Category: 2nd Amendment

Posted on

Right to Bear Arms?

Tell me again that an ad hoc militia composed of armed citizens is of no use whatsoever. . .

One of the clearest examples of a case where the Second Amendment prohibition against infringing on citizens’ right to bear arms directly enabled a just overthrow of corrupt government is The Battle of Athens, TN.

WWII veterans and others in the community armed themselves and laid seige on the town jail in direct response to corrupt government practices, including blatant (and violent, even murderous) cheating at the polls. The end result was a housecleaning of local government. Unfortunately, the “housecleaning” was not violent enough (I am quite serious here). . . “Clean” government only lasted a couple of years.

Posted on

Opposition to “Constitutional Carry” Has Some. . . Expected “Reasons”

Revenue. An article about permitless open/concealed carry of firearms in Oklahoma included this final line:

“State agents said they’ll adapt to the changes. But because Oklahomans won’t have to pay to get a permit anymore, the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation could lose between $4 – $6 million in fees.”

Yeh, “concern” over milking citizens for more money is certainly one reason. Of course, a strong desire for state control over citizens’ inherent rights is prevalent as well.

Posted on

“Gun Violence” *mhwa*

[Extracted from a ub-thread of a discussion discussing the disparate topics of “mass shootings” and wrongful shootings by cops.]

To whatever extent wrongful shootings by police exists (and any is a Very Bad Thing, IMO), it can more easily be explained by Lord Acton’s pithy comment, Rudyard Kipling’s “General Summary,” or even the theological concept of universal moral depravity. Humans being what we are, any group of people is going to have apples that are, urm, “badder” than the norm, and unfortunately, there are bad apples in government jobs at almost any level (LEOs, run-of-the-mill bureaucraps, public “persecutors,” politicians, and corrupt judges), and they ARE be a problem, universally, to some degree or another. How to deal with the bad apples without crucifying the “less bad,” maybe even marginally OK apples? (“Marginally OK” because as long as their PEERS do not stop them, the “badder apples” will find it easier to abuse their authority.)

Well, that’s the nut, isn’t it?

Qui custodit ipsos custodes?

But as for being a “problem with guns,” well, it’s the same answer as to the issue of “gun violence.” Guns do not commit violent acts. People do. One way (really, AFAIK, the only legitimate way for governments that are not supposed to infringe on natural rights but protect them) is to make the punishments for serious violent acts serious punishment, pour encourager les autres, as it were, and those punishments should apply to ALL, with no weasel room for LEOs to argue “qualified immunity.” (“So I shot the guy seven times. I thought that UNARMED MAN SPREADEAGLED ON THE FLOOR was a threat, and how was I to know that I busted down the door at the wrong address? Qualified immunity” “Well, I thought that baby she was holding was a deadly weapons, so I killed her.” Qualified immunity. Etc.)

But, demanding that our faux “nobility” give up special privileges just isn’t going to fly, I don’t think. *sigh* Meanwhile, anti-gun folks argue that citizens should surrender their rights because of an almost vanishingly small number of bad actors. *smh*

Posted on

Gun “Control”? #feh

A site I visit now and then, just to bring a smile to my face.

“When any government deprives a citizen of his freedom or property, the individual must take action to publicise his grievances. To this end, I hope to illustrate in the following pages, the futility of gun control, and that no amount of arbitrary legislation can ever prevent those wanting firearms from owning them. The individual who has the ability to construct his own homemade gun can never be permanently disarmed by any level of gun control legislation.”

https://thehomegunsmith.com/

Do note that the “expedient firearms” featured at the site are rather crude, and not examples of firearms I would ever be tempted to build, but it is nice that, even though the site creator has passed away, there are those committed to natural rights who have been willing to step up and maintain the site.

Below, “gun control” as desired by the enemies of the people:

Posted on

Three Citizens, One Goblin Down

I’m withholding any comments aside from the following, until more facts emerge.

1. 3 Dead People = evil.
2. That LEOs who can in no way qualify to be employed by the Broward County Sheriff’s Department were present resulted in what good there may be in this, so far, namely
3. One Dead Goblin.

You are here: Home U.S.
3 People Killed, Including 6-Year-Old Boy, in Mass Shooting at a California Food Festival

(I assume the death of the shooter doesn’t count as a dead “person.” I know, I know: far past simply harsh, but he is the one who chose to dehumanize himself.)

No word as of the latest reports on the incident on where Scot Peterson was hiding out.

Posted on

Gun Control

Properly, gun control is a combination of Jeff Cooper’s four rules and many hours of correct practice in implementing those rules and in practice using firearms correctly–many thousands of rounds spent at the range, for example, so that the norm in practice means

“Gun control” in the typical political sense of limiting and even denying individuals a means of exercising their inherent right of self-defense, is just evil. Period. No exception, no excuses.

Posted on

Just Saw a Quintessentially Stupid Question. . .

. . .on Quora. (Of course. The site is almost as bad as FarceBook.)

“If removing the 300 million guns circulating in America is the only way to turn it into an Australian sanctuary, how would we do it?”

The first person to address the question did a pretty good job dealing with it, but I’d add a sidebar:

About that Utopian “Australian sanctuary. . . “ Since the Australian “gun ban” (although it’s not really a ban) in 1996, Australia has had well more than 10x the number of deaths per capita from single-actor massacres than the US—only a few of which were committed using firearms.

Yeh, Australia is not a violence-free paradise, and reducing the numbers of firearms in the hands of law-abiding folks has not reduced the per capita ratio of deaths from mass murders.

For anyone questioning my statement, just compare single-actor mass murder totals in US and in Australia since 1996 and run the numbers against the population of each country. If you have trouble with the math, go back to school and pay attention in class this time.

Anyone who has trouble doing a search for the basic data should go live in an “assisted computing facility.” (“Here, dearie, let me make that mouse click for you.”)

Posted on

Rights: Whence Come They?

Sidebar: I avoid terms like “gun rights,” because the real issue is the inherent right of every individual to defend one’s own life and limb against an aggressor (individual or group) doing or threatening to do harm, and to defend his loved ones and the otherwise defenseless innocent from the same. Guns are just one of many tools (excellent and effective tools, indeed often the best of tools, but one of many) for effecting legitimate self-defense.

I also do not like the terms “constitutional rights” or “2nd Amendment right” for similar reasons, but expanding to include the fact that those rights which arementioned in the constitution are mentioned only to prevent infringement of those rights by the federal government.

Posted on

For the Children

The ONLY good thing about the Waco massacre (and it’s a thin reed indeed *sigh*) was the blue-on-blue ATF deaths. When the bad guys kill each other, it’s always good. Too bad there were so few. It in no way mitigates the horrendous evil perpetrated by the feds, but at least it’s a small (very small) thing. *sigh*