Winning the Universal Background Check War (by pre-emptive surrender).
Democracy is dangerous. Democracy is mob rule.
LATER, after the power outage. If I may, let me comment on this:
Fair or foul, “universal” background checks are incredibly popular among voters and will be implemented in some way, shape, or form. Our best hope to counter the draconian initiatives at the state level would be a pre-emptive attack at the federal level that allows for background checks, but doesn’t tie the background checks to the de facto registration of specific firearms, which is the real goal of the background check initiatives pushed by gun control groups.
No, no, no NO, oh, HELL NO! This is pre-emptive surrender.
Our only real defense is to NULLIFY the whole damn thing with armed civil disobedience. By what right does any government entity intervene in the transfer of private property from one law-abiding citizen to another? Not even King George the Third was so tyrannical, so grasping. The only solution is that of the Founders -- DEFY, RESIST, EVADE, SMUGGLE.
17 comments:
Democracy looks like a combination of two words: "Dumb" and "crazy"...
Firearms Sellers Say They’re Being Choked Off From Payment Processors
http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/12/firearms-sellers-say-theyre-choked-off-payment-processors/
Animal crap! (pick your favorite: Bull, Horse, Pig...)
Ain't no such thing as 'Universal' background checks. The dirtbags you'd be trying to weed-out through such checks won't bother purchasing a gun through 'the system'. Why? 'Cause they freakin' KNOW they couldn't pass the background check! So they'll obtain their weapons through other means. In the meantime, Jane and John Q. Public have entered the drawing for a free, all-expense-paid ride on a boxcar to some exotic location.
Obama Declares War On ‘Extremism’ – Are You An ‘Extremist’ According To His Definition?
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/obama-declares-war-extremism-extremist-according-definition
Bob,Bob,Bob.
While the federal preemption idea you pose gets close...no cigar!
One has to view this in the light of WHAT is preempted. As even SCOTUS admitted, the Second Amendment preempted government itself! This because the right to keep and the right to bear ALREADY belonged to the people, with the Second being an admission that this is where it HAD to stay - starting off with one very important reason WHY.
Preemption federally is not the same as federal preemption. Federal preemption would be federal preemption OF the Second Amendment. That's called infringement of the highest order. GCA is federal preemption. The Second is supposed to preempt GCA. See the difference?? I hope so because what you wrote here Bob is what the NRA calls "compromise".....
I believe the Second Amendment has been "compromised" entirely too much already - and that we should FIX it rather than break it more.
Oh and another thing. Bob, you talk about false narrative... You bet, that exists! The "billionaire" narrative hides what's REALLY going on. Added to our own government usurpation of the self defense rights we witness not a few Richie Riches but instead powerful INTERNATIONAL CABALS disguised as "a few billionaires. See, these corporate masters are using the "billionaire" as a front so their corporations themselves aren't the targets of "backlash".
I do not question your integrity or your honor, Bob. But you do a disservice to the cause with articles like this. Either you know better and intentionally mislead people much the same way the NRA does with its "state preemption" or you aren't intellectually honest enough, with yourself, to see that you are doing the very things the NRA and the "billionaires" are without realizing it.
I mean no disrespect, I simply aim to be blunt with the goal being truth told. Bob, you "botched" it again - even if your attempt is genuine and heartfelt.
What we require, simply and straightforwardly, is adherence to what is already the highest Law of this Land... our Constitution. And yes, it really IS that simple.
Mike
III
They had me until this part:
Our best hope to counter the draconian initiatives at the state level would be a pre-emptive attack at the federal level that allows for background checks, but doesn’t tie the background checks to the de facto registration of specific firearms, which is the real goal of the background check initiatives pushed by gun control groups.
Ah--the preemptive surrender gambit. No thanks.
"Federal preemption is the only way to stop them."
Wrong. Disobedience is the way to stop them. Good luck bending the Federal government to your wishes, dude.
I like Bob Owens, and much of what he says here is true.
However with much do respect I must say his solution here is wrong.
As a free man I should not have to seek permission form government to defend myself or own a gun, so his solution to background checks at the state level is background checks at the federal level.
My rights do not come from man nor their government and can not be regulated by either.
Death before slavery!
Comrade X
In Oregon we have both representative government and "mob rule" (the initiative). The legislature considers thousands of bills every session, and passes many hundreds of them. The people consider a few (on the order of 10) ballot measures and pass maybe half of them. Lately the people have been passing measures friendly to liberty (e.g. making civil forfeiture illegal, or making regulatory takings illegal) while the legislature has been overturning these or watering them down, on behalf of special interests.
While in Wyoming I created and ran the Wyoming Liberty Index. Year after year, the legislature, even in those short sessions, managed to pass 3 or 4 times as many liberty-harming bills as the liberty-enhancing bills.
In other words, the quantity of legislation by direct democracy is far less than what the legislature cranks out, and the quality of it is far better - where liberty is concerned. I'm speaking of averages, of course. So I would say that the old, "democracy is bad" meme is at least questionable. The way I look at it, what really is bad is having anyone in power above you.
The deck is definitely stacked against liberty, in the legislatures; otherwise we wouldn't be in the pickle we are in, needing a revolution.
TRUISMS:
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- H. L. Mencken , New York Times, 1920
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin , 1759
--------------------------------------------------------------------
“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” - Winston Churchill
--------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no Left or Right,
there is only Tyranny, and Freedom.
-and Freedom.
is only for those with the guts to defend it
Owens says "universal background checks" are inevitable, as we might as well bend over and get ourselves all excited.
With friends like this, who needs enemies?
I once had an "urban youth" enlighten me on the ethical code under which his ilk operated: "If you ain't watching it, you deserve to lose it!" Back to that in a moment.
Benjamin Franklin once opined on the subject of impeachment:
“History furnishes one example only of a first Magistrate being formally brought to public Justice.[1] Every body cried out agst this as unconstitutional. What was the practice before this in cases where the chief Magistrate rendered himself obnoxious? Why recourse was had to assassination in wch. he was not only deprived of his life but of the opportunity of vindicating his character. It wd. be the best way therefore to provide in the Constitution for the regular punishment of the Executive when his misconduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused.”
http://www.shestokas.com/constitution-educational-series/constitutional-impeachment-an-alternative-to-assassination/
I am not familiar with all of the laws on removal of a public official from office in the various jurisdictions in the USA, but I believe in most cases it's by either recall initiative and election or suspension from office by the state governor.
Recall initiative and election: that's the side of mob rule that is an example of nothing being all good or all bad. And in many cases where it has been tried, "The Mob" has proven more successful at removal of someone from office than those who control impeachment at the federal level. It seems like it would be an obvious move to start circulating recall petitions at any rally such as the anti I594 rallies. And then for gun owners to get out and support the recall when it comes up for election. Whereas those who have squishy opinions turn out most heavily for presidential cycles, and less so for off year cycles, they tend not to show up for recalls. Colorado's recent experience shows that can be in our favor. And you would sign a petition & vote for recall in a case like kicking out the jerks who voted for I594, wouldn't you?
Like my ghetto "acquaintance" would say, "If you ain't willing to fight for it, you're gonna lose it to someone who will."
We have had a version of STATE Preemption in Pa since the implementation of the GCA of 68 when you needed to wait 3 days to pick up any handgun you bought from an FFL, as the checks went through the Pa State Police, and the States version of N.I.C.S. ala P.I.C.S. When they put Brady into play the enabling State Legislation specifically stated that NO RECORDS were to be kept after a specified period of days and that all currently held records of passed purchases in the P.S.P. system were to be REMOVED. The State police with all the enthusiasm they could muster politely told the Legislature in no uncertain terms "F**K NO! They now not only have on file all of your handgun purchases since 1968, but any and all long guns that have gone through since Brady, despite repeated attempts by our esteemed lawmakers to have them do otherwise. So to Universal backround checks I say NO
I see that Bob Owens is more of a statist than I originally thought. I already had him pegged for one since he's a massive badge worshiper and opposes unlicensed carry.
When will They come up with a system which targets criminal misuse rather than waste time and money resources harassing those who merely exercise a right?
The existing background check system checks millions of transactions to find a tiny percentage which fail and of those an even tinier proportion are prosecuted.
All a huge waste of everybodies resources and totally counter-productive.
III
Most Americans have a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome. It can be demonstrated that the .gov in general, and their enforcers in particular, are definitely not interested in the people's best interests. Yet, the people can't get enough cop-worship. And the huge majority identify with one "party" or the other. They claim to dislike the .gov, yet they gobble up the spoon-fed lies when it comes to the excuses for government aggression, both at home and abroad.
I can tell you from firsthand experience that when you try and sell disobedience to the vast majority of Americans, you would have better luck selling dogshit, so long as you coated it with enough sugar.
AJ, if you think Americans are incapable of disobedience, you haven't been to Europe yet.
Think of the homeschooling movement, one created by law-breakers, and a direct affront to government schools and their indoctrination effort, not to mention the most powerful lobby in every state legislature, the teachers unions. There is no homeschooling in Germany.
Think of RKBA. You think we have it because we wrote our congresscritter? Hah! We have it because the rulers fear to take our guns. Charlie Hebdo happened in a place with restrictive gun laws.
Think of marijuana. The war on drugs is immensely profitable to the ruling class and the prison industrial complex. Yet it is failing because Americans break those laws.
Post a Comment