This is a placeholder for now because I have not had ads on this blog for years. In case I ever start up again, this will be the policy in effect:
The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don't think we're getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you're stupid, too. I have had a few ads on this site in the past and may do so again if I think it's worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn't buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don't mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now--you're not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer.
About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
Comment House Rules
Keep them on topic. No spam. No threats against anyone except me. Do not feed trolls--I'll take out the trash. Try to keep it clean. I'm the final arbiter. If you don't like the rules, start your own damn blog.
Link Policy
WarOnGuns reciprocates links with liberty-oriented sites promoting the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable individuals. If you have linked to me and don't see your site below, it's probably just because I haven't noticed it yet. Shoot me an email via the "Contact Form" (see above in this sidebar) if you want to fix that.
As a general rule I remove links for blogs that have been inactive for over one year.
Socialists and Soros Fight for Article V Convention [More]
But...but...but "conservative" Mark Levin...
3 comments:
Anonymous
said...
One should remember that once an Article V convention is assembled, all bets are off. No existing law will guide or limit the outcome, except perhaps for the precedent set by the first Constitutional Convention.
Instead of reforming the Articles of Confederation, four men set that gathering on a path to throw out the existing framework and essentially start again from scratch.
Those calling for a ConCon imagine it reforming the current system, pushing FedGov back into the box contrived for it by the founders. What is more likely, given the Law of Unintended Consequences, is that States like Illinois, California, and New York, will send delegates like the ones they now send to Congress, and that those members of a new "Squad" will contrive to use a blank sheet of paper to make things even worse when viewed from a conservative perspective.
A second Constitutional Convention could have many possible outcomes, but a Conservative "Deus Ex Machina" is not the most likely.
It is stupidity indeed to believe that the problem of politicians blatantly disobeying the contents of the old piece of paper will be remedied by creating a new piece of paper.
"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." -- Federalist #51
3 comments:
One should remember that once an Article V convention is assembled, all bets are off. No existing law will guide or limit the outcome, except perhaps for the precedent set by the first Constitutional Convention.
Instead of reforming the Articles of Confederation, four men set that gathering on a path to throw out the existing framework and essentially start again from scratch.
https://www.amazon.com/Quartet-Orchestrating-American-Revolution-1783-1789/dp/0385353405/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Those calling for a ConCon imagine it reforming the current system, pushing FedGov back into the box contrived for it by the founders. What is more likely, given the Law of Unintended Consequences, is that States like Illinois, California, and New York, will send delegates like the ones they now send to Congress, and that those members of a new "Squad" will contrive to use a blank sheet of paper to make things even worse when viewed from a conservative perspective.
A second Constitutional Convention could have many possible outcomes, but a Conservative "Deus Ex Machina" is not the most likely.
It is stupidity indeed to believe that the problem of politicians blatantly disobeying the contents of the old piece of paper will be remedied by creating a new piece of paper.
"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." -- Federalist #51
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed51.asp
Post a Comment