Notes From HPS
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 10 months ago
… much of the Mexican drug cartel violence uses weapons–like those so infamously used in France recently–far more powerful than those legally available to most U.S. citizens–machine guns, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. If some handguns and “assault weapons” can so easily cross the U.S./Mexico border going south, heavier weapons can do so coming north, along with all the drugs (and illegal aliens/future Democrat voters).
Perhaps the gun ban zealots should re-think their love of open borders.
Yes, but I don’t think they will. The collectivist mindset will always reflexively revert to more and more government control, including control over weapons. The collectivists won’t see the problem as open borders. They will see the problem as the availability of weapons at all among non-state actors. Thus, they will push for tighter and tighter control over guns, regardless of the fact that this control has absolutely no effect on criminals.
Mike Vanderboegh sends an open letter to Alan Gottlieb. Mike has more patience than do I. I consider Alan to be a lost cause, an irrelevant fixture on the gun control scene, a tool for the collectivist media to exploit. I’m not depressed, and I am not encouraging you to be a defeatist. I just don’t think Alan will play a role in the coming festivities.
The role of citizen disarmament in assuring the killers would succeed was expanded on by Kurt Hofmann in his latest JPFO Alert …
“Let there be no doubt, we are asking that all weapons will be issued for self-protection only, and to designated personnel that will undergo thorough investigation and training by local authorities,” Margolin continued, essentially revealing he never learned the lesson of Alfred Flatow on the dangers of letting “authorities” determine who they will allow to have guns – and who they will not. While Margolin is on the right track, he’s on the wrong understanding of what a right is. Certainly European Jews have a right to keep and bear arms, and not just sanctioned designees – it’s a human right, one that’s recognized in the Second Amendment, but not dependent on the Constitution, and not limited to Americans. Likewise, it is not limited to European Jews, and any who presume to withhold or dispense it, that is, to “grant” it, assume the roles of usurpers and tyrants, the very people we’re supposed to have guns to guard against and repel.
I’m sorry to lift so much prose out of the article, but it is involved while still worth the time to read it. David is emphasizing a theme I’ve pressed before. I don’t believe in the second amendment. I believe in God. The almighty gives me the right to bear arms, and no man can legitimately take it away. What God has spoken is law for all men, everywhere and in all ages and epochs.
Mike Vanderboegh links a piece where a number of armed women drive off a recent Boko Haram attack. Well, I guess they aren’t such bad asses after all when facing gun fire, are they? Pussies, they are?
|
|
On January 19, 2015 at 10:07 am, Ned Weatherby said:
If one checks out website comments regarding a mass murder incident, (typically in a gun-free zone) one will typically see posts from British “subjects” and other European pseudo-intellectuals, citing bogus or irrelevant statistics, and explaining how deaths from guns in England are so much lower than in USA. They’ll continue with ad hominem assaults about penis size, or how paranoid American “cowboys” are, for living in such fear that they feel the need to pack a heater with them on the way to the local drugstore.
Part of the problem in much of Europe is that they actually believe that they are all safer because no one is armed. I don’t know, but I suspect, that even if one jumps through all the hoops to own a gun in France, the owner likely won’t be able to carry it to work.
So they have restrictive laws, along with a hoplophobe mindset which makes them “feel” safe. And yet, these Europeans still can’t seem to learn from either history or current events.
On January 20, 2015 at 12:15 pm, Archer said:
It’s so much worse than being unable to learn from history. Those same British who think themselves so high-and-mighty, still speak the King’s English largely because Americans took it upon themselves to send troops and war supplies and donate massive numbers of privately-owned firearms “to defend British homes” back in WWII. The second the war was over, most of those privately-owned guns were seized and “disposed of”.
The question for them now is: What will they do if/when Islamo-fascists seize control of a neighboring European country (France, or Germany, for example) and decide to get froggy? What will they do?
This isn’t just an inability to learn from history. It’s an outright rejection of historical lessons; a conscious refusal to learn from history.
On January 21, 2015 at 2:07 pm, Ned Weatherby said:
Agreed. I’m often too generous regarding prima facie stupidity.