Firearms…A Fundamental Question


There was a period of time, from 1987-1990 where I went to a funeral sometimes once a week, another time once a month. Out of a group of sixty friends, none remains but myself and my friend Caspar.

The death of every one of those other friends was the result of someone using firearms against them. Their deaths still reverberate through my being and the thought of a 10 year or 20 year reunion remains decisively out of the question.

Indeed my generation was the generation of firearms. If you look at the people born in the years 1969, 1972 and 1974, after having had children, these people and their siblings are less in number than when they started.

The reason for that was that from AD 1988-1992, more than 17,500 people from my generation: Arabs, Mexicans, Blacks, committed a fratricide of genocidal proportions. Yes it is true that this was the direct result of the West Coast gang bangin’ philosophy and the colour line controversy;

But the main tool used in this generational holocaust was firearms (it is still my prayer that the truce called between the 18th Streets and Mara Savatrucha Trece (MS-13) works out as it partly involves my old neighbourhood and people I still know).

When my family left North Africa and came to Cuba, then the Central America nations of Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama and Honduras, we saw these tiny nations in disarray, nationalistic revolutions overturning the regimes that the US had previously but in place.

Cuban guerillas

Figure 1a: Cuban guerrillas with the firearms they used to usher in the Cuban Revolution. These guns were later collected and confiscated once the Socialist Government had a secure hold on the reigns of power.

Gun powder, cordite and the tools that fired the projectiles needed were utilised to complete this job. Newsreels could be seen of armed civilians proudly walking the streets with their families, grinning broadly and shouting that now they had their “freedom.”

Once my family made their way through Mexico into the United States, we first landed in Annapolis, Maryland, then moved to the south. My grandfather’s brother was murdered and when his son attempted to investigate, he was murdered by the police, the commissioner being the uncle of the murderer of my great uncle (my grandfather’s brother).

The chosen tool for use before he was hung up and set on fire and we had to cut down the charred remains, was a firearm. My grandfather would forever remind me of this and it is perhaps one of the greatest evidences in favour of my anti-americanism.

The police did not stop and continued to harass my family and we ultimately left Louisiana after he (my grandfather) shot a policemen in the crotch with a sawed off shotgun when they attempted to surround him to subject him to the same fate that his brother experienced.

We then moved to the West Coast and there saw some serious gun crime. The police departments of Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles County, Denver, Billings and other locations continued to (then and for the most part now) pull their main recruits from the southeast of the US or similar quarters who either currently are or are later inducted into the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.

Our suffering therefore did not end and the corrupt police that imposed curfews and martial laws over our areas and used Chinook helicopters to guarantee air supremacy did so only with massive firepower.

They had firearms and the Chinook helicopter (named after an aboriginal tribe from the Northwest that was almost completely exterminated by the same firearms) possessing gun turrets that struck terror in our hearts.

Hearing them do a quarter dive and come in over our heads by fifty feet or sometimes fly over our houses low enough to blow out the windows of our houses are things I will never forget.

American patriots in their war machines

Figure 1b: An example of Chinook helicopters that have been used by the US in domestic and international operations.

None of these contraptions and other war machines would have any punch if it wasn’t for firearms. About this there can be no dispute.

All of this continues in the United States today, a country that possesses an arsenal of 300 million firearms distributed among a population of the same number. The difference is that for the first time in their history, they are facing these mass deaths in their own ranks.

Proud, white, American men are storming through cafeterias, shopping malls, elementary schools, movie theatres, post offices and almost any other place that whites can congregate and it is nearly impossible to seek refuge anywhere without the fear of some rampage or outrageous atrocity occurring.

Watching the Sandy Hook Elementary survivors and the parents of the children crying, weeping and wailing on the television reminded me of similar scenes when I grew up. The only difference is when the police would shoot my friends in the back walking home from school as target practice, we wept. They smiled.

Police officers would often make the symbol of the gun and pointed at us and “pulled the trigger,” not long after blowing away the imaginary smoke from the improvised barrel. So it finally grabbed them, I shook my head in affirmation while watching the spectacle unfold.

This was a result of firearms. People using guns on other people, releasing a magazine, quarter magazine or just giving it a good spray and seeing what happens…

All of this is now a national issue because it involves whites and not just Mexicans, Arabs and Blacks…or for that matter Puerto Ricans, Dominicans or Trinidadians.

Americans then appeared from the wilderness, aggressively demanding gun regulations that would ban assault rifles (which will probably be as effective a ban as there was against the AK 47 in the 1980s and my uncle, to show how impotent the laws were, bought one off the street within an hour – unregistered).

There are just too many firearms, too many tragedies and this cannot be allowed to go on. Those desiring regulation said that a breaking point had been reached…the matter had gone past the Rubicon. Something must be done.

One of the leaders of this movement is British transplant Piers Morgan. After every mass atrocity that involved whites and assault weapons, he has raised the question of whether the United States is just plain awash with weapons and they need to regulate it.

To the readers I will say this very simple statement: no matter what I have mentioned above, I am still very much pro-guns. In fact, all that I have seen in my life, my growing up with guns, has made me more resolutely pro-gun.

I know the reader of these words might be incredulous. It might not make any sense to you. So I will explain myself. Allow me that before you make up your mind about whether I have understood this issue or not.

A Response in Revelation

I am a Muslim and self-defence has always been a huge part of my faith. When I look at all of the corrupt regimes around the world, I notice that most of them either have laws that ban guns altogether or they place stringent restrictions to prevent those who would be qualified to access them.

I grew up in the gang capital of the planet, the place where crack cocaine exploded and was put on the map by dealers from Central America, the site of the Iran-Contra controversy playing out.

No doubt about it, gang bangin’ was and is a big problem in the places where I lived; but some of the things that were not a problem were: rape, serial killers, child molesters. Why? The free access to guns…this is why.

Klansmen, Eastside White Pride and other assorted skinheads could not live in my neighbourhoods. Why? Free access to guns. The problems with skinheads and such happened on the way to school or the way back, in between these neighbourhoods and such.

Once deeply in my area, we would not see these matters, firearms made sure of it. I remember the shock of meeting Muslims who were against the free access to guns and having to contain myself. What book are they reading?

Just look at what Allah said in Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayah 190:

So fight in the Cause of Allah those who fight you and do not transgress. Indeed Allah does not love the transgressors.

And again in Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayah 191:

So do not fight them while in the presence of the Sacred Masjid unless they fight you first. If they fight you therein, then kill them. That is the reward for the unbelievers.  

Allah has said in Surat ul-Anfal (8), ayah 60:

Prepare for them what you are able to from power and steeds and chariots of war so that you might terrorise the enemy of Allah and your enemies, those you do not know, but Allah knows them.

He told us yet again in Surat ul-Anfal (8), ayah 39:

Fight them until there is no more fitnah and the religion is all for Allah alone

Here He actually challenges Muslims to do something in Surat ut-Tawbah (9), ayah 38:

You who believe! What is wrong with you that when it is said to you that you should march out to fight in the Cause of Allah, you do not and you cling to the Earth?

Allah actually loves it when people fight a war with righteousness and this would naturally involve some sort of weaponry for use as He said in Surat us-Saff (61), ayah 4:

Indeed Allah loves those who fight in His Cause all together as if they are a solid structure.

Any Muslim in his right mind that trumps a policy of disarmament, decommissioning globally or on a personal scale has no real knowledge of Islam and has forgotten that the whole point why prophets started carrying swords was when they started to be assaulted and then later killed for their statements.

Whether the discussion is regarding swords, bow and arrow, crossbow, six shooter, Walther P-38, Desert Eagle, any number of assault weapons…WHATEVER! In the ayat, Allah has still listed defending oneself and being armed.

Historical Milestones

When I think back, had it not been for that Muslim brother in Algeria inventing the repeat action rifle in AD 1250, we would not have won the Crusades, taken back the Holy Land and I would probably be speaking Italian or French (both languages I despise and revile) and be headed to mass (a religion that is not only false but also protects paedophilia).

It was firearms that gave us the ability to stop the Spanish Inquisition when they attempted to roll the pogroms out across North Africa. The same firearms served Muslims well to defeat invading forces in Cambodia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Chechenya, Tuva, Chad and all other places where uprisings appeared.

Men like these defeated the USSR, the British Empire twice and now the US. Choose your Freedom!

Figure 1b: Mujahidin with rifles from the Great Afghan War on the way to defeating and dissolving the Soviet Union.

When people are violently oppressive (burglars, police, government officials, special forces, FBI, CIA, Blackwater), what other means does one have to redress the matter and re-balance the equation?

No one should ever want to sit at home biting his or her fingernails hoping there will be no break in or that the police will treat them justly.


Guns are Unsafe

Often, people in opposition to guns, whether it be ownership or free flow of them, state that they are unsafe and “what if it falls down and a kid picks it up.” Those with this objection are almost always those who have never owned a gun.

Let’s put things in proper perspective:

1. Most gun owners keep their guns in a safe or on a rack in the house. A small child either does not know the combination or cannot reach the rack.

Keep your firearms safe!

Figure 2a: An example of a gun safe used by a responsible firearm owner. Once locked, it can only be opened with the key or combination code held by the owner.

nice rack!

Figure 2b: Example of a wall mounted rifle rack kept out of reach of children by a responsible firearm owner.

2. If you have a hand gun, the leather holster (even if you oil it regularly to keep it moist) will be too secure and snug for the gun to merely “fall out” or “accidently slip and fall on the floor.”

an example of one way to conceal weapons

Figure 3a: An example of a holster for a pistol. This is often used in some fashion by those bearing concealed weapons permits.

3. It is not as hard as most of these people believe to carry a concealed weapon, gun or otherwise. The great majority of the time, since I was 10/11 years old, I have been armed in one way or another. No one has been injured and no one is the wiser.

This is why it is a concealed weapon. If there was school security and metal detectors (like at the schools I went to) or concealed weapons permits granted to the principal, a few of the prefects and the homeroom teachers, this would definitely be a deterrent to the outrages that unfolded at Sandy Hook Elementary on that day.


I Would Rather be Shot Today Than in the Past

Another claim often rushed forward by those beating the drum of disarmament and capitulation is that being shot or the risk of it is extremely dangerous.

In the case of the United States, snivellers and whiners (the drone of their voice often initiating howls of pain from the tortured eardrums of their opponents) say that the “Founding Fathers” could never have envisioned a day when there would be AK 47s, 45 Desert Eagles, 9mm Glocks, SIG P220s, KT-47 (which can pierce through police car doors).

Again, I really do not think that the advocates of this position (including Bill Maher, Piers Morgan and others who are happy for soldiers they do not know to fight wars they support with weapons they do not believe in) have thought things out properly. A little history is in order.

The “Founding Fathers” all packed and many pictures of them can be found posing next to, with or holding their guns.

The second amendment was only a natural outgrowth of this cultural norm.

George Washington packing steel

Figure 4a: A painting of George Washington. In the background, a black powder rifle is clearly visible.

This is the same norm that led to the Wild West and then assisted and gave a helping hand to the West Coast gang bang mentality. I proudly stood next to allies before and after campaigns in pictures wearing our “uniforms” and feeling mighty and masculine;

But something else needs to be considered. The “Founding Fathers” were packing black powder. This is far more dangerous than the guns that we see today.

an exact replica of George Washington's favourite firearm.

Figure 4b: an exact replica of George Washington’s favourite firearm.

A black powder hand gun will release a molten ball of lead flying at you that upon impact might not fully enter your body but instead splatter all over your face. You will probably die from lead poisoning, one of the compounds in the powder or any number of other complications.

The entry and exit wounds are the least of your worries. It is for this reason, when you see pictures of men from the 1700-1800s with pock marks on their faces or their skin looks seared, this is due to the fact that when they were soldiers, they walked through the smoke of black powder weapons or were hit by some of the backdraft when they were fired.

This is actually far more dangerous than handguns that we have today. Black powder handgun and rifle owners know this and are some of the most abstentious and cautious gun owners I have ever met. If you are shot with black powder by someone who is accurate, short of a miracle (no, Kevlars probably wont help you either), you are not going to make it.

Imagine if some of the rappers we hear of today that have been shot multiple times were instead shot ONCE with a black powder round from a handgun. They would not be here today. Understand that fact.

Survival from gun shots issued from “modern weapons” is more certain today than being hit with something like black powder. If forced, I would rather to be shot with a “modern weapon” than black powder or even a metal bolt from a cross bow

(think about the damage it would do having to pull out the metal bolt along with the head and tail of it which will undoubtedly tear and gore out more flesh).

This is not to say that “modern” handguns or assault rifles do no damage, as entry and exit wounds with hollow points and such are indicators that the damage done by these weapons should be understood in solemn terms;

My point however is that the “Founding Fathers” possessed firearms that in many ways are more destructive than some of what we possess today. Therefore, putting across this assumption that assault weapons are someone a new and unbelievably inconceivable weapon of the same capacity as the difference between a cannon and a nuclear bomb is not only irresponsible to put across as an argument, but it is patently unhistorical.

I want the readers to think (especially some of my brothers who support the Arab uprisings – these same uprisings where we can see Arabs clearly brandishing guns, not for hunting but for combat) about the wider consequences of banning or making firearms illegal.

Ferdinand Marcos, Najibullah, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, all the Central and South American dictators, Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin all banned firearms for the populous when they swept into power. The results of the public acquiescing to this can be read in history books and seen on documentaries.

The Warsaw Ghetto Uprisings were successful when the Jews obtained firearms. Banning assault weapons is the beginning of banning all firearms. There is no difference between assault weapons and other firearms except the amount of firepower.

"Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the people’s liberty’s teeth." George Washington

Figure 5a: George Washington seated with a sword across his lap. He is reputed to have also said the following: “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the people’s liberty’s teeth.”

Self-defence and possessing the means to do so and if necessary remove oppressive governments are rights that are in the Qur’an, Sunnah and are known by necessity to the human race. The obfuscation of this is nothing short of preparing a population for martial law and totalitarian rule. The Lord keep us all safe from that day.

3 responses to “Firearms…A Fundamental Question

  1. Assalaam alaykum,

    Jazakum Allah khayran for this fantastic. I hope and pray that many Muslims in Europe and North America read it and start moving away from the causes and ideals of the liberal/progressive left. Apart from being anti-war (especially Iraq and Afghanistan in recent history) and supportive of the Palestinian people, there is not a whole lot that we have in common with these people. The vast majority of their causes are ideals are the building blocks of full-blown statism, whether fascist or communist.

    And Allah knows best.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s