Sunday, December 16, 2012

"Solving" mass shootings by starting a civil war. Yes, by all means, let's have a 'serious discussion' about more firearm rights restrictions.

It is the Sunday following the Connecticut massacre of innocents. All the usual suspects of the citizen disarmament lobby are on the talking head shows demanding a "serious discussion" about further proscribing the rights of American firearm owners. They are demanding, among other things:
1. A ban on private sales of firearms without first obtaining the federal government's permission. (This would mean that before a grandfather could hand a family heirloom to his son or granddaughter that he would have to get the government's permission to do so.) No one, and I mean NO ONE, would be able to legally transfer a firearm to ANYONE with first being entered into the government's database. This is what the antis call a "reasonable restriction." It also happens to be an infringement of individual rights that the Founders would have consdiered a casus belli, for not even King George the Third was so grasping.
2. A ban on "large capacity magazines", which seems to be anything over 10 rounds. The reasoning behind this is that "no one needs thirty rounds to hunt a deer," the so-called "sporting purpose" written into the 1968 Gun Control Act by Senator Thomas Dodd who apparently lifted it from the Nazi weapons law of 1938 (Dodd was a Nuremberg trials prosecutor). The Founders would have found this to be silly, for the Second Amendment is not about the right to bear arms to hunt game but rather to resist tyrannical government. Thirty round magazines come in handy for that.
3. A new "Assault Weapons Ban" like the 1994 law which was neither about "assault weapons" (those are, by definition, full automatic which can empty the magazine with a single pull of the trigger) nor was it a ban, since it merely regulated cosmetic features on military-style semi-automatic rifles (which fire one shot per pull of the trigger) and it grandfathered in all existing so-called "assault weapons," presumably because they knew that a confiscation bill would be resisted by force. Indeed, in the run up to the passage of the AWB, millions of such riles were domestically produced, imported and sold. This time, we are assured by the antis that not only will the new bill be "tougher" but that it will exempt several hundred semi-automatic rifles by name that are used for "sporting purposes." This is an attempt (and it may well work) to split off the hunters from the collectors of evil, black military-style semi-automatic rifles. How the bill will do these two seemingly mutually exclusive things is at this writing unexplained.
The fact that the weapons used to kill the little children and their teachers at the school were stolen from a legal owner in a state which strictly regulates firearm ownership (who was a crime victim herself) and that, like almost all mass shootings took place in a woefully-misnamed "gun free zone" (more like a criminal empowerment zone), makes no difference to the antis, whose only "solution" is to force lawful gun owners to surrender more of their rights. Within hours of the tragedy of unspeakable evil, these people were out in the media, social and traditional, dancing in the blood of the victims to make their points that the rest of us should submit to further circumscription of our God-given, inalienable traditional rights to liberty and property.
So now they are demanding a "serious discussion" about firearms, which translates into jaw-boning the weak-kneed GOP leadership in the House and Senate to agree to one or more of their proposals as outlined above. Yes, by all means, let's have a 'serious discussion' about more firearm rights restrictions.
My contribution to this "serious discussion" is this question that I would like the antis to answer up front: What do they intend to do with the millions of us "bitter clingers" who will disobey any more such laws? If they pass the "gunshow loopjole" bill, we will simply host out own without background checks and defy the federal government to do anything about it. If they ban large-capacity, I can guarantee you that they will soon be turned out by the million in thousands of metal-working shops around the county. (Didn't anyone learn anything about Prohibition?) If they "ban" military-pattern semi-auto rifles, the same thing will happen. The only thing is, that if you make the punishment for possession of a previously-legal semi-automatic rifle (that he can no longer legally obtain) a felony, isn't that incentivizing the home gun maker to turn out small, concealable machine guns? You will have already made him a felon. What then does he have to lose?
So I'd like the antis to answer up front before their "serious discussion" -- How many of us are they willing to kill to achieve their avowed purpose? A hundred thousand? A million? Two? Ten?
You may pass a law, but how will you enforce it? And, again, how many of us "bitter clingers" are you willing to kill in the process of this civil war you propose?
Mike Vanderboegh

25 comments:

Osmium said...

Mao Tse Tung murdered 70 million people in his discussion.

"Power flows from the barrel of a gun. It is essential that the party commands the gun and that the gun does not command the party."

Bill Ayers and his disciples worked out the logistics and strategies to murder 25 million Americans. They will kill as many people as it takes to form their utopia.

When Mao Tse Tung was in power China was not industrialized. Today there are millions of machine shops all around the country to turn out SMGs in addition to millions of gun owners.

bubba said...

There is no more certain path, which leads to the death of millions, than the one which starts with government confiscating private property.

Legal or not, voted on by self selected superiors (or countrymen) or simply mandated by the same it won't matter. Many of the sheep will blindly follow the Judas goat to their own destruction.

Yet, how many are there who remember their former liberty and the price they and their fathers before them paid? I don't think the elites really have an answer to the question of how many will resist at any cost.

Yank lll said...

" And, again, how many of us "bitter clingers" are you willing to kill in the process of this civil war you propose?"

Mike;
I'd venture to say that they're willing to kill plenty of people to enforce that ban..
What we should be asking them is how many of them are willing to die enforcing it ? That will show the true measure of their bravery in Treason.

Yank lll

CowboyDan said...

One felony's as good as another, right? As long as they're going to cage you, it doesn't really matter how long. I think they're going to kill a lot of us early on.

I really don't know if I want to live though it. I will NOT be a good inmate, I can promise you.

Pray for our souls, and pray for our Republic. My God have mercy on us all.

LL said...

Let's not talk guns. Let's talk drugs and how effective the USGOV has been in keeping them off the street. Just about as efficient as they were in controlling alcohol during prohibition.

High Cap magazines are to defend the sovereign individual from the state but they also come in useful in defending the sovereign law abiding individual from criminals -- who will inevitably be armed with weapons that have High Cap magazines.

Parity would be nice.

And when seconds count, the police are minutes or hours away. They can come, mop up blood and take photos - but I prefer that it not be MY blood.

Anonymous said...

BY ALL MEANS, let's have your 'civil war,' so your tiny 3% can be plowed into the soil and we can civilize this country. We are much more eager for it than you are, you criminal, because we know we will bury you.

Anonymous said...

Well, if you see the you tube account of the FBI informant who infiltrated the weather underground during their heyday, they would kill as many as necessary. Back then it was 10% of the population, 25 million that they estimated would not toe the party line. You have to understand that these "people" are monsters without souls.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately Mike, history has all ready answered the question of how many - ALL - every single one. Their first move is always to disarm. The rest is relatively easy...

sfr III

-flylow said...

That "Anonymous" person down there at 6:47 sounds so cultured and sophisticated. I'm giving up all my guns so I can live in his world! It sounds so pleasant and anger-free!
Idiot. Go squawk somewhere else where people might believe your B.S.
Pass your laws. I'm standin' with Mike and pickin' out my rocks in the meantime.
-flylow
III

TotC said...

This comment is directed to anon who wishes for the civil war to start. The butchers bill for such an action will cost you dearly. Mike has said before that Clinton's rules of engagement are in effect. Sympathetic media, politicians, & advocates of tyrannical policies become valid targets. I suggest you sleep on that and if capable, thinking that through to it's logical conclusion.

Paul X said...

"I'd venture to say that they're willing to kill plenty of people to enforce that ban."

Depends on who you mean by "they". Of course members of the ruling class have no effective limits on the number of people they would kill.

However, as Boetie said, rulers must be supported by the ruled. The average hoplophobe wants guns gone because he thinks fewer people will be killed. When government action accomplishes the opposite, in spades, the desire for gun control and support of the rulers will wither on the vine. In fact I believe this is the main reason gun control has suffered so many defeats recently - the realization among the average hoplophobes that we "bitter clingers" will not go gently into the night. The prospect of war has caused him to lose his appetite.

Robert Fowler said...

1968 Gun Control Act by Senator Thomas Dodd who apparently lifted it from the Nazi weapons law of 1938 (Dodd was a Nuremberg trials prosecutor).

The book Gateway to Tyranny is the 1968 law and the 1938 Nazi law presented side by side. With the exception of registration, that the Son of a Bitch LBJ wanted, it almost word for word. Dodd had the Library of Congress translate the German law for him before he wrote GCA68.

Anonymous said...

Got me these white fence posts all along my fences - every 100 yards.
There may be no batteries for the range finder ...

III

Yank lll said...

Another Mr. Anonymous.. imagine that. That choice to hide your name or whatever you choose shows that your convictions ae sure as long as someone else does your killing for you..

rest assured no matter how it turns out your anonymity wont save you, your friends in the politboro and comintern have made sure of it you fool.

Yank lll

alabamagunowner said...

Well,sadly, if this is the way it is going to be then bring it...molon labe.

wiskers said...

Tom Jefferson: "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. ... What country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that the people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

AJ said...

I dunno. When they banned semi-autos in Oz, the Aussies folded like cheap suits and handed 'em right over. I certainly hope that we in the US have bigger nuts than the Aussies did.

Anonymous said...

They are willing to fight for their Marxist beliefs right up to the last federal agent and national guardsman.

Of course by that time they and their significant others will be enjoying their hastily arranged vacations in Europe, Russia, China and socialist south and central American countries.

wiskers said...


They (BATFE, Sheriff ,others) know who we are and where we live. Trace and purchase data is available. Just asking your neighbors will yield lots of information . E-trace allows foreign http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etrace. countries to track citizens purchases.
Military Technology will be used against us, Tia Linx inc.http://www.tialinx.com/systemsolutions.html - Sense through the wall and roof systems,Remote sensing and interrogation systems, Unmanned aircraft (DRONES) and vehicle systems. Raytheon 's Boomerang Shooter detection systems http://bbn.com/boomerang . The LRAD http://www.argoasecurity.com/products.aspx?CategoryID=2 Long Range Acoustic Defense(offensive weapon). Thermal imaging devices scopes,cameras, look right through your walls.
They use military Full Auto weapons,extensive Military training and practice a lot ,we pay for it.
They control the media so you know what you will look like .That huge illegal Arsenal of assault weapons (more than 1 Gun), giant stock pile of ammunition(more than 2 boxes) , Huge supplies of stored food(Hoarder), Violent propaganda(Declaration of Independence,Constitution &Rights of Man) you get the point.
Having drawn your line in the sand, they will of course use overwhelming force in a multi point attack or siege like Branch Davidian's or Ruby Ridge. Forget your lawyer no one can help you.(Patriot Act) BATFE,FBI's(Women&children) murderers were/are never prosecuted because they (LEO's)are above the Law.
So, when the SHTF are you going to take a stand? Most will just give in, Many may fight but will be under reported or Unreported so as not to be seen as Martyr's. All will be treated as criminals. “We must all hang together, Because we will surly hang separately”- Ben Franklin. “I would rather die on my feet than live on my knees”- Numerous persons. As for some of us Patriot's- Molon Labe . “Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen,and then say, what should be the reward of such sacrifice?”-Sam Adams. Mao Tse Tung restated the idea of our 2nd amendment succinctly when he said “Political Power comes mainly from the barrel of a gun” ,Laws are made by government and government is a criminal enterprise pure and simple. http://patriotpost.us/alexander/15685/,
http://www.sobran.com/articles/tyranny.shtml . http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm#chart .We do not stand alone at Thermopoly! Si Vis Pacem,Parabellum.

Anonymous said...

A good conversation on Guns... for those wanting to take them...

http://www.dethguild.com/so-you-want-to-have-a-conversation-on-guns/

SWIFT said...

In contemporary America, I know that right is now wrong, left is right, up is down and everything is crazy. Still, I never thought I's hear a Lefty be the town crier for civil war. That is way over the top. But, Ok, lets git 'er done.

knuckledraggertech said...

Don't plan on having a serious discussion with these gun-grabbers; they are impervious to logic or reason. I got into a tussle with a friend (staunch liberal) whom I have helped out over the years. When they started running off at the mouths about AK-47s being killing machines, I challenged them to name one thing, round for rounnd, that they could do with a Kalashnikov that I couldn't with my 1915 Remington Model 8, 35-Rem auto-loader. I was accused of being obsessed with guns because I challenged their ill-informed opinions. I am all done trying to save these idiots from themselves.

Paul Rowlandson said...

It takes 20% of the populace,in full cooperation with the aggressor, to secure any nation through enforced control. Getting more and more Americans to oppose citizen gun ownership, makes it easier to implement removal of previously legal guns from the populace. The government instigated all 15 mass shootings, in the USA this year, to advance the removal of most guns. The elite know that US citizens have too much fire power to take them down easily and they want to rectify that problem, with less guns. If you are emotional, to an extreme, about this issue, then try to implement some calm thought. Do you want to save your country or go out in a stream of bullets? Please get cool and organize yourselves, so that you will be of some use and not a foolish liability. This is war and the point is to win. Do what you have to.

Rova said...

I'm a permanently disabled (industrial accident) lesbian and I live quietly with my partner of over 20 years. More self-educated than otherwise, being a libertarian is instinctive, stereotypes to my demographic notwithstanding. Both of us enjoyed shooting IPSC and IDPA for years and made a few long-lasting acquaintances in the pro-gun community that continue to enrich our lives and minds to this day.

I have survived violence, and will not volitionally surrender the EDC .45's I own and train with.I choose to support and promote RKBA and self-defense at every opportunity, though my circle of influence is less broad than I might wish.

Mike, I agree: there are only two kinds of people. Armed, free Americans, and slaves.

The politicians who bask in power and privilege and seek only more of both now pursue opening the agenda of servitude. Obamacare, and the Socialist dream of gun control and confiscation, TrapWire and data mining are our burden to defeat, revoke, repeal, and defend against.

Liberty is neither easy nor free. I can only continue to write, to speak as well as I am able, and to work towards rational and Constitutional security of our heritage. For all that I have learned and been stimulated to explore further through independent study of American history, my sincere thanks.

Bill Miller said...

I take issue with the statement that supposedly true "assault weapons" full-auto.

Actually the term "assault weapon" was invented in 1988 by Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center and the National Coalition to Ban handguns. Before that year, no one had ever heard the term "assault weapon." It's a meaningless bullshit propaganda term with no fixed meaning. It's designed to scare the sheeple into accepting gun control. In California, it is illegal to attach a flare launcher to an otherwise perfectly legal rifle (such as an M1 Garand). The result, I kid you not, is an "assault weapon," a actual felony, and an offense "against the peace and dignity of the state of California."

Do not confuse "assault weapon" with the term "assault rifle," the latter being a technical term from the firearms lexicon referring to a specific category of rifles.