[IC]
Archer's Log-Moonstair
Moonstair in an interesting place. Their whole reason for being appears to be geared toward supplying adventuring parties and selling looted treasure to fetishist dilettantes trying to be trendy. Friendly merchants have set up their wares along every street, and there is more than enough action to keep someone interested at the two major taverns.
After picking up Squeaks over at Lord Obsidian's joint (actually more like throwing some oil on his hungover carcass to bring him around, followed by some hair of the dog to keep him interested), we headed out into the vendors to see what we could scare up in the way of supplies. We found the Alchemist's shop (closed for lunch), a Relics and Curios shop (closed, "at the ruins"), and a couple of armorers in among the more "Specialty" establishments. I decided to dig through the old weapons and ammunition in the dusty back area of the less reputable looking shop, in hopes something of value would turn up while Squeaks tottered off in search of whatever it is he eats. As luck would have it, I came across some charred-looking arrows which turned out to be Firestorm Arrows! The old guy running the store figured that 2 of them were Level 8 enchanted, and the rest of them were Level 3. After some intense haggling, I bought both of the Level 8s and as many of the 3s as I could afford (9), reserving some Gold for the Alchemist after lunch.
After heading back over to Lord Obsidian"s place for some lunch and an Ale (5% discount!), I headed back out. The Alchemist was in, so I bought a flask of Alchemist Fire in case things get dicey later. Then, went over to the other Armorer to see if he had a decent whetstone for sale (no luck). Mine is not as effective as it used to be and both of my swords need a hone. Looks like I am going to spend my evening stoning the blades again.
Walking around the center of town, it was hard not to notice the look of apprehension on most of the faces. It is hard to tell if this is fear, or hope, or a mixture of both. Everybody was pretty friendly though, even the old guy at the fishmonger's hut. Although, with that much damage to his face, it might just have been scar tissue instead of a smile.
Walking the perimeter of town, I spotted some good vantage points for ranged defense. The main wall defenses, though, are in such disrepair that no credible defensive action would last very long. They would have to trench a moat and fill it with burning oil to have a hope, and as rocky as the soil is it would take an army of giant trolls an entire month to do anything substantial.
Finished the day having dinner with the barbarian again. I think I've figured out what's going on with him. He hasn't had a chance to do any serious butt-kicking in a while and he's lacking direction. I almost feel sorry for him...
Vanèäron
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Basement Knights - Moonstair Quest, Log entry 1
[IC]
Archers log, Frostmyr to Moonstair
Interesting trip to Moonstair...
Shortly after leaving Frostmyr headed for Moonstair, I hooked up with this band of adventurers. Since we were headed in the same direction, it only made sense to stick together. During the journey, my favorite purveyor of Ale and Tail-Lord Obsidian-joined up, apparently he was returning from some trade show or something. Lord Obsidian and I had met before, although, I am not sure he has fully forgiven the time I shot at an obnoxious dwarf in one of his taverns and missed, knocking a lit oil lantern into the fryer...
(Reminder to self, never play with weapons when drunk on "Lake of Fire" Ale.)
Anyway, our merry band of pranksters came upon a scene of the usual horror and devastation, in the form of some trolls tearing apart some poor soul and his horse. Ugh. Trolls. I hate their smell. I can smell them from 200 yards away and they sure don't smell like my home woodlands! Since the conditions were perfect, good light and little breeze, I was able to do my work from a little farther away than normal. It is really nice when you have a clear field of fire to work with!
After dispatching the trolls, and causing an Oni to Disapparate, we were able to revive one of the victims and recover a message. Summary: Moonstair is reaping the pain of failing to maintain their defenses and the Troll King wants a trophy. From the sound of it we are going to have to get up close and personal with some of them. Hopefully there will at least be some profit in this.
On a brighter note, after (finally) arriving at Moonstair (yes, we had some trouble with the "victim"), we found that commerce was still thriving. I should be able to buy some supplies to help with the job that the town wants us to do. And, I ran across someone in Lord Obsidian's eatery and beatery who could be useful in a fight. A Barbarian named "Squeaks". Although, after his last battle, he drinks a little more than he used to. We'll see what the rest of the crew thinks.
I am going to chat up some local talent, get re-supplied, and have another Ale or six. It might be a while before I get another chance.
Vanèäron
[OOC]
D&D Questing is an excellent way to explore game theory and game development. While I am not very good at role playing, I do enjoy the gaming action. Also, the interaction with the other gamers is always interesting. It is a good way to burn off some frustration after hard work dealing with other people's problems.
Thursday was Day One in a new quest. Hopefully we can get through this before most of our party has to go back to college in the Fall. In the meantime, I need to figure out how to retrain some of my Ranger's feats to adjust for the fact we are going to be battling in caves and not open area. "V" is deadly with a bow, even at extreme range, but his melee skills could use some improvement...
I wholeheartedly recommend D&D as a great way to spend an evening. Find a game near you and join up. The dark side isn't so bad...and they have cookies.
Pax,
Newbius
Archers log, Frostmyr to Moonstair
Interesting trip to Moonstair...
Shortly after leaving Frostmyr headed for Moonstair, I hooked up with this band of adventurers. Since we were headed in the same direction, it only made sense to stick together. During the journey, my favorite purveyor of Ale and Tail-Lord Obsidian-joined up, apparently he was returning from some trade show or something. Lord Obsidian and I had met before, although, I am not sure he has fully forgiven the time I shot at an obnoxious dwarf in one of his taverns and missed, knocking a lit oil lantern into the fryer...
(Reminder to self, never play with weapons when drunk on "Lake of Fire" Ale.)
Anyway, our merry band of pranksters came upon a scene of the usual horror and devastation, in the form of some trolls tearing apart some poor soul and his horse. Ugh. Trolls. I hate their smell. I can smell them from 200 yards away and they sure don't smell like my home woodlands! Since the conditions were perfect, good light and little breeze, I was able to do my work from a little farther away than normal. It is really nice when you have a clear field of fire to work with!
After dispatching the trolls, and causing an Oni to Disapparate, we were able to revive one of the victims and recover a message. Summary: Moonstair is reaping the pain of failing to maintain their defenses and the Troll King wants a trophy. From the sound of it we are going to have to get up close and personal with some of them. Hopefully there will at least be some profit in this.
On a brighter note, after (finally) arriving at Moonstair (yes, we had some trouble with the "victim"), we found that commerce was still thriving. I should be able to buy some supplies to help with the job that the town wants us to do. And, I ran across someone in Lord Obsidian's eatery and beatery who could be useful in a fight. A Barbarian named "Squeaks". Although, after his last battle, he drinks a little more than he used to. We'll see what the rest of the crew thinks.
I am going to chat up some local talent, get re-supplied, and have another Ale or six. It might be a while before I get another chance.
Vanèäron
[OOC]
D&D Questing is an excellent way to explore game theory and game development. While I am not very good at role playing, I do enjoy the gaming action. Also, the interaction with the other gamers is always interesting. It is a good way to burn off some frustration after hard work dealing with other people's problems.
Thursday was Day One in a new quest. Hopefully we can get through this before most of our party has to go back to college in the Fall. In the meantime, I need to figure out how to retrain some of my Ranger's feats to adjust for the fact we are going to be battling in caves and not open area. "V" is deadly with a bow, even at extreme range, but his melee skills could use some improvement...
I wholeheartedly recommend D&D as a great way to spend an evening. Find a game near you and join up. The dark side isn't so bad...and they have cookies.
Pax,
Newbius
Monday, May 25, 2009
Thought for the day:
“The long-term answer has to be that, if you have enough talent and enough will to succeed, you will get there by whatever route presents itself. Once you have scaled the castle walls, with the sword in your hand, it matters little how you got there..."
Brain May, Guitarist for the band Queen
Brain May, Guitarist for the band Queen
Memorial Day
Remembering all of the fallen heroes who have paid the ultimate price to secure our Freedom.
Keep them in your hearts today and say a prayer for them, their families, and for this great nation. May we always remember that the price of Liberty is very dear indeed, and never, ever squander that legacy.
Pax,
Newbius
Keep them in your hearts today and say a prayer for them, their families, and for this great nation. May we always remember that the price of Liberty is very dear indeed, and never, ever squander that legacy.
Pax,
Newbius
Sunday, May 24, 2009
NOVA blogmeet?
If you are a Gun Blogger (or a Blogger for Liberty), and you are near the DC Metro Area, I am interested in hearing from you. I want to put together a "Blogmeet" in Northern VA and meet some of my peers, trade some lies, and maybe sample a micro-brew or three.
Any takers?
I can be reached through the email link on my profile page.
Newbius
Any takers?
I can be reached through the email link on my profile page.
Newbius
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Let them fail, and why the Feds won't
Buddhists call it Karma.
The Bible says "as you sow, so shall you reap"
The rest of us call it Justice. At least those of us who still understand Cause and Effect. Yes, I am talking about the end game of the Slow-Motion Suicide called the American Auto Industry, and their personal "Dr. Death" - the United Auto Workers union.
I think that the workers, who blindly believed that their union bosses would take care of their needs, are in for a big disappointment. For some of them, the death of these companies will mean the end of life-long careers. Working at the auto plants is a family tradition for an awful lot of very good people. And, many families are devastated by this tragic failure. But, these workers trusted a group of players who sold them out for personal power and political gain. And the car makers played along.
Let them fail.
The Big Three say they cannot make it in today's economic environment. That their legacy costs, which they failed to streamline, are too high. That their pension obligations, which they agreed to, are crippling them. That their labor costs, which they agreed to, are unreasonable. That too many workers, which they agreed to carry even if plants close, will be displaced if their companies go under. That foreign competition, which they lobby for protection from, places an unfair burden on them. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Enough!
Let them fail.
The Unions, with considerable help from sympathetic lawmakers (supported by campaign contributions funded by union dues) throughout the years, played bully-boy with the companies when times were fat. The companies, with short-sighted Boards of Directors, waged a retreat of incrementalism in conceding corporate power to their workforce and the unions. Both of them went to Congress and whined about the rest of the world throughout the years, to try and keep their scheme protected from outside influence and competition. Now, they are reaping what they have sown.
Let them fail.
In the news today, federal lawmakers are pleading with the President to slow down on his "reform" of General Motors. Fiat, mostly state-owned by Italy I might add, is having issues with Chrysler's financial structure.
Other than Bankruptcy Court, why is this even a Federal matter? Answer: Because "Oh-Barry" can't control the means of production in the US without this trial balloon succeeding. Once the auto makers are under control (and "Card Check" is passed), then the next large industries in line will become the targets of centralization.
He already has the banks.
Remember the 10 pillars of Communism? Here is a link for those who have forgotten. I posted about this right after the inauguration, predicting that we would see a return to the Statist policies that feeds the virulent Left in America today. I also posted a comparison to the Democrat Party platform here (along with a contrast to the Objectivist or Capitalist position as described by Ayn Rand). The D-Party platform is populist in approach, but their underlying means to achieve them bear a striking resemblance to the 10 Pillars. (No, I am not saying that the Democrat Party is really the Communist Party. They have different voter rolls. Same agenda at the top though. And "Brand R" is darned near as bad...)
We are not even six months into this administration and have seen proposals for nationalizing the Press, the auto makers, the banks, the Internet, and Health Care. That is nearly half of the economy, including supporting industries and businesses, and including the Defense Contractors who are at the mercy of the Fed already.
For review:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (See Kelo v. New London, and any regulation by other means which amounts to a taking without just compensation)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (Ah..Yup)
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. (Let's start with the Inheritance, or "Death", Tax, and go from there, shall we?)
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
(Special note on this one: Obama has proposed a policy to the legislators for figuring out a way to punish banks who allow US depositors to shelter their foreign capital from US taxation. The goal here is to confiscate through taxation that capital which has emigrated, even if the owner of the capital is still under US jurisdiction. Expect to see Seizure laws expanded to include people accused of "Domestic Terrorism"...).
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (Anybody who still believes that the Banks are independent is naive).
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. (Communication is more important than transport, but both are heavily regulated by the Fed currently. Obama has also proposed to have legislation drafted allowing him to shut off the Internet in the US "in the event of Emergency").
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. (Nationalizing General Motors looks like it is Step One).
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. (See Obama Youth Corps and the text of H.R.1388. See also Card Check...the Unions LOVE this one).
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equal distribution of the population over the country. (I am not sure that this one even matters in our decentralized economy...)
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. (We have State-run schools and Child Labor laws, and our schools do not teach our history but do produce marginally-effective sales clerks for a consumerist economy to utilise).
Whenever a "solution" is proposed to any "problem", always ask yourself: "Who Wins?"
As a Patriot, I see the above and shake my head in disbelief that we have strayed so far from the Liberty ideal. The yoke of slavery is indeed willingly donned if placed lightly enough initially. The takeover of the United States by the forces of Statism - Communism or Fascism (depending on the amount of private property is left)- is nearly complete. The creation of "zero-liability voters" by Government has assured a constant power base of recipients who will feed on whatever life blood is still left to consume, as long as the Elites stay in power to supply them. Woe betide those welfare-voters when they discover how fragile that system truly is. And, that they are just lower on the food chain, but not off of it altogether.
For those of you who can see, keep them oiled...
Pax,
Newbius
|||
The Bible says "as you sow, so shall you reap"
The rest of us call it Justice. At least those of us who still understand Cause and Effect. Yes, I am talking about the end game of the Slow-Motion Suicide called the American Auto Industry, and their personal "Dr. Death" - the United Auto Workers union.
I think that the workers, who blindly believed that their union bosses would take care of their needs, are in for a big disappointment. For some of them, the death of these companies will mean the end of life-long careers. Working at the auto plants is a family tradition for an awful lot of very good people. And, many families are devastated by this tragic failure. But, these workers trusted a group of players who sold them out for personal power and political gain. And the car makers played along.
Let them fail.
The Big Three say they cannot make it in today's economic environment. That their legacy costs, which they failed to streamline, are too high. That their pension obligations, which they agreed to, are crippling them. That their labor costs, which they agreed to, are unreasonable. That too many workers, which they agreed to carry even if plants close, will be displaced if their companies go under. That foreign competition, which they lobby for protection from, places an unfair burden on them. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Enough!
Let them fail.
The Unions, with considerable help from sympathetic lawmakers (supported by campaign contributions funded by union dues) throughout the years, played bully-boy with the companies when times were fat. The companies, with short-sighted Boards of Directors, waged a retreat of incrementalism in conceding corporate power to their workforce and the unions. Both of them went to Congress and whined about the rest of the world throughout the years, to try and keep their scheme protected from outside influence and competition. Now, they are reaping what they have sown.
Let them fail.
In the news today, federal lawmakers are pleading with the President to slow down on his "reform" of General Motors. Fiat, mostly state-owned by Italy I might add, is having issues with Chrysler's financial structure.
Other than Bankruptcy Court, why is this even a Federal matter? Answer: Because "Oh-Barry" can't control the means of production in the US without this trial balloon succeeding. Once the auto makers are under control (and "Card Check" is passed), then the next large industries in line will become the targets of centralization.
He already has the banks.
Remember the 10 pillars of Communism? Here is a link for those who have forgotten. I posted about this right after the inauguration, predicting that we would see a return to the Statist policies that feeds the virulent Left in America today. I also posted a comparison to the Democrat Party platform here (along with a contrast to the Objectivist or Capitalist position as described by Ayn Rand). The D-Party platform is populist in approach, but their underlying means to achieve them bear a striking resemblance to the 10 Pillars. (No, I am not saying that the Democrat Party is really the Communist Party. They have different voter rolls. Same agenda at the top though. And "Brand R" is darned near as bad...)
We are not even six months into this administration and have seen proposals for nationalizing the Press, the auto makers, the banks, the Internet, and Health Care. That is nearly half of the economy, including supporting industries and businesses, and including the Defense Contractors who are at the mercy of the Fed already.
For review:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (See Kelo v. New London, and any regulation by other means which amounts to a taking without just compensation)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (Ah..Yup)
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. (Let's start with the Inheritance, or "Death", Tax, and go from there, shall we?)
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
(Special note on this one: Obama has proposed a policy to the legislators for figuring out a way to punish banks who allow US depositors to shelter their foreign capital from US taxation. The goal here is to confiscate through taxation that capital which has emigrated, even if the owner of the capital is still under US jurisdiction. Expect to see Seizure laws expanded to include people accused of "Domestic Terrorism"...).
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (Anybody who still believes that the Banks are independent is naive).
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. (Communication is more important than transport, but both are heavily regulated by the Fed currently. Obama has also proposed to have legislation drafted allowing him to shut off the Internet in the US "in the event of Emergency").
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. (Nationalizing General Motors looks like it is Step One).
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. (See Obama Youth Corps and the text of H.R.1388. See also Card Check...the Unions LOVE this one).
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equal distribution of the population over the country. (I am not sure that this one even matters in our decentralized economy...)
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. (We have State-run schools and Child Labor laws, and our schools do not teach our history but do produce marginally-effective sales clerks for a consumerist economy to utilise).
Whenever a "solution" is proposed to any "problem", always ask yourself: "Who Wins?"
As a Patriot, I see the above and shake my head in disbelief that we have strayed so far from the Liberty ideal. The yoke of slavery is indeed willingly donned if placed lightly enough initially. The takeover of the United States by the forces of Statism - Communism or Fascism (depending on the amount of private property is left)- is nearly complete. The creation of "zero-liability voters" by Government has assured a constant power base of recipients who will feed on whatever life blood is still left to consume, as long as the Elites stay in power to supply them. Woe betide those welfare-voters when they discover how fragile that system truly is. And, that they are just lower on the food chain, but not off of it altogether.
For those of you who can see, keep them oiled...
Pax,
Newbius
|||
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Link Added
I confess to absolute stupidity in my failure to have this on my blogroll already. Funny as hell, and informative too! I bring you: The Atomic Nerds!
I've visited their site often enough to feel ashamed at not having a link posted. I mean, Hey, it's just atomicnerdsdotcom...what could be easier?
Duh.
Please enjoy them as much as I do.
Pax,
Newbius
I've visited their site often enough to feel ashamed at not having a link posted. I mean, Hey, it's just atomicnerdsdotcom...what could be easier?
Duh.
Please enjoy them as much as I do.
Pax,
Newbius
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Gun Show in Richmond this weekend
Nothing much to write about right now. Work is a living Hell with no relief in sight. Obama is continuing to ram his Fascist agenda down our throats with his willing accomplices in both parties of Congress. The fawning Media fails to cover what is really going on in the fight against our Liberty.
And, I am short on Ammo.
None of these things are related, I assure you...
But, with the gun show in Richmond coming up and Georgia Arms planning to attend, I am hoping to pick up a couple-thousand rounds of 5.56mm for Beauty for something less than $.50 per round.
I am not happy with the results of the last sight-in, and I have to re-zero the scope since I adjusted it in the rings. I figure that the sighting dance will take at least two standard magazines' worth...one for the BUIS, and one for the scope.
I am not yet comfortable with my proficiency using the iron sights and I need to get better. It will come in time, I know. I just need a lot more practice with the rifle. Also, I still need to teach the boys how to shoot it. So, I need more ammo.
Weather permitting, we should be able to put a couple of hundred rounds down-range. It will make a nice diversion from the daily grind.
If you go to the Greater Richmond gun show, I'll see you there. I'll be the one in the Gadsden T-Shirt.
Pax,
Newbius
And, I am short on Ammo.
None of these things are related, I assure you...
But, with the gun show in Richmond coming up and Georgia Arms planning to attend, I am hoping to pick up a couple-thousand rounds of 5.56mm for Beauty for something less than $.50 per round.
I am not happy with the results of the last sight-in, and I have to re-zero the scope since I adjusted it in the rings. I figure that the sighting dance will take at least two standard magazines' worth...one for the BUIS, and one for the scope.
I am not yet comfortable with my proficiency using the iron sights and I need to get better. It will come in time, I know. I just need a lot more practice with the rifle. Also, I still need to teach the boys how to shoot it. So, I need more ammo.
Weather permitting, we should be able to put a couple of hundred rounds down-range. It will make a nice diversion from the daily grind.
If you go to the Greater Richmond gun show, I'll see you there. I'll be the one in the Gadsden T-Shirt.
Pax,
Newbius
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
"No More Free Wacos"
Adding my limited readership to the distribution of this missive from Mike Vanderboegh. Please read and pass it along.
Pax,
Newbius
Pax,
Newbius
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Why the wimpy endings?
Recently I was asked about why my posts always end with an exhortation to work within the system.
The answer is simple. Because advocating armed rebellion against government excess is a crime.
Since I am not a criminal, except maybe to the thought police, I will continue to advocate peaceful means to change the system from within. That is, until and unless the government takes up arms against its citizens...at which point they will have lost all legitimacy and we are free to invoke change in the manner that Jefferson advocated.
I pray that day never comes.
Pax,
Newbius
The answer is simple. Because advocating armed rebellion against government excess is a crime.
Since I am not a criminal, except maybe to the thought police, I will continue to advocate peaceful means to change the system from within. That is, until and unless the government takes up arms against its citizens...at which point they will have lost all legitimacy and we are free to invoke change in the manner that Jefferson advocated.
I pray that day never comes.
Pax,
Newbius
Tax Simplification Plan
Here's a thought: Let's simplify the Tax Code.
If taxation is really all about revenue generation for Government, let's make it as simple as possible. First, kill all of the deductions, exemptions, set-asides, and credits. Next, define that the tax is only on new income or new profits, and eliminate taxation on capital gains, inheritance, and interest generated with after-tax dollars. Set the rate at 10% Flat for all income earners regardless of income level (because equality of treatment before the law is the only true equality).
The revised 1040 would look like this:
A) How much did you make? $________.__
B) Multiply by 0.10 (10%) $________.__
C) Send in amount on line B
Of course, the Democrats tax form for would look exactly the same, except you would send in the amount on line A...
All humor aside, the tax code is NOT about income generation to support government function. It is instead a spoils system whereby the government can favor some groups over others, punish success, reward indigency, and pry into the affairs of all the citizens. If the tax code was about revenue, then it should be as simple as possible to comply with, and would allocate the tax burden fairly.
A flat tax does this to some degree. A consumption tax (like the FAIR TAX) does this in a much more equitable manner still.
Since neither of these proposals allows forthe Master Government to screw with the Slaves manipulate the code to favor some constituents over others, they will not happen unless the Slaves citizens revolt and make it so.
Feeling revolutionary today? Call your congress-critter.
Pax,
Newbius
If taxation is really all about revenue generation for Government, let's make it as simple as possible. First, kill all of the deductions, exemptions, set-asides, and credits. Next, define that the tax is only on new income or new profits, and eliminate taxation on capital gains, inheritance, and interest generated with after-tax dollars. Set the rate at 10% Flat for all income earners regardless of income level (because equality of treatment before the law is the only true equality).
The revised 1040 would look like this:
A) How much did you make? $________.__
B) Multiply by 0.10 (10%) $________.__
C) Send in amount on line B
Of course, the Democrats tax form for would look exactly the same, except you would send in the amount on line A...
All humor aside, the tax code is NOT about income generation to support government function. It is instead a spoils system whereby the government can favor some groups over others, punish success, reward indigency, and pry into the affairs of all the citizens. If the tax code was about revenue, then it should be as simple as possible to comply with, and would allocate the tax burden fairly.
A flat tax does this to some degree. A consumption tax (like the FAIR TAX) does this in a much more equitable manner still.
Since neither of these proposals allows for
Feeling revolutionary today? Call your congress-critter.
Pax,
Newbius
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Rational Arguments, Useful Idiots, and Liberty
A call to action.
I have witnessed a lot of attempts at "reasoned discourse" concerning the Second Amendment. What I hear from those who would infringe this right is disturbing. It is especially disturbing when coming from those who are passionate defenders of the REST of the Bill of Rights. Those Useful Idiots who bleat incessantly about protecting the First, Fourth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, or Twenty-sixth amendments. You know, Free Speech (except "hate speech"), Unreasonable Search (except border checkpoints), and the right to vote for all, including women and minorities, over the age of 18 (and especially the illegal immigrant vote!). Sarcasm aside, the defenders are being used by others who are promoting a different agenda under cover of Liberalism.
Yesterday, I came across a link to Angry Mouse's diary entry on Daily Kos from April 21st of last year. It was heart warming to see a quality defense of the right to bear arms from a Liberal. It is a passionate and articulate argument for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and was well-reasoned in execution. It spoke of the true reason we have this right (revolution), in unapologetic terms. Angry Mouse, in this article, personifies the classic "liberal" position as a staunch defender of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. ALL of the Bill of Rights. Not just the parts that she likes the best. The "Comments" on the article were also illuminating. It was interesting to see what passes for thought by those who argue for further infringement or for completely taking this right away, especially in light of our position as an "enlightened and civilized" society.
The arguments against guns basically boil down to a few core points:
Guns have no place in a civil society. Guns are evil. Guns are scary. Guns kill. Guns in the hands of citizens aren't effective at resisting tyranny or invasion. "Assault Weapons" are evil-squared, and doubly scary, and make you more deader... (sigh).
Since it is my personal position that inanimate objects have no moral standing, I would have to resort to comparative arguments using other inanimate hunks of metal as a baseline. Like-Cars vs. Guns; deaths and injuries per year; total, and as a percentage of the total items in circulation in the United States. Cars lose this one every time yet nobody argues for total bans on cars (well, except for the Green wackos, but that is another article completely). I will say that anthropomorphizing inanimate hunks of steel lends them more credence than they deserve, and ignores that they are tools, not actors in their own right.
The arguments for additional legislative infringement basically boil down to a few points as well, usually as comparison to "infringements" on First Amendment freedom:
You can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. You can't use speech to incite riots. You cannot threaten to kill someone. Religious Cults which pose a danger to people are illegal.
Taking these arguments individually, let's see what the real issues are.
First, the "Fire" argument. Falsely shouting "Fire" in a theater full of patrons is a Tort issue. The person doing the shouting is either attempting to cause injury to the patrons by causing a stampede to the exits, thereby risking injury to the patrons, or he is causing harm to the theater owner through potential lost sales and by exposure to liability due to injuries sustained in the incident. The speech itself is not the issue. The Tort claims arising from a false shouting of "Fire" is at issue. Truthfully shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater that is aflame is a protected act, as it alerts the patrons to a real danger. The act of shouting "Fire" is the same. Only the intent of the actor is at issue. This is not a Speech issue at all, but rather an issue of Tort law based upon intent and subsequent harm.
Next up, the "Inciting speech" argument. Briefly, the speech is protected, the riot is not. If it can be proven (tough to do, really) that the specific words caused the action, then the issue is again one of Tort. The action that was subsequent is the causative problem, not the speech. The riot, and any resulting property damage, are issues of law. The speech itself does no harm. I can listen to "inciteful" (but not insightful) speech all day long and take no action and there is no issue at law. Only when I take action is there a problem. The speech is not causative, it may be contributive, but my actions are definitive.
""Religious cults" are evil". Well, all religions have detractors who claim that the specific religion is a cult. The line is drawn based upon bias, and my Christian church may be your dangerous cult. Unless people are actually being harmed by the "religion", and not by the people professing to be practicing the religion, there is no case against the religion. Again, the human element is the defining issue here, not religion.
Then there is the pacifist who thinks that guns are evil things and doesn't want anybody to own guns, anywhere, at any time. He would rather die than kill. Would rather everyone was a victim instead of resorting to violent means to defend themselves against violent means!?! No kids, thankfully, but at least he is consistent. And he would disarm all of us if he could. If there was ever a SHTF moment, this guy is toast no matter which side he is on. Thankfully, he doesn't get much support even from other pacifists on the Kos board. To take a position such as his is to effectively deny all of human history and to wish for a Utopia that will never come.
Next up: "ownership of automatic assault rifles fails to demonstrate any rational purpose while posing a significant danger to the public. Requiring special laws for ownership of such weapons does not violate any individuals "right to bear arms" yet serves the purpose of offering greater protection to the public who continues to suffer at the hands of these weapons." I love this argument because it deftly exposes the logical flaw, as well as the rationalinfringement regulation argument, in one neat paragraph. The logical flaw? That it is the gun that kills, completely removing the human element from the equation. The rational infringement regulation argument? That it is OK to remove SOME types of weapons or to license the owners of same, and that doing so is not an infringement of a right. Of course, this argument ignores even the recent history of the Twentieth Century in which more than 80 million people were killed by brutal regimes who disarmed their populaces, and of which licensing and registration was the first step.
Of the people who argue against guns as evil, not a single one of them accords evil intent to the wielder. Because a gun is a tool for killing, the gun is the killer. The person who pulled the trigger can not be blamed for the actions of the gun...
Pointing to gun violence in "gun free" zones like Washington DC and Chicago and New York City as valid reasons to continue gun prohibition efforts completely misses the irony of the argument. Obviously, the problem is that not all of the U.S. is gun-free, right? It is self-evident that the gun causes the violence; that the nice people in these cities would not be criminals if we removed the tools of their crime, right? Sure. The numbers expose this argument as a lie. Even the numbers by people who tried to prove it was true only proved the opposite. Gary Kleck's research was originally an attempt to bolster the gun control argument. That it proved the opposite, definitively and decisively, has caused Kleck to be vilified by the gun prohibitionists. They ignore that he is a spiritual soul-mate because his report is so damning to their cause.
Pointing to drug-related crime as a reason to prohibit legal gun ownership also misses the irony of this argument. Illicit drugs like cocaine (1915), opium (1909), and heroin (1923) have been prohibited since shortly after the turn of the Twentieth Century. We still have a drug problem. "Evil drug cartels" make BILLIONS of dollars per year in profits, marketing illegal, prohibited, substances through our porous borders for sale in just about EVERY city and town in the US. So, naturally, prohibiting trafficking in guns to law-abiding citizens as a defense against these cartels is a logical and rational response to the problem, and will prevent them from acquiring more guns illegally, right?
Think about that one for a minute.
I'll wait.
If we cannot keep these people from marketing, distributing, and selling already-prohibited substances which have been illegal in the US for around 100 years, how in the HELL does it make sense that we can keep these very same people from acquiring the weapons that will be prohibited by the new laws?
Can someone honestly answer this?
I can. The answer is, "you can't".
The drug argument is not about crime or even weapons traffic. It is about controlling the population by disarming them using whatever red herring tactic gets traction with the electorate.
And it is wrong.
Just as alcohol prohibition gave rise to criminal gangs who used guns to control their territories (leading eventually to the restrictions of the National Firearms Act of 1934), so too is drug prohibition empowering criminal gangs through illicit profits gained by trafficking prohibited goods. The argument today for Gun Rights infringement? Criminal Drug Cartels.
We broke the alcohol gangs by repealing prohibition. I wonder what a similar action relating to drugs would do for the criminal elements' ability to fund their enterprises? But I digress...
Let's get to some truth about the Gun issue.
If we take the Second Amendment seriously and literally, we can only come to a single possible conclusion. Namely that Any law which infringes upon the people's ability to own any arm is unconstitutional. NFA34? Unconstitutional. GCA68? Unconstitutional. AWB94? Ditto. AWB2 (2009/2010)? Ditto. HR45? Unconstitutional. Pick any one. They are ALL infringements of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Taken literally, The People have the right to own any weapon of warfare that they can afford to acquire. Thompson sub-machine gun? Yep. Quad-50 "Whispering Death"? You betcha! Ma-Deuce? Where do I sign up? M1918-BAR? I'll take two, thank you very much. Grenades, mines, missiles? Are they arms? If so, then yes, ownership should not be a crime. The citizen-owner holds the responsibility for proper use, and holds the liability for improper use.
An extremist position? I guess that depends upon your definition of "extreme". But it is not a position that harms anybody. Why? Because I believe that the OWNERSHIP and USAGE (keeping and bearing) of these arms in non-criminal ways should not be criminal acts all by themselves. Peaceful usage of these arms is not a crime. They do no harm by themselves, threaten no one by themselves, and have no evil intent, by themselves. And, they are effective means of defense against tyrannical regimes. Very effective. So are your typical, run-of-the-mill, rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Just ask the Soviets about Afghanistan. Or the United States about Iraq.
What do we learn from this?
First, the lesson from the diarist is that there are passionate defenders of Liberty on the Left who recognize the Second Amendment for what it is-a critical component in our fabric of Liberty-ensuring rights.
Second, that there are a great many people on the Left who just never thought about guns in any meaningful way since they had no intention of owning or using them. These people have passively occupied the sidelines on the issue and allowed the extremists among them to co-opt their party, and throw away votes, to ensure ideological purity of the Party on other issues.
Third, that there truly are people out there with little-to-no rational basis for the disarmament argument. These people fear guns because of innocent ignorance, and might be swayed with proper education and a rational approach to guns as a means of personal preservation. Oleg Volk's site has convinced many from this group, and it is a powerful tool for educating the uninformed about what personal liberty requires.
Lastly, there are people out there who would disarm us to ensure that their vision of a peaceful world is enforced, even if it is at the point of an oppressor's gun. Because safety means never having to worry about your own security. These are the dangerous ones to our rights. They would trade liberty for security, and would receive neither.
All of the foregoing brings up an important question: How do we reach out to Liberals on the issue of Gun Rights? The NRA hasn't figured it out, that is for sure. Removing the demagoguery from the arguments would help. As would embracing organizations like JPFO and Pink Pistols. Those of us who who want to band together in favor of Liberty need to embrace these organizations, even if we disagree on other social issues.
Reading through the comments in the Kos thread and in others whenever the issue of gun rights comes up, one wonders whether the "Antis" arguments have any foundation in logic. A lot of what I have witnessed in these discussions hinges on gut emotion and feelings, rather than an objective look at natural law and human nature. As someone who just wishes to be left alone by our government, how can I get like-minded Liberals (classic definition, not the modern definition), Libertarians, and Conservatives to engage on the gun issue in a positive way? This is not a "Brand D" or "Brand R" platform difference. This is a fundamental issue of how free citizens relate to their elected government.
Both sides, "R" and "D", have incrementally moved us from a Nation that is mostly free to one that is mostly not. We have bought into the lie that it is OK to enslave portions of our society (through economic means, taxation, wage laws, unionization, forced volunteerism) in order to provide benefits to people who did not earn them. We have bought into the lie that it is OK to become dependent upon government for our support, our retirement, our medicine, our shelter, and our freedom. We have bought into the lie that it is better to be lightly shackled but reasonably well fed, rather than completely free but with our means tied solely to our successes and abilities.
If we are to move back to a point where we are free as a nation, we need to firmly and permanently roll back and remove the oppression that we have voluntarily donned. To do this, we need to secure ALL of our liberties against infringement by the State once again. This starts with the Second Amendment. If you are a liberal reading this, or a conservative for that matter, heed these warnings. "Government rules best which rules least." "The people are most free when their government fears them."
Status Quo is no longer an option.
In order to secure your liberties, you must be willing to fight those who would take them away. The person who stands idly by while a fearful government passes the Patriot Act against its citizens is as much at fault as the person who stands idly by while the Government bans the most effective means of defense against tyranny in the Brady Act. Both acts are abominations against Liberty.
The Patriot act should be repealed, but the current president won't push for that because he can use it against his political enemies.
New gun control (replacing the expired Brady Ban), or ratification of CIFTA, or any other act which disarms the populace also threatens every body's liberties. Those who would oppress us will come for the guns first. They will come for the presses, blogs, and other media next. They will use the Patriot Act to label dissenters as enemy non-combatants or domestic terrorists and no one will be the wiser.
Remember Waco and Ruby Ridge? Think about the implications of a Guantanamo Bay, from a falsely-accused citizen's perspective. What do we REALLY know about Gitmo? Not a lot. All we hear about right now is how the "evil Bush regime" was torturing those poor cuddly guys from the Middle-East. They weren't. The "torture" you heard about is a lie. I firmly believe that using water boarding, wooly caterpillars, and other psychological means to obtain information is not torture.
Tearing your fingernails out, or inserting glass rods into bodily orifices and then shattering them, or jamming bamboo slivers into your gums is torture. Playing loud music and keeping someone up past bedtime is not. Get over it.
Liberals, let's face it. You need the gun owners. You need to become the gun owners. You need to, because your nation's identity as a beacon of Liberty and Justice and Equality for all is at stake.
Conservatives, get off of your high horse. You need the Liberals, too. You need them to ensure that the Nation you wish to conserve is one which respects all of its citizens rights and freedoms. Even the ones that you dislike.
All of you, who would sow the seeds of discontent, need to embrace your political opposite. You need to wrap your mind around the thought that a government that has the power to persecute dis-favored groups has too much power. The levers of government in the United States were not designed to become a political "spoils system" whereby whichever party in power persecutes and prosecutes their predecessors. We need to dismantle the bureaucracy and remove the departments and directorates which exceed the constitutionally defined limits on the Federal Government.
Think about this: Brand D and Brand R are the obverse and reverse of a coin known as Statism. No matter which way the toss lands, the citizens now lose. We the People, Citizens all, need to put aside the differences of party and the labels we choose for ourselves. We need to recognize that there are events happening right now that will radically alter the way we relate to our government and to each other. We need to band together for the future of our nation and the future of our way of life.
Democrats, the present occupant of the White House has co-opted Brand D by using all of the right words, but with totally different meanings attached. He and his coterie of staffers and advisers have put one over on the citizens with sparkling oration and empty rhetoric. Be as vigilant in watching his actions as you were with Bush. Assume that the media is covering for him and utilize alternative sources of information, even sources you distrust like Fox News.
Republicans, thanks for nothing these past 8 years. You have destroyed the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. It is now time for you to either sweep yourselves into the dust bin of history, or purge yourself of those Statists among you. Using government to oppress the citizens is wrong, and you own the responsibility for the mess you find yourselves in. Clean up your own act before you ask me for another dime of support. Prove your worth by preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution, as you swore to do in your Oath of Office.
Citizens, I implore you to take up the cause of Liberty. Embrace the Constitution. Require your elected representatives to uphold their Oaths of office. Thwart those who would oppress you with laws and treaties, and who would take away your rights in the name of some "greater good". Mostly, embrace your neighbors and stick together. Together we can weather the coming storm. Apart, we are nothing.
Pax,
Newbius
I have witnessed a lot of attempts at "reasoned discourse" concerning the Second Amendment. What I hear from those who would infringe this right is disturbing. It is especially disturbing when coming from those who are passionate defenders of the REST of the Bill of Rights. Those Useful Idiots who bleat incessantly about protecting the First, Fourth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, or Twenty-sixth amendments. You know, Free Speech (except "hate speech"), Unreasonable Search (except border checkpoints), and the right to vote for all, including women and minorities, over the age of 18 (and especially the illegal immigrant vote!). Sarcasm aside, the defenders are being used by others who are promoting a different agenda under cover of Liberalism.
Yesterday, I came across a link to Angry Mouse's diary entry on Daily Kos from April 21st of last year. It was heart warming to see a quality defense of the right to bear arms from a Liberal. It is a passionate and articulate argument for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and was well-reasoned in execution. It spoke of the true reason we have this right (revolution), in unapologetic terms. Angry Mouse, in this article, personifies the classic "liberal" position as a staunch defender of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. ALL of the Bill of Rights. Not just the parts that she likes the best. The "Comments" on the article were also illuminating. It was interesting to see what passes for thought by those who argue for further infringement or for completely taking this right away, especially in light of our position as an "enlightened and civilized" society.
The arguments against guns basically boil down to a few core points:
Guns have no place in a civil society. Guns are evil. Guns are scary. Guns kill. Guns in the hands of citizens aren't effective at resisting tyranny or invasion. "Assault Weapons" are evil-squared, and doubly scary, and make you more deader... (sigh).
Since it is my personal position that inanimate objects have no moral standing, I would have to resort to comparative arguments using other inanimate hunks of metal as a baseline. Like-Cars vs. Guns; deaths and injuries per year; total, and as a percentage of the total items in circulation in the United States. Cars lose this one every time yet nobody argues for total bans on cars (well, except for the Green wackos, but that is another article completely). I will say that anthropomorphizing inanimate hunks of steel lends them more credence than they deserve, and ignores that they are tools, not actors in their own right.
The arguments for additional legislative infringement basically boil down to a few points as well, usually as comparison to "infringements" on First Amendment freedom:
You can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. You can't use speech to incite riots. You cannot threaten to kill someone. Religious Cults which pose a danger to people are illegal.
Taking these arguments individually, let's see what the real issues are.
First, the "Fire" argument. Falsely shouting "Fire" in a theater full of patrons is a Tort issue. The person doing the shouting is either attempting to cause injury to the patrons by causing a stampede to the exits, thereby risking injury to the patrons, or he is causing harm to the theater owner through potential lost sales and by exposure to liability due to injuries sustained in the incident. The speech itself is not the issue. The Tort claims arising from a false shouting of "Fire" is at issue. Truthfully shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater that is aflame is a protected act, as it alerts the patrons to a real danger. The act of shouting "Fire" is the same. Only the intent of the actor is at issue. This is not a Speech issue at all, but rather an issue of Tort law based upon intent and subsequent harm.
Next up, the "Inciting speech" argument. Briefly, the speech is protected, the riot is not. If it can be proven (tough to do, really) that the specific words caused the action, then the issue is again one of Tort. The action that was subsequent is the causative problem, not the speech. The riot, and any resulting property damage, are issues of law. The speech itself does no harm. I can listen to "inciteful" (but not insightful) speech all day long and take no action and there is no issue at law. Only when I take action is there a problem. The speech is not causative, it may be contributive, but my actions are definitive.
""Religious cults" are evil". Well, all religions have detractors who claim that the specific religion is a cult. The line is drawn based upon bias, and my Christian church may be your dangerous cult. Unless people are actually being harmed by the "religion", and not by the people professing to be practicing the religion, there is no case against the religion. Again, the human element is the defining issue here, not religion.
Then there is the pacifist who thinks that guns are evil things and doesn't want anybody to own guns, anywhere, at any time. He would rather die than kill. Would rather everyone was a victim instead of resorting to violent means to defend themselves against violent means!?! No kids, thankfully, but at least he is consistent. And he would disarm all of us if he could. If there was ever a SHTF moment, this guy is toast no matter which side he is on. Thankfully, he doesn't get much support even from other pacifists on the Kos board. To take a position such as his is to effectively deny all of human history and to wish for a Utopia that will never come.
Next up: "ownership of automatic assault rifles fails to demonstrate any rational purpose while posing a significant danger to the public. Requiring special laws for ownership of such weapons does not violate any individuals "right to bear arms" yet serves the purpose of offering greater protection to the public who continues to suffer at the hands of these weapons." I love this argument because it deftly exposes the logical flaw, as well as the rational
Of the people who argue against guns as evil, not a single one of them accords evil intent to the wielder. Because a gun is a tool for killing, the gun is the killer. The person who pulled the trigger can not be blamed for the actions of the gun...
Pointing to gun violence in "gun free" zones like Washington DC and Chicago and New York City as valid reasons to continue gun prohibition efforts completely misses the irony of the argument. Obviously, the problem is that not all of the U.S. is gun-free, right? It is self-evident that the gun causes the violence; that the nice people in these cities would not be criminals if we removed the tools of their crime, right? Sure. The numbers expose this argument as a lie. Even the numbers by people who tried to prove it was true only proved the opposite. Gary Kleck's research was originally an attempt to bolster the gun control argument. That it proved the opposite, definitively and decisively, has caused Kleck to be vilified by the gun prohibitionists. They ignore that he is a spiritual soul-mate because his report is so damning to their cause.
Pointing to drug-related crime as a reason to prohibit legal gun ownership also misses the irony of this argument. Illicit drugs like cocaine (1915), opium (1909), and heroin (1923) have been prohibited since shortly after the turn of the Twentieth Century. We still have a drug problem. "Evil drug cartels" make BILLIONS of dollars per year in profits, marketing illegal, prohibited, substances through our porous borders for sale in just about EVERY city and town in the US. So, naturally, prohibiting trafficking in guns to law-abiding citizens as a defense against these cartels is a logical and rational response to the problem, and will prevent them from acquiring more guns illegally, right?
Think about that one for a minute.
I'll wait.
If we cannot keep these people from marketing, distributing, and selling already-prohibited substances which have been illegal in the US for around 100 years, how in the HELL does it make sense that we can keep these very same people from acquiring the weapons that will be prohibited by the new laws?
Can someone honestly answer this?
I can. The answer is, "you can't".
The drug argument is not about crime or even weapons traffic. It is about controlling the population by disarming them using whatever red herring tactic gets traction with the electorate.
And it is wrong.
Just as alcohol prohibition gave rise to criminal gangs who used guns to control their territories (leading eventually to the restrictions of the National Firearms Act of 1934), so too is drug prohibition empowering criminal gangs through illicit profits gained by trafficking prohibited goods. The argument today for Gun Rights infringement? Criminal Drug Cartels.
We broke the alcohol gangs by repealing prohibition. I wonder what a similar action relating to drugs would do for the criminal elements' ability to fund their enterprises? But I digress...
Let's get to some truth about the Gun issue.
If we take the Second Amendment seriously and literally, we can only come to a single possible conclusion. Namely that Any law which infringes upon the people's ability to own any arm is unconstitutional. NFA34? Unconstitutional. GCA68? Unconstitutional. AWB94? Ditto. AWB2 (2009/2010)? Ditto. HR45? Unconstitutional. Pick any one. They are ALL infringements of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Taken literally, The People have the right to own any weapon of warfare that they can afford to acquire. Thompson sub-machine gun? Yep. Quad-50 "Whispering Death"? You betcha! Ma-Deuce? Where do I sign up? M1918-BAR? I'll take two, thank you very much. Grenades, mines, missiles? Are they arms? If so, then yes, ownership should not be a crime. The citizen-owner holds the responsibility for proper use, and holds the liability for improper use.
An extremist position? I guess that depends upon your definition of "extreme". But it is not a position that harms anybody. Why? Because I believe that the OWNERSHIP and USAGE (keeping and bearing) of these arms in non-criminal ways should not be criminal acts all by themselves. Peaceful usage of these arms is not a crime. They do no harm by themselves, threaten no one by themselves, and have no evil intent, by themselves. And, they are effective means of defense against tyrannical regimes. Very effective. So are your typical, run-of-the-mill, rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Just ask the Soviets about Afghanistan. Or the United States about Iraq.
What do we learn from this?
First, the lesson from the diarist is that there are passionate defenders of Liberty on the Left who recognize the Second Amendment for what it is-a critical component in our fabric of Liberty-ensuring rights.
Second, that there are a great many people on the Left who just never thought about guns in any meaningful way since they had no intention of owning or using them. These people have passively occupied the sidelines on the issue and allowed the extremists among them to co-opt their party, and throw away votes, to ensure ideological purity of the Party on other issues.
Third, that there truly are people out there with little-to-no rational basis for the disarmament argument. These people fear guns because of innocent ignorance, and might be swayed with proper education and a rational approach to guns as a means of personal preservation. Oleg Volk's site has convinced many from this group, and it is a powerful tool for educating the uninformed about what personal liberty requires.
Lastly, there are people out there who would disarm us to ensure that their vision of a peaceful world is enforced, even if it is at the point of an oppressor's gun. Because safety means never having to worry about your own security. These are the dangerous ones to our rights. They would trade liberty for security, and would receive neither.
All of the foregoing brings up an important question: How do we reach out to Liberals on the issue of Gun Rights? The NRA hasn't figured it out, that is for sure. Removing the demagoguery from the arguments would help. As would embracing organizations like JPFO and Pink Pistols. Those of us who who want to band together in favor of Liberty need to embrace these organizations, even if we disagree on other social issues.
Reading through the comments in the Kos thread and in others whenever the issue of gun rights comes up, one wonders whether the "Antis" arguments have any foundation in logic. A lot of what I have witnessed in these discussions hinges on gut emotion and feelings, rather than an objective look at natural law and human nature. As someone who just wishes to be left alone by our government, how can I get like-minded Liberals (classic definition, not the modern definition), Libertarians, and Conservatives to engage on the gun issue in a positive way? This is not a "Brand D" or "Brand R" platform difference. This is a fundamental issue of how free citizens relate to their elected government.
Both sides, "R" and "D", have incrementally moved us from a Nation that is mostly free to one that is mostly not. We have bought into the lie that it is OK to enslave portions of our society (through economic means, taxation, wage laws, unionization, forced volunteerism) in order to provide benefits to people who did not earn them. We have bought into the lie that it is OK to become dependent upon government for our support, our retirement, our medicine, our shelter, and our freedom. We have bought into the lie that it is better to be lightly shackled but reasonably well fed, rather than completely free but with our means tied solely to our successes and abilities.
If we are to move back to a point where we are free as a nation, we need to firmly and permanently roll back and remove the oppression that we have voluntarily donned. To do this, we need to secure ALL of our liberties against infringement by the State once again. This starts with the Second Amendment. If you are a liberal reading this, or a conservative for that matter, heed these warnings. "Government rules best which rules least." "The people are most free when their government fears them."
Status Quo is no longer an option.
In order to secure your liberties, you must be willing to fight those who would take them away. The person who stands idly by while a fearful government passes the Patriot Act against its citizens is as much at fault as the person who stands idly by while the Government bans the most effective means of defense against tyranny in the Brady Act. Both acts are abominations against Liberty.
The Patriot act should be repealed, but the current president won't push for that because he can use it against his political enemies.
New gun control (replacing the expired Brady Ban), or ratification of CIFTA, or any other act which disarms the populace also threatens every body's liberties. Those who would oppress us will come for the guns first. They will come for the presses, blogs, and other media next. They will use the Patriot Act to label dissenters as enemy non-combatants or domestic terrorists and no one will be the wiser.
Remember Waco and Ruby Ridge? Think about the implications of a Guantanamo Bay, from a falsely-accused citizen's perspective. What do we REALLY know about Gitmo? Not a lot. All we hear about right now is how the "evil Bush regime" was torturing those poor cuddly guys from the Middle-East. They weren't. The "torture" you heard about is a lie. I firmly believe that using water boarding, wooly caterpillars, and other psychological means to obtain information is not torture.
Tearing your fingernails out, or inserting glass rods into bodily orifices and then shattering them, or jamming bamboo slivers into your gums is torture. Playing loud music and keeping someone up past bedtime is not. Get over it.
Liberals, let's face it. You need the gun owners. You need to become the gun owners. You need to, because your nation's identity as a beacon of Liberty and Justice and Equality for all is at stake.
Conservatives, get off of your high horse. You need the Liberals, too. You need them to ensure that the Nation you wish to conserve is one which respects all of its citizens rights and freedoms. Even the ones that you dislike.
All of you, who would sow the seeds of discontent, need to embrace your political opposite. You need to wrap your mind around the thought that a government that has the power to persecute dis-favored groups has too much power. The levers of government in the United States were not designed to become a political "spoils system" whereby whichever party in power persecutes and prosecutes their predecessors. We need to dismantle the bureaucracy and remove the departments and directorates which exceed the constitutionally defined limits on the Federal Government.
Think about this: Brand D and Brand R are the obverse and reverse of a coin known as Statism. No matter which way the toss lands, the citizens now lose. We the People, Citizens all, need to put aside the differences of party and the labels we choose for ourselves. We need to recognize that there are events happening right now that will radically alter the way we relate to our government and to each other. We need to band together for the future of our nation and the future of our way of life.
Democrats, the present occupant of the White House has co-opted Brand D by using all of the right words, but with totally different meanings attached. He and his coterie of staffers and advisers have put one over on the citizens with sparkling oration and empty rhetoric. Be as vigilant in watching his actions as you were with Bush. Assume that the media is covering for him and utilize alternative sources of information, even sources you distrust like Fox News.
Republicans, thanks for nothing these past 8 years. You have destroyed the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. It is now time for you to either sweep yourselves into the dust bin of history, or purge yourself of those Statists among you. Using government to oppress the citizens is wrong, and you own the responsibility for the mess you find yourselves in. Clean up your own act before you ask me for another dime of support. Prove your worth by preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution, as you swore to do in your Oath of Office.
Citizens, I implore you to take up the cause of Liberty. Embrace the Constitution. Require your elected representatives to uphold their Oaths of office. Thwart those who would oppress you with laws and treaties, and who would take away your rights in the name of some "greater good". Mostly, embrace your neighbors and stick together. Together we can weather the coming storm. Apart, we are nothing.
Pax,
Newbius
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Accidents Don't Happen
Stupid does.
Accidents are a by-product of stupid.
Thankfully, no accident happened this time. Because I was stupid.
Dangerously stupid.
Last weekend I took Lefty out to the range to punch some holes and re-do the sight settings on Beauty. Everything went very well. Lefty is an excellent shot and likes to shoot Beauty. Other than a couple of hot cases on bare skin, no problems.
After shooting our last rounds we decided to pack up. The range went cold. Red Lights lit. Magazine out and action locked open, rifle on the table on its bipod.
We collect our used targets and return to the line and police our brass. I opened the rifle case behind the red line and started to put away the accessories. So we are all behind the line and I am below the table cleaning up. I put the magazines away, and the unopened ammo, the sand bag and scope.
Without thinking about the range condition, I reached up and grabbed Beauty by the butt and began to lift it to put it away when another shooter yelled at me.
Like I would have done in the same situation to another person.
I immediately set it back down and thanked the other shooter for calling me out. I apologized to the guys on the line, and to the RSO (who didn't see it).
Even though I KNEW the gun was empty and I KNEW that I was done and I KNEW that the ammo was already put away, it was still STUPID of me to touch the gun. And I KNEW that, too. Red light ON, no contact with the weapons. Period.
I know the rules. I broke the rules.
In front of my daughter.
A moment's distraction is all it takes. I know better and I still broke a safety rule. Don't let it happen to you. The rules are there to keep people alive.
To the shooter who called me out on the rules, thank you again. I wish that everybody on the line would have had the same level of diligence as you did. If I ever meet you again, I owe you a beer. Or two.
Remember, accidents don't happen. Stupid does.
Stay smart.
Pax,
Newbius
Accidents are a by-product of stupid.
Thankfully, no accident happened this time. Because I was stupid.
Dangerously stupid.
Last weekend I took Lefty out to the range to punch some holes and re-do the sight settings on Beauty. Everything went very well. Lefty is an excellent shot and likes to shoot Beauty. Other than a couple of hot cases on bare skin, no problems.
After shooting our last rounds we decided to pack up. The range went cold. Red Lights lit. Magazine out and action locked open, rifle on the table on its bipod.
We collect our used targets and return to the line and police our brass. I opened the rifle case behind the red line and started to put away the accessories. So we are all behind the line and I am below the table cleaning up. I put the magazines away, and the unopened ammo, the sand bag and scope.
Without thinking about the range condition, I reached up and grabbed Beauty by the butt and began to lift it to put it away when another shooter yelled at me.
Like I would have done in the same situation to another person.
I immediately set it back down and thanked the other shooter for calling me out. I apologized to the guys on the line, and to the RSO (who didn't see it).
Even though I KNEW the gun was empty and I KNEW that I was done and I KNEW that the ammo was already put away, it was still STUPID of me to touch the gun. And I KNEW that, too. Red light ON, no contact with the weapons. Period.
I know the rules. I broke the rules.
In front of my daughter.
A moment's distraction is all it takes. I know better and I still broke a safety rule. Don't let it happen to you. The rules are there to keep people alive.
To the shooter who called me out on the rules, thank you again. I wish that everybody on the line would have had the same level of diligence as you did. If I ever meet you again, I owe you a beer. Or two.
Remember, accidents don't happen. Stupid does.
Stay smart.
Pax,
Newbius
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)