It is instructive to read this account of the battles of Lexington and Concord, even if it is from Wikipedia. It is important to understand the value of your local tribe and the commitment to arrive on the spot of contention. It is important to understand the delicate way in which the British attempted to do nothing other than confiscate the arms accumulated by the patriots.
Confusion on both sides; an unwillingness to go too far by either side; a disbelief in the actions being taken by each side all led to the start of a war. What started the war, really, was the intent of the British to execute a law. It sought to uncover and confiscate hidden caches of weapons. As one reads the account of these battles, one realizes that it was not the initial resistance that was important, but the reinforcements on both sides that escalated this abuse of government power into conflict.
Today we have an abusive federal government which has lost its understanding of itself. It has loosed itself from restraint, from reason, seeking only compliance and intolerant of legitimate demands of individual rights. As individuals, our rights are not recognized by any government body, especially the federal government that now acts to impose laws it has no legal right to issue. But, we are not safe in local governments either as the New York citizenry are now discovering.
Our rights to free speech, to freedom of worship, to publishing our views and pointing out abuses of government, to the right to keep and bear arms to maintain the security of a free state, to privacy of letters and effects which the government has no right to demand or discover, to our right to due process, to a speedy trial, to a trial by jury, to no excessive bail or cruel or unusual punishments, to other rights not listed and the right for our states to act where the federal government is prohibited from acting. All of these are daily undermined, abused and denied in one form or another to individuals who do not have the high-priced legal talent to demand them. In essence we live in an aristocracy where one class is capable of exerting rights and the lower class which is not.
All of these depend on one most important right above all: the right to keep and bear arms to maintain the security of a free state.
What does a "free state" mean? It meant, at one time, a free state as in a free nation, or perhaps it meant a free state as a participant in the union, but today it might just mean the state of being free. Read any way it suggests that freedom is secured by the right to keep and bear arms, logically that the loss of arms means that the security of a free state cannot be maintained.
If we are to draw arms against the oppression of a tyrannical government, defined simply by the desire of the government of any division as one which would violate any or all of these rights, is it not for the defense of all of these rights that we should do so?
Ask yourself: is it not what I have written, what I have said, with whom I have gathered, what I have purchased, what religious beliefs I hold, or what I have in my house that will cause the government to focus on me as someone who might be violating the law? Is it what I have confided in to my therapist that will bring the thugs to my door? Is it the medication that I have been prescribed that will put me on a list, one of a lesser station than my brethren? Won't all of these things soon be the cause and reason I am no longer able to defend myself and my family from the murderers and thieves in our society that the government cannot control?
We are unprepared to demand our rights because we are like most of those assembled in Lexington and Concord. We are rural, distanced with those few in our tribes, those we trust, with whom we have confided as to our intent. We wait for the columns, knowing that there will be none that we recognize. They will come with lawyers instead of cannon, with police cars instead of bayonets. They demand right now that we identify our caches and point to their location. They do this without showing themselves as individuals, but by decree.
Elections got us here, to this point of despotism, but our rights are not up to the majority to define, they have already been defined by the founders. They are my rights and yours, they are unalienable. But, they can only be defended by might. No amount of pleas or demands for respect will secure them now. The corruption of their definitions have been slowly ingrained by government. Those who have been elected to defend these rights have turned against their oaths, against their own legitimacy as representatives. They do not see themselves as traitors, but as employees. They do not see themselves as representatives, but as leaders.
Listen closely for the panicked shots that start the new call to arms. They will be few and sporadic. They may even be fired in error, or in haste, but they will be fired and it is up to you to ride to the defense of patriots.