45 human beings legally disarmed the state of New York under the leadership of the Governor Cuomo. A state with a population of 19 million people has been disarmed in a significant fashion for those foolish or sheepish enough to comply with the law. The country is bombarded with media propaganda on a continuous basis on the moral high ground and fairness of democratic processes. In one fell swoop, the rulers of the tax jurisdiction of New York have proven not only the folly and charade that is representative democracy but abridged the most fundamental right of all – the right to self-defense. Ironically, the legislators had accidentally disarmed the only ones who should be subject to total disarmament in the prosecution of their duties – the police. This was quickly remedied by the worthies in Albany and all is well with the continuing weaponization of the police.
As I have mentioned before, absent the police, no political bad actor in history has any power to deny rights or exploit tyrannical rule. None. This would be a reason why the politicos would behave in a most uncharacteristically efficient manner to correct that oversight. Now the governor and his entourage will continue to have heavily armed private praetorians at their beck and call to provide security much like the Private Security Detachments (PSD) that protect VIPs and general officers overseas and in the combat zones in America’s neo-imperialist quagmires around the globe.
As with so much in government, what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the mundanes that dot the fruited plain and have their wealth and resources filched at gunpoint on a perennial basis.
Not only is there a tremendous government animus toward any aspect of self-reliance as I discussed earlier but there is a very real fear of the general population having a peer competitive capability to defend themselves at the same level of a government’s military offensive capability. I will leave it to others to drone on endlessly about the Constitutional Second Amendment and its mystical and sanctified capability to keep Americans in arms. The evidence would prove otherwise with the endless parade of legislation and laws that have effectively removed modern military analogs such as fully automatic firearms and crew served weapons and suppressors and grenades and mortars and the list is endless on what you cannot legally possess without going through a government probe search that would make the NKVD blush in admiration. Most of these items are simply prohibited.
I believe the “20,000 gun laws” is a canard and that 300 may be nearer the number according to the Brookings Institution: All 300 or whatever the true number may be certainly infringe in a substantive and material way on the ability of the common folk to maintain a peer armory and capability against their oppressors.
The most informative answer to the question of “how many gun-control laws?” is then “about 300 major state and federal laws, and an unknown but shrinking number of local laws.”
In my state of Arizona, the local laws are shrinking due to state preemption and the heroic efforts of the Arizona Civilian Defense League. Since the systematic disarmament of blacks toward the end of the nineteenth century and the raft of weapons prohibition legislation since 1934 to include Ronald Reagan using the black possession of firearms a causus belli in 1967 to get the 1968 Gun Control Act rolling, the government assault on individual possession has not ceased.
The Second Amendment of the vaunted but toothless Bill of Rights has been ravaged, savaged and rendered to the point of being a nice slogan and perfect bunting for a rally but effectively an empty promise and a worse protector of individual arming.
One can get all the quaint quotes from the Founding Era and make all the legalistic arguments one wants but you find yourself in the same pathetic position of the wacky and deluded Sovereign Citizens adherents trying to outwit the robed government employees with their rapier wit and deep Blackstonian understanding of the law. Not.
The Second Amendment will do nothing to stop gun prohibition in America. The Constitution was built to create a system first and foremost that fleeces and relieves citizens from their wealth and will concomitantly disarm its citizens if the objections to the former become too disturbing to the rulers.
Those who think another case in front of the Supremes will seal the deal and sanctify their individual rights to bear arms are in for a rude surprise. Remember Scalia’s infamous words in the Heller decision reserving the right of rulers to remove “dangerous and unusual weapons” from the ruled class. It was a curious and ambiguous drawing from the US v. Miller decision concerning the employment of a militia weapon (in this case, a trench style shotgun). As we have seen from so many decisions, the Supremes will find a way to twist the language to suit their propensity for restricting rights instead of expanding them.
Much like the recent decisions on police surveillance, the government rule-enforcers will simply find other means or suborn the law. It is what they do.
I am suggesting that a sole reliance on the Second Amendment will never fail to disappoint if decriminalization of weapons is not the first and only effort. Much like the illegal mood enhancers chased by the Drug War, the worst thing that can happen is legalization because then the Forces of Darkness can regulate and tax to their heart’s content. Decriminalization of weapons and self-defense is the only course of action.
I would like to briefly address the “need argument” so popular with the disarmament talking heads in the government and media. The common canard is that a free people must establish some kind of need and until such time as permission is given by the rulers, this is forbidden. Why do I need a Kalashnikov or grenade or fully automatic firearm?
The answer is deceptively simple: any population in any tax jurisdiction on Earth should be a peer competitor in weapons and training to the standing military and constabulary within those boundaries for a very simple reason; no government on Earth has ever remained within the confines of its creation and none has ever disarmed its population without severe penalties to individual rights and freedoms. At one end of the spectrum, the Communist nations used it as a means for wholesale pogroms against the disarmed citizens and at the other end have guaranteed a hazard-free workplace for those who break laws for a living (the private sector criminal element) leading the ironic position of the vaunted United Kingdom being the most violent nation in Europe.
When politicians ask after the mere needs of a citizen, there will always be an agenda designed to deprive the populace of their loot or their liberty. After all, it is a favored tactic of the collectivists to satisfy their constituents in the Free Shit Army by rhetorically asking why the wealth should not open their wallets wider and be dragooned into surrendering more of their private earnings for the herd.
Why do we need cars that exceed the speed limit? Why do we need to have 120” LCD televisions? Why do we need to have ball bats, hammers and pipe wrenches if they are so harmful?
Some of the worthies and talking heads in the media and blogosphere spend countless hours wringing their hands over the baleful effects of firearms yet they ignore the far greater death toll at the hands of government approved doctors or the government subsidized hell-holes in the inner city where the ruler’s policies have created perverse family structures and the inevitable obesity epidemic that result from following the government diet program. Whatever government touches, it blackens, deadens, and deepens the crisis it raced to resolve.
Draw a line in the sand and just say no to disarmament.