NECESSARY. And I’m not talking about the rag tag bullshit fake militias like the three member Militia of Montana.


It it also the ONLY amendment where the founders used the words”SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” I dont see what’s so hard to understand about those four words!!!


When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, they hadn’t just returned from a hunting trip, they had just liberated a country.


Leftists aren’t interested in facts; facts get in the way of their anti-American agenda.


Just another example of the left accusing us of exactly what they’re doing.

Mike the Limey

The Guardian newspaper is a vehicle for the far left & read by adherents thereof. Thus it is no surprise they’re promoting citizen disarmament, as agents of a socialist state doesn’t want people able to fight back when they come hammering on the door in the middle of the night.


Bravo! Mr. David Codrea .


Bottom line: propaganda costs money. Good propaganda costs lots of money. Obviously Bloomberg and company have not been generous enough in supporting the liberty deconstruction movement because they cannot even produce “C” level propaganda. Their pathetic attempts to rewrite history are a case in point. Any competent lawyer could line up a lineage of cases like Cruikshank. More importantly anyone who has read English history can find those natural law based rights and duties dating back to the time of the Roman occupation. Progressives used to take great joy in writing books and articles referencing “taking rights seriously” and then… Read more »


Old or not it’s exactly what people did during the American revolution to end the Tierney the British tried to take down on American citizens


Yeah, when they had MILITIAS. See any STATE militias anywhere around? See the first 13 words being utilized anywhere as intended?


If you study what the Founders said and meant, in the language of the time, you’d know your post is wrong.


For the love of Pete, it is spelled: TYRANNY.


Keep pushing your leftist un-Constitutional crap and you will find out what these guns are for.


Gosh David,

Josh could have ignored you. Instead, without realizing it, he helped you.


Did I miss the boat here or did we have a war with Brittan because we don’t give a rats ass what they think or want or try to impose. I hate these countries thinking they have any influence over what we think or how we should be. America is the closest thing to a free country that there is and though they preach that we are so bad, we have given lives, blood and money to countries for years to help them and lift them out of the whole that they have created. US being so mean and bad… Read more »

Ryben Flynn

A 2nd Amendment Grammar Lesson | The Political Hat
Look it up. Plain English.


Has anyone actually met Josh? He’s shorter than Tom Cruze.