Video: You’re Not A Liberal!

A Truth Revolt Original from Bill Whittle that succinctly explains why Leftists aren’t Liberal.

 Published on Oct 10, 2014

The 4:20 minute mark in the 6 minute video has its most important point:

The founding fathers were the True Liberals because they believed in Liberty – with both words having the same origins.

They believed in individual Liberty, private property,
limited government and the common sense civil rights of free-speech and
armed self-defence.
They believed in the freedom to be left alone.

The point of the video is that the collectivists of the nation’s Socialist-Left do not meet the definition of the word Liberal. They
believe in collective rights, Collective ownership of property,
unlimited government, limitations on speech and gun confiscation.

Those of that mindset (Leftists) are not Liberal by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Originally published on the NOQ Report

Advertisements

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.

 

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

 

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

 

It’s ‘official’ now, the Left has become the party of Gun Confiscation.

The nation’s Socialist Left wants to deprive the people of the
most basic of Liberties, so much for their claims of being Liberal.
We already knew the often repeated line: “We’re not talking about confiscating guns” was a blatant lie
of the first order. Almost every day brings another Leftist entity
coming out from the authoritarian closet demanding a variation on the
theme of Gun Confiscation. Many of the signs from the March against Liberty movement spoke on this theme, with this easily confirmed from the many videos on the subject.

Now this has been confirmed by a recent Quinnipiac poll that had Democrats with 33% Support for the question: “Would you support or oppose repealing the Second Amendment, also known as the right to bear arms?”

Interestingly enough, the support totals are greater at 21% for the 35-49 yr. age group while it’s only 12% in the 18-34 age group. So much for this being a ‘youth movement’.

Still further, while support for stricter gun laws in the United States peaked at 66% on Feb 20, 2018 it has already dropped down to somewhat normal levels (56%) as of Apr 11, 2018. No wonder the Liberty Grabbers work fast in ‘Rahming’ [As in “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” Rahm Emanuel.] through whatever they can get in the emotion of the moment.

Now that the Shroud of Gun Control has Fallen we need to be aware of the threat and what to do about it.

 Originally published on the NOQ Report

 

The Top 5 Reasons to Reject Intergalactic Background Checks.

Call them what you will – enhanced, Intergalactic or whatever,
they will be Universally ignored by the guilty and only serve to punish
the innocent.

Once again, we are seeing our rights being eroded before our very
eyes. With the latest mass murder outrage caused by the Left’s cultural
Marxism, it is being demanded that we compromise on that which shall not
be infringed. In their unending quest to disarm the people and empower
themselves, the push is being made for Intergalactic Background Checks (enhanced, Universal, etc.)

As surely as night follows day, the Liberty grabbers are in high
dungeon over the people actually having the ability to defend
themselves. Thus they want the next stepping stone to their final aim of
Gun Confiscation. The most infuriating aspect of this is that
there are those on the Pro-Liberty, Conservative-Right side of the aisle
who are willing to concede this important point to the Liberty
grabbers.

Let us be clear on the real meaning of the seemingly innocuous phases
bandied about by the enemies of liberty on the Left. When they talk
about the ‘Intergalactic’ version of Background Checks they are really asserting the authority over everyone’s private property,
a governmental overreach that would be enraged the truly Liberal
founding fathers. Property rights are the cornerstone of Liberty, so do
we really want the government to control It with these controls?

The following are the Top 5 reasons to reject this gross intrusion
into our private property, not to mention being a violation of a number
of the amendments in the Bill of Rights

1). Intergalactic Background Checks would punish the innocent for the sins of the guilty based on a polling impossibility.

The Liberty Grabbers have a perennial favourite tactic when it comes
to this issue, trotting polling data that implies 90% agreement with
‘Background Checks’. Everyone should be immediately suspect of any
polling data that shows upwards of over ¾ of the populace agreeing on
anything. In the diverse electorate environment of the states, this kind
of agreement is almost impossible. But to the Liberty Grabbers of the
national Socialist Left, this is akin to mom and apple pie territory.

This polling is like that of comparing a known political candidate with an unspecified place holder. Often times people will fill in the blank with their ideal, in the case of ‘background checks’ those on the Pro-Liberty side merely agree to that which already exists.

While the Leftist enemies of Liberty fill in the blank with all
manner of draconian schemes they can think of to punish the innocent for
daring to want to protect themselves. After all, these are people who
evidently don’t understand firearms or the unimaginable overburden of
laws on a basic human right. So to them, imposing a hardship any milder
than outright confiscation is being overly generous.

2). They don’t work while burdening the innocent in exercising their Common Sense human rights.

A massive study on the efficacy of ‘Gun’ Control from the RAND Corporation was recently published  that stated in part:

We reviewed thousands of studies to identify all
available evidence for the effects of 13 gun policies on eight outcomes.
After excluding studies that did not meet our criteria for establishing
a law’s effects, we found little persuasive evidence for the effects of
most policies on most outcomes.

On the specific issue of ‘Universal’ [‘Intergalactic’ or ‘enhanced’] Background Checks on mass shootings

Summary: Evidence for the effect of background checks on mass shootings is inconclusive.

Key Findings:

Background checks have uncertain effects on mass shootings.

Evidence for this relationship is inconclusive.

Translating the academician speak into the King’s English – when they use phrases such as ‘uncertain effects’ or ‘inconclusive’ it really means ‘We don’t know’ and there is no hard data that these policies work.
Parenthetically speaking, It’s hard to believe that they wouldn’t have
trumpeted concrete, real world results for these policies from the
virtual rooftops, if they could have found the data to support them.

Compare their ‘uncertain effects’  against the societal cost
in disarming the innocent with people no longer having the ability to
defend themselves. In an article published on townhall.com entitled: How Many Lives Are Saved by Guns — and Why Don’t Gun Controllers Care?

The author details the number of non-suicide firearm deaths as roughly 11,000. While estimates of lives Saved by guns as ranging from “500,000 to more than 3 million per year”. That would be the societal cost of Intergalactic Background Checks for virtually no benefit.

3). Intergalactic Background Checks lack Constitutional Justification.

Can anyone imagine the founding fathers acquiescing to governmental control over private property?

They knew that private property was the cornerstone of Liberty, so
governmental control of it wouldn’t of made any sense to them. Set aside
the enormous infringement on a common sense human right as prohibited
by the 2nd Amendment while considering this possible ‘addition’ to the
4th amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated”
– but they will be under complete control of the government.

It could also argued that since the government asserting control over property, there would no longer be an ‘private’ property, thus part of the 5th amendment would no longer exist: “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

So, in a trifecta of tyranny, Intergalactic Background Checks would
violate at least 3 Amendments of the Bill of Rights. We could have
extended this with the those also violating the 9th and 10th amendments,
but the point has been made.

Parenthetically speaking, it’s always fun to ask our comrades of the
national Socialist Left what is the legal or Constitutional
justification for Intergalactic Background Checks. No answer will be
forthcoming because there is no justification for this absurd amount of governmental overreach.

As to the justification for regular background checks, it could be
argued that they are based on the often abused commerce clause with the
firearm dealers being federally licensed.

4). IBC’s would set the Very Dangerous precedent of Collective Property Control.

Those imbued with the precepts of individual Liberty would find such a precedent abhorrent. Those of the collectivist ‘Common good before individual good’
mindset would be perfectly satisfied with that level of government
overreach. It would also give them the opportunity to extend that kind
of social engineering to untold areas of mischief.

Considering that such a perversion of property rights would turn the
governmental limitations of the 2nd Amendment on it’s head, the
implications of Intergalactic Background Checks are enormous. Instead of
being a restraint on the government, a new-found constraint on the people will have been created out of whole cloth.

For if the government has purview over firearms, why not over items
that emit greenhouse gasses? What other human rights could the
collectivists eviscerate with that level of control? History has proven
that governments cannot be trusted with too much power, hence the
rationale of the founding fathers to limit it’s potential to grow out of
control.

Who knows how the precedent of government control of private property could be abused?

Perhaps ever-increasing fees over obtaining permission to transfer a firearm?

Why not property taxes on firearms, enough to price most people out of possession?

[Note: There is a very good chance that the Liberty grabbers have
already considered these ideas, so we cannot be blamed for presenting
them]

5). Intergalactic Background Checks are the next step towards Gun Confiscation.

It should be painfully obvious that the only reason the Liberty grabbers obsess over this issue is that it is the next step for them toward their ultimate objective of gun confiscation. Intergalactic Background Checks would naturally lead into Gun registration followed by Gun confiscation.
In point of fact, as soon as the government has control over everyone’s
firearms, it is just a matter of picking them up at the most opportune
time: Gun Registration is Gun Confiscation

The enemies of Liberty on the Left have overwhelmingly expressed a desire for gun confiscation
so it’s primarily a matter of determining who has the firearms.
Intergalactic Background Checks will go a long way in attaining this
goal, for once they have control over the legal transfer of every gun,
they can assemble registration lists and demand that their owners
surrender their ‘property’ at any time.

This is why this type of tyranny needs to be stopped, dead in it’s tracks.


Reference:

On the specific issue of ‘Universal’ [‘Intergalactic’ or ‘enhanced’] Background Checks on mass shootings

We identified one study that examined the effects of background
checks on mass shootings and met our inclusion criteria. Using a two-way
fixed-effects linear probability model, Luca, Deepak, and Poliquin
(2016) estimated the effects of background check laws on a binary
indicator for whether a mass shooting occurred in a given state-year.
The authors included two measures of background check laws: an indicator
for whether laws required a background check for all handgun
transactions (including private sales) and an indicator for whether laws
required a background check for all firearm transactions (including
private sales). The authors’ regression ­analysis covered 1989–2014 and
included controls for time-invariant state characteristics; national
trends; a host of other state-level gun policies; and time-varying
state-level demographic, socioeconomic, and political characteristics.
Their findings showed an uncertain relationship between background check
laws and the probability of at least one mass shooting event occurring.

Originally published on the NOQ Report

Liberty Control becomes a farce with the absurd idea of knife Control.

The Liberty grabbers have just parodied themselves into non-existence with the absurd notion of restricting edged weapons.

Let’s begin with this brutal reality: Bladed weapons can be easily made of any material that can hold an edge. They have been around for millions of years, they literally defined the stone age.

Anything that can hold an edge can be made into an easily concealed weapon.

They only need a material that can hold an edge and a way to make it sharp. These materials range from the stone to hard candy.
with almost every solid material in between. It’s well known that these
weapons are easily produced within the confines of maximum security
prisons.

Nevertheless, the Liberty grabbers have gone to the absurd length of trying to control these weapons with calls for their removal from kitchens or detection by ‘Knife wands’.
Not only are these weapons easily produced under the strictest of
conditions but they can also be made of non-metallic materials,
undetectable by non-invasive search methods. In addition, edged weapons can also be easily concealed, making them easily hidden from even the most invasive search methods.

Therefore, it should be obvious that society cannot control these weapons.
Any attempts at the level of control necessary to carry out this task
will inevitably fail. This type of control of Liberty will be to the
detriment of the innocent since they will be rendered helpless in the
face of criminal or terroristic threats.

The Liberty grabbers never give up trying to control people.

However, that hasn’t given pause to the Left in trying to push the
authoritarian envelop into untold reaches of insanity. Never mind that
Liberty control doesn’t work as advertised or that each failure means
they will try to punish the innocent even further. Each failure of the
Left’s Socialist national agenda only means they double down even more.
Even the perennial “Cut down on the carnage” excuse fails since on balance because more people will be adversely affected by these controls on their freedom. Meanwhile, the government becomes more empowered while innocent people are killed.

The UK is showing everyone the future if the Liberty grabbers get their way.

The UK has reached a point where the sheer insanity of Liberty control has imploded in on itself. The imposition of private property controls (Intergalactic Background Checks)
will be followed by gun registration. All of this setting for their
final solution of Gun Confiscation, where the very same situation will
happen, with the same tragic results.

It’s time to end the insanity of Liberty Control.

 Originally published on the NOQ Report

 

Repeatedly doubling down on the insane notion of trying to control
the guilty by punishing the innocent has to stop at some point. We need
to learn from their mistakes to halt this absurd process before it goes
any further. As Benjamin Franklin once mused: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” The people wanting to defend themselves will have to declare enough is enough with these absurd measures knowing that both Liberty and safety are at stake.