Category Archives: authoritarian swine

Elections: I got those I wish I didn’t care but I care anyway blues

You know what they say about elections. “No matter who you vote for, the government gets elected.” Or “If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.”

It’s also been said that elections are advance auctions of stolen goods and (unlike the legitimate acts of self defense and justice described by Ilana and by commenter Tahn) that voting is a form of violence because it’s trying to force our will on others.

So true. I try not to think of elections as anything more than a team contest, sort of like the Super Bowl or the World Series, but for people with less talent. This month I care very much, though. Mostly I care in the same way I might care about who wins the SuperBowl. It might be dramatic or suspenseful to see if the R’s beat the D’s for the Senate as most oddsmakers are saying, but life and freedom probably won’t depend on whether Joni Ernst grabs that Senate seat from Iowa (though I like her) or Mary Landrieu has to go into a runoff election in Louisiana (though I’d like to see that political biotch driven back into the bayous, never to be seen again).

The thing I really care about this month has nothing to do with politicians and everything to do with common people and our rights. I’m talking about initiative 594 in Washington state. Even for people who don’t live in or near Washington this is a big one.

Since you’re reading gunblogs I suppose you already know that I-594 is the anti-gunners’ dream this year. Under the pretense of being ‘only’ a universal background check bill (common sense, you know!), it would criminalize nearly all transfers of firearms, including the most helpful, innocent, and momentary. Loan a gun to a friend in need? Felony. Instructor hands a gun to student and student hands it back? TWO felonies. So on so on so on.

Because this is just about the only victim disarmament measure on the ballot anywhere in the U.S. this year, the Billionaire Brigade has poured money into it by the millions. Of course Washington state has quite a few homegrown anti-gun billionaires like Microsofties Bill Gates and Paul Allen, plus Nick Hanauer (a Jew who ought to come here and read some of the posts by Ilana and Y.B. if he thinks leaving people helpless is what Judaism is about), but naturally Bloomberg is in for his million, too.

The pro-gunners are way out spent and, according to every poll, also outnumbered. The NRA came in late with its anti-594 money and Washington’s biggest homegrown (supposedly) pro-gun activist, Alan Gottlieb, proved his true intentions once again by getting another measure on the ballot (I-591) that appears to protect rights but in fact doesn’t “give” anybody anything they don’t already have and sets the stage for later federal UBCs. So another million or so that could have been spent to fight 594 got diverted into supporting 591.

The big reason the fight against 594 matters even to people who live elsewhere is that if Washingtonians can kick 594 to the curb, it’ll be the best sign ever that bigoted billionaires should spend their money on something other than disarming the common people. On the other hand, if 594 wins, it’ll just encourage them to keep hammering at us and our rights.

The polls all say 594 is not only going to win but win big. They may be wrong. They’ve been dead wrong about gun rights in Washington before. (For a blue state, it has decent gun laws.) They’ve been polling registered voters, not likely voters. I’ve also got to wonder how much of the polling covered only the Puget Sound urban area (already leaning anti-gun and the place where the billionaires have been pouring all their ad money). If the pollsters have missed a lot of likely rural and eastside (that is east of the Cascades) votors, they’ll be dead wrong.

So this year I’m watching and caring and I’d even say if you live in Washington state get the heck out and vote against that awful thing.

There’s also the possibility that both 594 and 591 will pass and then the championship game of gun rights, or at least the NW Regionals of gun rights, will go into some long and probably pretty weird overtime.

Free people will keep their rights no matter what. The Billionaire Brigade and their useful idiots can’t vote them away, but we shouldn’t even give them the illusion that they can make a successful try.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

UPDATED: Billionaire Bastards (I-594)

“Make sure it doesn’t happen in your state next,” warns Michelle Malkin, in “Rocky Mountain Heist,” a documentary in which the columnist puts her trademark shoe-leather journalistic sleuthing to work in exposing the Democrat-rigged “democracy” of Colorado, where a “group of wealthy liberals overtook Colorado. They used every scheme possible to impose a backward agenda and they transformed the place [she] love[s] into a testing ground for their liberal ideology.”

Malkin, who once resided in our state, might already know that the dice are loaded against decent people in Washington State too. I-594 is, by Rachel Alexander’s telling, “the only gun-control measure on the ballot this fall anywhere across the country.” It “is being bankrolled by billionaires on the left in favor of gun control, including anti-gun activist and former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, as well as former wealthy Microsoft execs Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.”

Let us not forget Paul Allen, also a billionaire and also of Microsoft. He and the other bastards—who no doubt have security details guarding their abodes—“have raised more than $6 million” to make it more difficult for ordinary folks to defend life and property.

In 2011, another unfathomably wealthy individual got behind an effort to bilk businessmen and women of modest means. The Service Employees International Union (state and national locals), the National Education Association, and Washington teachers union locals all united to champion a new income tax, the poster boy for which was William H. Gates Sr., father of Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

UPDATE (11/2): Vladka Peltel writes:

Since you’re reading gunblogs I suppose you already know that I-594 is the anti-gunners’ dream this year. Under the pretense of being ‘only’ a universal background check bill (common sense, you know!), it would criminalize nearly all transfers of firearms, including the most helpful, innocent, and momentary. Loan a gun to a friend in need? Felony. Instructor hands a gun to student and student hands it back? TWO felonies. So on so on so on.

MORE.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Beatifying Aaron — while ‘disappearing’ him

Yes, David old friend. “Some will no doubt object to this.”

Word came out earlier this week (to those not previously in the know) that JPFO founder Aaron Zelman received a postumous “Bill of Rights Award” at Alan Gottlieb’s 2014 Gun Rights Policy Conference.

Now, the GRPC is a big deal and surely few people on this planet deserve a Bill of Rights award more than Aaron (my friend, co-author, and tireless crusader for ALL the Bill of Rights).

But as fellow TZP blogger Sheila Stokes-Begley wrote in an email: “Coming from SAF, is this a little like Obama congratulating someone for being an excellent constitutional scholar? They may well be an excellent constitutional scholar, the problem lies in knowing the compliment came from a man who wouldn’t know a constitutional scholar from a cartoonist.”

As you may know, TZP was created in response (and in protest) to the Gottlieb/SAF buyout of JPFO. Short version of the story: Aaron Zelman was a man who never compromised on any issue of principle and Gottlieb never met a compromise he didn’t like.

—–

In the post linked above, David Codrea notes that he was “… invited to an evening working meeting/closed-door advisory session supplemental to the GRPC, and heard no evidence that there were plans to bastardize the mission, and plenty of plans to make the organization viable without involving compromises.”

Though I surely wish I could have been a fly on the wall at that meeting, I don’t doubt David’s description at all. David is a hero of gun rights and a man of great integrity. When he and the very sweet Kurt Hofmann decided to stay on with the new JPFO when Nicki, Sheila, Brad, Ilana, and I left, I wished them well.

But I admit I laughed when I read David’s description of that meeting. Because of course Gottlieb and Co. are not going to have a meeting in which they rub their hands together like cartoon villains and cackle “Bwaahahaaaa!” while they eeeeevilly plot to turn JPFO from a no-compromise outfit into some watered-down imitation of itself.

That’s not the way it works. In the world of corporations and politics, inconvenient predecessors are gotten rid of and policies and views are mutated … politely. Just as SAF is doing.

First they pull the cagey (though rather painfully obvious) PR stunt of “honoring” Aaron to show that they’re really not such bad guys after all. But that’s a cheap, meaningless gesture. It fools only those who haven’t been watching closely. Then they’re going to make some improvements to sadly neglected portions of JPFO’s infrastructure (oh, that creaky old website!). They may come out with a few new projects. They’ll almost certainly use Gottlieb/Merrill’s huge fundraising operation to bring in a lot more money. At first things will look GOOD! GOOD! GOOD! By golly, look what wonders SAF is doing to save the legacy of Aaron Zelman and preserve gun rights!

Then slowly, over a period of years, they’ll turn JPFO into …

… into what, it’s hard to say. Will it just be some bland, almost-forgotten thing? That’s what KeepAndBearArms.com became after Gottlieb bought it. One of the most lively, popular gunsites on the ‘Net is now a backwater.

Or will JPFO live and appear to thrive while subtly toning down its positions?

At this point, nobody can say. I can only say that it’s simply not within Gottlieb’s character to perpetuate Aaron’s character.

Very likely the first real test will be how the new JPFO responds the next time Gottlieb pushes for universal background checks. Don’t ever forget that Gottlieb called Manchin-Toomey a “win” and a “godsend.” Although he eventually removed his support from that particular bill, he still advocates universal background checks. He was still pumping hard for them at this year’s GRPC.

And this was after buying JPFO, folks. This was during the same weekend as that meeting to pretend that JPFO will be allowed to live “without compromises.”

So tell me this: Next time Gottlieb pushes his UBC agenda, what will JPFO’s staff and writers do? Go along quietly? Keep their mouths shut? Actually agree with Gottlieb?

Or will they — as they would do if JPFO remained its real self — shout to the rooftops that UBCs are wrong, dangerous, anti-rights, a front door to registration, and a backdoor to confiscation? Will JPFO’s spokespeople bravely inform the world that Gottlieb is selling us all out?

And if JPFO writers and staff actually did have the courage and fortitude to speak up and oppose their boss, what will SAF and Gottlieb do then? Will Gottlieb applaud and say, “Isn’t it great? See, I really meant it when I said I wanted JPFO to remain hardcore and uncompromising?”

Or will he purge the purists (or let them quit in protest and replace them with more compliant types) and continue what was always inevitable — making JPFO over in his own image?

Time will decide. Maybe — could be — Gottlieb will give up his advocacy of universal government control of firearm sales and avoid that potential conflict. But he and some of his shadier minions can wave awards over Aaron’s grave every day of the week and it wouldn’t change a thing. “Honoring” dead people is one of the tidier ways of turning them into powerless pictures on a wall, names on a plaque, hallowed (and ignored) institutions — and therefore shoving their real, inconvenient views out of the conversation.

—–

* Shady minions do not include David, Kurt, or webmaster Chris, who are all great people worthy of high regard.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

No, we don’t want to be like the UK!

Quite often, in my travels on these here Interwebz, I find gun grabbers pontificating how cool it would be if we were just like Britain. After all, they have stringent gun control, and their homicide rates are SOOOOOO much lower than ours!

Must be the fault of the evil gunz, right?

After all, the United States, according to recent figures, has 4.7 murders per 100,000 residents, while the United Kingdom has 1.

Must be the fault of the evil gunz, right?

Ehhhh… not so fast.

While the United States does, in fact, have a higher murder rate than the UK and much more guns in circulation, anyone with a shred of an education knows that correlation does not equal causation, and that the presence of guns tells a very limited and very inaccurate story.

We have by far one of the highest per capita gun ownership rates in the world, and yet, we’re far from being the most violent country out there.

Countries such as Latvia, that have the same per capita murder rate that we do, have a much lower gun ownership rate.  Whereas we boast 90 firearms per 100 people, and despite this fact, our per capita homicide rates are below those of Estonia and Lithuania, Haiti, the Cayman Islands, and Mexico, which all have gun ownership rates far below ours.

So is it really the guns?

B0JTUOVCcAAK0wg

 

I’m thinking not so much, especially with our homicide, accidental death and violent crime rates on the decline, while gun ownership increases.

homicides-per-year

The UK enacted its strict gun control legislation after the 1996 Dunblane massacre, which resulted in the deaths of 16 children and their teacher. The ban did not stop murders in the UK. As a matter of fact, they increased dramatically in the aftermath of the legislation, and reached their peak in 2003/2004.

That said, the nation has had historically low homicide rates to begin with, so the increase was definitely noticeable.

What also is notable are the low homicide rates prior to the enactment of the gun control legislation, which left most Britons disarmed and vulnerable to armed thugs.

So in a country with historically low homicide rates, one incident prompted a comprehensive infringement on the people’s right to bear arms, and said infringement had no appreciable effect on the already low homicide rates in this country.

Meanwhile in the United States, we finally got rid of the odious and worthless “assault” weapons ban, gun ownership rates have been climbing, and homicide rates have been declining steadily.

But if you think that the Brits are finished spanking the gun owners for incidents of violence for which they are not responsible, you would be wrong.  According the latest news from the UK, if you’re a registered gun owner in Britain, you will be subject to unannounced police visits to your home, and warrantless inspections of firearms storage.

Right to privacy? Forget it.

Right to property? Screw you.

If you are a gun owner in the UK, you have no rights. And yet, we have Mommies Demanding Action for Gunsense screeching about safe storage laws… for the children.

They either don’t understand that such mandates would involve massive violations of Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights, or they don’t care.

My bet is on the latter.

They want more stringent controls. They demand universal background checks that would essentially eliminate private firearms sales, infringing on the people’s right to dispose of their property without government interference.

They want a ban on scary, black rifles for no other reason than they’re black and scary.

And all for what?

For nothing. The UK’s example shows that their gun control laws have had no effect on actual murder rates, but instead of looking at actual causes of violence, the gun grabbers in this country want to be just like the UK.

Do we want to emulate a nation that routinely infringes on its citizens’ right to privacy, right to property, and right to self defense in vain?

I would hope the answer is a resounding “NO!”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

DC – Nothing much has changed

Those celebrating the demise of the DC gun ban may want to hang on a bit. If you think your freedoms have been restored in the nation’s capital, that is just not true.

To be sure, it was yet another kick in the groin of statist gun grabbery when a US District judge ruled  in July that Washington DC’s ban on carrying guns outside the home was unconstitutional.

In the ruling, Judge Frederick Scullin ordered the DC government to stop enforcing DC’s odious ban on carrying firearms.  Two days later – two days of unbridled joy and freedom – the District was granted a motion to stay the ruling until it could either appeal or adjust.

That adjustment came in the form of new licensing laws that make it odiously difficult to get a license to carry.

As of October 22, a DC resident may apply for a license. Good luck getting one, however. DC officials claim that merely fearing for your safety in a city where you can get shot just for stepping foot in a particular neighborhood is not reason enough to be granted a license to carry.

Want to carry while sightseeing? Nope. Monuments are federal property, and Park Police won’t let you carry on the National Mall.

If you can prove you have a stalker, you may be granted your right to carry a firearm.

The mere idea that some government bureaucrat has the authority to “grant” you a right negates the very idea and principle of a right.

And the mere idea that you cannot exercise your right as a free person whenever you see fit without begging permission from a faceless, statist desk-jockey in the capital city of the only nation in the world whose Constitution expressly protects the people’s right to keep and bear arms is repugnant.

So don’t celebrate quite yet. While Palmer was a terrific blow to the gun grabbers’ cause, there’s a long way to go until we achieve freedom.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Gottlieb: The man who owns JPFO

From the great Herschel Smith:

As for Gottlieb, I always knew that the “stupid” act he played after support of Manchin-Toomey was a ruse. He has a deep character flaw that enables him to support totalitarian measures. We all have our flaws, but this one runs deep and dangerous. In fact, read again his excuse for supporting universal background checks. Basically it boils down to this: if you don’t voluntarily agree to it, they will do it anyway. Or by way of analogy, if you don’t give a pick pocket you money, he’s just going to take it anyway.

Someone please try to convince me that isn’t what he is saying, because it looks to me like it is. And that’s puerile and childish reasoning, and in this case I think he advances it not because he really believes that it is logically compelling, but because he is frightened, or a publicity hound, or something dark. As I said, I don’t know exactly what, but the character flaw runs deep in Alan.

Gottlieb appears to want universal background checks, despite his Washington state initiative that, on the surface, opposes them. The very short text (pdf) of his I-591 manages to include language completely unnecessary for the stated purpose of the measure — and it’s language that virtually invites the federal government to try again to impose the very UBCs he supported last year.

Gottlieb just wants background checks and the inevitable firearms registration on on terms that he considers favorable — even as everybody else in the gun-rights movement (even the normally limp and compromising NRA) draws their line in the sand in front of UBCs. And “favorable” means favorable to Gottlieb in some way.

What Gottlieb is up to, nobody really knows. The only thing anyone can be sure of is that whatever he’s up to will benefit Gottlieb. That’s been his way of business for a very long time.

One Jewish gun-rights activist I know calls Gottlieb a Kapo. The Kapos were prisoners, sometimes Jews, that the Nazis used to help them rule others in the concentration camps. The Nazis couldn’t do it alone, so they enlisted sellouts — men interested in saving their own skin and working to their own advantage — to help them rule and destroy their fellows.

Per Wikipedia:

The system was also designed to turn victim against victim, as the prisoner functionaries were pitted against their fellow prisoners in order to maintain the favor of their SS guards. If they were derelict, they would be returned to the status of ordinary prisoners and be subject to other kapos. Many prisoner functionaries were recruited from the ranks of violent criminal gangs rather than from the more numerous political, religious and racial prisoners; those were known for their brutality toward other prisoners. This brutality was tolerated by the SS and was an integral part of the camp system.

Prisoner functionaries were spared physical abuse and hard labor, provided they performed their duties to the satisfaction of the SS guards. They also had access to certain privileges, such as civilian clothes and a private room.

Yep, that shoe fits. When Gottlieb supported (and even claimed to have helped write) last year’s Manchin-Toomey-SCHUMER bill, he repeatedly cited petty privileges that the bill supposedly granted, ignoring the principles and rights it would have slaughtered and the millions of gun owners it would have put at risk.

And this is the man to whom JPFO’s weak, tired, willful, and (in one case) quite possibly senile board members sold Aaron Zelman’s legacy. That they sold it “on the cheap” and without even considering better options makes matters worse. But a Gottlieb-owned JPFO, cheap or dear, is a travesty and an abomination.

Poor Aaron. He must be so weary from rolling and rolling in his grave.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

A war of ideas, a religious war

Everyone should read this today. It is about ghosts, about gods, about G-d, about truths blowing away in harsh winds, about the islamist and statist chaos engulfing the world, and about we who are trying to uphold the truth that individuals and the rights of individuals matter.

And the disconnect between their collectivist ideologies /slash/ godless-religion and the deeply held beliefs of those of us who still revere the Founders, seek liberty, and worship the God of Abraham, Moses, David and the Christ could not be any more stark than that between us and the beheading savages of the Islamic State.

As I have observed before, we are a nation divided along the answer to the existential question, “Does the government serve the people or do the people serve the government?” This is a political question, yes. It is an intellectual question. It is a question of competing and mutually exclusive world views. It is thus also a moral question. It is a religious question. It is a question of blood and belief, to use Peters’ words.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Defense Distributed and the spirit of resistance

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the Atmosphere. — Thomas Jefferson

The American Revolution had been over just three years when a group of Massachusetts farmers rose up against their state government and even tried to attack the (federal) Springfield Armory. Their reasons should have sounded familiar and noble to anybody who’d just lived through the revolt against England: unjust taxes and an unresponsive, corrupt, crony-filled government.

Instead of support and sympathy, however, Shay’s Rebellion was answered with outrage and hard-line crackdowns.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the few former revolutionaries who took the news of the rebellion with aplomb, even approval. While other former rebels (including the formerly rabble-rousing Samuel Adams) were calling for death for the Shaysites, Jefferson wrote the above words to Abigail Adams.

—–

I thought about Jefferson and the Shaysites (and for that matter the Whiskey Rebels) today after reading about Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed. This morning CW and DD announced a new product that authoritarians everywhere will hate and fear: the Ghost Gunner. As Wired puts it:

Continue reading Defense Distributed and the spirit of resistance

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Stunning Ignorance from Gun Ban Camp

Cross posted at the Liberty Zone.

I was speechless.

There’s nothing I can say about this clueless, feckless twit that hasn’t been said already by the Internets. I’m just here to show you irrefutable proof that Moms Demand Action frothing lunatics are also ignorant of history.

And we know what happens to those who forget history.

Exhibit A:

image58

And no, this is not a joke. Nor is it a troll account on Twitter. Until very recently, Alison A. Martin’s Twitter account was very much active and very much real.

Until this.

Yes, the photo above was from an actual conversation one of the guys I follow on Twitter had with a Moms Demand Action leader!

It’s quite obvious Alison A. Martin had no idea who Josef Goebbels was, so she replied in the usual gun-grabber flippancy.

I’m betting that after a cursory Google search, she realized what she said. But in typical gun grabber style, she deactivated her Twitter account, deleted her other social media, and went into hiding, so to speak, rather than admit and own her mistake.

Cowardice, ignorance, and lack of personal responsibility… all trademarks of Bloombergian idiots.

Meet your adversary, and take the time to ridicule it.

And then fear for the future of this nation, if there are actually political activists out there who are so stunningly ignorant about World War II, the Holocaust, and the Nazis.

I thought this was an appropriate first post for the Zelman Partisans.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail