A Memo to the Liberty Grabbers of the Left from the Pro-Liberty Right.


Hat Tip: Nazis Are Socialists (Meso)

A dose of reality for you Leftists opposing freedom on behalf of the gun owners of America.

Seeing that we gun owners been your rhetorical punching bag for
several weeks, there are a few things we would like to point out to you
folks opposed to the most essential of Liberties. You’ve spent all
manner of airtime talking down to us, dictating what we ‘need’
with regard to our basic human rights. So now it is time for you to
listen to a couple of brutal truths in the matter. These aren’t going to
be ‘politically correct’, by any means, but such is usually not the case with cold hard reality.

From your ever so self laudatory language, you Liberty grabbers on
the Left like to think of yourselves as noble warriors, out there ‘changing the world’ for the ‘Common good’ [Gemeinnutz in the German vernacular]. Fighting for Socialister. Social ‘Justice’ and all manner of flowery folderol [Cue mournful violin music]. Yes, you think of yourselves as ‘sacrificing’ for the ‘the children*’
no matter what that entails. Whether it’s all manner of fame on Youtube
or Facebook, to endless praise from your echo chamber, there are no
limits as to your willingness to signal your virtue to everyone.

*Unborn children excluded

Well, sorry to break it to you, but in the words of the Marchers: “We call BS!”

The fact is there is nothing more selfish than demanding that others be deprived of their ‘essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety’
for yourselves. You want others to sacrifice their freedom for some
mythical gains in your perceived security. It would be one thing for you
to give up your Liberty, but that isn’t the case is it? You are
marching to demand that the basic human rights of others be stripped
from them, that is self-centred in the extreme.

“Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves” ― Abraham Lincoln

Empathy is a very important human quality, so perhaps you should
consider giving up some of your essential liberties to understand what
is at stake for those of us on the Pro-Liberty side of the aisle. Maybe
you should demand that you be stripped of your First amendment rights?
Or perhaps Liberty Grabbers groups should be licensed before they can
demand that others be deprived of their rights?

Oh, what’s that you say? You have a Constitutional right to free-speech or freedom of the press? That those rights ‘Shall not be infringed’? [to coin a phrase] Or that the slightest amount will lead to a slippery slope towards the loss of them all. Welcome to our world,
where every time a Leftist lunatic decides to go on a mass murder
spree, our Constitutional rights are suddenly on the chopping block.
With it just being a question of how much of those rights we’re going to lose – if not everything.

Can we dictate what you ‘need’ in exercising your Rights?

Can we demand that you justify the keeping of your liberties? Can we arbitrarily decree that certain modes of speech are ‘Militaristic’ in style? Do you really ‘need’ to appear on the Tele 30 times a day? Do you really need a ‘high capacity’ smart phone? Do you really need to fire off 5 tweets in a minute just to kill off a basic human right?

Hypocrisy on parade: Liberty Grabbers have guns to protect themselves while denying that right to others.

Please note that the people in the Liberty Grabber movement you
idolize are also complete hypocrites in that while they work tirelessly
to take away our property and our Liberty, they are safe and secure
surrounded by ARMED security. Yes, think about it, the people who rail
against guns have no problem being protected by them. Were they to be
true to their words, they would disarm their security details. If
Citibank and Bank of America didn’t care to be hypocrites they would
dismiss their armed security and announce it to the world.
Oh, they have to deal with threats? So do the rest of us – and yet they want to make everyone else vulnerable to those threats while they stay safe and secure.

Here’s a hard dose of reality for you: We gun owners protect everyone, even you Liberty Grabbers.

The truth is that while you uselessly virtue signal your inestimable
magnanimity, it is those of us on the Pro-liberty side who work to keep
you people safe. This may come as a shock, but if you live in one of the
states or localities that value Liberty, you are around concealed
weapons every time you go out in public. Yes, you might find this to be
too scary to think about, but every day you are protected by the
deterrence effect of ordinary folks just like you [aside from their cherishing freedom that is] carrying around *Gasp* Firearms hidden from view.

Consequently, you don’t know who might be carrying a gun…. and neither do the criminals.
Thus the value of an armed citizenry. They don’t know who may have the
means to defend themselves, so they don’t know who to victimize,
therefore everyone is protected.

The exception being The “Gun-Free” zone, that vestige of the
Utopian fantasy world of the Left. Most mass shootings take place where
the innocent are denied their basic human Liberty of self-defence. So
what does that mean for you Leftists of the so-called “Party of Science”? It means that your absurd idea that a sign will stop a mass murder results in dead children. That is what you want everywhere, how does that even reach the threshold of rationality?

If you aren’t going to thank us for keeping you safe, could you at least leave us alone?

So why is all of this important? Because the people you have demonisd
for weeks are the ones keeping you safe. Those you label as terrorist,
splattered in blood are the people providing for your security. How is that for irony?

  • We’re the ones who take the time endure the draconian hurdles put in the way of our basic human rights.
  • We’re the ones who take the time to select the proper firearm and holster to carry concealed out in public.
  • We’re the ones who practice with our weapons in case an emergency arises.
  • We’re the ones who carry a cellphone and extra magazines for that potential emergency.
  • And We’re the ones who will most likely have to deal myriad legal
    problem and legal fees for merely protecting ourselves, our families and even you people should it be necessary.

Now, we don’t expect you people to grateful for this protection you
are afforded. Goodness knows you wouldn’t lower yourself to talk to
those of us on the Pro-liberty side. But could you at least acknowledge the effort and perhaps stop obsessing over taking away our Liberty that keeps you safe?

 

Originally published on the NOQ Report.

 

Advertisements

Video: On the Banning of Owen Benjamin | Upholding a Culture That Values Free Speech

Matt Christiansen

Published on Apr 7, 2018

A discussion on the culture of the Left has become increasingly
authoritarian, making the point that this isn’t really about the 1st
amendment. It’s about a political movement that wants to shut down opposition voices while it still purports to be “Liberal”. The issue is free speech in general and free speech as a cultural value – a value we are losing to the authoritarianism of the Left.

He further points out that it should be the individual that makes the
decisions on speech – not the government or other entities that make
that decision for you.

ITEMS REFERENCED

Owen Benjamin’s Facebook post: http://bit.ly/2qg9gU2

Nurse fired for post about Stephon Clark: http://bit.ly/2GpxS7w

David Hogg calls for boycotts of Laura Ingraham advertisers: https://ti.me/2qex4Yb

Berkeley Mayor advocates cancelling speeches because of violence threats: http://bit.ly/2qcpNby

 Originally published on the NOQ Report

 

When have the Enemies of Liberty on the Left ever compromised on the 2nd amendment?

The history of freedom always has been one of it’s enemies slowly
ratcheting it down with restraints in the name of equality or security.

Everyone knows the drill by now, a ‘Serious Crisis’ takes
place, the Left immediately demands the surrender of more human rights
forcing the innocent to pay for the sins of the guilty. Meanwhile, those
who dare defend those rights are pilloried with almost every pejorative
in the book.

The history of Liberty Control has always been one of unending
incremental infringements on our rights. The enemies of Liberty on the
Left always follow the same progression. They begin with spurious claims
over the ‘easy access to guns’, getting whatever they can, after which they reset the sequence for the next go around.

The Left’s idea of ‘progress’ is always one direction,
with demands that the pro-liberty side give up as yet more of their
freedom. Each time around it’s the same story, with only ever worsening
regularity. But why is this the case? When have the Liberty controllers
on the left ever compromised on the common sense human right of
self-defence, or any other liberties for that matter?

Liberty Control down through the ages.

The dirty little secret of Liberty control is that it has it’s roots
in racism, epitomised in the infamous United States Supreme Court case DRED SCOTT v. SANDFORD, (1856):

It would give to persons of the negro race, who were
recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter
every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies,
without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as
long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day
or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of
law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the
full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon
which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon
political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.

Please note that it specifically mentions “the full liberty of speech
in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens
might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”,
as the partial rationale for the decision.

Further on, the past century has saw an inexorable sequence of
infringements with the examples ranging from the National Firearms Act
of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968 to the Brady act of 1993.

In some rare cases, the Republican party spearheaded some partial
relief of earlier infringements, but these were always accompanied with
other restrictions. The overall trend has always been ever intensifying
restrictions on the rights that are supposed to be free from
infringement.

The Left’s idea of ‘compromise.’

It should be obvious by now that the enemies of Liberty on the Left
do not want anyone to have the basic human right of self-preservation.
They have made that clear in many articles, editorials and videos on the
subject of repealing the 2nd amendment or outright gun confiscation.  Consequently, it can be presumed that anything short of that immediate goal is a ‘compromise’ to them.
The win-win eventuality for them is that their ‘compromise’ positions
sets up for their ultimate goal none the less. Asserting government
control over everyone’s private property with ‘Intergalactic’
Background Checks followed on with the governmental permission
requirements in gun registration that will eventually lead to gun
confiscation. They would also like to control free-speech with the
expedient of ‘Political correctness’ or entirely undefined ‘Hate speech’. But for now they merely want to get people used to these restrictions on Liberty.

The Takeaway

The Left’s increasing stridency towards Liberty has intensified as of
late, which is quite odd given that they supposedly support the concept
with the self-labeling as “Liberals”. The Left has become single-minded in their pursuit of gun confiscation(and it’s precursors),
to the point of rejecting measures that would actually serve to protect
the children. As is typical of the nation’s Left, they self-label their
obsession with taking guns away from the innocent as being ‘reasonable’. Meanwhile, they vehemently oppose workable solutions to the problems they caused in the first place.

Their latest tactic is to exploit the victims of mass murder in a bid to shut down debate and impose their unworkable ‘solutions’ to the exclusion of anything else. Do they even sound ‘reasonable’ or ‘Liberal’
for that matter? They incessantly complain that the proponents of
Liberty won’t surrender their principles and once again yield to their
demands, but when will they ever compromise and defend liberty?

 Originally published on the NOQ Report

We need to call it Liberty Control instead of Gun Control.

The current debate is over Liberty and Freedom, the national
Socialist Left wants it to be about scary objects they don’t understand.

“She who defines the terms, wins the debate”

For all of their inherent faults, one must have a begrudging respect
for our comrades on the national Socialist-Left in how they exploit
language to very good effect. They enforce an iron discipline when it
comes to the words they use to frame the discussion to their cynical
advantage. An article in The Atlantic exemplified this with: Don’t Call It ‘Gun Control’.  Or more recently in New York magazine: ‘Gun Control’ Has Outlived Its Usefulness

While we will never adopt it’s immoral base ideology of collectivism, it is time we maintained the same discipline in the words we use. This occurs in various instances, with the incorrect use of the term Liberal being the most prominent, but that is for another column.

The debate is rightfully over the cause of Liberty, so why not act like it?

At present the important point is that we use the term ‘Liberty’ in place of the word ‘gun’ in the discussion over the common sense human right of self-defence. It is the underlying issue of the debate over the 2nd amendment. A Pew research poll from last June showed that For most gun owners, owning a firearm is tied to their personal freedom.  The best way to convince non-gun owners of this critical issue [ aside from taking them to the range having fun shooting an EBR ] would be to instantly frame the debate as being over Liberty instead of guns.

It is absurd to ascribe rights or controls to inanimate objects, but
that is the implication when using those terms instead of the underlying
issue. Consider some other essential topics of freedom such as the
right to vote or the right to privacy, would we really talk about a ‘War on ballots’ or ‘assault search warrants’ instead?

Framing the debate over Liberty instead of scary objects the Left doesn’t understand.

The national Socialist-Left would love to keep this debate framed as one over scary looking pieces of aluminium instead of freedom. Even though polling has shown there are about 120 Million gun owners
in the country, many have no direct experience with firearms. Still
further many gun owners don’t have personal experience with every aspect
of the issue. Sad to say, but many people don’t care about subjects
that do not impact their lives directly. Never the less, they do care
about the subject of Liberty, they can see as something immediately
important to them.

Just compare the emotional influence of a polling question with just one word difference Liberty in place of Gun:

Do you favour more gun control?

Do you favour more Liberty control?

That changes the thinking from that of objects to one that personally impacts their lives. This Liberty instead of Gun phraseology also goes directly to the heart of the Left’s deceptive use of the term ‘Liberal’.
Even if they don’t know it implicitly, both words have the same
underlying meaning – they both come from the same root word after all.

The Takeaway.

It should be obvious why the national Socialist Left does things in a
certain way with an iron grip on words being at the forefront.
Revealing the underlying issues will cause them to lose the argument. So
now, en mass they are playing games with language the use to avoid the
word ‘Control’ but still framing the debate as one over inanimate objects. They’ve begun to use the alternative phrase ‘gun reform’ but this is still an issue over everyone’s freedom. Thus a phrase such as ‘Liberty reform’ will nail them to the wall as to their true intent.

Originally published on the NOQ Report

 

Why Principles Matter – 2nd Amendment Edition.

There are times when one feels compelled to write on certain subjects
without knowing the reason. Consequently, this was begun a few days ago
in anticipation of some occurrence. Then came the infamous utterance of
President Trump to ‘Take the guns first, go through due process second’.
This was followed up by the stomach-churning video of that meeting with
Senator Dianne Feinstein giddy at the prospect of Trump betraying his core base in banning almost all firearms.

Anyone with a logical mind should be able to see what is going to
happen next. Whatever measures passed under the auspices of Trump will
not solve the problem – because this was Never the intent. Soon enough,
another massacre will take place, the rhetoric will be reset to zero
with a repetition of the same process. Demands will be repeated to “Do something”!

Once again President Loose cannon will blithely advocate parceling away our God-given rights as a sacrifice to ‘Bipartisanship’.
The precedent will have been set for another round of attacks against
our common sense human rights. The same meetings will take place, with
as yet another denigration of our rights. At some point, it will occur
to Trump that the nation’s socialist Left doesn’t have his or Liberty’s
interests at heart. But by that time the damage will already have been
done.

Let’s make this perfectly Clear: The 2nd amendment is non-negotiable.

It is not to be trifled away like Christmas hams for the sake of a pleasant photo-op. The
Bill of Rights has a two-fold purpose, it restrains the government
while protecting the liberty of world’s smallest minority – the
individual.
Each one of it’s carefully crafted amendments limit the collective power of the mob against a minority of one. The truly Liberal founding fathers knew that freedom is diminished with the expansion of the government:

“The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground.” Thomas Jefferson

This crucial point is perfectly exemplified with the 2nd amendment,
for each denigration of this common sense Human and Civil Right has a
corresponding expansion of the power of the government. It is an
understatement to declare that this Civil Right is the most important. People cannot exercise their other rights without having the means to defend themselves from oppression.

This has been proven many times down through history with the
Hungarian revolution against the oppressive USSR in 1956 to the massive
daily protests last year against the Socialist regime of Nicholas Maduro
in Venezuela. From the Prague Spring to Tiananmen Square, if
the people do not have the right and means to defend themselves, they do
not have rights of free-speech, free-press or every other right.

This is a debate over Liberty, not about inanimate objects.

The people who falsely fashion themselves as being ‘Liberal’ have been quite busy exploiting this current “Serious Crisis” to the hilt. They’ve dropped the toxic phrase ‘Gun control’ for the fascist friendly phrases ‘Gun reform’ or ‘Gun safety’.

Make no mistake, this isn’t about ‘safety’, ’Gun law reform’ or a number of other deceptive terms. This is about Liberty Control or Liberty reform. Yes, you read that correctly: Liberty instead of the word ‘gun’.
Unlike the national Socialist-Left, we are going to use the words that
precisely define the issue at stake. Guns are nothing but inanimate
objects of metal, wood or plastic. These items have no inherent Civil or
Human rights, they are only the means to secure Liberty. Rights can only be possessed by individuals – not a hunk of iron, thus the real meaning of this debate.

It’s been said that “He who defines the terms, wins the debate”. The gun grabber Left would love this to be about inanimate objects: guns, or even the undefined term “Assault Weapons”.Those who are supposedly ‘Liberal’ don’t want this debate properly framed as one over Liberty – because then they would lose the argument.

One last point: The Left has clearly shown themselves to be the enemy of Liberty.

The Left has made this perfectly clear with their moves to eviscerate
the most important right, the first freedom if you will, along with
other attacks against the 1st and other amendments. The right of
self-defence is the lynchpin for all the other rights, take that away
and the rest will be in jeopardy. Therefore, it should be patently
obvious the Left does not care for the cause of liberty
in the form of the 2nd amendment or any others. They are following in
the blood-soaked footsteps of collectivist of the past who have used the
vestiges of democracy to attain power and then ejected them when
convenient.

It should also be clear that they do not deserve the self-lauding approbation of being ‘Liberal’.
Liberty and Liberal both have the same root word origin in Latin as
meaning freedom, it should be clear that they no longer fit this overly
complimentary term. We will not win this argument playing the rules set
down by the national Socialist Left. And we will not win if we don’t stick to our founding principles.

Originally published on the NOQ Report

 

Let’s Just Say It: The Socialist-Left Doesn’t Really Care About Protecting Children.

The Socialist Left cares more about gun confiscation than any common sense ideas that will really protect kids.

Once again, we are witness to the nation’s Socialist-Left blithely
assuming the unearned mantle of moral superiority because they
supposedly care for ‘the children’. Allegedly ‘objective’
journalists are falling all over themselves to promote a nascent
campaign to destroy our common sense civil rights to the exclusion of
steps that will really ‘Do Something’.

It is not without a hint of irony that the nation’s Socialist-Left
does not care about children before they are born.  But soon after they
become a precious commodity that must be protected at all costs– including everyone’s fundamental human rights.
Those who are merely a cluster of cells or some other humanity denying
pejorative in the womb, suddenly become children to be exploited for
political gain upon their full emergence into the world.

Gun Control Doesn’t Work – If it did, Chicago would be the safest city in the nation.

Before the nation’s Socialist-Left is celebrated by the world with the laurels protector of children par excellence, shouldn’t we check their alleged solutions as to whether they work? For
if gun control doesn’t work, then they are merely setting up next the
mass murder tragedy, and for another round of attacks on our civil
rights.

Examine their much ballyhooed utterances over the past few days: The national socialist left is promising a little temporary safety exchange for a mere pittance of our essential liberty.
Of course, if they are pressed on the point, they will respond with
some sort of meaningless boilerplate about cutting down the carnage.
Even so, such vague promises are hardly worth the loss of liberty it
would entail.

So what are we getting for the low-low cost of our
freedom? How do their ‘solutions’ fair in the real world? Do they
actually protect people? Or do they make the situation worse – far
worse?

Well, we already know that very much like it’s tyrannical half-sister socialism,Gun control doesn’t work.
Just ask the good people of Chicago or Caracas whether or not depriving
the innocent of their means of self-defence will protect them.
Parenthetically speaking, if gun control actually worked in some
mythical Utopia, we would be hearing it about 24/7. This fantasy world
doesn’t exist, but there are other steps that can be taken to save at
least one life – and isn’t that the standard by which such things are
measured?

Commonsense steps that will really protect children and their Civil Rights.

There have been plenty of suggested initiatives that will help reduce
these terrorist attacks, from containing the contagion by reducing the
killer’s media profile to providing better security. Not to mention
restoring basic discipline and a moral underpinning to our children, or
simply letting people defend themselves getting rid of the insanity of
so-called “Gun Free” zones.

But instead of discussing steps that will actually work, the Socialist-Left ridiculesthem.  Or they insanely advocate we go further in removing God from the public square or decree them to be a redirection from their real obsession.

The Takeaway

To be perfectly blunt about it: The most disgusting aspect of
this whole cycle is that it won’t do a thing to protect children and we
will be back here doing the very same thing in a few weeks or months.

That is what is sickening about this whole affair, and just crediting
the Socialist-Left with just a modicum of basic intelligence will show
that they know this as well.

To the nation’s Socialist-Left, getting to their ultimate
goal gun confiscation is far more important than the lives of children
they supposedly want to protect.
They care more about depriving people of the means to resist [how’s that for a word?]
to their Marxist tyranny than everyone’s safety, and they are willing
to climb over the bodies of children to get there. If the nation’s
Socialist-Left really cared about protecting children they would
advocate what works instead of what brings them power.

Originally published on the NOQ Report

 

The Top 5 Reasons Gun Control is Dead.

Time to bury the non-functional authoritarian idea of people control that has been negated by circumstances and technology.

It’s the same pattern every time, within minutes of a mass murder attack, calls for Intergalactic Background Checks or Gun confiscation
are heard throughout the media. To be clear, these repeated assaults
against our common sense civil rights by those who are supposedly ‘Liberal’ are contrary to the very precepts of individual Liberty, but that has become all too commonplace these days.

One should be extremely suspicious of ‘solutions’ that have to be passed in the heat of the moment, on the basis of a ‘serious crisis’.
Were these ‘solutions’ of good quality and worthy of rational support,
they could be discussed in the context of an open debate without the
inclusion of useless emotional appeals.

The fact is the world has passed by the gun grabbers without their notice.
Americans today own an estimated 600 million guns, they also are wise
to the incremental attacks on their fundamental liberties. Advancing
technology and the fact that gun control has never worked have also
contributed to the death of this old tyrannical idea. Finally, this common-sense civil right is an integral part of the truly Liberal philosophy of individual Liberty.

1). Millions of gun owners and millions of guns in circulation make the ultimate gun grabber goal of Confiscation impossible.

A few months ago The Washington Free Beacon ran an analysis using data from a recent poll and census data and determined that ‘Nearly 120 million Americans have a firearm in the home’

The Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey of 1,200 adults found 48 percent of Americans said they or somebody else in their household owned a gun.

The United States Census Bureau estimates there are 249,454,440
adults currently living in America. If the Wall Street Journal/NBC News
survey is accurate, that equates to 119,738,131 Americans with a gun in
their home.

In addition, the website ‘WeaponsMan’ ran an analysis of ATF and came up with an estimated 412-660 Million firearms.

2). Gun grabber mendacity over the issue of Liberty Control.

Nothing epitomized the sheer lack of honesty on the part of the gun
grabbers on the nation’s Socialist-Left than statistic supposedly
showing 18 school shootings this year or that the New York Times reported 430 People Have Been Shot in 239 School Shootings.

If they truly had a righteous cause that made sense, they would have no need to lie about it.

The plain fact is that most, if not all people control proposals are
predicated on trust. For example, there really is no justifiable reason
for Intergalactic Background Checks other than to force
citizens to get permission to exercise their Civil rights and as a
precursor to gun confiscation. But the gun grabbers will solemnly attest
that this further infringement will not lead to that obvious end
result. We are supposed to trust them not to use purchase data to create
a registration and confiscation database. Well, they are perfectly
willing to Lie about school shootings as well as other issues, so what
is to stop them from doing so in this case?

3). Gun Control has Never Worked as advertised.

Gun control has never worked – as is most, if not all of the Left’s
Socialist national agenda. There are plenty of examples that range from
Chicago to Caracas. Basic logic will inform those who thoughtfully
consider the issue. People control laws only impact those who obey it anyway.
These are people who don’t really pose a threat, so these impositions
on personal liberty only serve to help criminals and the government.

Of course, a further analysis of these measures would show that they
were never meant to work in the first place. They merely set up the next
infringement without ever solving the problem, as intended.

In recent years the gun grabber set has openly and freely admitted their goal of Gun confiscation – whether they dress it up in euphemisms of ‘Gun buy backs’, Gun bans or merely getting rid of the 2nd amendment. They all mean the same thing.

It should be clear that any proposals to ‘Just do something about guns’ are but precursors to gun confiscation, whether it’s Intergalactic Background Checks or Registration. It’s ‘All or nothing’ with the anti-civil rights crowd, so they get nothing.

4). The Rapidly advancing technologies CNC machine tools and 3D printing will make gun control impossible.

The authoritarian ideas of gun control are almost as old as the guns
themselves. As soon as the common man was able to get a means of
self-defense, potential tyrants tried to keep this from taking place.
Back then, not many had access to the technologies to manufacture their
own weapons. In recent years, this has drastically changed to the point
that almost anyone can manufacture a firearm completely free from
governmental control. Reason recently profiled the pioneers in this field and how it has rendered a death knell to any hope of controlling guns.

For those who may be logically challenged, please try to follow
along: It is becoming easier and easier to make weapons. Thus any
restrictions on our common sense civil will only have an impact on the
innocent. So any future attempts at people control will be negated by
everyone and anyone manufacturing their own without government
interference. But of course, we have outlined this issue on these pages as well.

5). The Common Sense Civil Right of Armed Self-defence is an integral part of the cause of Individual liberty.

There is a reason the Liberal founding fathers set out the Civil
Right of Armed Self-defence at the top of the Bill of rights. They had
just fought and won a war where the possession of the common ‘weapons of war’
was crucial to victory. In fact, the possession of these arms by the
colonials was the spark that set off the American revolution. The
founders knew that the possession of firearms was the only way the new
nation would be able to maintain it’s security. These were the ‘weapons of war’ commonly held by the infantrymen: The ubiquitous AR-15 of today as was the musket of the colonial time period.

The Right to keep and bear arms was also an integral part of the philosophy of individual rights. The right to ‘Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ is meaningless without a self-defense capability.

There also a reason that the Liberal founding fathers used the word ‘unalienable’ – meaning they cannot be taken or given away by the possessor of these rights. In other words, even
if people were persuaded by slick marketing or Leftists, they could not
give up the right to life and by extension, the common sense civil
right of self-defense.

The Takeaway

Therefore, it should be quite clear that millions of gun owners,
possessing millions of guns will not fall for Leftist lies or their
fantasy world of safety by disarmament. Furthermore, it should be clear
that advancing technologies and civil rights that cannot be given away
signifies that gun control has metaphorically drawn its last tyrannical
breaths.

 

Originally published on the NOQ Report