I quite often refer to individuals and organizations who favor strict gun laws as "anti-gun," or even "rabidly anti-gun." The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) might fairly be considered about the most extreme of the forcible citizen disarmament advocacy groups. CSGV, after all, is the only group I know of that openly calls for a government monopoly on force. Care for an example?
The concept of a "monopoly on force" might sound foreign or even frightening to Americans that take great pride in our revolutionary beginnings, but it is the fundamental organizing principle of any political entity, including the United States. In 1919, German political economist and sociologist Max Weber defined the conditions required for a political entity to be termed a "state." Weber said, "A compulsory political association with a continuous organization...will be called a 'state' if and in so far as its administrative staff successfully upholds its claim to the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in the enforcement of its order."
In light of that (and that's just one example of many--want another, or another?), it becomes clear that Horwitz and his CSGV minions are not anti-gun, in the sense of wanting to deny people the means to shoot one another. Indeed, CSGV is apparently completely on board with the government's ability to shoot citizens unopposed (pdf file):
The standoffs at Ruby Ridge and Waco -- often cited as proof that the government can and does abuse its power -- illustrate why armed resistance is a dead end. Randy Weaver and David Koresh may have had good reasons to distrust the government, but they had no right to use private arsenals to keep the police at bay.
Horwitz's message, as far as I can ascertain, is that a citizen's civic duty is to sit there and take what the government chooses to dish out, rather than resist with force.
Speaking of Horwitz and messages, Josh has recently asked what the message is behind the massive, sustained spike in firearm and ammunition sales over the past year (plus).
Visitors at an online poll that accompanied the Washington Post article mentioned above made similar-sounding remarks. Asked "Does it worry you that guns and bullets are selling at a record pace?" one individual commented, "Maybe this is sending a message to Obama that people don't trust his policies and the direction of the United States?" Another stated, "I will argue that a population not trusting their government is not a bad thing. You are in good company: Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, etc. I will further argue that the guns and bullets are not meant for fellow citizens, but for an opperessive [sic] government." A third commenter explained that he joined the NRA and bought an assault rifle because Obama's "crazy ideas make me very wary."
The NRA leadership's constant dissemination of "insurrectionist" propaganda has been an inspiration for such statements. In his 1994 book, Guns, Crimes and Freedom, LaPierre writes that, "The people have the right, must have the right, to take whatever measures necessary, including force, to abolish oppressive government."
You want the short version of the message, Josh?
Step away from oppressive gun laws; acknowledge that when the government ignores the Constitution, that government abandons any claim to the citizens' loyalty, and resistance to said government can no longer be characterized as treason; know that we will not disarm.
That's the message, Josh, and if you're a good deal wiser than I think you are, you will help disseminate it, because if that message is ignored . . .
Nobody wants to go there.
-------------------
Brady Campaign distortion exposed, update: As I mentioned most recently last Thursday, the Brady Campaign has been desperately suppressing the video of their legal director, Dennis Henigan, misquoting the Second Amendment in a way that served the Brady Campaign's purposes at the time. That video is once again available online, because ICarry's Shaun Kranish obtained the file, can host his own videos, and loves fighting with the gun-haters. Enjoy the video, and you might want to download it.
Atlanta: Ed Stone | Austin: Howard Nemerov | Boston: Ron Bokleman | Charlotte: Paul Valone | Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn | Cleveland: Daniel White | DC: Mike Stollenwerk | Denver: Dan Bidstrup | Grand Rapids: Skip Coryel | Knoxville: Liston Matthews | Los Angeles: John Longenecker | Minneapolis: John Pierce | National: David Codrea | Phoenix: Douglas Little | Seattle: Dave Workman | St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann | Wisconsin: Gene German
Comments
All enemies foreign and/or domestic!
We are not taking another step backwards. Your move.
Nex ut Tyrannus!
"...deriving their just powers from the CONSENT of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government ...." - Declaration of Independence
"A third commenter explained that he joined the NRA and bought an assault rifle because Obama's "crazy ideas make me very wary."
I would bet that statement was posted by someone on the opposing team. No knowledgeable gun owner that I know would make such an ignorant statement like that, at the very least not an intelligent gun owner.
"Assault rifle" when used in a non military context is a political code phrase used exclusively by rabid, uneducated, frothing at the mouth gun banners like Micheal Bloomberg. Sorry if I'm preaching to the choir.
"The concept of a "monopoly on force" might sound foreign or even frightening to Americans that take great pride in our revolutionary beginnings, but it is the fundamental organizing principle of any political entity, including the United States."
George Washington explicitly warned us about this very danger in his Farewell Address of 1796. In reference to paragraphs 19-22:
en.wikisource.org/wiki/Washington's_Farewell_Address
Max Weber's musings: Well he's not the only 19th & 20th century German philosopher whose theories have been roundly debunked.
Treason? In the context of the United States, I suggest that treason can only be charged as an act against the Constitution (or a State Constitution in the context of the citizen of a given state), NOT against the Government.
We don't take an oath to be support and defend the Congress or the Supreme Court, or even the President. Though as part of the oath, we DO promise to obey the LAWFUL orders of those officers appointed over us.
When I took a constitutional law course in college years ago, the professor told us that "SCOTUS follows election returns". meaning that its rulings follow the political winds.
In view of the escalation of firearms purchases in the past year, I can't see how SCOTUS can rule against 2A incorporation against the states, since there are now close to 100 million gunowners owning close to 300 million guns in all 50 states and D.C.
The task is now, to get gunowners to vote freedom first - it may be a little easier now that gunowners won't be swayed by AHSA's drivel, the way some were in the 2008 elections. Now, we have a much better idea of what Obama's "hope and change" agenda is all about.
Funny how, AHSA and its shill Ray Schoenke, are MIA all of a sudden.
To all who comment & blog here, well said & count me in as another gun owner who knows the tactics of these gun grabbers & the consequences of any sucess these groups have had on freedom. I live in Kalifornia where most of these assinine gun laws are hatched. I've fought every bill that came down the pike, with mixed results, only to see the same type of gun grab reintroduced time & again. Since my government doesn't trust me w/my firearms I can't support those in government trying to deny me my civil rights. It's a 2 way street & if the government continues to infringe my rights, like it was said above, WE DON'T WANT TO GO THERE!! But it seems to me the government is going to force that confrontation no matter what we say. I don't think they know what kind of fight their in for. I think they under estimate the people's power when it comes to "correcting" the BS government is trying to do to us. DON'T TREAD ON ME!!
sowhatbyteme,
I lived in Kalifornia for 8 years. As much as it pained me to leave a great quality of life in 2002, I saw the writing on the wall and decided to vote with my feet, sooner than later.
Short of a full blown coup d'etat in California the politicians have dug their heels in and will not relinquish their positions of power over Californians. When enough California taxpayers flee the state to seek asylum in other states from the growing economic oppression, it's only a matter of time before California becomes fiscally insolvent and goes bankrupt regardless of whether the state declares it or not.
Then and only then will the politicians be forced to out, but not before life in California takes precipitous downward plunge, higher crime, taxes, inflation, interest rates, etc.
Voting with your feet seems to be the only taxpayer revolt indicator the politicians cannot ignore not just in California but New York, New Jersey, Chicago, etc.
Good Luck out there.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!