Article Index

I perceive our current society to be at an increased risk of hyperinflation and societal breakdown more now than ever before in my 50 odd years on the planet. I don’t think I’d like to be left as defenseless as the President and Vice President would have us, so I’m having a hard time deciding. Being able to carry concealed and having the added security of being able to defend my home with firearms if necessary allowed me to make the decision to stay in my neighborhood and restore a historic house, attracting new, responsible neighbors in the process. I have never needed to draw my firearm in self defense, but if I had been prohibited by the state from defending myself I may have judged the risk too great stay and defend my true ‘homeland.’ ”

I appreciate the time John took to share his long-term experience beating urban decay and why he decided to stay and fight for change. He gives us much to ponder.


A member from Pennsylvania who is also named John echoed the ideals stated above when he wrote—

“I live in Pennsylvania, and I am alarmed by the passage of draconian gun laws in neighboring states. Pennsylvania at the present time is friendly towards gun rights, but I am concerned that in the future, Harrisburg will be dominated by the same type of politicians who are completely hostile towards law-abiding gun owners.

“Leaving the state for a more gun-friendly state is not an option for my family and me. This place is our home, and we would not want to leave our extended families, friends, neighbors and livelihoods. I plan to work with grassroots organizations to stop the state and federal government from forfeiting our Constitutional rights. I believe that this is our civic responsibility.”


Scott wrote—

“I thoroughly enjoyed reading your commentary about whether law abiding gun owners should leave a gun restrictive state or stay and battle it out.

I have lived my entire life in Kalifornia and have abided by all the anti-gun rules that have been put in place. With this latest affront to our rights, I am deeply considering moving my family to a more gun-friendly state. I do write letters to my representatives when any bill is brought up regarding guns. But in such a liberal state, my voice doesn’t count here. It appalls me to think that while I’ve been completely lawful with my weapons, the next bill they pass very well make me a felon overnight.”


I enjoyed a long e-mail discussion with Michael, that started this way—

“In the scenario where everybody moves to a state that recognizes the natural or God-given rights of people (not just the right of defense, but all of them), what is going to happen is that the highly populated states (Northeastern seaboard, West Coast) are eventually going to dominate D.C., and the federal government will simply legally overpower the rights of the states (something that’s been happening bit-by-bit since before the Civil War). Some states will cave in, and some won’t, and then we’re back where we were in 1861. A map of the Union and Confederate states looks distressingly like typical political maps today.

“The good news is, unlike the 1850s, those powerful progressive states can’t really support themselves any longer. Most of their food is either produced in the states they would like to dominate or must be transported through those same states. California, Oregon and Washington are geographically poor allies for New England. A huge segment of the federal armed forces are from gun-friendly states, and, in fact, are currently stationed in those states. It would be really interesting to see D.C. attempt to physically intimidate Texas, for instance.

“Unlike the 1850s, instead of declaring war or allowing a secession to occur, D.C. will probably react the way they did with the 55 mph speed limit.