The real reason behind it
When the New York Times recently opined that Florida's relatively liberal (in the original sense of the word) concealed carry laws were allowing "criminals" to obtain permits and that the lunatic legislators (along with, of course, their Stygian masters at NRA headquarters in Virginia) who allowed this law to come into being should be ashamed of their willful abetting of not-yet-committed murder, I was again puzzled about why a thoroughly discredited and hugely unpopular policy like "Gun Control" was again featuring on the To-Do list of the American Socialist Left.
After much cogitation and evaluation of recent political events I am convinced that "Gun Control" is the "Great Obstacle" to the success of Socialism in this country. The New York Times editorial staff knows that "Gun Control" has never and will never positively impact crime. What it will do, however, is remove the power to resist from those over whom the Editors and their political masters would rule.
"Gun Control" swept through Europe in the aftermath of the First World War and the economic upheavals of the nineteen-twenties and thirties. It is generally acknowledged that the laws were passed not to combat crime, but to prevent the arming of political factions opposed to the status quo.
With all the anecdotal evidence we have today, it snaps the back of credulity to argue that “Gun Control” is to protect the people. Combined with the recent assaults on free-speech (embodied in the McCain/Feingold Act) and property rights (a la the Kelo decision), it is beyond chilling to consider what a gift a disarmed populace would be to the ascendant Political Class in this country.
The Constitution of The United States is dead. It has been for over seventy-years. The only thing standing in the way of authoritarian Socialist rule in this country are 30,000,000 gun owners who will not go quietly into that good night.
If the government succeeds in its incrementalist approach to undermining the idea of self-defense against all enemies foreign and domestic, the United States will be over. As it is, our liberty hangs by a slender thread.
I will not meekly submit to the rule of people like Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer - or for that matter Jerry Falwell.
Don’t Tread on Me.
And now, as a famous blogger likes to say, “I’m off to the range”, just to piss off Diane Feinstein and Hillary Clinton.
After much cogitation and evaluation of recent political events I am convinced that "Gun Control" is the "Great Obstacle" to the success of Socialism in this country. The New York Times editorial staff knows that "Gun Control" has never and will never positively impact crime. What it will do, however, is remove the power to resist from those over whom the Editors and their political masters would rule.
"Gun Control" swept through Europe in the aftermath of the First World War and the economic upheavals of the nineteen-twenties and thirties. It is generally acknowledged that the laws were passed not to combat crime, but to prevent the arming of political factions opposed to the status quo.
With all the anecdotal evidence we have today, it snaps the back of credulity to argue that “Gun Control” is to protect the people. Combined with the recent assaults on free-speech (embodied in the McCain/Feingold Act) and property rights (a la the Kelo decision), it is beyond chilling to consider what a gift a disarmed populace would be to the ascendant Political Class in this country.
The Constitution of The United States is dead. It has been for over seventy-years. The only thing standing in the way of authoritarian Socialist rule in this country are 30,000,000 gun owners who will not go quietly into that good night.
If the government succeeds in its incrementalist approach to undermining the idea of self-defense against all enemies foreign and domestic, the United States will be over. As it is, our liberty hangs by a slender thread.
I will not meekly submit to the rule of people like Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer - or for that matter Jerry Falwell.
Don’t Tread on Me.
And now, as a famous blogger likes to say, “I’m off to the range”, just to piss off Diane Feinstein and Hillary Clinton.
posted by Voolfie at 8:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home