The State Legislature is in full swing, and South Dakota Gun Owners is working on several issues that will impact gun owners...Click on the link to find out more.
Action
Anti-gun Sen. Dave Knutson is the key opponent of the Citizen Self-Defense Bill. He is the left-leaning Majority Leader of the State Senate, and was primarily responsible for last year’s narrow defeat...
It is vital that Sen. Knudson receive a high volume of calls and emails. If possible, please do both. Let’s see if we can light up the Capitol switch board! [More]
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
South Dakota: Action Alert
Hail to the Chief?
By the time some of you read this, Barack Hussein Obama will have been sworn in as 44th President of the United States. Untold millions will be ecstatic. The Era of Hope and Change has arrived. [More]This is the first installment on a series I've got planned for this week's Gun Rights Examiner column: Obama's plans for guns.
Tell a friend?
Hamblen v US
"The Court concludes that Petitioner [Hamblen] has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as to his Second Amendment claim, and reasonable jurists could find the Court's assessment of the constitutional claim debatable…Accordingly, the Court will issue a certificate of appealability on Petitioner's Second Amendment claim."--Judge Todd Campbell, U.S. Court for the Middle District Of Tennessee, Richard Hamblen vs. United States, No. 3:08-1034, December 5, 2008The case involves possession of a machine gun by a member of a state-organized militia. Mr. Hamblen has approached me to call it to your attention.
I advised:
Suggestion: Start a free blog to be a central repository for information you want the public to know about. Go to another free service like esnips.com to post pdf and Word docs that can then be linked to--I can't post this memorandum in full anywhere, so if it were stored on a free server, I could give a summary statement and then send people there to read and download it for themselves. A guy like me can direct people to sources of information, but I can't take point on it.For now, you can learn more about his case from The Volokh Conspiracy (which has posted Judge Campbell's Memorandum) and from Of Arms and the Law.
Suggest you also publicize contact info, and if you're requesting people to do something, be specific about it. Also, if you have links to any news accounts, that would be helpful.
I'll try to keep tabs on this as relevant developments happen.
Blackwell Blues?
Denny Church raises a flag. I have not had a chance to check it out and offer no opinion. I bring it up here because it's a comment on my site and I think it deserves to be explored, but I just don't have time right now. I leave it to you to read what he says and judge for yourself. [More]
The Bum Rush Giving the Bum's Rush to Constitutents
I received an email that's relevant not only to recent stories I've been following, but it also demonstrates the arrogance with which government treats We the People when we presume to involve ourselves in the way they would rule us.
It also shows us something we all need to be willing to do if we are to ever have a system of self government: Take the initiative to implement our own ideas.
My hat is off to my correspondent, who agreed to let me post his email here.
It also shows us something we all need to be willing to do if we are to ever have a system of self government: Take the initiative to implement our own ideas.
My hat is off to my correspondent, who agreed to let me post his email here.
Mr. Codrea,Thank you. Mr. Quilty. For your effort, for sharing it with us, and for setting an example.
Thank you for your articles. I’ve been following your writing since I came across it 6 months ago. You do a great job of articulating what so many of us think and say in a less coherent manner. I just finished reading your “Kill the Bill” series and am gratified to see I could pick out the insanity in the bill almost as well as you.
I am unfortunate enough to live in the Illinois 1st Congressional district, so as soon as I saw this Rush Representative thing had introduced the bill, I stopped reading your article and read the bill for myself, hopefully without outside influence in how I interpreted what I read. While reading the bill, I noted the outrages and set them to paper with questions. All this, I hand-delivered to Mr. Rush’s local office in Midlothian, IL. I stated in the letter and told the worker there that I had many questions on the bill in my letter and as a constituent; I would greatly appreciate some answers. Here’s the mentality in that office: “Why didn’t you mail it?” “Well, as you can see, it’s quite heavy, and since I live a few blocks away, I thought I’d save a tad of money in postage. Besides, security being what it is, I’m here, envelope open for inspection for various things that may not be paper and you can assign a face to the name on the letter.” “Oh, thank you sir. What’s it about?” “H.R. 45, I have a lot of questions.” “Well I’ll see that it gets to Mr. Rush in Washington.” This, after being left to stand at the door outside for almost 10 minutes while I rang and knocked in -2 degree weather.
Mr. Codrea, I do not expect any reply whatsoever from this elitist. I’m not an educated man but I have some operating gray matter. As you can see, I can get wordy, but I believe I’m entitled to a reply to my questions from those who claim to represent me. I’ve written his office twice in the past 8 years about other issues and never received a reply. I’ve not received so much as an acknowledgment before. Come to think of it, the only Illinois political organization which has stooped to answering me was Jack Ryan’s campaign just before he was forced out of the race for governor. Granted, it was a staffer I spoke with, but I at least received a personal call and all my questions were answered over a 30 minute conversation. I’ll let you know what comes of this if you’re interested.
C. Quilty
Guest Editorial: HR 45, the Assault Weapons Ban, and the Hegelian Dialectic
by Dominus Defensor
The Obama administration wants to craft a new assault weapon ban and make it permanent, and it wants to end the private sale of all firearms, among other things. This announcement from the potential attorney general is one of the most important events for the gun rights community in a long time. This is the first public expression of Obama's plans by an identifiable individual within the Obama administration.
At the 1-16-2009 Senate Judiciary Hearings Eric Holder said the following: "I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent would be something that would be permitted under Heller, and I also think [it] would be good...."
The announcement by Holder is likely the real plan of the administration. The previously announced HR45 is likely a diversion as part of the implementation and execution of the Hegelian Dialectic. HR45, as recently discussed at WOG and at examiner.com outlines the draconian plans to require licenses to own firearms, the passing of a written exam, government access to your private medical records, and a central registry of all gun owners, etc. All of this just for the exercise of a fundamental human right.
HR45 is probably not their real agenda for the moment (not that they would be upset if they did achieve it). It was announced with perfect timing right before the Holder confirmation hearings. The drafting and announcement of HR45 was likely designed to achieve the following goals:
1. Execution of the Hegelian Dialectic. They intentionally create a sense of panic with the proposed draconian legislation (HR45) that the boot is about to stomp our heads. Then, when they subsequently release their slightly less draconian plans at the confirmation hearings for Holder (assault weapon ban, end all private transfers of guns, etc.), we breathe a sigh of relief that things are not as bad as we thought and voluntarily accept lesser infringements. (NOTE: it could be argued that the real plan is just the opposite in that HR45 is the goal and not another assault weapon ban. Either way, their ultimate goal is to deny us our fundamental human right to keep and bear arms, and the main thing for us is to understand the tactics behind their actions.)
We must counter this by knowing the nature and origin of our rights and refusing to surrender them in the most loud and raucous way possible. Never voluntarily surrender any rights. We must reinforce the idea that attempting to take these rights will come at a great cost for the enemy because we will never voluntarily submit to their abuses or their tricks.
Summary of the Hegelian Dialectic:
This has been explained before, but here is another summary.
The basic premise of the Hegelian Dialectic is to incrementally move in the desired direction to the detriment of a group of people with the voluntary consent of the aggrieved people. This is done through fear and release. First, a terrifying plan is leaked out that would mean catastrophe or a gross violation of the target people's rights. Then, a less extreme plan is proposed as a compromise to the more extreme plan. This makes the target feel relieved that things will not be as bad as originally thought, creating a sense of release, and the target voluntarily chooses to submit to the less extreme plan under the false hope that the bad guys will be satiated and under the false belief that a crisis has been averted by choosing the lesser of two evils. The bad guys are NEVER satiated, and they will be back for more in the future. In addition, choosing the lesser of two evils as dictated by the bad guys is never the solution. We must dictate our own solutions that confront evil.
2. Divert attention from the Holder hearings so gun owners and freedom lovers will not pay attention to the planned infringements that are being publicly announced during the hearings. They are not hiding their plans from us. However, they are using simple tricks to make us look the other direction. Everything we need to know about their plans is right in front of our faces. They are simply creating the psychological opportunity for us to ignore reality.
We must counter this by facing reality, accepting what has been exposed right before our eyes, and getting the issues to the forefront. Also, we must publicly expose their actions and their plans in the most loud and raucous way possible. This does not mean we should ignore HR45. In fact, the recent efforts by David and and gun rights activists at examiner.com were very impressive, and they should serve as a model for how to agitate against Obama's plans as announced by Holder. We must understand their tactics and keep them under steady pressure on all fronts.
Here are the recent efforts at examiner.com:
-"Qualifying Firearms"
-"Kill (the) Bill"
3. Condition the target (us) to eventually accept the more draconian plan in the future and test the target for compliance and submissiveness. By constantly barraging the target with threatened attacks and incremental infringements, the hope is that the target will eventually grow weary of threats to the peace and will decide that the constant threats of warfare are not worth the price. They also want to use numerous small attacks to make it seem like they have an impossibly large number of supporters. The enemy believes that if they keep this up long enough, one of their attacks will eventually reveal us as totally submissive and compliant to their plans. They also hope that we will feel overwhelmed and give up. The war will be over at that point, and they are gradually trying to move us in that direction.
We must counter this by refusing to submit in a loud and raucous manner at every opportunity. We must push back at every attack point because we will find that their forces are spread very thin and offer very little in the form of dedicated, deep resistance at any point. This is obvious whenever we take an aggressive stand against them - all opposition melts away, and we are left standing alone and victorious. The perfect examples are the recent battles over at examiner.com on HR45. In every case, the enemy threw in the towel in the presence of our onslaught and disappeared into the night. We must make it clear that we will never grow weary of the fight, and we must be prepared to back up our words with the relevant actions.
4. Provide plausible deniability for the Obama administration in that they did not publicly propose the more draconian HR45. Obama and his administration can point the finger at "extremists" outside of their administration who drafted HR45. Obama can then play the role of a great compromiser (and a moderate, to boot) by proposing a less extreme agenda than what is found in HR45. The "less extreme" agenda will actually be filled with extremist plans (e.g.; permanent assault weapon, end of private transfer of firearms, etc.), but these plans will seem tame compared to what is in HR45.
We must counter this by exposing the fraud of their behavior, and we must never let the Obama administration successfully play the moderate/compromiser card. We must "name names", and never let anyone off the hook for their actions.
Conclusion
The tactics of the enemy reveal that he is weak. If he were strong, he would launch a direct attack against us and crush us with a single blow. He is not strong enough to beat us with a single blow, nor does he have the broad public support that the media deceptively portrays. The other side of this coin is that we are strong. The only way the enemy can beat us is if we voluntarily submit to his simple tricks. His tricks have now been revealed to everyone. Now, we must use our knowledge and continue to fight back. The war is clearly on, and so are we.
The Obama administration wants to craft a new assault weapon ban and make it permanent, and it wants to end the private sale of all firearms, among other things. This announcement from the potential attorney general is one of the most important events for the gun rights community in a long time. This is the first public expression of Obama's plans by an identifiable individual within the Obama administration.
At the 1-16-2009 Senate Judiciary Hearings Eric Holder said the following: "I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent would be something that would be permitted under Heller, and I also think [it] would be good...."
The announcement by Holder is likely the real plan of the administration. The previously announced HR45 is likely a diversion as part of the implementation and execution of the Hegelian Dialectic. HR45, as recently discussed at WOG and at examiner.com outlines the draconian plans to require licenses to own firearms, the passing of a written exam, government access to your private medical records, and a central registry of all gun owners, etc. All of this just for the exercise of a fundamental human right.
HR45 is probably not their real agenda for the moment (not that they would be upset if they did achieve it). It was announced with perfect timing right before the Holder confirmation hearings. The drafting and announcement of HR45 was likely designed to achieve the following goals:
1. Execution of the Hegelian Dialectic. They intentionally create a sense of panic with the proposed draconian legislation (HR45) that the boot is about to stomp our heads. Then, when they subsequently release their slightly less draconian plans at the confirmation hearings for Holder (assault weapon ban, end all private transfers of guns, etc.), we breathe a sigh of relief that things are not as bad as we thought and voluntarily accept lesser infringements. (NOTE: it could be argued that the real plan is just the opposite in that HR45 is the goal and not another assault weapon ban. Either way, their ultimate goal is to deny us our fundamental human right to keep and bear arms, and the main thing for us is to understand the tactics behind their actions.)
We must counter this by knowing the nature and origin of our rights and refusing to surrender them in the most loud and raucous way possible. Never voluntarily surrender any rights. We must reinforce the idea that attempting to take these rights will come at a great cost for the enemy because we will never voluntarily submit to their abuses or their tricks.
Summary of the Hegelian Dialectic:
This has been explained before, but here is another summary.
The basic premise of the Hegelian Dialectic is to incrementally move in the desired direction to the detriment of a group of people with the voluntary consent of the aggrieved people. This is done through fear and release. First, a terrifying plan is leaked out that would mean catastrophe or a gross violation of the target people's rights. Then, a less extreme plan is proposed as a compromise to the more extreme plan. This makes the target feel relieved that things will not be as bad as originally thought, creating a sense of release, and the target voluntarily chooses to submit to the less extreme plan under the false hope that the bad guys will be satiated and under the false belief that a crisis has been averted by choosing the lesser of two evils. The bad guys are NEVER satiated, and they will be back for more in the future. In addition, choosing the lesser of two evils as dictated by the bad guys is never the solution. We must dictate our own solutions that confront evil.
2. Divert attention from the Holder hearings so gun owners and freedom lovers will not pay attention to the planned infringements that are being publicly announced during the hearings. They are not hiding their plans from us. However, they are using simple tricks to make us look the other direction. Everything we need to know about their plans is right in front of our faces. They are simply creating the psychological opportunity for us to ignore reality.
We must counter this by facing reality, accepting what has been exposed right before our eyes, and getting the issues to the forefront. Also, we must publicly expose their actions and their plans in the most loud and raucous way possible. This does not mean we should ignore HR45. In fact, the recent efforts by David and and gun rights activists at examiner.com were very impressive, and they should serve as a model for how to agitate against Obama's plans as announced by Holder. We must understand their tactics and keep them under steady pressure on all fronts.
Here are the recent efforts at examiner.com:
-"Qualifying Firearms"
-"Kill (the) Bill"
3. Condition the target (us) to eventually accept the more draconian plan in the future and test the target for compliance and submissiveness. By constantly barraging the target with threatened attacks and incremental infringements, the hope is that the target will eventually grow weary of threats to the peace and will decide that the constant threats of warfare are not worth the price. They also want to use numerous small attacks to make it seem like they have an impossibly large number of supporters. The enemy believes that if they keep this up long enough, one of their attacks will eventually reveal us as totally submissive and compliant to their plans. They also hope that we will feel overwhelmed and give up. The war will be over at that point, and they are gradually trying to move us in that direction.
We must counter this by refusing to submit in a loud and raucous manner at every opportunity. We must push back at every attack point because we will find that their forces are spread very thin and offer very little in the form of dedicated, deep resistance at any point. This is obvious whenever we take an aggressive stand against them - all opposition melts away, and we are left standing alone and victorious. The perfect examples are the recent battles over at examiner.com on HR45. In every case, the enemy threw in the towel in the presence of our onslaught and disappeared into the night. We must make it clear that we will never grow weary of the fight, and we must be prepared to back up our words with the relevant actions.
4. Provide plausible deniability for the Obama administration in that they did not publicly propose the more draconian HR45. Obama and his administration can point the finger at "extremists" outside of their administration who drafted HR45. Obama can then play the role of a great compromiser (and a moderate, to boot) by proposing a less extreme agenda than what is found in HR45. The "less extreme" agenda will actually be filled with extremist plans (e.g.; permanent assault weapon, end of private transfer of firearms, etc.), but these plans will seem tame compared to what is in HR45.
We must counter this by exposing the fraud of their behavior, and we must never let the Obama administration successfully play the moderate/compromiser card. We must "name names", and never let anyone off the hook for their actions.
Conclusion
The tactics of the enemy reveal that he is weak. If he were strong, he would launch a direct attack against us and crush us with a single blow. He is not strong enough to beat us with a single blow, nor does he have the broad public support that the media deceptively portrays. The other side of this coin is that we are strong. The only way the enemy can beat us is if we voluntarily submit to his simple tricks. His tricks have now been revealed to everyone. Now, we must use our knowledge and continue to fight back. The war is clearly on, and so are we.
Thumbs Up for "Mall Cop"?
It's funny, 'cause it's true: Paul Blart, the unarmed mall security guard hero of the new film, is a more suitable exemplar of the "protect and serve" ethic than the government's armed enforcement agents.I can believe the last part, easily, but this business of an unarmed protector works against reality on two counts--first that we should rely on protectors, and second, it perpetuates the myth that arms are superfluous when confronting violent evil-doers.
I typically have nothing but respect for what William N. Grigg writes, and my natural inclination is to trust him. In this case, I need to reserve judgment until I see the film. And I'm afraid with the cost of movies and with others out there I'd rather see, I'll just have to wait for it to come out on cable.
Maybe next year I'll gush in agreement. Still...
[Via Zachary G]
Bread and Circuses
So America continues the transition from a citizenry to a people, that waits for government handouts and the comforts of a monarchy as spectacle, broadcast simultaneously on all channels. While Obama preps a cabinet slate, half of whom belong in jail, the media continues applauding loudly to drown out any criticism. And the public watches with glazed eyes. [More]Daniel Greenfield looks at the spectacle his neighbor to the south is putting on and speaks his mind. And how.
[Via Joe G]
A Free Market Solution
One group in the border city of Ciudad Juarez pledged last week to "clean our city of these criminals" and said their mission was to "end the life of a criminal every 24 hours." [More]I'm trying to find the downside here.
The government that wants them disarmed isn't stopping the victimization, and is often in partnership with the gangs. What are people supposed to do under these circumstances? I'd be tempted to go all Guatemalan myself.
I guess it's time for my obligatory summation:
Damned American gun shows.
Curses! Foiled Again! has more.
Who is David Olofson?
The judge in this case has accomplished what the Brady Campaign, Dianne Feinstein, and other anti-gunners have been trying for years - convicting a law abiding citizen for owning a semi-automatic rifle by mis-labeling the firearm as a machine gun. [More]Jennifer Freeman gives us a summary on the David Olofson case. Included are links to the Lou Dobbs segments, as well as to the Olofson Relief Fund.
What Libertarians Believe
No matter what you may hear to the contrary—generally from those individuals who wish to derive some benefit from being called libertarian, but who can't (or won't) make the cut ethically or politically—the one thing that sets real libertarians apart from other people is their strict adherence to a "Zero Aggression Principle"... [More]
L. Neil Smith presents an initial chapter in a larger endeavor.
This Day in History: January 20
Patriot and British forces skirmish at Somerset Courthouse (present-day Millstone), New Jersey. [More]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)