Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Refusal as a weapon. There is NO unconstitutional law that Mike Bloomberg can buy that we cannot nullify with armed civil disobedience.

NOTE: If you agree with this post, please forward the link as far and wide as you can. (LATER: My thanks to Larry Pratt for the mirror on his Facebook here.)
They can jail us. They can shoot us. They can even conscript us. They can use us as cannon-fodder in the Somme. But… but, we have a weapon more powerful than any in the whole arsenal of their British Empire. And that weapon is our refusal. Our refusal to bow to any order but our own, any institutions but our own. -- Liam Neeson portraying Michael Collins, 1996.
Mike Bloomberg thought he was on a roll. In the wake of Sandy Hook, his money managed to buy unconstitutional legislation in Connecticut, Colorado, Maryland and New York. In the election just past, his money staved off defeat for two governors who did his bidding, although as Wellington said about Waterloo, it was "the nearest run thing you ever saw." Most importantly -- and the latest jewel in his anti-firearm crown -- his money and that of Bill Gates, Paul Allen and other like-minded elitists "bought the mob" (in the parlance of the Founders) with the success of I-594 in Washington state.
Yes, Bloomberg was on a roll. The so-called "mainstream" gun rights organizations, from the NRA to Alan Gottlieb's Second Amendment Foundation and all the smaller spin-offs in the affected states, had no answer to Bloomberg's millions and refused to put their own rivalries and jealousies aside to find one. This is hardly a surprise, since almost all of these groups have always been more about raising money to "fight gun control" than actually FIGHTING gun control. Each has been more obsessed with their own reputation in the collectivist-dominated press and their obsession to "win friends and influence people" in the middle. So, following their long-established patterns and refusals to think and act outside the boxes they placed themselves in, they lost. They lost in Connecticut, they lost in Maryland, they lost in New York, they lost in Colorado and now they have lost in Washington state.
In each case, Bloomberg understood his enemies, their foibles and their failures far better than they understood him. So he won and they lost.
But then something happened that Bloomberg in his arrogance never expected, something that the "mainstream gun rights organizations" for their part never expected either -- in every single state where Bloomberg had "won," it turned out that the victims of his unconstitutional laws had other ideas. And they didn't need "leaders" like Wayne LaPierre and Alan Gottlieb to lead them.
The "I Will Not Comply" movement in the various affected states began the instant Bloomberg's Intolerable Acts were passed. Individual firearm owners, led here and there by some courageous activists of the smaller rights groups who were not so worried about raising money and preserving their press image than their "betters," simply announced that they would not obey such unconstitutional laws. They refused to cooperate in their own disarmament. They refused to obey. If the government wanted to make them criminals, well, then, they would be criminals and they dared the authorities to do anything about it.
And the authorities did . . . nothing. When it became apparent that Connecticut was experiencing a stunning non-compliance rate approaching 85 percent, Mike Lawlor, the governor's appointed "gun commissar" in that state made threatening noises. But the raids did not begin. And now, almost two years later, they still haven't begun. In New York, the non-compliance rate is even higher, with county sheriffs even threatening to arrest state policemen who seek to enforce the SAFE Act in their jurisdictions. And Governor Cuomo has done . . . nothing.
In Colorado, on the day the magazine ban went into effect in July 2013, resisters gathered on the statehouse steps and broke the law. And the authorities did. . . nothing. After I announced on 20 April 2013 on the steps of the Connecticut state capitol that I had smuggled in forbidden magazines in violation of their diktat, Lawlor had the state police open a criminal investigation of me, but did . . . nothing. Since then my friends and I have smuggled in more such magazines to that state and the authorities have done . . . nothing. I even recently attended a gun show in CT simply to give the authorities a chance to arrest me if they felt froggy enough. And they did . . . nothing. The raids have not begun. The state and its newly felonized citizens have been looking at each other with firearms in their hands for almost two years now. Yet the other jackboot has not dropped. And the authorities, as with those in other states with Bloomberg Rules, don't know whether to defecate or go blind. Consequently they have done . . . nothing.
This refusal, this armed civil disobedience, reached its highest expression to date with the "I Will Not Comply" rally at the state capitol in Olympia on the 13th of this month. Two thousand armed people met, without a permit, defied I-594, held a successful rally without incident, and the authorities did . . . nothing. I was privileged to speak at this historic event as well. I will go back to Yakima in June for a planned gun show that will refuse to conduct the 594-required background checks and we will give the authorities a chance to enforce their new Bloomberg Rules.
And where are the "mainstream gun rights groups" in this national campaign of armed civil disobedience which has negated the results of Bloomberg's money, his so-called "victories"? Why, they're nowhere to be found. They have either condemned them or ignored them. In a recent interview, Alan Gottlieb, -- who was apparently vacationing in Hong Kong on the proceeds of his members' dues while the brave men and women of his state were risking arrest defying I-594 -- denied that the rally was in fact "armed civil disobedience" because, he ludicrously claimed, "most people there weren't armed."
And if you didn't get the underlying message, he went on to say "I don't think it helped us with the general public. It doesn't help us with the public or the legislators." And, he added, "I'm not a fan of armed civil disobedience."
Coming from a guy who has never risked more than a paper cut opening fundraising envelopes . . . coming from a guy who was willing to trade away national background checks in the immediate aftermath of Sandy Hook . . . this was hardly surprising. He will do what he has always done when confronted with Bloomberg Rules. If he cannot sue it, if he cannot lobby a "compromise" that gives up a little more of other people's essential liberties and property, he will do . . . nothing.
Yet such "leaders" risk exposure and irrelevance in the new shifting paradigm. Legal challenges on all these Intolerable Acts are working their way through the courts. All have, up to now, failed. Elections have been fought and lost. Lobbying has been redoubled. Indeed, in the same interview Gottlieb asserted that the emergency was so grave that they had hired another lobbyist!
But the practitioners of armed civil disobedience, the resistance behind enemy lines in Connecticut, New York, Maryland, Colorado and Washington state, have ALREADY NULLIFIED BLOOMBERG RULES. And Michael Bloomberg himself doesn't seem to know whether to defecate or go blind.
The failures of the "mainstream gun rights groups" to protect liberty and property from Bloomberg's assaults have forced the American people -- an eminently practical people -- to make their own arrangements. If this risks exposing the increasing irrelevance of such groups there is nothing we can do about it. (Although there is certainly something THEY can do about it -- thinking and acting outside the boxes of their own comfort zones would be a good start.) But the fact of the matter is that, as demonstrated now by almost two years of experiences THERE IS NO UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW THAT MIKE BLOOMBERG CAN BUY THAT WE CANNOT NULLIFY WITH ARMED CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE.
Refusal is a weapon. It is a weapon that has been used to good effect in this country since the time of the Founders. Michael Bloomberg's Rules are negated by the Law of Unintended Consequences. And looking back on the past two years of expensive laws and craven legislators bought and sold that all of his "victories" required, Bloomberg must be wondering this Christmas why it is that someone crapped in his stocking. He should be celebrating. Instead he has been frustrated, as the Founders intended, by the refusal of the armed citizenry of the United States to bow down to him and his tyrannical kind.
Link.

24 comments:

Wraith said...

It's so satisfying.

After watching our so-called 'Conservative/Libertarian "leaders"' draw line after line in the sand and watch helplessly as the Thug Regime tap-dances across them...

Commies: Give up your guns!

America: No.

Commies: We're serious!

America: No.

Commies: OK, we're TOTALLY SERIAL now.

America: F.U.

Commies: Really, now, we're drawing our SUPER DOUBLE SECRET PROBATION line in the sand...!!

America: (extends social digit)

God help me, the impotent ravings of a bunch of arrogant bullies really are music to my ears. Molon Labe, bitches! :D

Nightshade said...

Tyranny is never forced. It is an act of deliberate and mutual consent between ruler and subject. Refuse. Simple as that.

AJ said...

Alan Gottlieb is a liar and a phony. He screwed the gun owners of Washington in general and his own SAF membership in particular with his piss-poor I-591 campaign. He bilked WAC out of a considerable sum of money with the complicity of his buddies on the BoD. SAF, you guys need to find a new leader.
BTW, I was at the rally, and I can assure you that every single person there was armed.

johnnyreb said...

Me-thinks I hear the sweet sound of leftist desperation ringing through the hills. This was their big chance; seemed like all the cards were falling their way with all their collectivist schemes.

It's starting to slip away, and time is running out; people are starting to wise up, and even bath-house Barry's bullshit is not working.

Tick, tock.

TimeHasCome said...

Mike I know you were looking forward to tomorrows UN ban on firearms . So here is a link.


http://news.yahoo.com/global-arms-treaty-enters-force-wednesday-062303197.html

Ry Jones said...

Blogged, tweeted.

Anonymous said...

Bloomberg buying his way is only proving more and more that our government has been taken over by the money people .. if this can be done by the wealthy , than we no longer have a Republic or a representative government

and those states that sucked his wallet need to be sued the pants off of for infringing our rights .. we no longer should stand for this crap and make it known if it continues that were coming for restitution

EOTS

Anonymous said...

From behind enemy lines in NY: the a*&holes in state gov't can screw themselves. If that means calling me a criminal, so be it. I've been called worse. ..But I absolutely refuse to be called a coward...And mike, I received my hat today and it looks great. Thank you..

Anonymous said...

We will not comply!

Judenr├Ąte Gottlieb can make all the deals with the Nazi's he wants but we will not comply.

Hope to see you in June Mike V, look for the flag that say's;

Sic semper tyrannis

There will be a place for you at our campfire!

Death before tyranny!

Comrade X

Brian Morton said...

"I'm not a fan of armed civil disobedience." -Alan Gottlieb

Translation: I'm not a fan of this country's founding generation whose demonstration of armed civil disobedience gave birth to the world's first truly free country.

Anonymous said...

The only decission that Bloomberg and his ilk can make is to blindly defacate.

WE will know what to do when the SHTF ...

III

Anonymous said...

A picture of Alan making that quote, morphing into Alan Colmes saying the same thing would be, well, deeeelicious.

In a sane world, that comment would see him drummed out of SAF akin to way a particular "writer" was stunned out of a particular magazine.....

Anonymous said...

There is a real good reason Alan Gottleib does not like armed resistance. Alan Gotter is a convicted felon, for tax evasion of all things. He doesn't like it because he can't participate. How in the hell does anyone even give him the time of freakin day?

I594 was a deliberate attempt to placate the anti rights bigots, he was the brains behind feeding the alligator. Thanks, Judenrat, we here in Arizona really f***ING appreciate that, seeing how Bloomdouche wants AZ as his next prize! Not in my state you New York asshole! And Gottleib, please stop helping us!

Tom 762 III

Anonymous said...

They will not take your guns. They will wait you out. If you want a fight, you'll have to shoot first.
Of course, then you'll lose.

Rock, meet hard place.

Anonymous said...

" Of course, then you'll lose", Isn't that what the British empire said?

Anonymous said...

Armed civil disobedience?????

That is most definitely a very last resort, if at all.
Not smart to even talk about it.

Paul X said...

This works in other spheres too. On my local homeschooling list the newbies always asked how to "get right with the authorities". I always asked them, "Why bother? Whose kids are they, yours or the state's?" The lists were always monitored by the teacher's union, we are certain, but they did nothing. I suppose none of them wanted to tangle with an irate, armed father; I made it clear I would not tolerate anyone messing with my family.

We can expect Bloomberg's flunkies to try to SWAT some "ringleaders". This won't work either because some old men with nothing to lose can always take out the mayor and police chief and any local gun grabbers in relatiation. Also it looks bad to use government overkill to trample a popular rebellion; see for example what happened with Julio Buitrago:

"Somoza still was completely in control. The guerrilla actions in urban and rural zones were repelled and in 1967 a second organized move was knocked down after several combats in the northern region of the country. The remnant Sandinistas were forced to disperse in much more remote areas.

Nevertheless, the movement did not die. In 1969, a small group of battlers hidden in a house in Managua was discovered by the National Guard, and a battle took place almost as if it was a movie scene. Three hundred soldiers, tanks and planes were sent to destroy the hidden guerrillas. The battle lasted several hours until there was no more answer to the attack. When soldiers entered the house seeking for bodies they realized that the entire combat was fought by a single young man, Julio Buitrago, who stayed inside the house so that his partners could escape.

Somoza showed the battle on TV to demonstrate the FSLN’s destruction, but the heroic action of a single man turned the entire situation around and the population was moved by the event and identified themselves even more with the revolutionary movement. Other unequal battles took place in several cities."
https://vianica.com/go/specials/15-sandinista-revolution-in-nicaragua.html

Texas TopCat said...

I agree with this article in the main part. However, do we really think that I-594 would have been passed if opposing view could have spend the same amount of money? The law was not passed by educated/informed voters, but by people that hard hundreds of ads claiming I-594 just closed loop holes in background checks.

Anonymous said...

It takes more than one type of organization. Some fights require money, and those that raise money cannot afford to advocate violation of the law lest the courts take their money from them. Disobedience is the realm of stealth organizations.

Anonymous said...

Michael Collins was fighting for an Irish Republic, so why does this movie repeatedly speak of the Democracy he achieved?

BHirsh said...

And thus, absolute proof of the framers' natural law concept of deterrence through armament not only survives, but THRIVES.

Don Holmes said...

I notified all of my "pro gun " organizations that I have sent my last donation and will not be re-joining. Sad Member of NRA since 1970 what a waste. Also Goa, Saf Nssf and more.
Now it's We The People, And I will not comply, not
now and not ever.

Anonymous said...

While I hold no love for the NRA, the ire directed against the SAF is unfounded and unwarranted. So they were outspent and out down by the gun grabbers. The strength of the SAF is not in campaigning and outspending elitist billionaires, but in taking the fight to the courts and winning. From Heller, to McDonald and every other win we've had at the Supreme Court knocking down restrictive gun rights right and left, every single such case has been lead by Gottlieb and the SAF legal team.

They didn't prevail in WA because that is not their battlefield. So starve them of support at great risk to us all. Supreme Court Challenges are not cheap. Just consider that when you rail against them. GOA and NRA are a different matter.

And no I'm not employed by SAF, but I do support them.

Anonymous said...

Lex Luthor said:

Enough with the "Judenratte" BS.

If Gottlieb is not your favorite person, or not effective in his role, it is not his religion or heritage that is at fault. There is no room for bigotry in the fight for freedom.