Abbey’s Road: Liberty is the Monkeywrench Against the State by Bill Buppert

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

“The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police and the military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy… If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government—and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws.”

“Fantastic doctrines (like Christianity or Islam or Marxism) require unanimity of belief. One dissenter casts doubt on the creed of millions. Thus the fear and the hate; thus the torture chamber, the iron stake, the gallows, the labor camp, the psychiatric ward.”

“A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.”

“Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.”

-Edward Abbey

I am opposed to the government death penalty; I am also pro-life which makes me blessedly consistent.  I don’t trust the government to be able to have the responsibility to mete out the severest penalty and to do it either professionally or with no ill intent.  In the smaller sense, the evidence is massive of the queue of innocents who have been shot, hanged and poisoned for crimes they did not commit.  In the larger sense, government puts us all on death row and it is just a matter of time before the cops kill you in your home or vehicle or we suffer a massive die-off in America from an EMP burst that takes us from zero to 1850 in one second.

I use this preamble to frame my severe skepticism of the state doing the right thing…ever.

I am not opposed to the death penalty in my house if an intruder comes in to do harm to me or mine.  I am a Flinter in temperament and predisposition.  Most of the laws on the books are noxious, useless and liberty-draining in their essence.  Malum prohibitum is the state saying don’t do that because I told you not to.  A monstrous fallacy whose logic only serves to reduce subject populations to assessed rentals on their freedom that can be wrested away at the drop of the constabulary’s hat.  I daresay that one could throw every statute book into the bonfires across the nation when Americans finally wake up and throw off their shackles of serfdom from the local to the national level and folks would not find themselves in danger but would stumble into prosperity.

Will commerce and everyday living really come to a screeching halt because the coproaches don’t show up to work or the sloth-like city landscaping crews refuse to shamble from their abodes to dawdle at make-work throughout the burgs of America?  All of a sudden, the economic illiterates occupying the municipalities across the nation go on strike for higher wages and more vacation time for weeks, nay months; will the country stagnate and fold onto itself?

Things would be difficult for about 24 hours and then voluntarism, persuasion and cooperation would emerge as the factors that make life worth living.  No utopia this and there would be scores settled and inevitable failures but only the individuals would be responsible and not the nameless strangers who lord over every facet of our lives like pawns on a macabre chess board.

Innovation has never once sprung from the mind of a mob. Ever.

The heavy hand of the state and its shambling yoke-tenders would be out of work and the country would revitalize itself.  Tens of thousands of Americans would wake up the next morning and look to the east and exclaim:  “You can go away now; we have awakened from our prison slumber.” Ed Abbey made me say this.

I found Edward Abbey’s 1959 thesis on “ANARCHISM AND THE MORALITY OF VIOLENCE” over the weekend while reading a small tome entitled “Epitaph for a Desert Anarchist” by James Bishop, Jr.  I have been an Abbey reader most of my adult life and found his books amusing and penetrating.  He held a lifelong distrust of all authority, especially the state and the thesis provides an insight into the flame that burned in him at a rather tender age.

What one learns about personal political evolution is that a road traveled to the right is far more traveled than the opposite direction.  It is rare indeed for folks to age and yearn for more government instead of less.  I am a skeptic of the Left-Right paradigm but use it to simply illustrate the purpose.  It is far more descriptive to chart one’s philosophical predisposition on a quadrant chart at whose corners are interventionist, collectivist, non-interventionist and individualist on whose map I am located within the nexus of the last two.  Abbey was a strange brew at times but consistency escapes most of us for everything we believe.

He was a desert dweller who found the vast emptiness, solitude and sheer ferocity of nature to be a welcome refrain from dealing with the hubbub of civilization and the attendant disease of intrusive government.  His books are lyrical, intense and peppered with brilliance.

Kirk Douglas starred in a screen treatment of Abbey’s novel, “The Brave Cowboy” in the early 1960s called “Lonely Are the Brave”.  It is a powerful and stark film treatment of a  cowboy (the unacknowledged unconscious anarchist in American history)  marooned in a 20th century which continues to ”fence me in”.  Douglas looked at it as one of his favorite roles in his film career.

Abbey was fond of saying that “sentiment without action is the ruin of the soul”.  He discovered anarchism at a tender age and sought to find the evolutionary blueprint for it in the earlier writings of Greek philosophers and everyone in between which his thesis is peopled with and he asks a central question:  will violence lead the people from their subject braces and chains into freedom?  He thought the answer was no but he was no pacifist, he was a staunch supporter of gun rights and considered himself something of the cactus in which one could only get injured if you screwed with something or somebody.  If you read “The Monkey Wrench Gang” and later “Hayduke Lives”, his growing frustration got the best of him as some of his characters started to break the First Rule in the Code:  Harm No One.

Continue reading

DDD: Fundamentals, Body Armor and the Survival Team Myth by John Meyers

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

Publisher’s Note: Please take the time to visit the debut of The American Partisan. Please read John’s article on junk gear here. Comment.-BB

Preface:  I generally try to ignore the daily deeds of politicians and the incessant bickering between voting blocs and identity groups but it seems to have gotten to me lately, as you’ll witness. While I prefer proactive apathy toward the system, the following needs to be said. I’d urge conservatives to seek the ‘safe spaces’ they mock as their sacred cows are going be butchered into extremely tasty burgers. -JM

 “At least it ain’t Hillary!” they bleat. Has Team Freedom bowed to Leviathan? This is usually the case when a person with an “R” behind their name is elected to the Offal Office.

During the Obama years, Doomsday Prepper’s became a wildly popular TV show. Oathkeeper’s marched on Lexington Green. Open Carry rallies sprang up across the country. Three Percent groups exploded to the point of making the original ideology inconsequential and even meaningless. The Tea Party movement, an offshoot of the late Ron Paul movement, became co-opted and institutionalized by the mainstream GOP.  Every other truck had a Gadsden flag on it, including ones found in DHS’s parking lots. People were ready to go to war if a single damned democrat uttered “gun control” one more time.

Enter the Age of Trump. Their guy got elected on a platform of populist nationalism. An outsider took the helm to Make America Great Again. He said the days of worrying about Second Amendment erosion are over. He inspired the racialist movements of old to reemerge and openly decry everything from the Social Justice Warrior down at the corner coffee shop to ZOG control of banking and everything in between. Former libertarians united with the white nationalist Traditionalist Workers Party despite them being literal communists on economic issues and fascists on everything else. Cultural conservatives and even some Identitarians now love the music of rapper Kayne West all due to a tweet. The entire spectacle has become the biggest laugh fest of political theater I’ve ever seen.

It has become entirely clear the Resistance has just been mostly playing Patriot for years.  Their guy got into office and America supposedly has been saved from the Cultural Marxists. Some factions went entirely to sleep and stopped showing up on range days or down at the monthly Prepper Meet ‘n Greet. Others stopped preparing all together.

In the last several months, the Orange Fuhrer has unilaterally directed the Department of Justice to classify owners of certain firearms accessories as felons, without a grandfather clause, which is more gun control in one executive directive than Obama instituted in his entire 8-year reign. The Right still cheers Dear Ruler while making 10 million excuses (Muh 4-chess!) or at minimum they remain silent.

He has signed the largest budget in history into law, called for the death penalty for dealers of illegal plant vegetation and chemical compounds, (muh war on drugs!) is fighting the “Deep State” by appointing its cronies to different positions, hoisted oppressive tariffs on steel and aluminum and sparked a trade war whose losers are the American people. People trade, not nations. The “Resistance” still stands by their man because he challenged Biden to a cage match… or something.

Individualist and economic think tanks used to host entire conferences called “Down with the Presidency” when George Bush was in office, attacking the institution of the Imperial Presidency from all directions. Now free market academics that used to speak at those conferences, host debates about Trump’s tariffs and actually consider the pro-tax side to actually have a legitimate position.

Meanwhile, the base is whistling past the graveyard as Trump threw them a bone with some trivial tax cuts. But in typical Supply Side style he didn’t accompany them with spending cuts. In effect he prefers to pay for his extravagant spending by borrowing or printing the money. It’s as if he told the taxpayers he was taking them out for dinner and then sent them the bill.

The same Proud Boys, who wrote, “taxation is theft” in the tip line on their restaurant credit card slips, now demand high tariffs on everything imported into the US while Trump gives his support for national Internet sales tax collection. Apparently the calls to double the federal gas tax are just to Make America Great Again.

Continue reading

High Holy Day: Lexington and Concord 1775 by Bill Buppert

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

It’s that time again.

High Holy Day.

Today is the 253rd anniversary of the “shot heard ‘round the world” at Lexington and Concord. The British regulars who started the fracas were following an age-old government tradition of seizing powder, munitions and property for a pretentious King who had assumed such wide distribution of the tools of resistance should be available only to the government approved groups such as soldiers despite the danger on the frontier.

We celebrate that time of defiance against tyranny when for sixteen years (1775-1791), all thirteen colonial provinces and the thousands of rural polities that exited outside or alongside the framework enjoyed a freedom they had not previously had and after 1791 would become enslaved once again under the totalitarian doomsday machine known as the Constitution.

The lobster-backs and British taxing regime would be replaced by a domestic variety of even more extreme virulence whose sole safety mechanism was a constant western diaspora trying to escape the clutches of the “Republic”.

The whitewashed history since then has lionized the inauguration of the divorce from the United Kingdom on this day and mistakenly links these events to all the “freedom” enjoyed under the Constitution. The Federalist coup in 1787 that reestablished an English-style yoke of central planning, national taxation and slight tinkering with indentured servitude to a kinder and gentler tax and regulatory apparatus did no more grant individual freedom than the Romans gave to conquered lands.

The Declaration of Independence, whether penned by Thomas Jefferson or Thomas Paine, is as elegant a jeremiad against tyranny as has been written. The relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution is the same as the one between the crucifix and the vampire. They stand as opposite documents embracing wholly different visions of freedom. One cannot be consonant with the other because their aspirations are antithetical to the other. As the brilliant Lysander Spooner would opine:

But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

CPT Parker commanded the militia this day for an idea that was smothered and crushed by the Federalist coup in 1787 culminating in the creation of the ratification of the most clever slave document of the age.

When you look around on this day in this time in the minimum security (for now) Club Fed that is America, ask yourself what Parker would think. Everything you see (and don’t see in the surveillance state that surrounds you) is a product of the glorious Constitutional Republic that Spooner described so splendidly.

As an Appleseed Instructor and Shoot Boss on extended sabbatical, part of the instruction in this extraordinary marksmanship program was a gripping retelling of the Three Strikes of the Match that led to the divorce proceedings with George III and started the First American Revolution.

While I don’t share all the goals of the program hence the extended leave of absence, the telling of this ripping yarn has no match. I regret you can’t hear this from a seasoned instructor but the reading can be compelling.

For those who wish further elucidation, I recommend Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty and Fischer’s Paul Revere’s Ride. The two books will lead to many more books to better understand the hoodwinking you have suffered through government schooling and the attendant media apparatchiks who reinforce the mewlings of the mind laundries. These books will lead to better understanding the modest but brilliant interregnum when the North American Confederation was free excepting the large number of indentured servants and chattel slaves. But the Constitution would remedy this by nationalizing the former and codifying the latter. The destruction of individual liberty would begin apace.

Please attend an Appleseed marksmanship weekend seminar if at all possible at your local range.

You can make sure Parker’s sacrifice, he would die in September of that year, was not in vain.

The taxes and limitations on liberty, you ask?

1750 The Iron Act was designed to restrict the manufacturing activities in the colonies

1763 The end of the French and Indian War (Seven Years’ War) left the British with a massive war debt. George Grenville became the British Prime Minister and to pay the war debt the British, under the leadership of Grenville ended their policy of Salutary Neglect in the colonies. The British started to enforce the Laws of the Navigations Acts and looked for ways of imposing new taxes in the colonies.

1763 Proclamation of 1763 was an attempt by the British crown to separate white settlements from Indian country

1764 Sugar Act – Law passed by the British Parliament setting a tax on sugar and molasses imported into the colonies impacting the manufacture of rum in New England. The Sugar Act was repealed in 1766 and replaced with the Revenue Act of 1766, which reduced the tax on molasses imports – also refer to Colonial, Continental and Revolutionary Currency

1764 Currency Act – Series of Laws passed by the British Government that regulated paper money issued by the colonies

1765 The Quartering Act: The first of a series of Laws requiring the provision of housing, food and drink to British troops stationed in towns designed to improve the living conditions of troops whilst decreasing the cost to the crown

1765 The Stamp Act of 1765 placed a stamp duty (tax) on legal papers, newspapers and pamphlets. Vehement opposition by the Colonies, led by patriots such as Patrick Henry, resulted in the repeal of the act in 1766.

1765 The Sons of Liberty. The Sons of Liberty was an an organization (a secret society) formed by American Patriots who opposed British measures against the colonists, and agitated for resistance

1765 The Non-importation Agreements (1765–75). Associations were organized by Sons of Liberty and Whig merchants to boycott English goods In response to new taxes. American colonists were discouraged from purchasing of British imports.

1766 The Declaratory Act: Declaration by the British Parliament that accompanied repeal of the Stamp Act stating that Parliament’s authority was the same in America as in Britain and asserted Parliament’s authority to make laws binding on the American colonies

1767 Townshend Acts – Series of Laws passed by the British Parliament placing duties on items imported by the colonists including glass, lead, paints, paper and tea. The reaction from the colonists was so intense that Great Britain eventually repealed all the taxes except the one on tea. Acts included the Revenue Act of 1767, the Indemnity Act, the Commissioners of Customs Act, the Vice Admiralty Court Act and the New York Restraining Act.

1770 March 5, 1770: The Boston Massacre during which British troops killed 5 Boston civilians.

1773 Tea Act – Law passed by the British Parliament allowing the British East India Company to sell its low-cost tea directly to the colonies, undermining colonial tea merchants. The introduction of the Tea Act led to the Boston Tea Party

1774 December 16: The Boston Tea Party – Massachusetts patriots dressed as Mohawk Indians protested against the British Tea Act

1774 Intolerable (Coercive) Acts: The Intolerable Acts also known as Coercive Acts were a were a reprisal to the Boston Tea party rebellion. A package of five laws aimed at restoring authority in its colonie

March 31, 1774: The Boston Port Act

May 20, 1774: The Massachusetts Government Act

May 20, 1774: The Administration of Justice Act

June 2, 1774: The Quartering Act

June 22, 1774: The Quebec Act established on June 22, 1774

Reflect and remember this day should force you to think on the state of your chains, whether you acknowledge them or not. –BB

The First Strike of the Match

It’s 19 April, 1775. In Massachusetts Colony, the times were hard. The Colonial government had been abolished, and a military governor, General Thomas Gage, controlled Boston under martial law. Boston was practically a ghost town. The Port Act had seen to that, as the port had been closed to all traffic for months. The town slowly died without commerce, and many of those remaining in town relied on the kindness of outsiders to acquire food and necessities. Troops destroyed buildings and their contents for fire wood. Disease was rampant. The King was bent on breaking the radicals and bringing the colonies back in line, where they would pay dearly in taxes and subjugation to the motherland, and he was close to doing it.

The precedent had been set. In order to subjugate the colonies, England would have to disarm them. The colonies had a long standing custom for militia, and the militia was armed. The most expedient method of disarmament was to take their ammunition. Gunpowder was typically stored in a specially built powder house for safety and security and drawn for the militia when needed.

It was a simple matter to march in and take the colonists powder supply, and they had indeed done it before. In September of 1774, they had marched swiftly into Cambridge and carted off 250 half barrels of powder, hauling them back triumphantly to Boston.

This had so alarmed the colonist that with 24 hours there were nearly 30,000 men on the march to Boston, hearing rumors that the Brits intended to burn and shell the town. The incident ended without bloodshed, but General gage, penned up in Boston with barely 3,000 troops had been so frightened that he asked the crown for an additional 20,000 men.

Paul Revere swore that this would never happen again, that they would not be taken by surprise, and instituted the Committee of Observation, an elaborate spy network throughout the colony. Then they began to smuggle arms and powder and hide them in various remote locations. They had even stolen four brass cannon right out from under Gage’s nose, a theft not taken lightly by General Gage.

Then in December, Paul Revere had ridden more than 20 hours straight, through a blinding blizzard, to warn the colonist in Portsmouth, New Hampshire that a British patrol was on the way by ship to confiscate their powder and ball. The Redcoats were met by a band of militia who raised the drawbridge across the river and simply taunted them. After a short skirmish, the Brits marched back to their ships empty handed this time. But the failure stung the pride of the British, and they yearned for revenge.

Now the stage was set for another such raid. This time to Concord where they would have the added honor of capturing not only the provincial government, which had been meeting there, illegally, but also perhaps the traitorous Sam Adams and John Hancock, who were destined, they thought, to swing from the gallows in England. There was also rumored to be quite a stockpile of war materiel stored there.

The Colonist had been forming an army, but as yet, it was only an “Army of Observation”, which was mostly sent out to shadow the British Regulars when they made forays into the countryside. This “Army” consisted of three groups: The main body was the Militia, mostly men from 16 to over 60 and able to fight. The second body was formed by taking 25% of the young men best suited from the militia to serve as “minute men”, who would drop what they were doing and report with musket and ammunition on a minute notice. Those not falling into either category made up the Alarm List, and were tasked with spreading the alarm and supporting the militia.

General Gage knew he had to operate in total secrecy, for the colonist had an early warning system in place, with spies in Boston and alarm companies throughout the countryside. He told no one of his plans to raid Concord, save his trusted General Smith, and of course, his American born wife. This was to be his undoing.

Continue reading

Against Humdrum Activism: A Critique of the Conventional Reaction by John Myers

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces.”

– Etienne de la Boetie

Cognitive dissonance is only dissonant if you recognize it

– John Mosby Mountain Guerrilla

The evidence on the effectiveness of conventional forms of activism in curtailing Leviathan’s march has been in for a long time. The sad reality is that protests, political machinations, and electoral politics have largely been completely ineffective except in isolated historically ripe circumstances.  20 steps in favor of the state eclipse every step made toward liberty. This is what the activist calls “victory.”

Antiwar rallies have been running for the duration of the GWOT (Global War on Terror) yet the war has yet to be ended. States with Assault Weapons bans and similar laws all experienced massive protests during those legislative processes, yet the bans went into effect. You mean those letters to congressional offices and online petitions to the White House didn’t work?

John Mosby of the Mountain Guerrilla blog detailed part of a conversation we had riffing on some of the above. Be sure to see his post for his full take.  Kit Perez discusses the issue here, which led to the conversation.

The garden variety Tea Party type response to things such as gun control is entirely predictable and the system already knows what it will be. There will be threats of voting the bums out, lots of letters to the editor and perhaps a rally with the same old speakers saying the same old thing. “Molon Labe!” and “from our cold dead heads!” It’s the same tired and empty response right out of the playbook that your oppressors handed you.

Yet the march toward gun control continues.  The system doesn’t care what you think. It only cares about its interests. In fact the system hates you with a passion. The system is not threatened in any way by a message of voter turn out and sign waiving down on the corner on a Saturday afternoon. This philosophical war has to be fought on a completely different level.  How many more hundreds of years will a belief in the Most Dangerous Superstition persist and keep people entrapped in their own cognitive dissonance?

Continue reading

Fantasy History and the American Left on Private Arms by Bill Buppert

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

“Weapons control is mind control.”

– Bill Buppert

“A woman who demands further gun control legislation is like a chicken who roots for Colonel Sanders.”

– Larry Elder

“In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were exterminated.”

– Joe Wurzelbacher

In the previous essay, I discussed the mindset of the weapons prohibitionists in the country. You’ll find many of these totalitarians on both the left and right.*

Please remember all the government supremacists who want your guns will see you dead to achieve their goal. Guaranteed.

I repeat, this is a commie jeremiad against private weapons, no limitations on government guns is on the table. Ever.

I’d like to revisit the latest attempts by academia and book publishers to press the edge of the envelope with the historical fiction that not only was early America gunless but much less of a gun culture than any observer imagined. In this case the fantastical and fiction-filled exploits of Bellisiles successor, Comrade Michael Waldman.

Comrade Waldman is the executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, a communist think tank and advocacy organization focusing on democracy and…progress[ivism]. He was the chief teleprompter-writer for Offal Office Rezident Bill Clinton from 1995–1999.

Remember these creatures exist in a mindset that not only identifies Trump as Hitler but seeks to beg and plead with the same chief executive to disarm them in the face of the Trump Derangement Syndrome that has unhinged so many soy-boys, metrosexuals, women of both sexes and the usual crowd of Marxian aspirants who despise all human transactions that don’t involve a government train conductor.

Let’s make the interpretive framework clear that Waldman operates under. The horrific and collectivist robed Bolshevik, William Brennan, said this gem in 1985 (or it may have been penned by one of his clerks):

“We current Justices read the Constitution in the only way that we can: as twentieth century Americans. We look to the history of the time of framing and to the intervening history of interpretation. But the ultimate question must be, what do the words of the text mean in our time. For the genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs.”

In other words, no anchor in the eighteenth century will deter this black-robed nazgul from bloviating from on high that government knows best in every aspect of society excepting his heroic work to make infanticide safe for all post-natal humanity.

Here is Waldman’s brief:

The Second Amendment gives the government permission to form and regulate militias, the sole amendment in the Anti-Federalist bill of rights that empowers the government despite the arcane notion of “shall not be infringed” which is a curious position unsupported by contemporary opinion in the eighteenth century. Waldman fails to explain how one amendment of the original ten would codify and justify a government veto on a right whereas the rest are rejoinders against government behavior.

If you have an air sickness bag, I urge you to read this interview with Waldman in the communist monthly, Mother Jones.

It allows you to rely on Comrade Waldman’s own notions without me putting words in his mandibles.

To Waldman, however, the idea of an individual right to gun ownership is not just wrong but ridiculous; those who disagree are not just mistaken but idiots. Pro-gun historians are hacks — for example, George Mason law professor Joyce Malcolm is “a previously little-known historian” who writes “in a tone of having discovered a lost hieroglyph.”

Keep in mind that the primary reason the Federal judiciary system exists is to regulate, reduce and eliminate all private life, liberty and property in America. The legal architecture is the farmer of the communist kudzu that has been consuming the US since its founding. The cascading reduction of private gun rights over time is simply a representative example of the project..

Three respected constitutional scholars — Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas, Akhil Reed Amar of Yale, and Laurence Tribe of Harvard — have concluded that the amendment protects individuals; Waldman does not answer but belittles them, citing “Robert Frost’s definition of a liberal: someone so open-minded he will not take his own side in an argument.” Levinson in particular deserves mention because he approached the notion of gun ownership with a law school article entitled “The Embarrassing Second Amendment”.

I am so grateful I was able to get a copy of this pig at the library so I wouldn’t contribute one debt-buck to this government supremacist. I’m waiting for Clayton Cramer to destroy Waldman in detail in the same fashion he turned the human dumpster-fire posing as a writer, Michael Bellisiles, into a former academic. Mind you, it’s a brief 170-page book with end-notes where he spends the first one hundred pages attempting to eviscerate the word militia to mean total government control of firearms and the weak un-packaging of the horrific Heller decision by the Supremes in 2008 (the court’s majority opinion said that the Second Amendment protects “the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home).”

BUT

 Zombie Scalia opined:

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

And then Zombie Scalia avers:

Page 51, in re Miller

“The Government’s brief spent two pages discussing English legal sources, concluding “that at least the carrying of weapons without lawful occasion or excuse was always a crime” and that (because of the class-based restrictions and the prohibition on terrorizing people with dangerous or unusual weapons) “the early English law did not guarantee an unrestricted right to bear arms.  Brief for United States, O. T. 1938, No. 696, at 9–11.” (Emphasis added.)

Page 55

“Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179.  We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.  See 4 Blackstone 148–149 (1769) …” (Emphasis added.)

I would have preferred the robed scum on the court have gotten one vote to fail the test of individuals’ rights and let the games begin to codify mass seizure of firearms in the country.

I am consistently amazed at the sloppy but unrelenting jurisprudence that if applied to any other Bill of Right appendage absent the besotted Ninth Amendment (the deadest letter of all) would be laughed at and belittled by any sober observer.

Continue reading

The Government Hates Your Guns by Bill Buppert

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

“When a people lose the courage to resist encroachment on their rights, then they can’t be saved by an outside force. Our belief is that people always have the kind of government they want and that individuals must bear the risks of freedom, even to the extent of giving their lives.”

“The right to buy weapons is the right to be free.”

― A.E. van Vogt, The Weapon Shops of Isher

“Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

– Luke 22:36

The NRA will not save your ability to defend yourself, they are invested in the government just as much as the commies…

The weapons prohibitionists who seek to eradicate all private ownership of guns, and notably have no such case for government arms, are at it again. Usually the murder of apex political violence brokers by private gunmen like Boothe, Guiteau, Czolcosg, and Oswald sets the gun prohibitionists in a lather. Much like the frustration of the American central state in the first 150 years of failing to be capable of imposing a mandatory and trackable tax on income until 1913; the attempts remained feeble and uncoordinated until the Kennedys were killed in the 1960s; the magical combination of bureaucratic horsepower, accountancy standards, tracking of arms through a nation-wide database and the political will on the part of American collectivists (twice as many Republicans as Democrats would vote for the 1968 Gun Control Act, a horrific infringement on self-defense that would start the cascade of nonsense that would bloom like communist inspired kudzu across the fruited plain).

This would be presaged by Ronald Reagan going full gun control with the backing  of the NRA (of course) in 1967 with the Mulford Act. The uppity blacks who dared to actually carry weapons in public made the Republicans fill their pants in California at the time.

Fast forward to today and we see that the usual suspects are at it again. What is curious is that the political vermin and their deep state alliance are doing two curious things: they are floating trial balloons for eradicating about repealing the Second Amendment demonstrated most recently by the former Supremes zombie aspirant, John Paul Stevens, spewing his vitriol about having to repeal the 2A to curb gun violence. Like the other ancient communist ghouls on the bench (at every level), their brief is the eradication of freedom that is not explicitly granted by a gargantuan beneficent state.

I welcome the repeal, of course, as I mentioned in this screed.

“The call for repeal of the Second Amendment is nothing new, a cursory internet search will reveal hundred of opinion-editorials and the usual collectivist vermin calling for this to happen; they, of course, hail from the government supremacist viewpoints of the collectivist keening and whining that is the national media voice in America on both Fox and CNN and everything in between (excepting the lonely planetary outpost at ZeroGov).

 Not that the 2A is worth the paper it’s printed on. The 2A is a sham to protect weapons ownership. It has no teeth whatsoever. If it did, how could the 1934 NFA, 1938 FFA, the decision in US v. Miller in 1939, 1968 GCA, Nixon’s pogrom against handguns, the 1986 FOPA, Bushevik I’s ban on foreign cosmetically offensive weapons in 1989, the NICs, the AWB all the way to the conservative zombie Scalia’s Leninist bromide about “dangerous and unusual weapons”. On and on and on.”

 What’s curious is that if the Second Amendment doesn’t guarantee an individual right as so many American socialist observers contend, then why bother? Isn’t the wholesale ownership of the judiciary by government supremacist boosters enough to use the judiciary to simply stamp out the right for good?

The usual suspects have been floating this nonsense for decades including this gem from 2007:

“This seems to me the right response to the amendment no matter which broad historical interpretation is correct. If, in fact, the amendment embodies only a collective right and the right to keep guns is indelibly linked to membership in the old militias—institutions that no longer exist—the amendment is already a dead letter. Repealing it would be then a simple matter of constitutional hygiene, the removal of a constitutional provision that has no function now nor could in the future but that, by its language, encourages the belief in an armed citizenry that I, for one, do not wish to see.”

It appears that this notion of individual firearms ownership really gets under the skin of the academic scum who churn this detritus out for a living while other rodents in the academy applaud politely the “heroic” stance of wanting to disarm and dismember the private ownership of weapons in an entire society.

No government weapons included, no restrictions there. Why, that would be…ahem…uncivilized.

The author, Wittes, further avers: “If, on the other hand, the amendment really does as Silberman, Tribe, Amar, and Levinson essentially claim–and I suspect they are all more right than wrong—then it embodies values in which I don’t believe.

This is the crux of the complaint from the women of both sexes and frightened males who need a fainting couch if someone talks about owning a weapon much less shows one to them. Next they’ll be making me pay for their adult incontinence diapers so their not fear-shamed in public for their unmanly natures.

They not only don’t believe in your right but feel their discomfort merits the wholesale confiscation of property that is not only private and expansive but secures a seldom seen quality; not only does it offer a brake to tyranny but it has been demonstrated planet-wide and throughout history to be a sure thing in effecting regime change. A confiscation that of contested will demand the liberal use of government guns to affect the forced removal of arms from Americans who refuse their betters in government’s request to surrender their arms. They may even have the temerity to violently repel boarders at their homes and take the seizure so seriously they commence a guerrilla conflict to play plink-a-pinko with the government agents the cowardly academics and politicians send to do their dirty business (don’t they always).

Continue reading

No. Their Cold Dead Hands. by Bill Buppert

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

“There are no dangerous weapons. There are only dangerous men.”     

– Robert A. Heinlein

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”     

– Dalai Lama

Ironic that Hogg is the son of a coproach, the irony is rich with this one in so many ways. His antics this past weekend as a Bolshevik spokes-budgies for the government supremacist seems to indicate that Tide-Pods may become a normal part of the proverbial diet. I think the Gods that my sons did not attend a government mind laundry and turn into that.

The best way to stop government school shootings is shutter every one of them raze them to the ground and fire every government teacher in America. Then the rebuilding can begin.

All the fatuous fury and nonsense is cast at an inanimate object. Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.

If we use the American NKVD’s own crime statistics, less than 400 humans per annum are killed by rifles which means that more people die by many other things to include a mere one percent of the suicides every year. 400 annually in a population of 326 million with an estimated hundreds of millions of guns and hundreds of billions of rounds. No one knows how many guns are in the US and you would be foolish in this day and age to reveal the inventory of your personal armory.

Just buy more and consider Comrade Boss Hogg to be the salesman of this century maybe exceeding the Obamunist sales force..

When it come to guns, the paper on your targets at the range pays far more dividends than reliance on the fetid slaver document celebrated and interpreted differently by left and right alike.

The Second Amendment doesn’t protect shit, it merely codifies a pre-existing or a priori right to self-defense. The government can no more nullify the right than it can force people to shut up, not drive and breathe. This doesn’t mean they won’t try and attempt to cloak their evil in legalese and legislative nonsense. This doesn’t mean they won’t pass law after law stacked like skyscrapers in the august chambers where the robed government employees will rubber stamp the nonsense when they take the time to bother doing anything.

At least a repeal of the Second Amendment would put some honesty in the entire enterprise by the government supremacists to make America England again and be a clone of the sinking island hell-hole across the Atlantic.

The gun grabbing Charlton Heston famously aped the words, “from my cold dead hands” and he got it wrong as he did so many other things. The object of conflict is to make the ratios count beyond your body you’re puppeteering in this life. Once the first life is taken in defense of kith and kin, all the rest are free.

This is grunt math. This is the arithmetic of both the good and the bad actors.

Continue reading

The Education Complex and Imperial Conditioning by Bill Buppert

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

“I’ve noticed a fascinating phenomenon in my thirty years of teaching: schools and schooling are increasingly irrelevant to the great enterprises of the planet. No one believes anymore that scientists are trained in science classes or politicians in civics classes or poets in English classes. The truth is that schools don’t really teach anything except how to obey orders. This is a great mystery to me because thousands of humane, caring people work in schools as teachers and aides and administrators, but the abstract logic of the institution overwhelms their individual contributions. Although teachers to care and do work very, very hard, the institution is psychopathic — it has no conscience. It rings a bell and the young man in the middle of writing a poem must close his notebook and move to a different cell where he must memorize that humans and monkeys derive from a common ancestor.”

– John Taylor Gatto, Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Education

Publisher’s Note: Buy weapons, ammunition and equipment while you still can.

Even here in the Arizona, our morally stunted Apparatchik Governor, fondly known as Il Douchey, is proposing a raft of weapons prohibitionist nonsense. It’s precious that one of his Orc Chiefs, Napier, in Pima County is spouting the “Only Ones” mantra. Here’s the qualification for a coproach to carry his weapon and shoot Helots in AZ:


“Commissioned members must qualify annually, at minimum, with a weapons system intended for on-duty use on a Department-approved firearms qualification course and must meet all Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training (AZ POST) firearms qualification requirements,”  Pima County Sheriff’s Department General Order 2015-003 mandates.

Once a year for “each weapon system used in an official capacity”? And  how many tries do they get?

“Members shall be allowed up to two (2) attempts to qualify on their initial qualification date. In the event of two (2) failures on the initial qualification date, the member shall be rescheduled by PRTC staff to return to the range, within five (5) business days, for an additional qualification attempt.”

OK, and what is it they get three tries to do?

Assuming we’re talking handguns, there is a revolver course you can check out, but for our purposes, let’s assume semi-automatic handguns are the more likely choice.

50 shots on TQ-19 andTQ-21 targets?

Timed stages at 25 (seven rounds), 15 (12 rounds), seven (19 rounds) and three (12 rounds) yards? Shooters have to manage their ammunition and perform a few reloading/malfunction drills? “Five points for shots within the designated scoring area (center of mass or head)” and a minimum of 210 points out of 250 maximum? 

So basically they get three chances to get a “B” and there’s nothing to stop those with the initiative from doing as much practice as they need in advance?


I thank the Gods every day that most coproaches are the poor marksmen that they are.

Pay attention to what is going on around you. I have an amusing response to the spoke-budgies and the “spontaneous” protects against the private ownership of firearms: get a sign that simply reads: “NO”.-BB

In case you didn’t know it, the primary reason the state owns the K-PhD education path happens to be the handy indoctrination of future subjects to be imbecilic, dependent and devoid of any critical thinking skills. The other reason is a convenient way to launder hundreds of billions of dollars through the education subsystem in subsidies, loans and grants.

Much like the pathetic and deadly Veterans Administration, the system is designed to enstupidate and philosophically sedate its clientele. In the case of education, to surgically transfer the brain-case from the individual to the state. Gatto infers adroitly: “In our secular society, school has become the replacement for church, and like church it requires that its teachings must be taken on faith.”

All statists are religionists for whom their idol and focused religious prostrations is the power of the state. Once you ask them to Socratically drill the substance of their assertions, they quickly fall dumb and mute. There is a reason that journalism and teaching are four (five?) year degree programs that prepare one to simply be a stenographer or spokes-parrot for the state.

The cherry on the colossal cake is the majority of the “workforce” is unionized and government supremacist in its orientation. I put workforce in quotation marks because the dirty little secret is that teachers work very little throughout the day. Like so many unionized zombies, the return is quite disproportionate to the legend espoused by the usual suspects in the government/media/education complex.

Continue reading

They Remain Unreconstructed: Defiance Still Alive in Mountain South by John Meyers

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

Moonshine trial ends with split verdict,” the headline read.

It caught my attention as I seldom peruse the various political rags and news sites. I consider them complete wastes of time filled with Stalinist (or fascist depending on the source) political drivel, progressive mentality and centrist statism of the worst order. The article was no surprise to me in the mountain South however. Certain traditions won’t die.

I read of the recent case in my home county with a shit-eating grin. The woman defendant in the case was charged with a sundry of drug and alcohol charges after calling 911 to seek help for her husband (who suffers from PTSD) who was threatening to kill himself. Upon arrival on the scene, it was calm, and officers directed their attention to marijuana paraphernalia and what appeared to be illicit, untaxed whiskey.

After the state’s instrument of prosecution built an elaborate narrative of ruthless drug dealers and rumrunners, with logs of customers and sales, and these people being a grave threat to society, their case collapsed. All charges came back not guilty, save one, which we’ll get to momentarily. It appears the drugs on site were used to treat PTSD and traumatic head injuries. (I would be remiss to also point out they found other drugs, including morphine, but these were ‘legal’ with a state granted prescription) The ‘customer log’ was merely a log of money she owed to a couple people who they borrowed from when they were on hard times.

It was a classic case of Jury Nullification. Many of the juror’s and would be juror’s were asked if they thought marijuana should be legal and if they did, could they judge the case based on the current law. So much for that, eh?

One other charge came back with a hung jury. This was the charge related to the possession of what they claim is approximately 20 gallons of illegal alcohol.

The ironic twist to this part of the case was that the defendant claims it was her inheritance from the late Popcorn Sutton, the infamous Smoky Mountain moonshiner. The defendant claimed that the liquor in her possession was legal and the taxes had been paid on it. Let me remind you that the alcohol tax amounts to approximately 40$ per gallon. For comparison, a gallon of gasoline nets the feds approximately 20 cents.

How could this be? Taxes paid on moonshine whiskey? The defendant stated that the local sheriff’s department knew she was in possession of this whiskey since 2008 and has never bothered her about it.  She produced receipts that the taxes were paid in court.

To step back a little bit, Popcorn Sutton was arrested in 2008 and allegedly had in storage units, approximately 800 gallons of whiskey. When you are convicted with this type of thing, part of your sentence nearly always includes a fine, which is for the back taxes “owed” to the ATF/Treasury Department. My guess is that the defense is making the argument that the fine had been paid therefore the taxes are paid. Should said liquor not be legal to possess?

Continue reading