Banned in Six Paragraphs!

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:00:00 GMT

Scott Bieser at The Libertarian Enterprise - In Memorium: Daniel Conan Weiner - a pink pistol for Dan. [tle]

William Stone, III at The Libertarian Enterprise - Warp Speed - a eulogy for Dan Wiener. [tle]

I didn't know Dan long, nor well, nor intimately. I never met him face to face, nor even talked to him on the phone. I have no words to describe the details of his life, nor the pain and sorrow his family and friends now feel at his loss.

Nevertheless, from hundreds of miles to the south and without ever having met me, Dan touched my life.

For me, Dan was a white voice in a black void: thoughtful, often provocative words that spoke to me from the depths of cyberspace. He spoke of freedom, life, and making choices that initiated force against none. He was an important, irreplaceable comrade-in-arms in the never-ending struggle for freedom against those who wish to strip all human beings of their rights.

After all, how many gun-toting, libertarian, gay Texans are there in the world?

Kapt Kanada, aka Manuel Miles at The Libertarian Enterprise - The Kaptain's Log: Harass Thine Enemy - since the bullets haven't started flying, at least not here in the good ole U. S. of A., it's still the time to win the hearts and minds of those who have not yet recognized the minions of Leviathan for the criminals they are. How? Expose their lies. [tle]

The Empire will always have another war to which to "move on", so it is not only our duty but a vital tactic to expose their lies without either mercy or relief until the entire imperial system collapses under the weight of its accumulated prevarications and we, the citizens of the world, can finally enjoy the blessings of... Peace and Liberty.

Publicola - The Guns & Ammo Forum (my title) - Mike tells about changes in the Primedia Second Amendment Issues forum and why he has stopped posting there. I joined, introduced myself, was welcomed by a couple of members, and summarily banned by the Hunting & Shooting Moderator. Gee, even Democratic Underground let me say more than that before kicking me out, and their written policy is to not allow divergent views. Here's the text of my introduction of myself:

New to the forum 2:52 PM 11/2/2003

Greetings fellow supporters of the second amendment.

I was led to this forum by a blog entry from Publicola, who called himself "miketgtr71" in the incarnations of this forum to which he has contributed over the years (click). I'm sad to read that his reason for leaving was in-fighting here.

I'm not here to engage in such infighting. I'm here because it looks like an interesting place. My signature below will tell you my interpretation of the meaning of the Second Amendment. Don't bother trying to move me towards the center on this issue. You will fail. In return, I won't push it too hard. Actually, I'll probably lurk most of the time and only speak up when there is something that I must say.

I believe that an anarcho-capitalist society would work better than America's Constitutional Republic, but I can live with our Constitutional republic as long as the Constitution is narrowly interpreted and rabidly enforced. I realize that this puts me in a small minority. So I won't push this one either.

The Constitution is a statement of the limited powers of those who have sworn to uphold and defend it. I believe that any sworn servant of the people who takes even a baby step outside of that Constitutional cage is a criminal. He should be removed from office, should never be allowed to take any sworn position again, and should serve prison time for his crime. 18 USC 241, "Conspiracy against rights", provides for a 10 year visit to Club Fed for this kind of crime. In my opinion, something like 90% of the current members of Congress belong in prison for this.

I believe in fair fighting. I essay to argue the message, not defame the messenger. But I'm human, so sometimes I forget. Please remind me if I step out of line.

_______

The Atlanta Declaration: Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. -- L. Neil Smith

Here's the moderator's reply:

Re: New to the forum (Bill St. Clair) 4:25 PM 11/2/2003

Sorry, Bill, but no, you are not welcome here. Let me tell you why. This forum, among many others across the NET, has been disrupted and derailed by a few extremist for too long. I say extremists because the goal you are working towards is a fantasy. Any reasonable person knows the citizens of this country, or any civilized society, will never be allowed absolute unrestricted access to any and all weapons. Even if the Supreme Court ruled the Second Amendment says they can, the vast majority of Americans would demand Congress amend the Constitution to allow for some control of weapons.

But it is not your fantasies that bother me so much. It is your tactics. Well, they are not going to work here anymore. There are too many important matters to discuss to allow this forum to get bogged down again with the rantings of a few radicals. With your first post here, you clearly show you came with an agenda. You read Mike's ludicrous delusional blog about this forum and decided to get you some of that. Nope. I didn't go to all this trouble just to swap one trouble maker for another. Goodbye.

Modified by Dan Johnson at 4:34 PM 11/2/2003

_______

Dan Johnson

And here's the email I sent to Mr. Johnson, since I could no longer respond in the forum:

To: dcjohnson2002@hotmail.com
Subject: Silenced for decently expressing my opinion
From: "Bill St. Clair" <bill@billstclair.com>
Cc: "bill@billstclair.com" <bill@billstclair.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:26:47 -0500

Mr. Johnson,

I thought my introduction of myself was done very decently and openly. I could have chosen to lurk for a long time and made tepid posts with the intent of keeping you happy. Instead, I started in a very open way, honestly saying that though my opinions are more radical than most, I would not push that in your forum. So what do you do? Judge me by my references (I don't even know Mike, I just read his weblog now and then) without even allowing me to speak for myself. Shame on you, sir. Shame.

Knowing very little about your forum, I had no way to know whether Mike's blogging was "delusional". You have certainly backed up his opinion by banning me so quickly. "Go elsewhere," you say. "I've read an entire six paragraphs from your keyboard, and I can already tell that you're a worthless troublemaker." And you expect to turn the antis? When you won't even listen to someone on your side for five minutes? Yes, I'm a radical, but I'm also a practical man. I don't expect to get most of what I ask for, but I DO expect to pull the argument in my direction. And, as I said, I tend to lurk most of the time and only type occasionally.

Tom Knapp ( http://rationalreview.com/ ) uses the metaphor of a train trip to talk about our political destination. He and I want to go all the way to anarcho-capitalism. Most people who haven't fallen in love with power, i.e. most good people, want more freedom, a smaller government, less restrictions on gun ownership, less taxes, fewer regulations, etc. We can share the train ride until we get there. At that point we'll part company, and Tom and I will attempt to convince you to travel a little further. Or maybe we'll decide that things are good enough, and politics isn't worth our time any more. That's certainly what I want. I want the government to leave me alone to live my life. Keep the tax rate low enough, let me defend myself and my family from criminals, and I'll gladly wash the stench of politics from my hands.

One reason that I stand at the far limit of positive belief about our right to keep and bear arms, besides that being the precise meaning of "shall not be infringed", is because it makes the concessions the NRA has made over the years appear exceedingly reasonable to our enemies, those who will not stop until no one but the police and the military may own any weapons whatsoever. If I'm repeating that they should be hanged from the nearest lamppost (and I believe that the behavior of Chuck Schumer, "my" New York Senator, and friends is tantamount to treason, so I'm entirely serious about hanging), they're going to be mighty happy to be thrown a bone by the NRA.

Anyway, enjoy reading tepid posts from your conservative friends. I may check in occasionally, but it's not much fun having gag over your mouth.

-Bill St. Clair
bill@billstclair.com

Discussion has continued without me, and it turns out that quite a few members are in agreement with me about the meaning of the Second Amendment's "shall not be infringed".

Add comment Edit post Add post

Previous Posts:
Supremes to Consider Fourth Amendment
October 2003
Hardyville Returns!
Dan Weiner, RIP
Men Just Wanna Make Babies
Skype Works
How to Respond to Contempt in the Courtroom
Skype Me
Back to Work
Hodgdon Buys IMR

Navigation

History

Quotes

Government doesn't work. Never did. Never will. Can't. But there are lots of good people. Love them.

-- Bill St. Clair

The Atlanta Declaration

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission.

-- L. Neil Smith

Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings.

-- L. Neil Smith

A Penalty Clause for the Bill of Rights

Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

-- L. Neil Smith

Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents.

-- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report on gun control laws.

Who is a libertarian?

Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap")

"A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."

-- L. Neil Smith

(Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP")

Why Did It Have to be... Guns?

Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

-- L. Neil Smith

Concise

"Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

-- Mike Vanderboegh

Also from The Atlanta Declaration:

... like going to the bathroom, breathing, eating, sleeping, or making love, it turns out that self-defense is a bodily function one cannot safely or effectively delegate to a second party.

-- L. Neil Smith

This does not mean that "Marijuana should be available by prescription." It means that morphine sulfate should be available in five pound bags at the supermarket for a couple of bucks, like sugar... but probably in a different aisle, to avoid confusion.

-- Vin Suprynowicz

If you refuse to pay unjust taxes, your property will be confiscated. If you attempt to defend your property, you will be arrested. If you resist arrest, you will be clubbed. If you defend yourself against clubbing, you will be shot dead. These procedures are known as the Rule of Law.

-- Edward Abbey

The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war.

-- Bill St. Clair