Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Interesting Viewpoint on the 2A

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Interesting Viewpoint on the 2A

    Below are excerpts from an article on the 2A by Gary North, an investment sort of guy.

    There are two main extremes in the debate over guns. The gun control people are basically worshippers of the state. They grovel before the image of the state. They believe in the state...

    ...At the other extreme is the private militia crowd. They think that the ownership of weapons is basic to conducting a new American Revolution. They think that that their ownership of weapons will in some way slow down the state...

    ...Here is reality. The ownership of guns is mostly symbolic most of the time. The gun as a symbol says this: the state is not God. The state is not finally sovereign. Citizens are sovereign under God, and they possess the right to bear arms as a mark of this sovereignty...
    ...The correct goal is to wait for the federal government to go bankrupt before it bankrupts us. It will go bankrupt. It is not God...

    ...In the political vacuum that will appear in the aftermath of that national bankruptcy, armed citizens with economic assets and economic and political skills will be in a position to pick up the pieces. Local armed citizens will become the back-up of the local police, which local citizens will elect...

    That was just to wet your whistle. Please read the rest at the link.

    http://teapartyeconomist.com/2012/03...rship-of-guns/


    I look forward to Gary North's articles. He's perceptive and insightful. I'm not saying he's always right; but, he sees economic items in ways you don't get from the lamestream media. Definitely worth reading. He has his own website beyond the blog linked above, and his articles frequently appear on LewRockwell.com, which is a must for any freedom-minded individual.
    Last edited by Citizen; 03-10-2012 at 03:59 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    I have never heard any person argue that the State is God. The State is a tangible Authority capable of fulfilling its purpose whether it be the Federal Government or the State Government. God is not a physical Authority, God is some sort of psychological Authority--to some.

    A citizen sovereign under God is not factual; it is a version of Truth. There are very few Facts in the Universe, and God is not one of them; and neither is the notion that the Gun represents some sort of singular symbolic purpose. The firearm is many things, yes, one of which is the ability of the citizen to defend against Despotism, if it exists or is perceived to exist.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 03-10-2012 at 05:41 PM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Please don't anybody be dumb enough to argue with her.

    Please, please, please just let it ride.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Some other food for thought concerning the firearm debate. The author acknowledges that they are for regulating firearms but is balanced in his 11,000 word essay.

    The HUGE bump in the road for some, I suspect, will be the latter portion of this paragraph. But I encourage others to continue reading; I don't think any person has ever agree 100% with an argument...I could be wrong:

    "Guns are a serious menace to public health in the United States. Gun control critics need to acknowledge at least that much about an instrumentality responsible for more than 35,000 fatalities and 100,000 injuries annually. On the other side, gun control advocates should accept that guns are here to stay. If it helps, I am not a gun prohibitionist. I probably would be if I thought prohibition would work, but in a nation where more than 200 million privately owned firearms circulate freely, I do not think it would work. Like everyone else, I do not want only the bad guys to have the guns. I have come to accept that, for better or worse, guns are a permanent fixture in our society. However, as a teacher of tort and products liability law who views all products and their associated dangers from a cost-benefit, injury avoidance perspective, I strongly believe much closer regulation of guns is warranted" http://www.saf.org/journal/11/mcclurgfinal.htm

    From the link you provided (http://teapartyeconomist.com/2012/03...hip-of-guns/):

    (1)The main idea behind gun ownership is to maintain the right of every law-abiding resident to defend his life and property when the state cannot do it. (2)We live in a time when the local agencies of law enforcement cannot secure the peace. (3)This leaves citizens the task of defending their lawful zones of jurisdiction: in their cars, in their homes, and in their places of business.
    (1) I completely agree.
    (2) IMO, we have never lived in a time when local agencies could secure peace or defend the individual citizen efficiently, and effectively.
    (3) I am not sure what the author means by "lawful zones." I have always been under the impression that citizens have always had this task; although, the state has stepped in and restricted or out-right banned firearms in many areas of social life (in a number of states).

    The lone gunner who takes a stand against the authorities will wind up like David Koresh and his followers. It is better to live to fight politically. Suicide missions benefit the state.

    There are better examples than some man claiming to be Jesus Christ, and having sex with his brainwashed female followers.
    As for armed students in public schools, there is a solution. Close the public schools. No one hears of bullied students who go on a shooting spree in private schools.
    Another push for privatization, that privatization is the answer to problems such as school shootings. Of course it couldn't be bullying, right, because kids have always been bullied in school. Apparently these days bullying in some instances leads to school shootings.

    We should not worship the federal government. We should plan a revolution to overthrow the federal government. We should work toward the day when local governments replace 90% of the federal government.
    I agree, the Federal Government ought not be worshiped.

    The author first argues that the Federal Government is going to bankrupt itself, and we ought to wait it out. Then the author states that we ought to plan a revolution to overthrow the Federal Government. Which is it? I suppose it can be stated that the author has an interesting position. The author's position is that the so-called Militia types are all about overthrowing the Government, the author is at first not supportive of that, offers up the alternative of waiting the Government out to bankrupt itself, then at the end states that there ought to be a revolution against the Government.

    I will jump on the wagon and agree that local Governments ought to replace 90% of the Federal Government; is this just a number pulled from a hat or is there a 90-10 proportion the author has in mind? We may never know.

    At the end of the day what we have sitting before us is a lot of ideas on how things can be made better and the author offers one of countless general ideas of the role Government ought to play in our life.

    If the citizen is sovereign under God then why would we take an alternative structure where the State has most of the Power, and the Federal Government has the least? The State will be a better form of Governance than the Federal Government?--I am skeptical.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 03-10-2012 at 07:26 PM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I read that this morning I see we visit the same websites....lol.....good taste.

    I agree with much that is being said.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    OK. I've had a chance to sleep on Gary North's idea that insurrection against a tyrannical government is less a reason for private arms. That waiting for government to go bankrupt and then pick up the pieces afterward is the preferred idea.

    I have read more than one historical reference representing as an almost axiomatic progression that a system of government moves from democratic to tyrannical. The Roman Republic devolving into the dictatorial Caesar and then the emperors is one example. Even Jefferson pointed it out in his liberty tree analogy, and wrote separately that across time liberty decreases and tyranny increases in a country.

    Also, the more I think about it, the more I think it likely that bankruptcy will just push the federal government into even stronger tyranny; or, conversely that the fedgov isn't going to come over all freedom-minded just because it goes bankrupt.

    For example, the fedgov has gone bankrupt twice already. Once in the 1930's when Roosevelt not only suspended redeeming paper currency in gold, he even confiscated citizens' gold, threatening a decade of imprisonment and punishing fines. Now, think for just a moment. The government gets into deep trouble (aka bankrupt). Government "solves" the problem by ending redeeming paper currency for gold. This itself is tyrannical because you're stuck with paper tickets (cash) that are worth whatever the government or central bank makes them worth when it then starts printing them by the boatload. Then the government demands you turn in your personal property (gold coins and bullion). This is even worse tyranny, because in your gold coins and bullion, you at least had items that held their value in the marketplace and were much less susceptible to losing their value the way cash does when boatloads are printed. Add to this that Roosevelt repriced gold so that you got fewer dollars than market value when you turned it in. Add that Roosevelt did all this by fiat decree, and a very short time later Congress enacted legislation making it law.

    The second time the fedgov went bankrupt was 1971 when Nixon "closed the gold window", meaning Nixon ended off letting other governments redeem US notes for US gold. This was the end of the gold standard. Suddenly the central bank (The Federal Reserve) could officially print boatloads of money at will, the money no longer needing to be backed by gold at all. I have read that the inflation and recessions of the 70's and 80's were directly attributable to excessive money printing made possible by Nixon officially taking the US off the gold standard. Although I have not confirmed this by reading multiple sources who give sufficient explanation, the pattern certainly fits. Devaluing the savings of the entire country through the price inflation that occurs after excessive money printing is plenty tyrannical, especially when the first beneficiary of the excessive printing is the fedgov itself. Throwing gosh-knows how many people out of work during recessions is pretty goddam tyrannical when it is done for the benefit of the fedgov and the banks. Reducing the standard of living of people already on fixed incomes by price inflation is pretty goddam tyrannical.

    "The fedgov went bankrupt? I never heard that," you might say. Of course not. The fedgov is not going to come right out and create mass panic and torchlight parades of pitchforks by saying, "Ummm. We *ucked up. We can't pay our bills. We printed too much currency." But, just think about it for a moment. What is it called when a corporation can longer honor its commitments, in this case when it cannot redeem in gold all the currency it created? They just didn't call it a default or bankruptcy and resorted to trickery in order to avoid an actual default. Something similar happened in Greece recently. A certain class of holders of Greek government bonds were told they had to accept only about 50% on the bonds. The bankers and government did everything possible to avoid calling it a default. Yet, a default is exactly what it was. But, since the government ordered it, and the bondholders were forced to accept, magically it wasn't a default. Hogwash.

    Technically, the fedgov is bankrupt. It has to print trillions to stay afloat. It has to raise the debt limit over and over to avoid an actual default. It has basically already defaulted. It "solves" its problem by massive more borrowing and Federal Reserve creation of money out of thin air. This is not a solution. This is trickery and deception. The only reason they can avoid being accused of bankruptness is because they can print and borrow at will, which is far, far from being able to actually honor commitments.

    So, I think we're going to get a lot more tyranny when the government gets into trouble again.

    So, back to Gary North. I wonder. Is it a case of "wait until the government goes bankrupt"? Or, is it a case of "when the government goes bankrupt or creates unendurable economic chaos and price inflation, the people will be finally angry enough to break out the guns"? Or, is it a case of "when government creates economic chaos and disruption, a dictator/savior will come along, then eventually he will be revolted against"? Or, something else entirely.

    I wonder.
    Last edited by Citizen; 03-11-2012 at 07:38 PM.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Oho! Here is an interesting article on government default on its debt. Do take a moment and ponder the implications.

    http://rt.com/news/argentina-advice-greece-default-033/

  8. #8
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    [snip]

    So, back to Gary North. I wonder. Is it a case of "wait until the government goes bankrupt"? Or, is it a case of "when the government goes bankrupt or creates unendurable economic chaos and price inflation, the people will be finally angry enough to break out the guns"? Or, is it a case of "when government creates economic chaos and disruption, a dictator/savior will come along, then eventually he will be revolted against"? Or, something else entirely.

    I wonder.
    The Government is already bankrupt. Americans are more docile than I thought, it is likely that it would take a significant hit for individuals to get-up and effect change--natural disaster is all we need for this, IMO. I remember hearing some person state that all we need in this Country to initiate a breakdown in social order is a large natural disaster, spanning many states.

    Economic Hegemony is a wonderful tool for control, IMO. No longer is it required that there be actual brute force, a psychological dependency is formed, and the individual is left dependent on the system and in a sort of perpetual survival mode.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  9. #9
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I might be meeting Gary north Friday anything you want me to ask him? And yes I will be OC I always OC unless I have to go to court....

    I think he brought up some good points. There is no way a "few" militia are going to fight the government. And I feel to romanticize violence as some of these militia guys do is a scary thinking. Can you say French Revelution!

    I wonder at the fortitude of the general public and myself, will we be able to stand up against tyranny, not because we are afraid, but because we may think that our neighbors or community may not join us and our instincts for survival to live another day to provide for our families override our desire to fight said tyranny.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    SNIP I might be meeting Gary north Friday anything you want me to ask him?
    That green glow you see to the east is me being envious!

    Nothing to ask. He's written tons, and I'm afraid I'd be asking him about something he's already written and I've already read.

    Tell him another OCer said thanks for all the great info.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    SNIP I wonder at the fortitude of the general public and myself, will we be able to stand up against tyranny, not because we are afraid, but because we may think that our neighbors or community may not join us and our instincts for survival to live another day to provide for our families override our desire to fight said tyranny.
    This is a good question. I recently found out more about John Lilburne and his stand against tyranny that ultimately resulted in our 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. A fairly superficial overview, but enough to make you step back and quietly say "wow" to yourself. This guy was definitely cut from a different cloth.

    I'm thinking the stand against tyranny won't initially be an armed insurrection. I'm thinking it will be more of an individual here and an individual there standing up against one thing or another. The trick will be to support those people, and gather support for them.

    So, I guess the real question is to estimate what might be coming down the pike from government, and then figure out some options in advance. Certainly, I am no Sam Adams who could organize a committee of correspondence. I guess any formulation will have to include an estimation of one's own organizing ability, estimating one's skills at verbal persuasion, etc. As North mentioned, citizens with property are going to be a factor in any recovery, so how much cash and property are available to tide one over the rough period will be a part of the calculation.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Please don't anybody be dumb enough to argue with her.

    Please, please, please just let it ride.
    I litterally LOL'd at this
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  13. #13
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    This is a good question. I recently found out more about John Lilburne and his stand against tyranny that ultimately resulted in our 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. A fairly superficial overview, but enough to make you step back and quietly say "wow" to yourself. This guy was definitely cut from a different cloth.

    I'm thinking the stand against tyranny won't initially be an armed insurrection. I'm thinking it will be more of an individual here and an individual there standing up against one thing or another. The trick will be to support those people, and gather support for them.

    So, I guess the real question is to estimate what might be coming down the pike from government, and then figure out some options in advance. Certainly, I am no Sam Adams who could organize a committee of correspondence. I guess any formulation will have to include an estimation of one's own organizing ability, estimating one's skills at verbal persuasion, etc. As North mentioned, citizens with property are going to be a factor in any recovery, so how much cash and property are available to tide one over the rough period will be a part of the calculation.
    Is he mentioned in "Origins of the Bill of rights", I can't get that book through my e-reader so I may have to make a trip to Barnes and Nobles. I think knowledge is power and being able to inform yourself and then help others understand is a major factor in overcoming tyranny. I turn anyone I can to "alternative" sources of news and viewpoints than what they can get on Mass media.

    When we look at history of other "tyrannies" the state simply had the people convinced it was futile to resist. I think you are right it will be individuals standing up and people flocking to support them, Ron Paul in 4 years has doubled his support that is a good example. In our state I am encouraged how OC'ers will flock together and have a gathering at a local spot where they were harassed by "law". It's a good point in trying to foresee what is coming and thwart it I suppose this is why it is said that the 'price of liberty is eternal vigilance.'

    I never been into "prepping" or "doomsday" scenarios but the more I see were society seems to be heading and the mere fact a natural disaster (like our tendencies to have large earthquakes and huge volcanoes in the Northwest) could render our infrastructure and government useless the more appealing the idea is to me. I suppose it one reason why I am so stubborn about holding onto what little property I have, it very well can be a buffer to a collapsed system or natural disaster. I think North is absolutely correct on that point its up to me to try and follow through on that.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  14. #14
    Regular Member jammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    62

    Learn to read: !!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I have never heard any person argue that the State is God. The State is a tangible Authority capable of fulfilling its purpose whether it be the Federal Government or the State Government. God is not a physical Authority, God is some sort of psychological Authority--to some.

    A citizen sovereign under God is not factual; it is a version of Truth. There are very few Facts in the Universe, and God is not one of them; and neither is the notion that the Gun represents some sort of singular symbolic purpose. The firearm is many things, yes, one of which is the ability of the citizen to defend against Despotism, if it exists or is perceived to exist.
    92F, YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW TO READ ! THE ARTICLE SAID, (THE STATE IS NOT GOD) But this is typical of obama bots though.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    SNIP Is he mentioned in "Origins of the Bill of rights", I can't get that book through my e-reader so I may have to make a trip to Barnes and Nobles.
    As I recall, John Lilburne was only mentioned very superficially. Most of Origins of the Bill of Rights focuses on the late colonial period on this side of the Atlantic.

    There was a bit more, not a biography or anything, but enough in Levy's The Fifth Amendment The Right Against Self Incrimination. This is what I read.

    You might try wiki. Or a printed encyclopedia.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by jammer View Post
    92F, YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW TO READ ! THE ARTICLE SAID, (THE STATE IS NOT GOD) But this is typical of obama bots though.
    Believe it or not, I can read your posts when it isn't written in all 'caps.'

    You seem to have misunderstood my post.

    I didn't state that the author had argued that the state is God.

    What I was referring to:

    There are two main extremes in the debate over guns. The gun control people are basically worshippers of the state. They grovel before the image of the state. They believe in the state. They see the state as redemptive: an agency of healing. This agency must be armed, they say, in order to collect the money necessary to fund the state’s messianic claims and programs. ...
    ... The defenders of the messianic state go ballistic in the face of this claim. They do not accept popular sovereignty. They accept state sovereignty. They accept the fact that voters can elect masters, but they do not accept the fact that citizens have a right to exercise the mark of sovereignty: to defend themselves by force of arms. The statists want the state to possess a strict monopoly over life and death. They understand the meaning of the symbol of the gun. They want guns and badges linked judicially: no badge–no gun. ...
    If you aren't able to decipher where I derived the statements within my post, just ask.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 03-14-2012 at 09:46 AM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    As I recall, John Lilburne was only mentioned very superficially. Most of Origins of the Bill of Rights focuses on the late colonial period on this side of the Atlantic.

    There was a bit more, not a biography or anything, but enough in Levy's The Fifth Amendment The Right Against Self Incrimination. This is what I read.

    You might try wiki. Or a printed encyclopedia.
    Thank you I am on the constant look out for new reading material. Right now I am reading "Death of common Sense" can't remember the author. Some great points on how regulatory laws actually causes more harm.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    I recall a You Tube showing a bunch of black children singing some kind of song to the messiah, mr. obooba. It was virtually identical to the one children sang to Hitler in Nazi Germany. Deified dictators are on point. Hitler accomplished a great deal for Germany, prior to Krystal Nacht and the start of the Holocaust. obooba is well on his way to destroying the United States, as Hitler finally did Germany. Both "gods" have much in common, as do the brainwashed thug class that worship/worshipped them, irrespective of their ages. Except Hitler was a brilliant, charismatic speaker and obooba is a moron who couldn't say 'good morning' without a teleprompter.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •