Rainmen: Voluntary Autism. The silent squirms of the selectively blind deaf-mutes of the so-called "Gun Rights Blogosphere" regarding the Olympia "I will not comply" armed civil disobedience.
Funny thing about the unprecedented armed civil disobedience rally in Olympia on Saturday where 2,000 folks deliberately broke the new I-594 law and got away with it without incident. The local press covered it. AP picked it up. I'm told by organizer Gavin Seim that outlets in Eastern Europe picked up on it. On the blogosphere, it was even bitterly denounced by the collectivist chatterers. For example, commiepinko Thom Hartmann on Russia Today calls me out on his "The Good, The Bad, And the Very, Very Immorigerously Ugly" segment asking what I mean by "Second Amendment Remedies." "Oh, that's right," he concludes, "Shooting people." Well, glad he figured that out.
On the so-called conservative/libertarian blogs it got a little traction. Reason magazine noted it: Gun Owners Defy Washington Background Check Law as Rally Organizer Burns His Carry Permit
The New American picked it up:Washington State Pro-Gun Rally Draws Thousands
Townhall got it: Over 1,000 Gun Owners Violate Washington’s I-594 - In Front Of Police!
You know who didn't cover any of it? Not the run-up to the rally, not the rally, and not the aftermath? Why almost all of the so-called "Gun Rights Blogosphere." Now we did get some mention in the run-up on Ammoland
And Dave Workman did give us some mention in a story entitled "Gun rights battle brings crowds to Olympia, Puyallup." But then Washington state is his AO as they say -- his and his employer Alan Gottlieb's home base. To not have mentioned us at all would have been far too obvious. As it was, his lede compared the gun show he covered (one of three that weekend that competed with the rally for firearm owners' attendance) to the largest and absolutely unprecedented armed civil disobedience in the country. Well, of course. And what vigorous action was happening at the gun show?
At the Puyallup gun show, WAC President John Rodabaugh, a practicing attorney and prosecutor, and a licensed firearms dealer, spent much of his time answering questions from members about what the new law does and doesn’t do. Likewise, staffers at the Second Amendment Foundation’s display were busy fielding questions.
To his credit, Workman also noted:
Remarkably for this time of year, weather cooperated for both events. This column noted earlier that attendance in Olympia — where some people had predicted a turnout of several thousand — might be dependent on the weather. In Puyallup, there’s a roof, and several hundred tables of goods including firearms, ammunition, knives and various accessories from parts to emergency disaster supplies.
Rugged duty and much risk there, no doubt.
Which makes the last paragraph in Workman's story the most priceless:
The people behind I-594, who will be in Olympia next month with a handful of new demands, want to add Washington and possibly Oregon and Nevada to that list. People who were in Olympia and Puyallup will do their best to stop them.
Their best. Yup. As long as there's a roof over their heads and they risk nothing besides someone taking exception to their answer to a question.
Still, as I say, you've got to give Dave credit. At least he mentioned us. The rest of the so-called "Gun Rights Blogosphere" apparently sat silently squirming in remarkable imitation of selectively blind deaf-mutes. Or perhaps a better analogy is Dustin Hoffman's Raymond from the 1988 movie Rainman. To even mention the largest instance of armed civil disobedience to tyrannical government in modern memory would have put them out of their comfort zone. Obsessed with watching the familiar Judge Wapner on TV, they can only deal with the spectacle of seeing others actually risking their freedom and safety doing what they spent their entire lives merely giving lip service to by registering their discomfort, murmuring to themselves: "Ten minutes to Wapner. We're definitely locked in this box with no TV."
Of course, these are largely the same people who ignored Fast and Furious after David and I broke the story and continued to do so until they felt it was safe to do so (or were finally embarrassed like the NRA and dragged kicking and screaming to it).
WA State Rep. Puts Sheriff Knezovich in His Place
I read the Workman article and got my hackles up a little at the "so-called "Three Percent" movement" comment. Just a little jealous is he?
The Washington I594 protest got a good write up with pix at WesternRifleShooters.wordpress.com.
That is all. Out.
Gotta give them folks a pass. You see, it is so tough for the SAF and NRA to support ACTUAL action against these types of legislative chicanery. They NEED these statutes so they can raise more funds!
Think about it folks - even a modern day hero Alan Gura goes SO FAR as to CONCEDE without even a peep that gubmint can PERMISSION SLIP exercise of a fundamental, individual, inalienable and incorporated right. With friends like that.....
We are on our own boys and girls. It's time to stop pretending that tax "exempt" entities are even remotely on the side of liberty- our individual liberty. Indeed, they sold out for that tax exempt status....
You got a brief mention on "Bearing Arms":
What the NRA, POGR, & SAF would-be "moderates" fail to realize is that the anti-Second Amendment, pro-abolitionists, the hoplophobe side is not reasonable and is never going to be convinced by sweet reason. They have no interest in it and little capacity for it.
You do NOT fight a rhetorical battle with dialectic (facts & stats); in a rhetorical battle the only use for dialectic is in a rhetorical manner; it can be used to explode pseudo-dialectic poses, but that is the extent of its effectiveness. It is an intrinsically defensive weapon on the rhetorical level. This means you cannot win with it.
The primary difference between the Left and the Right is that the Left instinctively defends its extremists and the Right instinctively runs from them and leaves them out to dry. The latter is an appeasement strategy, and it works about as well as the infamous failures of appeasement we all know from history. (Neville Chamberlain?)
All appeasement does is signal to the hoplophobes what buttons he needs to push in order to force an opponent to retreat. When you dutifully point out that "you don't agree with everything X says" or "don’t include the militias, the 'racists' and those who argue in bad faith", what you are accomplishing is not the inoculation of your argument from their extremist taint, you are telling the hoplophobe exactly how he can rhetorically defeat you by painting you as the very sort of extremist you disavow. And remember, rhetorical victory is the entirety of their objective!
Embrace the extremists. Defend them. Refuse to permit them to be cut off and isolated. Allow them to play their role as the intellectual shock troops they are. That is how you win. Because if they're not taking the incoming fire, you are. And the shock troops are much better equipped psychologically to take it and survive than the average self-styled moderate.
Gates of Vienna gave it favorable coverage. Pretty rah-rah, actually!
The Rainmen analogy is a hoot in especially rainy Washington State . I was there and it was a great event . I went there half expecting to be in a crowd of 400 instead there were 2,000.
Any time you are a trailblazer expect a lonely path. Apparently nearby both Puyallup and Chehalis held their gun shows at the same time. This did effect turnout.
As a stand alone event it was ground breaking. If you have a lawless President it follows that you have a lawless people.
I was there and posted about it on my blog.
Post a Comment