Hoplophobia: Drive a Rifle or Ride a Railcar by Bill Buppert

 

“Hoplophobia is a mental disturbance characterized by irrational aversion to weapons, as opposed to justified apprehension about those who wield them.”

“Remember the first rule of gunfighting … have a gun.”

– Col. John Dean “Jeff” Cooper (1920-2006)

Publisher’s Note: I just finished James Hornfischer’s book on the Pacific War from 1943-45 and it was a great with a few flaws. I consider him one of the best naval historians alive.

The Fleet at Flood Tide: America at Total War in the Pacific, 1944-1945

Narrative history in the tradition of the pre-New Left historians. He suffers from Clancyesque triumphalism but it is worth the read nonetheless.

I mentioned in a post earlier that I was trying to make my way through the entire 1988-2018 library of the Military History Quarterly (this is the more popular hardback magazine series you may have seen. This is not the Journal of Military History which is published as an academic journal by the Society for Military History). It has been a slog but progressing.

I have also embarked on making my commutes to work more productive by listening to ProfCJ’s consistently excellent Dangerous History Podcasts. I can’t recommend them highly enough. Not only because I co-hosted his Irregular Warfare series with him but because it is damned good history that cuts through the nonsensical court history drilled into non-professional and professional historians alike by the government subsidized college mind laundries.

My T-shirts are selling like hotcakes and I and my youngest daughter thank you (she gets all the profit through the largesse of her loving father).

My forum is back up and running so please join in. It is like the 18th century Green Dragon Tavern but electronic. One dare not go there to fellate the King. The forum is larger once you join than non-users see on the ‘net.

I’d like to request that anyone who has read my book or both that are currently published please write a review no matter how slight.

The Mango Emperor has given you an opportunity to update your armory and train on the tools of liberty, don’t waste a minute. -BB

 

 

Most everyone who has read my screeds know that I hold the Constitution in low odor and consider it one of the greatest human slaver documents ever written; it took the Declaration of Independence, gutted it, reversed course and embraced the worst forms of centralization popular at the time and even borrowed from Roman governance in the past. It took the worst offenses of the Crown in London, localized them and started mimicking those very notions early in its career as the liberty destroyer in America.

But let’s get down to brass tacks on weapons ownership in particular. The Second Amendment doesn’t guarantee anything even though it couldn’t be clearer in its intent.

Copperud avers: “A well-schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.’

But clearly, American jurisprudence in the last century has seen fit to reduce the right to a privilege heavily regulated, taxed and socialized to something little better than indecent exposure to the feminized urban elites who view such ownership with disdain and disfavor.

“If you give a dime to any “gun rights” organization doing special pleading with the owners of the tax plantation and they help craft legislation and not eliminate laws and statutes, they are the king’s men and don’t give a rat’s ass about individual and private small arms ownership.

 Exhibit A is the 1934 NFA, 1938 FFA, 1939 US v. Miller, 1967 Mulford Act (CA), 1968 OCC & SSA and GCA, 1986 FOPA, Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988, Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990), Brady Act (1993), AWB (1994), on and on and on.”

There is no political elite in the history of mankind who champions the unfettered ownership of weapons. Both parties in the US have been hostile to private ownership and no one wing of the uniparty is better than the other. The myth is that the Grand Old Politburo is the stolid booster of such ownership. Please recall who ran the Offal Office in 1986 and the consequent efforts by both Busheviks to regulate and eliminate important aspects of private weapons ownership.

Take a look at the voting rolls for the 1968 Gun Control Act. The GOP vermin were just as enthusiastic as the Democrats to impose these limitations on the private ownership of weapons.

There are two central questions to ask:

First, can self-determination be realized by the unarmed?

I’m an abolitionist which means I object to any government outside of self-government. This puts me officially off the reservation of acceptable dialog in “civilized society”. Hell, I am a single digit percentage of single digit percentage of the American polity as an abolitionist on the libertarian spectrum. Minarchists (cannibals who nibble instead of devouring other humans) comprise the lion’s share of the acceptable libertarian intelligentsia in polite society.

I have often said there are three pillars to ultimate liberty:

  • All initiated aggression is wrong but self-defense against such aggression is always justified
  • My self-ownership is non-negotiable
  • I will fulfill any contract I deliberately sign onto (the social contract is government supremacist nonsense)

And all of these components obtain on a single concept: self-determination.

Can one fulfill the ideation of self-determination if you are unable to defend the notion itself against all comers?

No.

All weapons control therefor has one primary objective: to ensure that the government no matter what flavor is unhindered in using any and all means to subdue and force its subject peoples in its tax jurisdiction to submit to alien authority outside of the individual.

That’s it in a nutshell.

This means that every single edict, EO, law, regulation or whatever flavor of government coercion instantiated is a declaration of war on self-determination.

Second, does the same government that makes claims to heavily regulate the private ownership of weapons consequently regulate the government ownership of weapons?

No, of course not.

And I thank the Gods every day that the coproach infestations in America are not only the fattest “profession” on American soil (that shows up in the workforce even though most apparatchiks in bureaucracies are on assisted living and overpaid at that) but also for the most part undisciplined, low information and among the poorest marksmen “required” to use weapons in any armed profession in America. In the end, when the violence brokers posing as “statesmen” finally call the ball and institutionalize a South Africa-style edict to disarm the Helots, the police will be the frontline spear of political will to make it happen.

Interesting times indeed.

Guns have two enemies – rust and politicians.

Pay attention.

You’re next.

“An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.” – Clint Smith

Bill Buppert
thirdgun@hotmail.com
10 Comments
  • kirk hayes
    Posted at 22:00h, 07 September Reply

    it is estimated that in the last century, govts killed between 200 – 300 million human beings with weapons, in fact, the numbers are so large and govts so devious, a truly accurate number of such deaths cannot be ascertained. with this in mind:

    Q: would anyone in full control of their mental faculties trust that govts alone possess weapons in light of this history?

    or, better yet:

    Q: is it reasonable, given the history of govts with weapons, to suggest that GOVTS should be denied the possession of weapons?

    the first question is seriously put forth and can be answered in one word: NO

    the second question is put forth in a tongue-in-cheek manner to accentuate the absolute foolishness of disarming the entity (private gun owners) that has not done even a fraction of the number of deaths govts have during the same time frame, while insisting the very entity that kills by the hundreds of millions has the sole ability to possess weapons. i am a practical man and realize that as long as there are govts, those govts will have weapons. therefore, under the current construction of the ‘world order’, the second question is, indeed, tongue-in -cheek and meant to demonstrate the foolishness of the anti gunners.

    i long ago gave up trying to ‘understand’ the position of those who would deny me the use of a tool to protect myself, in essence insisting that i become a passive victim under the proper circumstances. that is, simply, not normal thinking.

  • Fred Seymour, Jr.
    Posted at 06:00h, 08 September Reply

    Come and take them!

  • Dirk Williams
    Posted at 08:59h, 09 September Reply

    Those here, have answered that question in spades! If your reading BB, for the tools offered, then clearly your not THEM./THEY!. .

    Thinking it’s realistic to understand anybody here isn’t listening to those who think their our handlers,

    Our “Line in the Sand” was drawn many many moons ago. We all, understand the-possible consequence of our choices. I’m comfortable with that.

    My focus anymore is quality of life for my remaining years, here on planet Earth!

    Articles well done, Bill. Thank you.

    Dirk

  • Bot Roda
    Posted at 18:03h, 09 September Reply

    Sovereignty of the individual respecting natural law is the only philosophy under which a moral human being should live their life.
    Born on this plantation in North America through no choice of my own I do not recognize this government as having any authority over me nor will I accord it any respect, honor or loyalty as it has proven over and over again these last 200 odd years that it deserves none.

    Although reluctantly rendering it the tribute it steals from me at gunpoint (since its minions are much better armed than I as Bill so ably points out) I have in all other regards disassociated from it. My spirit remains free even though my physical body remains enslaved.

    Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based on five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, and county commissioners.

    Edward Abbey

  • Brandon Wark
    Posted at 13:51h, 13 September Reply

    “Gun Control is mind control.”

    L. Neil Smith

  • Sean Hofhine
    Posted at 08:08h, 16 September Reply

    Unfortunatey, the simple fact is, and always will be….

    About 99.99999999 percent of this plantation of tax cattle cannot live by a simple suggestion.

    I don’t own you, and you don’t own me.

    Up to and until we get just a few people to live up to and believe that statement.

    Yup, We’re Fucked

    Sean

  • Dallas Smith
    Posted at 08:41h, 19 September Reply

    Is there a way to get these shirts shipped to Canada? I’d love to have one but amazon.com won’t ship it to my address.

    • Bill
      Posted at 18:49h, 19 September Reply

      I frankly don’t know. You sure you won’t be arrested by Miss Trudeau’s armed nannies?

Post A Comment