Posts Tagged tyranny

An Individual Right

From The Federalist:

“The right of self defense is the first law of nature,” wrote George Tucker in the 1803 Blackstone’s Commentaries regarding the American Second Amendment. “In most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits . . . and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Baseball Player In Hot Water For Pro 2A Tweet

From The Federalist:

Yet Red Sox president Sam Kennedy told The Boston Herald that the team had spoken to Martinez about being more cautious on social media. The question is: Why should an athlete be subjected to warnings from his team’s owner—or a nonsensical controversy ginned up by some reporters—for showing appreciation of an enduring American value?

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

South Africa Looks To Gun Confiscation

From Zero Hedge:

The Constitutional Court of South Africa recently ruled that 300,000 gun owners must turn in their firearms.

No matter how socialist apologists rationalize it, the redistributionist agenda the South African government is pursuing will not be implemented passively. Ultimately, it must be carried out by force.

The kind of force socialists seek is a monopolized kind, which extreme forms of gun control like gun confiscation help facilitate.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Cody Wilson Interview

Interview by Micheal Malice:

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Resisting Tyranny With The Second Amendment

From Vox:

The Second Amendment does not create a right of revolution against tyranny. That inherent right is universal. As stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, “[I]t is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.” The Universal Declaration was influenced by the Declaration of Independence, thanks in part to the US delegation led by Ambassador Eleanor Roosevelt (who carried her own handgun for protection).

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Cardi B Understands The Need For Guns

From Reason:

“God forbid, the government tries to take us over, and we can’t defend ourselves because we don’t have no weapons.” She adds, “How do you think American colonizers went to Africa and it was so easy for them to get those people? Because they had guns. No matter what weapon you have, you can’t beat a gun.” She shrugs. “They have weapons like nuclear bombs that we don’t have. So imagine us not having any weapons at all.”

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Leftist Case For Gun Rights

From The American Conservative:

Between 1792 and 1848, French rebels forced three monarchs from power after bloody street fights. The Russian Bolsheviks overthrew the tsar and crushed the White Armies to establish the Soviet Union. In the years after World War II, Algeria fought for and won its independence from France.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Protest In Idaho Over Possible Gun Confiscation

From AP:

Idaho Republican state Rep. Heather Scott of Blanchard said the Veteran Affairs office has sent a letter to John Arnold of Priest River warning him that he cannot possess or purchase firearms.

“I took an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and uphold the laws of Idaho,” Wheeler said. “This seemed appropriate to show my support. I was going to make sure Mr. Arnold’s rights weren’t going to be breached.”


, , , , , , ,

No Comments

How Can a Rifle Defeat Tanks and Jets?

From Bearing Arms:

The simple answer to the question is “assymetric warfare.” Smart fighters don’t put their troops in front of the enemy’s best weapons. They use their best troops against their enemy’s weak points, and exploit those weak points mercilessly.

In the hypothetical event that the federal government attempted to impose tyranny upon the citizenry of the United States, it would likely trigger the largest insurgency that the modern world has ever known.


, , ,

No Comments

California Congressman Wants To Ban Body Armor

Why would the government need to ban body armor unless it thought it would fight its citizens?

From Congressman Mike Honda:

Washington, DC – Congressman Mike Honda (D-CA17) today introduced the Responsible Body Armor Possession Act of 2014, which allows law enforcement to respond to active shooters more effectively. It accomplishes this by prohibiting the sale, purchase, use, or possession of enhanced military-grade body armor by anyone who is not a member of law enforcement, active duty military, or other authorized users.

“There is no reason this type of armor, which is designed for warfare, should be available in our communities except for those who need it, like law enforcement,” Congressman Honda said. “There’s nothing more dangerous than what a well-armored, unstoppable active shooter can do. This bill is common-sense and long overdue.”

The Responsible Body Armor Possession Act has the support of Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern, Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith, Santa Clara Chief of Police Mike Sellers, and Milpitas Chief of Police Steve Pangelinan; along with the Fraternal Order of Police, the Violence Policy Center, the Coalition for Peace Action, and Stop Handgun Violence.

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen said, “There is an ongoing arms race between violent criminals and police officers. Let’s make sure that the men and women who stand bravely between us and the gunfire win that high-stakes race. Let’s make sure criminals and gang-bangers never walk our streets shielded with military-grade body armor and the arrogance of someone who cannot be stopped.”

 Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley said, “I commend Congressman Honda on this important piece of legislation, and thank him for his long-standing leadership in keeping our communities safe and strong.  This law will serve to combat our nation’s epidemic of gun violence and protect communities and law enforcement from mass shootings.”

“By limiting civilian access to body armor that is designed to protect against ‘law enforcement ammunitions’ and weapons that are ‘generally only used in tactical situations,’ the legislation would be an important step forward in reducing the availability of military-style gear that enables shooters to attack innocent civilians and confront law enforcement responders with a level of firepower that has no place on America’s streets,” said Kristen Rand of the Violence Policy Center.


, , , , ,

No Comments

NY State Confiscating Guns

I thought “they” said it wouldn’t happen?

From Conservative Daily:

We learned of another incident from a post on A Nassau County man answered his front door to see a swarm of cops. He was told that the police were there to check his firearm’s serial numbers. Under New York law, the police have the authority to verify that the serial numbers registered with the State are correct. That is one of the conditions of owning a firearm. However, in this particular incident, Police entered the home without a warrant.

It was only after the safe was opened that the police informed the homeowner that this wasn’t a routine inspection… it was a confiscation order. After registering his firearms with the state, the police realized that the man had been found guilty of a misdemeanor charge FIFTEEN years ago. Not only was it a misdemeanor, but it might as well have been a lifetime ago!

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Malcolm Gladwell on the Tragedy of The Branch Davidians

From The New Yorker:

Outside the Mount Carmel complex, the F.B.I. assembled what has been called probably the largest military force ever gathered against a civilian suspect in American history: ten Bradley tanks, two Abrams tanks, four combat-engineering vehicles, six hundred and sixty-eight agents in addition to six U.S. Customs officers, fifteen U.S. Army personnel, thirteen members of the Texas National Guard, thirty-one Texas Rangers, a hundred and thirty-one officers from the Texas Department of Public Safety, seventeen from the McLennan County sheriff’s office, and eighteen Waco police, for a total of eight hundred and ninety-nine people. Their task, as they saw it, was to peel away the pretense—Koresh’s posturing, his lies, his grandiosity—and compel him to take specific steps toward a resolution.

Here is Gladwell discussing his piece and what got him interested in what happened in Waco:

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Anti-gunners Now Going After Hunting Rifles

The hoplophobes continue to lie about their objectives and move the goal posts until everyone is completely disarmed, except for the government of course.


BrothersCalifornia Gov. Jerry Brown will soon decide whether to sign a bill that expands his state’s “assault weapon” ban to cover any centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine.

, , , , ,

No Comments

China’s Tyranny a Result of Gun Control

A former Chinese national discusses the issue in National Review Online:

Citizens were not allowed to have any guns or they would be put into prison, or worse. Chinese people were helpless when they needed to defend themselves. I grew up with fear, like millions of other children — fear that the police would pound on our doors at night and take my loved ones away, fear that bad guys would come to rob us. Sometimes I could not sleep from hearing the screaming people outside.

When it came to dealing with the Chinese government and police brutality, there was nothing we could do. They had guns, while law-abiding citizens did not.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Citizens Must Have Access to “Weapons of War”

The anti-gunners have made the argument that no one should have a weapon of war. That is precisely what every citizen should have access to, but does not (AR-15s are not weapons of war). The staff makes the case quite well:

Tenche Cox, Pennsylvania delegate to the Continental Congress, thrice explained the purpose of the Second Amendment to his fellow citizens. The first time was in The Pennsylvania Gazette, on Feb. 20, 1788.

The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army,  must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people

, , , , , ,

No Comments