As the collective pressures of modernity batter America and her 360 million inhabitants into a nearly unrecognizable shape – certainly it would be unrecognizable now to its founders — and as old freedoms and responsibilities fall to the sword of frenzied cultural crusaders, many of us may soon wake to find ourselves living and working deep behind the lines of a threatening and alien culture. We may look out from our windows one morning to see swarms of energized militants – many of them children — celebrating our defeat in the streets, razing our strongholds, looting our treasuries, and tearing down symbols meant to memorialize a hard-won and collective history of creating and preserving freedom.
And if history is any guide, we may even, eventually, be put to the sword ourselves.
A bold movement in that direction was recently made here in Oregon, when an “Interfaith” religious group from Portland introduced a proposal, Initiative Petition 43, which would require gun owners — among other draconian measures — to surrender or register their “assault weapons” with the government or face felony charges. The proposal is actually much broader in its aims, and I would recommend reading it if you would like a short-course in the language of 21st century tyranny.
Sadly, the only tangible result of this petition, should it eventually become law, will be the forced conversion of tens of thousands of law-abiding citizens into criminals. It will decidedly NOT reduce firearm related violence, which is its stated purpose.
But it will make history, and of the very worst kind.
But here’s the rub for us law-abiders: citizens who possess and use “semi-automatic weapons” – for whatever reasons, and which fairly describes EVERY firearm that is not fully automatic — are not going to win this fight in the long term. We may even lose it in the shorter term.
With their ranks now swelled by millions of emotional know-nothings coached in our own schoolhouses — and who have their dander worked up and their empathy-uniforms on – and who in many cases are led, as in the crusading days of yore, by mere children – these new crusaders are on the determined march to eliminate a fundamental freedom that Americans have enjoyed for centuries, and to forever rearrange the American citizen’s relationship to his government.
Remains of the Citadel at Antioch
For whatever mysterious reason, this movement has lost sight of the notion that human beings are responsible for human behavior. They have become fixated on inanimate objects, as if those objects had a life independent of their users. And so, in a perfect reflection of a now somnambulant and utterly dronelike citizenry all-too eager to surrender the hard work of thinking and reasoning to the wafting pheromones of the hive — computer servers, memes, and mere emotion — they are setting out to strip human beings of their essential freedoms and to replace them with fantasies derived from magical — almost medieval — thinking.
In a decaying culture freedoms typically vanish by increments. Things fall apart. The Knights of the First Crusade, for instance, occupied the ancient city of Antioch long before the city’s Citadel finally fell. That comparison is instructive because the preservation of rights in a collapsing culture is essentially a kind of siege warfare. In this case, we are the defenders of Antioch, the walls have already fallen, Bohemond and his cohort are having dinner in the city below, and we are merely holding out on half-rations while praying fervently for a relief column to arrive on the horizon.
But nobody ever wins a siege, and the relief column isn’t coming.
I have long held that Americans with an interest in sustaining the best of our culture – a term I use in the broadest, most inclusive sense – have for some time been living behind enemy lines. That’s because the general trends of American history, as reflected in its politics and the throw-away mentalities of its people, are clearly aimed toward the eventual exertion of limitless government controls and the ultimate extinguishing of individual freedoms. There is simply no alternative course for an obsessively consumerist “growth economy”, and the slave mentalities those pursuits and conditions both create and nurture.
Protesting Against “Gun” Violence
This sort of thing – the incremental loss of rights — may be inevitable over the natural course of empire. History shows that empires such as ours have a typical lifespan in the neighborhood of 250 years, but it is difficult for a close cultural observer to avoid the notion that in our digital age the cycle appears – like everything else around us – to be developing speed wobbles.
Yuval Noah Harari, in Homo Deus, writes, “On the practical level modern life consists of a constant pursuit of power within a universe devoid of meaning. Modern culture is the most powerful in history, and it is ceaselessly researching, inventing, discovering and growing. At the same time, it is plagued by more existential angst than any previous culture.”
Traditional religious institutions, for all of their faults, have typically been bulwarks against government intrusion in America because their own freedoms were always, and also, at stake. But in the modern age they have failed to provide solutions for any problems whatsoever, and have now been exposed as reactionary to the point of irrelevance. And because of that they are increasingly allied with government as a means of mere survival.
Yet our political characters – as is demonstrated daily — are also deprived of any creativity whatsoever, and have no solutions for modern conundrums either. And finally, after decades of aggressive orthodox, socialist, and evolutionary humanism, all in one manner or another pushing the notion that “humans must draw from within their inner experiences not only the meaning of their own lives, but also the meaning for the entire universe,” we have achieved an end result whereby the only solutions to cultural frictions are found in personal “feelings” as both the creator and arbiter of meaning.
So that, like children, we have generations of adults who now believe that if it makes them feel bad, it must be bad. And, as evidenced in the gun-ban discussion and elsewhere, when the issue comes to a vote, they will vote based on feelings rather than considered reason and acquired knowledge.
Harari tracks an historical formula for knowledge, which is an interesting exercise in visualizing the workings of culture over time. His formula looks like this:
Medieval Europe— Knowledge = Scriptures x Logic.
After the Scientific Revolution— Knowledge = Empirical Data x Mathematics.
After Humanism— Knowledge = Experiences x Sensitivity
As identified by Harari, the origins of modern American cultural angst seems supremely accurate, with the added note that all of that collective cultural existential angst tends to manifest in the only solution anxiety can ever produce: the exertion of even greater controls. That is particularly true when the source of that angst springs from an external source who doggedly insists on individual freedoms. Therefore, the thinking seems to be, if people who believe in and exercise individual freedoms are finally criminalized, the illusion of control will have exorcized all of that troublesome angst.
Except that we know it doesn’t.
Propositions that seek to disarm honest citizens, or to convert law-abiding individuals into criminals — now commonly disguised under the unassailable and entirely emotional banners of “public safety” — are in fact correctly seen as highly aggressive moves by very dangerous and unstable people.
The Siege of Jerusalem
Love them or hate them, the NRA has been dead right about the fundamental motives and long-range vision of gun-grabbers all along.
The second point Harari makes is that we have created a modern world that no longer believes in purpose, only in cause. “If modernity has a motto,” Harari writes, “it is ‘shit happens’”.
Which, when it is finally boiled down to its essential parts, we will discover is precisely the intellectual underpinnings of the insatiable crusaders dancing in the streets outside our windows when the Citadel finally falls.
And it will bear a remarkable similarity to what a veterano street gang member once told me after stabbing a rival nearly to death: “Shit happens, homey.”
In this circumstance, after “shit happens,” reason will be rendered meaningless, and appeals to meaning will fall on deaf ears — which is already the reality. In the case of firearms, ecstatic crusaders for safety have taken up yet another cross and are on the righteous march toward the promise of a Jerusalem that history proves they will never be able to conquer and hold.
But the freedoms they kill along the way will likely be gone forever.
Many among the anti-gun crusaders also claim to be socialists, which is a remarkably backwards leap for people who often claim — in the same breath — to be progressives.
That’s because socialism, which is also a religion — suffers from the same problems that the traditional religions of antiquity are facing: they are no longer relevant solutions to modern problems. “Socialists have failed to keep pace because they are holding onto ideas that Marx and Lenin formulated in the age of steam,” Harari writes. No one turns to the solutions of antiquity, in the modern era, for realistic problem solving. What is more, it is interesting to ponder the question of who in the 21st Century is more likely to be sought after for solutions: The Church, or Google?
Silicon Valley is the modern Vatican, and is the modern-day church most people are now attending.
The Norman Bohemond, Prince of Antioch. After betraying his commitment to Alexios, Bohemond fled Anatolia by ship. According to Anna Konemna, the Emperor Alexios’ daughter, Bohemond had himself sealed into a coffin with a dead chicken in order that the smell may thwart attempts to discover him.
I bring this up only because it is no accident that the Oregon Initiative Petition was born out of an “Interfaith religious group,” whatever that is. The initiative itself is, predictably, nakedly reactionary, a flawed and dubious farce equal in its deception to The Donation of Constantine[1], one of the world’s great hoaxes carried out in the effort to assume and maintain unassailable power over the individual.
A bill disarming citizens is precisely the kind of nonsense one would expect to be issued from a group of people whose own daydreamy solutions have been ineffectual since their inception, whose entire history is steeped in fraudulent claims of divinity, by unconscionable wars of conquest, slavery, child sexual abuse, and assassinations, and whose only real purpose from the outset has been to control the minds, bodies, and coffers of otherwise free peoples by the precise application of fear — ultimately backed by the imminent threat of annihilation or eternal damnation.
With a history like that, what other kind of initiative could an “interfaith” assembly of theologists, emasculated and rendered irrelevant by the realities of time and progress, possibly produce?
The constitution was meant to give us some measure of protection from all of that. It was meant to protect us from government, but also from the occasional wave of shining crusaders seeking to sack our citadels – which are always and only the shared recognition that individuals have rights that shall not be infringed.
Yet, despite clear historical warnings, there have been notable failures of reason and of constitutional protection in America, most notably the Prohibition-era, which succeeded only in growing the power of government while making utter scumbags and actual criminals enormously wealthy, while simultaneously having ZERO impact on alcohol abuse and criminalizing millions of innocent people. At least, in this case, prohibition of alcohol is one of the exceedingly rare cases of a mistake corrected.
Which is a fact unlikely to be duplicated as it regards firearms. You can probably discern for yourself why that might be.
And what is even more astonishing is that this latest surge to exert power in all of the wrong places, and against all of the wrong people, will find plenty of nitwits in the Oregon legislature – many of them proud, if somewhat confused, progressives — eager to take up the same cross of futility and carry the cause on to the walls of Jerusalem.
What to do?
When living behind the lines, or working undercover, it is imperative to be discriminating about which hill to die on, and to be careful when telegraphing one’s intentions. Survival of the individual, and by extension the community of people working for the preservation of freedoms, demands at least some level of strategic discretion.
But here’s what I know, and here is where I am willing to publicly plant my lance — knowing full well that declarations such as this may boomerang one day on the proclaimer.
And it’s actually quite simple as a statement of intent:
While there is breath in my body, and so long as I have the means to resist, I will NEVER surrender my firearms to the government or its agents, nor will I negotiate away my rights. I will violently resist anyone who attempts to take them away by force.
I have concluded that, as one mere man surveying the long view of history and its produce, this is the only course of action for an honest citizen and a free being who intends — heart and soul — to remain free.
Come what may.
[1] The Catholic Church long proclaimed that on “30 March 315 the Roman Emperor Constantine signed an official decree granting Pope Sylvester I and his heirs perpetual control of the western part of the Roman Empire.” The popes maintained this document in their archives, and used it as a powerful propaganda tool “whenever they faced opposition from ambitious princes, quarrelsome cities or rebellious peasants”…Except that, today, in a rare display of scholarly unanimity, “ALL historians agree that The Donation of Constantine was forged in the papal court sometime in the 8th Century.” Harari, Homo Deus
Liane says
Brilliant!
Thank you Liane. Keep your powder dry. 🙂
Chris says
The “Interfaith Religious Group” to which you refer is no doubt a collection of organizations steeped in liberal theology, a movement in the churches that goes back to an elevation of doctrine on equal footing as scripture, opening the door to all sorts of humanistic interpretations with no moral absolutes other than what man devises or deems suitable at the time thru secular philosophy or whatever other means. I saw this all over the great state of Oregon, particularly emanating from Portland-area churches, synods, bishops and the like. On the other hand, Reformation Theology, the religious and secular ideas which informed the founders, rests on a “biblical consensus” in society which provides the foundation for “freedom without chaos”. This makes possible things like individual accountability, personal responsibility, the inherent dignity of each and every citizen, persons as having been created in God’s image, and so on. If you don’t believe me, only go back to pre-1950s America and look at how many people attended church versus today. Go back another 100-years and find out what book it was that virtually everyone from the Appalachians westward used to teach and learn basic reading: the Bible. Compare this to today. The consensus around Biblical values was very real in this country, and sadly is no more. Is the Church to blame? Yes, I think they certainly could have been more vocal against certain national sins such as Slavery and the Non-compassionate use of Wealth. Better parenting might help, too; the kind that instills moral absolutes versus relative values. Church, Religion and Scripture are different things. Related, but different. Just my two cents.
I happen to agree with you very strongly that Church, Religion, and Scripture are different things. And when entities stray from teaching the Gospel into the weeds of dogma and ritual, or when the teachings are used to batter and control, they become useless or, perhaps, dangerous. Thanks for taking the time to comment, it is very much appreciated.
Matthew says
Jesus tells his disciples to buy swords at one point. It could have been metaphorical, but I don’t think he had a problem with being armed and ready to use self-defense.
Religious institutions are as susceptible to mission creep as any. This happens in liberal churches a lot. Not that it is unheard of Fundamentalist churches either. Tendency in those is to assume whatever someone’s personal beef is comes from God.
“While there is breath in my body, and so long as I have the means to resist, I will NEVER surrender my firearms to the government or its agents, nor will I negotiate away my rights. I will violently resist anyone who attempts to take them away by force.”
I will join you in this.
Also, this statement
“Propositions that seek to disarm honest citizens, or to convert law-abiding individuals into criminals — now commonly disguised under the unassailable and entirely emotional banners of “public safety” — are in fact correctly seen as highly aggressive moves by very dangerous and unstable people.”
particularly the words “public safety” reminded me of the French Revolution and the Terror that followed. Didn’t they have a Committee for Public Safety (or something with a similar name) during that time?
Excellent.
You are right about that and I wish I had thought of it while writing the piece. It is an EXCELLENT reference and a bullseye. Thanks, Keith.
You’re quite welcome, sir.
Thom Eley says
I must say that I am completely in support of Craig’s simple statement of intent. I’ve been shot at before a don’t fear having it happen again.
Semper Fi.
Reader says
A tour de force for the 2nd Amendment. What is deeply frustrating is that there are still so many of us (see NRA) but hope slips away daily. We are strong in spirit but have been vilified and whipped into silence. What are our acceptable options? Many of us are not joiners or activists. We want to hike and hunt and otherwise recreate in our leisure time, not plan our spring breaks around protest marches. Still, it does not seem right to wait for the knock on our door.
This is the conundrum Jim and I are working on too. What is meaningful resistance? How is that done? Are we simply going to slink around in our houses, waiting for the knock? I think not. It’s not in my nature. I don’t know exactly, just yet, what resistance will look like, but resistance there will certainly be. Thanks for writing in.
Patrick McGowan says
You had two part article where you address some of the concerns you had about the shooting attacks. Perhaps that is the place to start. The place where I sit is that I am Godamn sick to death of massive shootings. I want it stopped. You propose that it has very little to do with assault rifles, and I am open to intelligent arguments of every kind. I am not an expert in the slightest. Not on guns, not on violence, nothing. All I know is that when I was in school, this was not an occurrence. As a third grade teacher in Chinatown, Los Angels, I am now given a five minute “Training” which is really, “Just hope the odds are with you.” This is beyond negligent for all of our youth’s welfare. And I won’t be getting trained to carry a gun in the classroom. That is anathema to what I believe a grammar school teacher is. I am not a marksmen and don’t care to be. You seem, and I emphasize “seem” because I will not put you in a category, to think any kind of new laws regarding guns is dangerous to your rights. The law stated above sounds unconstitutional and I doubt would get through the court. In others, I wouldn’t vote for it. But do we just sit back and say “shit happens” while kindergarteners are being shot at point blank range? Yes, this is an “emotional” response something that seems to be regarded as weak here. I’m not abstractly emotional. People are dying and people are looking for a solution. Believe when I write that with Trump in the White house the last thing I want to see is a disarmed populace. I do however want some responsibility brought to the nation regarding massive shootings.
Patrick:
A large part of the problem with our discourse at all levels, from the national to the local is that everything falls into binary, zero-sum thinking. I know you’re not arguing this, but it’s not a choice between “sitting back and saying ‘shit happens’ while kindergarteners are being shot at point blank range” or making felons out of law-abiding citizens for the sake of a symbolic effort to purge the world of a particular weapon type that some people find disturbing (and one which they seem to know nothing at all about). If there’s no territory between those extremes, we’re well and truly fucked. And maybe that’s the case. I’m beginning to think so.
Craig is more than capable of speaking for himself, but I think you mischaracterize the attitude toward emotion at RIR. It is not “regarded as weak here” it is regarded as… emotion — one component of our psyche and soul. OF COURSE there is an emotional response to carnage in schools; it would be monstrous to feel nothing about such a thing. Cold “rationality” devoid of emotion (if such a thing actually exists) is as dangerous as emotion unchecked by reason. But a purely emotional response that merely screams “make the bad rifles go away!” ignores the multitude of other factors that have much greater agency in an act of evil than the implement used. Because of that, it will be ineffective.
And when that emotional response lashes out and collectively punishes people who have DONE NOTHING WRONG and have striven all their lives to be good and productive citizens, it is simply wrong.
It’s critical that we understand why that is. It is not because guns are more readily available, or because the AR-15 or its variants is supernaturally deadly. Contrary to media hyperbole, the 5.56mm round is not particularly destructive — any hunting round is equally deadly, or more so. I won’t derail the discussion with a bunch of historical reasons for the development of the mid-size cartridge, but it wasn’t because it was deadlier than the battle rifle cartridge — it was because it was smaller and lighter.
The real question is why a certain number of young men seek self-annihilation in nihilistic violence? Why are there internet fan clubs for school shooters? Whence came this sickness? And why, in almost every one of these cases, were warning signs or screaming red flags ignored or brushed off?
This misbegotten initiative in Oregon validates the most extreme rhetoric of the National Rifle Association, pushing firearms owners and gun rights advocates farther into a corner. It confirms the suspicion that many gun owners hold that “gun reform” or “gun safety regulation” is a stalking horse for those whose real agenda is disarming law-abiding Americans. Moves like this serve only to further polarize an already fraught discussion, eroding potential common ground between people of good faith who could — and must — come together to find holistic solutions to the scourge of mass shootings. That’s the tragedy — those who just want to “make it stop” and are willing to trample on fundamental rights to give themselves an illusion of effective action are going to make the polarization and atomization of society — which is, in my view, the root of most of our problems — worse.
P.S. When the eagle shits at the beginning of the month, I’ll drop what I can in the gofundme kitty.
Post again. Post regularly.
Traven Torsvan says
“Whence came this sickness? And why, in almost every one of these cases, were warning signs or screaming red flags ignored or brushed off?”
Given what we know about Nicholas Cruz (such as the carving of swastika’s on his gun magazines). IIt looks like the shooting in Parkland is part of a definite upswing in neo-fascist violence in the United States in Europe
There’s always a question with people who are drawn to violent extremism as to whether they are ideologically motivated or simply drawn to an ideology that lends weight to their violence and nihilism. Of course there can be a self-reinforcing feedback loop, too. From what I’ve seen, I doubt that Cruz was ideologically motivated or knows much (if anything) about National Socialism. A lot of these twisted people just find the iconography sexy. He doesn’t seem to be like Anders Breivik, the Norwegian mass killer, for example, who really does seem to have an ideological fixation. Perhaps we’ll learn more about Cruz. He’s already a celebrity in some circles.
Thom Eley says
They are only going to take guns from the law-abiding citizens. There is no way they will get them from the bad guys. The law-abiding citizens don’t soot upschools, etc.
Lane Batot says
Another factor regarding the “arming/disarming of the populace” has not come up AT ALL in any of the rallies, discussions, screaming arguments or debates that I have seen/heard about this(although that could be because my media connections are rather limited compared to most folks these days) is something no one seems to be considering, because almost no one has experienced it(yet) in this country(U.S.of A.)–and that is, a sure-enough, “Red Dawn” foreign invasion! ARMED CITIZENS(including–especially so–those with the now vilified “automatic rifles”) would be a GREAT deterrent to such, and the terrorist powers with hopes to topple the U.S.A. are out there now rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of a bunch of helpless, unarmed citizenry to slaughter with ease. No one thinks about it much in this country, because it hasn’t been much of a serious issue before(despite fears of such during the World Wars), but that doesn’t mean it NEVER will be. In fact, I think it is very short-sighted to not imagine, at least, that it COULD happen. I’m not so worried about our own guvmint, as I am the radicals at the gates! If it did occur, I should like to be able to give as good as I got! My own paternal side of the family, Texas settlers from Alsace Lorraine in France during the mid 1800’s, were issued guns by the government–one of which some member of my family still has!–to protect themselves against Indian attacks . Different times, those!
Few people know what HAS happened in the past and anyway assume that we moderns are exempt from history. They don’t think about what is possible, especially 50 or 100 years from now.
Andrew Keller says
Brilliant buddy
Thanks, Devil. Hope you are going to try to make it here for the big reunion in August.
Breaker Morant says
A Solzhenitsyn quote seems fitting and may provide a model to follow
»»»»»»>
»>And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.… We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”««
Solzhenitsyn is an excellent source, and I wish I had brought him into the conversation as well. We seem to have, after so many years of taking every freedom for granted, abandoned the necessary vigilance to safeguard those freedoms. One wonders if Americans have the actual stomach to defend their rights anymore, or if the ease and convenience of Amazon etc. etc. will finally succeed in destroying the spirit and establishing the illusion of freedom in its place.
Breaker Morant says
I am not as pessimistic as some. I fully agree that the goal is confiscation of firearms and so forth. However, I can’t figure out who they will send door to door to do it in vast swathes of the country. The marchers are not going to do it. Are they going to go door to door in Wyoming to do it? Our saving grace will be that they won’t do it, but they will just expect it to happen automatically.
Remember, these are people who can’t even begin to grasp that power/food/water etc etc needs to be supplied. Are the marines that you served with going to volunteer en-masse to confiscate private weapons or will many/most of them be on our side? Are your compadres willing to die/kill for “Starbucks” baristas by taking out the Craig Rullmans?
I think a key secret weapon we have is that they automatically assume that the soldiers/marines etc will automatically be on their side. I think they will be in for a shock in that area.
Go to any sporting goods store in the “Red” Counties. There are a lot of capable 24 year olds buying a lot of weaponry. These weapons will not be turned in at the first whiff of trouble.
OTOH, I have always thought the low-hanging fruit for them is ammunition. Buy lots of ammo.
I don’t know. It is difficult to imagine the 1stMarDiv rampaging around confiscating weapons, but California, after Kamala Harris and with the support of Moonbeam does have a weapons confiscation crew. There will be some, probably enough, who would likely participate. The problem for many of us is that should such a law pass there are plenty of creative ways to separate the formerly law abiding citizen from his weapons and to search his property to find them. Most people go to work. Roadkill the guy, roll back on his house and take his stuff. Happens every day. It will also mass produce informants so that simply going to the range to train will lead to denouncements. Where we live in Oregon is a strange borderland, between the deep blue coastal side of the Cascades and the deep red everything else. My only political affiliation is only with freedom and responsibility, which has a difficult time competing with fantasy and illusion and, frankly, intellectual laziness, which leads to these sorts of initiatives.
slm says
Considering the startling success of the War on Drugs and the relative ease with which the Federal Government recently disarmed the gun-owners in Vietnam, Iraq and those pesky Pashtun in Afghanistan what could possibly go wrong?
The lessons are clear. The question is what can law abiding citizens do about it, besides vote, which is a meaningless enterprise in many places because we will never have the votes. They simply aren’t making enough of us anymore. What does meaningful resistance look like? The War of the Flea? Maybe. And that might be the direction it heads as many will not cooperate with such a law and a kind of forced insurgency may be the long term result.
Matthew says
Don’t forget how no one ever had a drink during Prohibition.
I’ve encountered people who are for drug legalization on the grounds that making things illegal does not get rid of them, but support gun control. Making guns illegal will be different because.…they don’t like them, I guess. Honestly, I have more problems with drug legalization because while I don’t think the drug war is a roaring success I think the consequences of legalization won’t be that great either. The Mafia didn’t go away after Prohibition.
Gun control advocates say we ought to imitate Japan, but the Japanese are by and far more law abiding sometimes blindly so. They’ve also had gun control for CENTURIES.
I do not wish to live like the Japanese.
Besides, I thought cultural appropriation was bad.
Matthew says
Neither do I.
Gun control advocates say a lot of things, and because they are dishonest to an extreme degree I’m no longer interested in anything they have to say. They have made their position clear. They are not reasonable, they are dangerous to free men and free societies, and they are on the march to control everyone and everything that disagrees with them by enlisting the power of the law. I will not negotiate with them and so there is no longer any point in trying find a common point to begin a discussion. Mostly, they remind me of bleating sheep: full of anxiety, lanolin, and ticks, and just as dumb as the day is long.
Thom Eley says
Superb!
S/F
deuce says
Truly excellent post, Craig. Not a lot to add at this point. Plenty of good comments.
I’ll just post this link about a candidate for sheriff in North Carolina joking about killing any who resist gun confiscation while his audience laughs:
https://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/local/2018/03/26/buncombe-county-sheriffs-candidate-daryl-fishers-cold-dead-hands-gun-joke-goes-viral/459288002/
Predictably, he’s backtracked. “Kidding on the square” and all that. If we have this going on in frikkin’ North Carolina, the rot is deep. We know what they want to do. They’ve told us enough times.
Thanks Deuce. The Taliban also give a tactical advantage away because they make it quite clear what their intentions are. “We are going to destroy the Bamyan Buddhas”, they say one day, and the next day they line up howitzers and destroy the Bamyan Buddhas. But we have been lulled to sleep by humanist notions that the “feelings” of very dangerous people still matter. This is reflected often in the way heinous criminals are treated by the new American judicial system, often much better than the victims of their crimes. What we do with that information is the question. How do we define meaningful resistance to this? What are we willing to do about it?
Traven Torsvan says
The whole “what about the rights of victims” cant pushed by advocates of racist “tough on crime” laws has done much more to undermine American civil liberties than any gun legislation.
So we should double-down on stupid?
deuce says
“How do we define meaningful resistance to this? What are we willing to do about it?”
I guess we’ll have to figure that out. I can only observe that we keep staying within the frames, and playing by the rules, provided by our sworn enemies.
Yup, and it isn’t working. “People feel bound by democratic elections only when they share a basic bond with most other voters. If the experience of other voters is alien to me, and if I believe they don’t…care about my vital interests, then even if I am outvoted by a hundred to one, I have absolutely no reason to accept the verdict.” Harari
“I was taken out of context.”
Uh… the context of that “joke” is abundantly clear.
Lane Batot says
I wouldn’t worry too much about N. C., Deuce–this incident has backfired very badly on this fellow already(I would be amazed if he got elected). It was regarding Buncombe County, in the mountains of western N. C., which is where Asheville is located, and Asheville is a rather oddball town for the Southern Appalachians, as many wealthy liberal types do live there–IN TOWN. In the surrounding mountains(where I lived for many years), things are about as “backward”(ahem!) as you can git in the U. S. A., and this fellow would not have the guts(nor the back-up) to go door to door and TRY and confiscate guns of any sort! And he certainly wouldn’t live long if he tried. Just a blow-hard politician currying favor with a small, townie set of voters. He’ll be VERY LUCKY if he’s not “burned out” of the area. I’m not saying I’m supporting this kind of reprisal, but I lived in the area for years, and I KNOW how STUPID such a comment is, if you wish to continue to live there! He’ll probably be safe enough if he stays in town. Maybe.…..
deuce says
Thanks for the inside info, Lane. I found it hard to believe such would go over well in rural NC, but I have personal experience with how extremely leftist places like Raleigh can be. That created doubt in my mind. Insanity can be contagious.
deuce says
Also, in the NYT, we have a recently-retired Supreme Court justice saying, “Let’s just repeal the Second Amendment. For the children.” Here’s the archive link (I won’t give the NYT the clicks):
https://archive.fo/XoHk6
They simply aren’t trying to hide it anymore.
Nope, they are adept at seizing the momentum. They are also handy at putting children out front. This is an entirely new kind of fight for our freedoms because the opposition has no code whatsoever. They are exceedingly dangerous people.
More on that in just a bit…
brad lind says
you have a bunch of school children that are being brain washed by gun advocates! trying to force a 2nd amendment repeal and politicians are listening are listening! unreal
Thom Eley says
I think that if they try and take guns away from folks, it will be the bloodiest time in history. Worse than the Civil War. Plus they aren’t going to get the weapons from the bad guys.
No question. They’ve already tried that and it doesn’t work.
Reader says
Some are saying it may be time to conceptualize a network of law-abiding, rational-thinking, defenders of freedom. (We are next door to Idaho—maybe some lessons there.) But how to avoid the kooks?
That’s the very sticky part of a concept I entertain frequently.
I just have to add I find it odd that a state like Oregon — which seems to me well known for “outdoor” excursions including hunting and fishing — would have a group attempting this.
Or maybe my ‘Oregon’ view is too skewed as it comes from Jim and you — who happen to be “outdoorsy” types?
I mean, someone trying that here in ol’ Blue State Massachusetts wouldn’t surprise me.
The electoral map in Oregon is solid red — except for the populous counties around Portland and Salem. Salem is the capital and pretty much run-of-the-mill Democrat; Portland is nuts. The gun control rhetoric has been fairly successful at stigmatizing “assault rifles” and asserting that “nobody is coming for your guns” (except those). The play is to separate off the hunters and those who carry handguns for self-defense (Oregon is a robust concealed carry state) in the hopes that they’ll acquiesce in throwing one class of firearm owners off the back of the sleigh for the wolves to devour, saving themselves. It’s been somewhat successful. I have many gun-owning friends who question the “need” for an AR-15. And some succumb to social pressure because they fear being stigmatized by their “evil” rifle.
IP 43, however, affects pretty much anyone who possesses or carries a modern semi-automatic pistol, since it bans the mag that comes with the pistol in most cases. That has got some other folks’ attention. The felony attached is a bit startling even to those not directly affected. And Stevens’ call for repeal of the Second Amendment — well, like I said in another comment, that was a tactical error.
We’ll see what develops, but I think the mask is off on both the agenda and the divide-and-conquer tactic.
“who question the “need” for an AR-15”
Need has nothing to do with it. It’s not about need. It’s about rights.
That is a hard point to get across to people who just want the bad things to stop.
Reader says
Oregon was great. Sadly, its probably inevitable demise was hastened by Tom McCall’s bottle-bill hubris. To think I was a fan…
When Kamala Harris et. al. destroyed the California DOJ, my old task force commander — with 20 years plus fighting real bad crooks — was reassigned to recycling enforcement duties. No kidding.
TJ says
Well done Sir. Recovering from a graveyard shift that turned into a 24 (missed my sleep envelope and added a Kombucha beer). Some really great responses and a comforting reminder of the critical thinkers out there on both sides of a given topic. I should probably write this response on a word doc, sleep and review before sending, but here it goes.….. To quote the author (and again Craig, sorry for the grammar murder) —
“For whatever mysterious reason, this movement has lost sight of the notion that human beings are responsible for human behavior. They have become fixated on inanimate objects, as if those objects had a life independent of their users. And so, in a perfect reflection of a now somnambulant and utterly dronelike citizenry all-too eager to surrender the hard work of thinking and reasoning to the wafting pheromones of the hive — computer servers, memes, and mere emotion — they are setting out to strip human beings of their essential freedoms and to replace them with fantasies derived from magical — almost medieval — thinking.”
Facts don’t care about emotions right? Before I get started, I must confess I am processing my last shift and just finished watching “Bridge of Spies” with my twin boys. Last night, my cops bathed in the devil’s unfiltered handy work again (the beautiful and the terrible in 12.5+ hours). Ex cop and military veteran who rolled off the rails (not a nice guy, but still sad) and a little dog (and I’m not a small dog guy — at all) who was the catalyst for us finding his deceased owner inside the residence. Had a great conversation with that poor little, sway back balding canine standing century over his dead owner, when I took him for a walk. As much for me, as for him.
Yup, its getting ridiculous, especially for the states where the laws are made by the larger population along the coast like Californian, Oregon and Washington. The mountain range can only do so much. We (the system) are failing the law abiding, the true victims and catering to the chaos. The damage and injury is real for those on the receiving end of this misguided persecution of what is natural and fair. It is a desperate attempt by some to make sense of something they are incapable, or unwilling to acknowledge. Kind of like expecting folks to understand what a soldier, or domestic law enforcement professional processes in a year. That’s an unrealistic expectation. We all have room for improvement and I would love to live in a world without opportunistic predators where cops and soldiers were unnecessary. Sorry, already read the ending and it will never happen.
In terms of what I personally will contribute as long as my creator keeps me here: I can tell you 100%, I will not be kicking in any doors to arrest Americans for having one too many rounds in his, or her semi-auto pistol magazine. Not happening and most of us feel that way.
Most of us myself included, are so very blessed to have opened our eyes in a such a great country, the best country in my opinion. I would also agree with the prior comments and caution that you not sleep on this current trend and the dangerous false narrative. The threat is real and gaining traction in some parts of the country.
I never subscribed to the “well at least it’s not (insert oppressive government)!” Our standards and expectations are higher and they should be. Having said that and as example beyond my ramblings, I came across and a cool moment during one of my mma fight-nerd podcasts, in which Joe Rogan through Joey Diaz translating, asks Cuban Olympic Wrestler turned 185 pound UFC contender, Yoel Romero why he loved the US (scroll to 41:09 of the counter)? Not scripted, a cool human moment and although I am a strong borders guy, this is a good reminder there are a hundred reasons people still risk their life to come here, legally or not.
Please send prayers, thoughts, energy, or whatever your thing is for the young man facing very real struggles and that little dog who lost his owner and his home early this morning.
Jim and Craig — Thanks for the work you put into this project, you are using your talents constructively. I’m out, time for some cat videos!!
http://podcasts.joerogan.net/podcasts/mma-show-17-with-yoel-romero-joey-diaz
Go to 41:09
Christine DeForest says
Dad just read this and said, “If Craig will run for governor and win, I will move to Oregon.” Think about it.
I stand no chance of winning but I love the thought. Much like California, or Nevada, political power in Oregon is clustered in a few counties, where all of the people live and who think everyone else lives — or wants to live — the way they do. The way to victory is by setting up an alternative government that is more effectual than the one in existence. Which would not be so difficult. What’s funny is that an angry reader read the same thing and lambasted me for being a racist. Guess where he lives? Go figure.
“So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward.”
— HRC aka The Revenant
As opposed to us backward-looking troglodytes.
“Diversity” is a value; just a very particular kind of diversity where everybody thinks the same way. I get it.
Blake says
Great writing as always Craig. I enjoy your ability to be a free thinker in this age of binary ideologies. I believe in the second amendment, but you and I both know from working together, there is a good 20% of our population that is too mentally or criminally deranged to be a responsible gun owner.
I read the law and it says you have 120 days to register your assault rifle to have a mental and criminal background check. If you do, you get to keep your rifle.
It seems reasonable to me. What is the argument against registration and background checks?
Hope you’re well Craig. We miss you back here.
Blake:
This is Jim Cornelius weighing in. The initiative is deeply flawed. There is no indication as to how the registration system would be stood up or funded and a Class B felony attached to failure to comply. Also, for us here in Central Oregon, it would prohibit (again with felony penalty) taking the rifle out to our traditional shooting sites to train. The IP also affects pistol magazines. I have already filled out the 4473 and underwent a background check on my AR purchase. I’m not OK with the state deciding that I “get to keep” the rifle that I purchased legally, going through the appropriate steps to do so. If they want to change and enhance the protocol, that’s one thing, but to do it retroactively under threat is an entirely different matter.
My 2 cents.
I’m sure Craig will respond as well. You’re right — his writing is consistently excellent and it’s a pleasure working with him. You can’t have him back. Sorry.
Da Gonz says
Thank you Craig, for another outstanding piece. I too stand by your declaration. I will not be disarmed. Let them try. It will not be pretty.
Thanks, Dave. We will be shoulder to shoulder in the fight.
Saddle Tramp says
“The more corrupt the state, the more numerous its laws.”
— Tacitus
“Curse on all laws but those which love has made.”
— Alexander Pope
Above quotes were taken from inside the front cover (opening quote) and the back cover (closing quote) respectively in the spring 2018 issue of Lapham’s Quarterly (Volume XI, Number 2).
Lapham’s is a real favorite of mine with first class intellectual presentations on a given subject matter every quarter.. This issue subject and title is
RULE OF LAW.
They also recently gave a thorough treatment of historical FAKE NEWS in a special edition issue aside from their quarterly offering.
Lapham’s Quarterly is not cheap ($19.00) but quality seldom is. It is a good source for a variety of views in a more in depth way without going into the more back breaking heavy reading that most of us have not the time or inclination to pursue. As an example from this issue, Richard Cohen turns in an essay titled The World’s Greatest Outlaw (about Samuel Johnson). Richard Cohen is currently writing a history of historians. Sounds both daunting and interesting…
Gonna have to jump in on that.
Saddle Tramp says
ADDENDUM:
A link to clarify the Richard Cohen mentioned above as there are other Richard Cohen’s In field of the history as well.…
https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/rule-law/worlds-greatest-outlaw