A synopsis of the Rights of Citizens to keep and bear Abolitionist Arms

As it is the position of the Armed Citizen Project (ACP) to primarily promote ownership of, and more importantly arm citizens with, manually cycled internal magazine firearms; a classification of firearms known as Abolitionist Arms. The following is a comprehensive overview of why ACP has taken this position, with regards to gun rights, even though ACP, in the broader sense, is for all “Common Use” firearms & accessories.

So what exactly are Abolitionist Arms, and why use a contextual term to refer to a mechanical classification of firearms?

Quite simply, ‘Abolitionist Arms’ is an academically backed political marketing term that helps promote the concept of gun rights to various demographics, notably those that have always had gun ownership demonized to them and not yet read John R. Lott, JR’s More Guns, Less Crime, cover to cover. As the term quickly and efficiently makes a rather profound point about the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. Specifically the time period of the Civil War, for during this time period the Union of northern states, and the abolitionists who created it, came to see arms as the way to end slavery to the extent that...
"When the time came, many joined the struggle bearing arms. Many abolitionists joined Northern armies, leading soldiers into battle against the South, when it became obvious it had become a war of liberation. Many fought bravely and sacrificed their lives and for that, they are immortalized in our heart of hearts." Source: WorldFreeInternet

Abolitionist Arms is furthermore a helpful term for promoting gun rights because it easily debunks the popular gun-control claim that “the 2nd amendment only applies to muskets and swords”. For as aptly pointed out in Chris Kyle's book American Gun, the greatest ally to the cause of the abolitionist in world history, Abraham Lincoln, who was also a major constitution advocate, test fired the revolutionary lever action Sharps Rifle on the White House lawns, and immediately wanted 20,000 of them for use by Union armed forces, including militias. Thus it is notable that the term ‘Lincoln Guns’ can also be used as a synonym for ‘Abolitionist Arms’.

It is important to note, that unlike others, the weapons classification terms ‘Abolitionist Arms’ & ‘Lincoln Guns’ do have a definite mechanical definition to go with it them. While easily summed up as “manually cycled internal magazine firearms” more exact qualifiers, for what Abolitionists in 1865 would readily recconize as small arms, can be summed up as follows:
1. Any kind of non-repeating muzzle/breech loader up to .950 caliber
2. Internal magazine lever/slide/bolt action manualy cycled repeaters (the quintessential Lincoln Gun)
3. Revolver & multiple barrel manualy cycled repeaters
4. Long guns are defined by a barrel length of at least 16in and hand guns as anything shorter

Perhaps most of all, the use of the term Abolitionist Arms is helpful for promoting gun rights, because it helps puts gun-control into a historical context that allows it to be more easily exposed as a means of controlling people, not promoting safety. Notably the following 1840 North Carolina statute…
That if any free black, mulatto, or free person of color, shall wear or carry about his or her person, or keep in his or her house, any shot gun, musket, rifle, pistol, sword, dagger or bowie-knife, unless he or she shall have obtained a license” Source: KeepAndBearArms

A statute that is one of dozens of pre & post-Civil War black codes, specifically preventing the ownership of firearms by Blacks, though this statue is practically notably because of the “Have a license” shall-issue clause. For under shall-issue statutes Blacks were almost never given these license, as Dr. Martin Luther King JR found out in 1956 Alabama. The extremely reprehensible result of these Jim Crow gun laws was the cultivation of what is arguably the most blatant example of criminal gun violence in American history as the paramilitary KKK, acting as the enforcement branch of a political party, murdered thousands of Blacks, most of which were unarmed under the law. So prolific was the problem of unarmed Blacks being murdered that famous anti-lynching African-American journalist Ida B. Wells said in 1892the Winchester rifle deserved a place of honor in every Black home.

However, just as it for clarity of our cause and message, that Armed Citizen Project chooses to only arm citizens with firearms that can be accurately referred to as Abolitionist Arms, it is also for the same reason that we don’t actively promote, or legally defend, semi-automatic firearms ownership. Specifically, it is the success of the political marketing term ‘Assault Weapons’ and it’s synonym ‘Military Style’ that has been expertly used by gun-control groups to describe what are more aptly referred to by actual gun manufactures/owners as ‘Modern Sporting Weapons’.

By consistently and persistently associating the term ‘Assault Weapons’ with any kind of widely publicized shooting where the shooter had semi-automatic weapons, and even going so far as to make up new ones when the shooter did not, such as the infamous AR-15 Shotgun. Proponents of increased infringements of the 2nd amendment have successfully marketed gun-control to the masses by implying that Glocks, AR-15s, and other semi-automatic guns are directly equivalent to actual assault rifles and/or automatic weapons. While it is ultimately reprehensible that gun-control groups use the firearms classification terms Assault Weapons & Military Style to market gun-control public policy; it is not because they are using political marketing, rather it is because they are using an intellectually dishonest argument.

Perhaps as best summarized by Gregory Smith, author of Selling the Second Amendment, the terms ‘Assault Weapons’ & ‘Military Style’ fail to be weapons classification with any academic merit because… “Anything can be used to assault anyone, a hammer, a screwdriver, even a pencil can be wielded with deadly purpose (stick it in someone's eye). Thus assault really is a behavior, not a device. Likewise with the term military-style, every weapon is military-style since they have all been used in some military, at some point, in some fashion”.  Furthermore, the term ‘Assault Weapons’ is misleading as it conflates with an actual modern military weapons classification known as ‘Assault Rifles’. To fully appreciate just how intellectually dishonest it is to conflate actual ‘Assault Rifles’ with semi-automatic weapons by using the term ‘Assault Weapons’, especially with regards to Glocks & AR-15s, my recommended reading list is the following…
THE GUN by C.J. Chivers
Glock: The Rise of America's Gun by Paul M. Barrett

I could go on for quite a while about why gun-control groups using the terms ‘Assault Weapons’ & ‘Military Style’ to describe semi-automatic firearms, black tone finished ones especially, is a definite falsehood. However it is, quite frankly, beside the point as the damage has been done so to speak. Specifically, such consistent messaging by the part of gun-control groups, has convinced many that, 'Assault Weapons’ are what are used to mass murder people, and that two of the most prevalent of these Assault Weapons are Military Style Glocks & AR-15s.Perhaps the best illustration of just how successful the Assault Weapons political marketing by gun-control groups has been, is a recent study by Vox that showed a mixed group of correspondents a series of firearms images from flare gun to machine gun and asked both if the weapon should be legal or not legal to own, the results of which are showed in the chart below.

In this chart we find that despite being the most prevalent common use sporting firearm in the United States, the AR-15 only had 24% of correspondents believe it should be legal to own. However, what's more notable is that correspondents were 25% more likely to believe that the semi-automatic Benelli Montefeltro shotgun should be legal to own than the pump action Mossberg 500, and similarly 66% more likely to want to ban the Mossberg; simply because the Benelli, despite its state-of-the-art semi-automatic inertia-bolt, looked more like a Lincoln Gun than the manually cycled, but ‘assault colored’ Mossberg.

Thus the Vox chart shows that the Assault Weapons marketing tactic by gun-control groups has indeed been successful. An unfortunate consequence of which is that it has made it difficult to carry on conversations about gun rights with those who are traditionally on the left of American politics and/or have actually never shot a real gun before; when those conversations happens to defend the ownership of semi-automatic firearms with detachable magazines.

Therefore, the last reason for why Armed Citizen Project only advocates for Abolitionist Arms when promoting gun rights, is it greatly bypasses undo political hurdles that are a result of the success of the gun-control term Assault Weapon. Furthermore, it invariably happens that when these same Assault Weapon banning gun-control advocates are asked the question “which guns should be legal?”. They say if not imply that civilian gun ownership should be limited to weapons without semi-auto and/or detachable magazines.

Thus only advocating for the right of citizens to own manually cycled internal magazine firearms, AKA Abolitionist Arms, has the potential to greatly restore basic gun rights throughout the United States, especially in locations with de facto gun bans. As the political capital required to defend this apparent bi-partisan approved weapons classification, is vastly less than that of anything commonly labeled an Assault Weapon. A view that is further boosted from the fact that the classification includes the types of firearms that Joe Biden says you need to get, and Obama, who aptly as the first Black president, is willing to post pictures of him shooting.

An important aspect of the Armed Citizen project’s political stance of only advocating for the ownership of Abolitionist Arms, and being neutral on semi-automatic arms, is the extent to which we seek to advocate for the right of citizens to own the types of guns Lincoln approved of. For a fundamental point that cannot be understated is that the Armed Citizen Project seeks to politically pursue this fundamental right to own Abolitionist Arms with the goal of making it a 100% uninfringed right, the importance of which is rather significant.

Now when we say a 100% uninfringed right to own Abolitionist Arms we specifically mean:
1. No waiting periods
2. No mandatory training required
3. A background ID check system that has reasonable equivalency with Alcohol & Tobacco ID checks
4. Absolutely no registration required EVER!!
5. Points 1-4 must also apply for buying ammo too

For as it stands now the right to acquire arms, Abolitionist Arms in particular, in the United States is universally infringed by the NICS background check system. Not, and I stress NOT, because there is a background check system to verify that gun stores are not selling to prohibited possessors, but rather because it has numerous failings, including an approximate 95% false positive rate that is heavily biased against veterans, and has the potential to be easily used to create a national firearms registry.

This however, is not to say that Armed Citizen Project will give up and move on if we cannot get the infringements of the current NICS system resolved or any of the other numerous infringements found in various state and city jurisdictions for that matter. Rather it is simply our base ideology from which all our other policy and arming efforts are derived. For instance if Chicago were to restores its de facto legal gun ban via a required $100 Chicago Firearms Permit that has to be renewed every 3 years. Then subsequently if the ACP is not able to secure a 100% non-infringed right to own Abolitionist Arms, in Chicago, but only a reprieve from the grossly unconstitutional re-register clause. We would accept that reprieve, and use the increased freedoms to lower crime by arming applicable citizens as best we could with available funds.

More so, despite being our intellectual high ground that the NICS background check system is currently problematic, the Armed Citizen Project will never bypass the system anywhere we operate and it is legally required for firearms purchases and/or transfers. Furthermore, Armed Citizen Project will follow all applicable national, state, & city laws where we operate and arm citizens with Abolitionist Arms. Even if we do simultaneously advocate for the rights of citizens to own these Abolitionist Arms, truly without infringement.

For questions or comments about ACP's approach to firearms rights of defending Abolitionist Arms please contact Kenny Wolfam via KennyWolfam@gamil.com or Twitter @KennyWolfam
 Read more at Armed Citizen Project