RUNNING IRON REPORT

CARRY THE FIRE

NAVIGATE

Civil Disobedience

By 29 Comments

Share via

Disarmed by the government. Then murdered. Bosnia.

If you are one of those rarified Americans who still believe, as this space fervently does, that natural rights are bequeathed to us by our creator, rather than granted to us by government masters, you will perhaps appreciate the gift of Robert Francis O’Rourke.

During the last presidential debate, O’Rourke did us all a great favor by pulling back the curtain on progressive thought, exposing their willingness to seize by force the legally held and protected property of law-abiding American citizens.

Beto was the dodo who actually admitted what many of us have suspected for years: modern progressives are camouflaging an agenda that is inherently confiscatory, punitive, and authoritarian.  Moreover, it is clear that resistance to this agenda will be met with endless character assassination, smear campaigns, violence, and threats of violence, which the DNC, ANTIFA – and now Beto — have demonstrated repeatedly.

And isn’t it bizarre to see an audience of aging hippies, decades after Vietnam and the Civil Rights era, openly applauding Beto’s call for government-sanctioned violence against innocent people?  How quickly that generation flipped.

Beto came out in favor of outright gun confiscation, but it would be foolish to doubt, even for a second, that every candidate on the debate stage supports it.  The likely nominee, Elizabeth Warren, was strategically intelligent enough to keep her mouth shut, but if her plans for your 401k serve as any indication you can rest assured she’d be perfectly happy to kick down your door and seize your lawfully-possessed rifles too.

Which is weird coming from a self-declared Native American, her apologies for that deception notwithstanding.

One would presume that Warren is aware of Wounded Knee, which is where the 7thCavalry attempted to disarm the already impoverished Lakota and murdered 300 men, women, and children with a Hotchkiss gun. One would also hope that the senior senator from Massachusetts is at least tangentially aware of Lexington and Concord, where British soldiers attempted to disarm American colonists – mostly farmers — by brute force.

Disarmed by the government. Then murdered. Wounded Knee.

America’s flirtations with prohibition and outright confiscation have never ended well because something in the American character despises that kind of despotism.  Or at least it did, once. And even a cursory glance at history shows that there can be no public-safety reasoning behind these tyrannical ideations that isn’t rooted firmly in the pursuit of absolute power.

We shouldn’t be surprised. The Democrat party, after all, is the home of American slavery.  Democrats fought tirelessly for slavery, which resulted in a catastrophic Civil War.  After losing the war they created Jim Crow laws to enforce segregation.  Every democrat in Congress voted AGAINST the 15thAmendment, and every southern democrat voted AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Beto merely revived a long-dormant progressive theme.

Beto’s progressive utopia requires that every runaway be dragged back to the plantation – disarmed and muted, to suffer reeducation by government bullwhip.  Beto — and this both thrilled and horrified his colleagues on the dais — revealed that progressives are now feeling bold enough to enforce their dystopian fantasies by chaining innocent Americans to a post and whipping them into obedience.

While the Democrat Party is the birthplace of burning crosses, the contemporary shift to an even more radical leftism is ominous.  It’s ominous because millions of Americans have come to believe that sheep somehow make good citizens, and because the historical evidence points to the known result.

Disarmed by the government. Then murdered. Poland.

One need only look at Cuba, Venezuela, Mexico, Ecuador, the permanent economic stagnation of the EU, the entire continent of Africa, or the former Soviet Republics, which remain impoverished authoritarian backwaters.

The economic, physical, and spiritual bankruptcy of the slave cabin remains the progressive prescription for Americans who flee their plantation, and Beto has now admitted they would enforce that vision with storm-troopers.  All to uniform applause and while making emotional appeals to a “public-safety crisis.”

Progressives are unable see the problem, naturally, yet every public proposal meant to curtail gun violence will fall exclusively on law-abiding citizens.  Not one of them deals with criminals in possession of guns, or who use a firearm in the commission of a crime. Not one.  This is the single most revealing irony of progressive “gun control” ideology.

The progressive obsession with gun-control, which is a euphemism for people-control, is yet another legacy of deep-south racism, where the first measures curbing firearm ownership were passed in Florida to prevent black Americans from defending themselves against the Ku Klux Klan. Disarmed by law, and in the name of public safety, many hundreds were murdered across the south in sanctioned raids on their persons and their property.

Disarmed by the government. Then murdered. United States.

Only deliberate ignorance could believe such a thing will never happen again.

Oregon is likely, in the near future, to pass a raft of gun control measures.  Not one of them will prevent future gun crimes, and tens of thousands of conscientious and otherwise law-abiding citizens will then be forced into acts of subterranean civil disobedience.  If outlaws you will make them, then outlaws they will surely become, but as students of history this state’s millions of gun owners are unlikely to ever surrender their natural right to be properly armed against violent criminals, or Beto’s frothing government slave hunters.

Not that there ever was, historically speaking, a discernable difference.

 

 

 

Tagged With: ,

Craig Rullman

Craig Rullman

Craig Rullman is a writer, photographer, filmmaker, and occasional buckaroo. He is the author of The Bunkhouse Chronicles: Field Notes from the Figure 8 Ranch, and Director and Producer of a forthcoming documentary film -- The Outside Circle: A Movie of the Modern West.

Comments

  2. Jim says

    Great essay and needed. The Democrat field looks more like Ellsworth Touhey’s gaggle of mindless socialists. All in one varying degree or another just like AOC. Drunk with the idea of fame and power. Except they would be the good Stalin if the rest of us would just appreciate their benevolence.
    Thanks…more please.

    Reply

    • Craig RullmanCraig Rullman says

      Thanks, Jim. Lots of good little Stalins running for office these days. They are masters of disguise, and Beto’s slip may have set them back a pace, but they aren’t going away. It’s quite unnerving. I’ll stay in the fight. Hope life is treating you and the family well up there in deep Maine woods.

      Reply

  5. TJ says

    Good piece Craig

    During a recent brush fire in conjunction with a planned power shut off, on a particularly hot day in the valley, I was explaining this concept to my Godson. He is prepping for the military.

    We were sharing one of the last tri-tips from the deli — being the store (near your old house) was dark but could process debit and cash transactions. Smoke in the air and the outage was planned for approximately six hours. It was a planned outage.……

    Beginning inside; now seated at the tables we watched the parade of 100K Range Rovers jockeying for a place to park, nervous smiles avoiding eye contact as people essentially pushed past one another to get the last bag of ice and deli food.

    The tension was palpable and having been through nearly three decades of natural disasters, multiple victim crimes in progress and the like, we discussed the behavior while sawing at our tri-tip with a pocket knife and plastic forks.

    For the most part a typical response and similar patterns in other demographics within our county, except perhaps a few less crooks crawling out from their holes, to take advantage.

    As a fire chopper flew over head I told my Godson, that could be a military or police helicopter dealing with looters or an “angry mob.”

    Then I asked him, what if the military and or local law enforcement (his father is a deputy) were in the process of disarming our country and this smoke and chaos had nothing to do with a forest fire? 

    Many in today’s population, are a missed anti depressant prescription away from an anxiety attack. There are a lot of good people in our country who have lost their way and are generally on the verge of panic throughout their day.

    The ingredients for chaos already exists and the expectation for the government to make our decisions; tell us what to do and be responsible for our personal failures; has become a significant subculture within our society.

    It would take very little to light that fuse, especially in places like Southern Ca.

    ??

    Reply

  6. Brent says

    If only this could be required reading in our schools and shoved down the pie hole of the progressive movement. Another excellent read Craig!

    Reply

  7. RLT says

    I’d argue that neither of our current political parties can take credit or be blamed for things that happened before the great shuffling that was the 1912 election—although you’re absolutely right that it took the Southern Democrats until the ’60s to figure it out. 

    Call me crazy, but I’m not particularly spooked by the gun control bogeyman. I have no doubt that many on the Left would be happy to seize all of our guns. But the Supreme Court would overturn it—and the lower courts would halt it until it got to them. The only way to really get it done would be a new Amendment, but I doubt that *any* Amendment could make it through our current polarized political system, never mind one that overturns the 2nd. Even then, the states would never go along with it.

    As for enforcement, I just don’t see the military or the police playing ball. I’ll admit that this is the part I’m most fuzzy on, however. I know that gun control has been a key element of violent fascist and socialist takeovers the world over, but I don’t believe any of those nations had the codified relationship with firearms that we Americans do.

    And Beto…well, what blows my mind is that he can be a serious presidential candidate in this country without ever holding national public office—and indeed, after spectacularly losing his last bid for the same.

    Reply

    • Craig RullmanCraig Rullman says

      What should pique your interest is that a man running for president said it out loud. To applause. I don’t share your faith in either the institutions or the population to uphold any of those relationships.

      Reply

      • RLT says

        I get that. Not sure I’d call it faith…more like seeing it as a numbers game. Just can’t see it happening. If it does, it will be the sparking point of a new civil war.

        Folks running for president say all kinds of awful things to applause. I know there’s a pretty large contingent of anti-gunners out there, but I think there are other rights more likely to disappear first, even if the Dems do take take the White House and Congress next fall.

        Reply

        • Jim says

          Absent a violent take over which wouldn’t work well, The only way to take away the rights of the individual in this country is with the “cooking a frog” method. That method has been employed since the Wilsonian days. 

          Take over the education system which is nearly complete.

          Pack the government with like minded individuals, especially those trained through that education system. All government employees believe they’re performing yeoman’s work. 

          Ensure the government infiltrates every facet of life through laws. 

          Rewrite history one paragraph and one generation at a time.

          Shame and cancel out opponents as ignorant and selfish.

          I remember my final years in law-enforcement. There were a lot of rookies that held progressive or downright socialist viewpoints because they were of a different generation. Not because they were bad people, but because they really believed it. They knew no different. 

          In another generation or two no one will be able to argue that there is a biological difference between male and female. The ADA may require five types of bathrooms and no one will blink at the news.

          The military, law-enforcement, and other forms of government are just as susceptible to the lunacy. All you have to do is force detractors to eventually die off or retire. Then have well-intentioned soldiers and officers enforce the law of the land, come in your house and confiscate your (fill in the blank). 

          … and they will do so with a clear conscience!

          Reply

          • TJ says

            Thank You Sir. 

            A better articulated version of my ramblings.

            You nailed it on the head. This stuff is real and although never a lost cause, we should not sleep on this.

  8. TJ says

    Respectfully — be careful being too comfortable. Even if you don’t wish to exercise your right to carry a firearm, criminalizing law abiding, non felon, non drug and or mental health comprised American tax payers for having a firearm in their possession (person, or vehicle) — has been the standard in many states for decades.

    A military vet serves his country (multiple deployments, family man, zero criminal history or red flags re ownership); gets stopped with a registered, low cap mag compliant, loaded firearm in the glove box and is arrested by definition, released via criminal citation or incarcerated after his property is seized by the government.

    In addition to a criminal charge(s), expense, possible future punitive action and or “priorable offenses” — he will not get his firearm back (it will destroyed) and the whole process is intrusive and humiliating. That’s assuming everything goes well during the detention, arrest, firearm seizure and release.

    Insert Bob the diesel mechanic, or Mary the ranch owner. It doesn’t matter to me. No disqualify factors to gun ownership, in alignment with our constitution and now you are a criminal. 

    Granted — law enforcers with any sense of what is right and in the spirit of the law will exercise appropriate discretion, but this scenario has resulted in one or all actions being taken against our citizens on numerous occasions. It’s wrong.

    Since I was in my early 20’s a CCW was never something I had to worry about. I have had two incidents off duty including one with my child present in which I could not hide, run away or even concede to avoid either being a victim or allowing someone else to be. And I ignore 99% of what I see off duty unless I need to call it in, or in very rare cases intervene. 

    The prospect of a firearm being used against both suspects (both gang members and the last one engaged in an attempted murder) is what stopped them.

    Guns aside — forced vaccinations, punitive statutory laws and incremental loss of freedom, your hard earned money especially without your vote, or willing concession of those subject to these laws, should minimally get your attention.

    Talk to people here on the US that watched it happen in their country during this lifetime. They didn’t think it would happen either? 

    At least his threat to take out guns away was honest? I’ll give him that and I actually appreciate he had the metal to say it. There are factions within our government and society that have been and will continue to work towards disarming all Americans as a matter of policy.

    Again and as one who has seen the incremental reduction of liberties on a local and state level which by the way, has not made us safer or increased quality of life — please don’t just disregard the rhetoric entirely.

    ??

    Reply

    • RLT says

      Thanks for this, and these are all excellent points and well-taken. One of the reasons I like this site is the ability to have discussions that don’t devolve into fear-mongering or name-calling. 

      Something that occurred to me as I read this is that I am lucky in where I live. I love my state, and one of the reasons for that is that the prospect of gun control seems very remote, never mind confiscation. I have an enhanced carry permit, but if I wanted I could carry without any permit at all. 

      You write, “…as one who has seen the incremental reduction of liberties on a local and state level which by the way, has not made us safer or increased quality of life…” and I think that’s something I agree with very much. In addition to the low population density where I live (usually a plus), I believe that the high rate of firearm ownership does a lot to deter crime. I could be wrong, and I suppose there are panels of left-leaning sociologists who are ready to tell me so, but I can’t shake the feeling that it’s the case all the same.

      Not to discard my original points at all, but these discussions are a reminder—and one that I need—that these battles are being decided at the state level, not the federal one. It seems more and more that the state level is where the true governance happens, and that the state we live in makes all the difference in the world.

      You write that all of this “should minimally get your attention” and you are 100% right. I’d be the first to say that I keep my eye on the ball, but this case is one where perhaps I haven’t—or at least haven’t when making my original arguments.

      Thanks, TJ. It seems like we have very different life experiences, and that’s one of the reasons I always value your reasoned, respectful dialogue here. Love the flag by the way—the aversion to the American flag by many on the left does no one good.

      Reply

      • TJ says

        Thank Craig and Company for providing such an open forum.?

        I do appreciate your response, self reflection and the older and more life-experienced I get, the more grateful I am for things learned in honest, respectful dialogue based upon facts. 

        Preferably facts experienced by those sharing their contributions to the discussion. I think we both know the “editors” would promptly correct any of us going too far off the rails.

        Not for nothin — I do take heat for some of what I share including those within my professional circle, but it’s mostly well meaning and besides — how do we figure each other out without unfiltered dialogue?

        To your point and I couldn’t agree more that this is an amazing country filled with some amazing humans. 

        Worth protecting, celebrating and serving.

        ??

        Reply

  9. John Cornelius says

    Below is a excerpt from Abe Lincoln’s Lyceum address, when he was but 28 years old. He touched strongly on civil disobedience, liberty, and the value of the Constitution. Wise words then, wiser now. We would benefit greatly by going to school on Abe’s messages. 

    I know the American People are much attached to their Government;–I know they would suffer much for its sake;–I know they would endure evils long and patiently, before they would ever think of exchanging it for another. Yet, notwithstanding all this, if the laws be continually despised and disregarded, if their rights to be secure in their persons and property, are held by no better tenure than the caprice of a mob, the alienation of their affections from the Government is the natural consequence; and to that, sooner or later, it must come.

    Here then, is one point at which danger may be expected.

    The question recurs, “how shall we fortify against it?” The answer is simple. Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor;–let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children’s liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap–let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;–let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars.

    While ever a state of feeling, such as this, shall universally, or even, very generally prevail throughout the nation, vain will be every effort, and fruitless every attempt, to subvert our national freedom.

    The whole of the address can be found here: http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/lyceum.htm

    Reply

  10. Ugly Hombre says

    Truth- excellent post.

    It is self evident, that the New Democrats do not give a damn about crime- they only care about power.

    Their current bull chit “Red Flag” disarm law abiding American citizen’s plan, is a carved in stone example.

    A conservative lawmaker put forth the premise to the Gun Haters- ” Well, Ok hmm maybe, if you “Red Flag” criminal street gun crime gang members- perhaps, we can talk.”

    https://www.ammoland.com/2019/09/democrats-refuse-to-include-gang-members-in-red-flag-laws/

    The New Democrats wanted no part of that- as it would impact their voter base.

    Marcos in the Philippines- put forth a “Stop Crime Plan”- register your guns, help us stop crime! I think they even gave the folks who complied a few pesos. Step 1.

    His next move was “We know who you are, where you are, turn in your guns” Step 2.

    “During his presidency Ferdinand Marcos implemented gun confiscations against citizens. These were part of his martial law regime, what he referred to as “The New Society” or the Bagong Lipunan,”

    Step 3. was no fun.…

    “Strict gun control was enacted in 1972 under the presidency of Ferdinand Marcos. Under Proclamation No. 1081, citizens were banned from carrying a firearm outside of their residences. Though, despite the government claims that this was a temporary gun control law, citizens often fell victim to door-to-door searches for firearms. Confiscated firearms were not returned.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_Philippines

    I can tell you that from personal experience- you do not want to live in a country where only the Police, the Military and the Political Elite- own arms. I saw the fear.

    It’s very good that Senor Beto, has dropped his mask and the mask of the Democratic Party..

    If you give them power- you will damn sure regret it.

    Reply

  11. YeomanYeoman says

    By the way, we’re on the 100th anniversary of the Red Summer of 1919. We’ve forgotten that summer, but it featured one race riot after another, all summer long and into the fall. The underlying cause, more than any else, was the return of black veterans of World War One into their communities, with whites reacting very badly to it.

    The riots happened all over the country and in many instances the black communities really could not resort to police protection. You’ll find, in looking it up, in more than one of those instances they armed themselves for their own protection, sometimes to great effect.

    Not pretty history, but real. And a real reason that we have the 2nd Amendment.

    Reply

  12. Roger says

    Once again, it is shown that the second amendment is not about hunting, nor just personal defense. Primarily its intention was so that the people could defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Your words clearly show that intent.
    Well done sir.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 

Send this to a friend