End the War on Freedom

I say carry wherever you go regardless of whether it is legal or not. You don't need a "license" to save your own life. Americans are born with a CCW license. -- Josh Bergman

Antiwar News Service is a fairly new creation of Wolf DeVoon, the author of The Freeman's Constitution.

Gun's World - Exploded Firearms Drawings - includes a large number of rifles and pistols.

Garry Reed - Too Many Jihads - If the feds would stop fighting the war on possession of vegetables, they might be able to do a passable job of one of the few things they're actually constitutionally authorized to do: defend our borders.

So isn't it time to choke down a couple of priority pills? Like, maybe, wouldn't this be the perfect time to just end the jihad against America's drug-using citizens? It wouldn't even have to be announced, which would tickle the vote-nervous denizens of Congress. Just quietly shift all of our seek and destroy assets away from drug interdictions and into thug convictions. What's really important here? Has anyone even remotely associated with the world of Schedule I narcotics ever killed 6,000 people in one day?

The Libertarian Enterprise has a new issue, "Points of View". Articles I liked:

• Letter from Warren Tilson - tyranny marches on. The war on "terrorism" is just another excuse. Ends with an Especially entertaining scenario for a future made-for-TV movie. But then I laugh at everything.

  Also, in a "standard" war one side or the other is expected to win at some point. With the war over, however it went, the crisis is gone. Not so here. As long as there are angry people there will be terrorists. Continuing anti-terrorism will create more orphans, instill more hatred, and provide motivation for an endless crop of new terrorists. Ah, job security. Not for the line troops who will fight and die but for politicians and other policy makers. These prattling mudf**kers will always support more funding for the war and will always support new restrictions on liberty because...well because it's what they do.

• Letter from E.J. Totty -

  It seems that '911' will now have more than one meaning for a very long time. What is revolting is that even with all the evidence that points up to the fact that idiotic laws having absolutely no effect except to actually facilitate what happened, still more laws -- which will have no affect -- will be enacted, further eroding our already diminished liberty.
  
  The original laws were like whipping a dead horse. Well, the new ones will be thrashing the ground where the dead horse once lay. How many times does it take a person doing a thing -- which is not producing a desired effect, to realize that to increase 'the something' will yet again not produce the desired effect?
  
  ...
  
  When you climb aboard a craft, having surrendered any ability to effectively defend yourself, you -- and nobody else -- has any business complaining when the worst of all possible worlds descends upon you. If you do complain, then you are living the essence of the cult of the victim. Perpetual victims are those people who ensure that the are easy prey for every sort of human vermin; and they invoke every excuse to make everybody else likewise.

• Letter from Jim Davidson - Defends EJ Totty from David Brown's attack of last week.

  I have no sympathy with mass murderers. A friend of mine perished in the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.
  
  But, the USS Cole and the Pentagon are legitimate military targets. Attempts to project power into other countries are going to be opposed, and if that opposition reaches out to attack the home base of the USA military, nobody ought to be surprised.
  
  EJ Totty points out, "The US government is a damned bully." While I don't agree with his use of blasphemy, the sense of what he says is inescapable.
  
  It is inescapable to tens of millions of Americans who have direct personal experiences of the bullying nature of the feral gummint. It doesn't matter whether one is an Ivy League educated space enthusiast with a graduate degree in business offering a sweepstakes for Americans to fly in space or a high school dropout Christian fundamentalist with a penchant for guns, the feral gummint has it in for us. It bullies us until it gets its way, jails us if it doesn't, and if we resist arrest, it burns us to death in our churches.

• Letter from Tom Biggs - more on Mr. Brown's comments about Mr. Totty.

  I'll admit that I was mildly offended to read Totty's comment "part of me is cheering [bin Laden] on". But in a free society, we are allowed to disagree. He was speaking his true opinion, one that might be offensive.
  
  The rest of his argument is dead on - imagine that the roles were reversed - the US weak and some strong country was bombing it indiscriminately. Imagine your own child dying from their embargoes or bombs dropped from 30,000 feet. Or your parents. Or your wife. Would you not want to revenge that? War would not be an option since your country would be too weak to even attempt it. Certainly we would be growing freedom fighters who would be happy to strike back at the offending nation.
  
  I shouldn't even have to insert a disclaimer here - but I will anyway: None of the foregoing is meant to say or imply that the attacks were justified or moral or that we deserved them.

• Letter from Joe Tittigerg - Mr. Titigerg is about to apply for a concealed-carry permit in Florida. He's worried that past marijuana possession and DUI convictions plus occasional treatments for depression will disqualify him. He is personally unwilling to make the second amendment challenge engendered in carrying anyway and asks if someone else is. I must admit that I'm having second thoughts about applying for a New York state permit. I find it degrading to submit to finger printing and registration in order to exercise an inalienable human right. I feel that I might be in more danger form the gummint with a permit than I would just carrying without one. When they come for our guns, you can bet they'll visit first the houses of the permit holders. I'm sorely tempted to carry openly with the intention of being arrested for it, and then appeal the conviction to the supremes if I can't convince the jury to nullify. But I also have no faith in the courts. I've seen plenty of evidence that lots of them are corrupt beyond repair. It seems that I am left with two choices: travel around as an unamred victim or arm myself, work hard at concealing the fact that I'm armed, and kill anyone who threatens my right of self defense, no matter which funny hat or fancy uniform they're wearing.
• Planes, Trains, and Automobiles! or: How to Name a War! by Mike Pare - finds a name for GW's war on terrorism by reasoning about likely future targets. Of course the biggest damage done by these attacks is the government attempt to do something, anything, to reassure the sheep that they are safe.
• Racism and the New Profiling by Charles Novins - before 911, racial profiling was a horrible transgression of people's rights. Now, we must question every Arab. Contains a good summary of the "progress" of civil rights in Amerika. Though targeting of male Arabs makes sense in this case, letting the government do it is asking for trouble.

  Stossel interviewed dozens of people about this seeming contradiction. Comically, EVERY black citizen approved of profiling - Arabs, of course. He re-interviewed a black man who had been the subject of an earlier 20/20 report. The guy was racially-profiled and made a federal case of it, causing police to assault him, all on videotape, followed by civil rights suit, and so on. This guy's answer was similar to many others: He said he knows profiling is wrong, but it doesn't matter if it is, we must do it to Arabs now.
  
  ...
  
  The fact is that protecting America's homeland is NOT primarily a government function. Never was, and shouldn't be. The government plays a role, for certain. And in foreign lands, it is the government's role exclusively. But at home, the Constitution was completely unequivocal that defense rested primarily with the citizens. The two obvious examples of this were the Second Amendment, with its guarantee that citizens could not be disarmed, and the Constitution's explicit prohibition upon use of the military at home. While domestic "police forces" exist in the form of FBI, DEA, BATF, and so on, you will find not a single one of them authorized in the Constitution.

Add comment Edit post Add post