Richmond-Times Dispatch:

In an interview, Crompton falsely said the Confederate states seceded because of heavy taxation and “tyranny” by the federal government, not slavery. “They were overtaxing the South and the South got fed up with it,” he said. “Slavery was not a factor.”

Let’s cover this one more time for good measure.  The thinking in the South was based on who did the thinking.  If you were among the more educated, such as preachers and pastors, you would have seen the war between the states as a theological conflict.  My former professor, Dr. C. Gregg Singer, stated that “The Southern Presbyterian Church saw the war as a humanistic revolt against Christianity and the world and life view of the Scriptures” (A Theological Interpretation of American History, 86-87).

R. J. Rushdoony, citing Benjamin Palmer, stated that “Indeed an important aspect of the Civil War was the Unitarian statist drive for an assault on its Calvinist enemy, the South…  The gathering conflict (South Carolina had moved as early as November 16, 1860) Palmer saw as forces of a false theology, of atheism and of the French Revolution, of the religion of humanity, in short, arrayed against a Christian people dedicated to faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and to Constitutional government.  These forces sought to frame “mischief by law” (The Nature of the American System, 58-59).

Men like they cite – Palmer, Plumer, Thornwell, Dabney – were in the pulpits or seminaries informing men how to think.  Being “churched” today may not be a thing like it was 150 years ago, but the place for philosophy was in the pulpit.  On the other hand, on a more pedestrian level, there was the burdensome taxation and tariffs set in place by the Congress.

In addition to generating revenue, a tariff hurts the ability of foreigners to sell in domestic markets. An affordable or high-quality foreign good is dangerous competition for an expensive or low-quality domestic one. But when a tariff bumps up the price of the foreign good, it gives the domestic one a price advantage. The rate of the tariff varies by industry.

If the tariff is high enough, even an inefficient domestic company can compete with a vastly superior foreign company. It is the industry’s consumers who ultimately pay this tax and the industry’s producers who benefit in profits.

As early as the Revolutionary War, the South primarily produced cotton, rice, sugar, indigo and tobacco. The North purchased these raw materials and turned them into manufactured goods. By 1828, foreign manufactured goods faced high import taxes. Foreign raw materials, however, were free of tariffs.

Thus the domestic manufacturing industries of the North benefited twice, once as the producers enjoying the protection of high manufacturing tariffs and once as consumers with a free raw materials market. The raw materials industries of the South were left to struggle against foreign competition.

Because manufactured goods were not produced in the South, they had to either be imported or shipped down from the North. Either way, a large expense, be it shipping fees or the federal tariff, was added to the price of manufactured goods only for Southerners. Because importation was often cheaper than shipping from the North, the South paid most of the federal tariffs.

Much of the tariff revenue collected from Southern consumers was used to build railroads and canals in the North. Between 1830 and 1850, 30,000 miles of track were laid. At their best, these tracks benefited the North. Many rail lines had no economic effect at all. Many of the schemes to lay track were simply a way to get government subsidies. Fraud and corruption were rampant.

These ideas don’t conflict.  In fact, they dovetail together as a real example of statism and its effects.  While the pastors were philosophically training the men who would ultimately decide on war, these same men were suffering under the yoke of financing an entire country due to protective tariffs.  You can believe they heard from their countrymen, their neighbors and their wives about the yoke of burden they felt.

War ensued.  If anyone tells you that the war was fought over slavery, he is lying to you.  That’s revisionist history, a version of events that has no basis in the primary source documents of the time (newspapers, sermons, etc.).  Idiot “journalists” today may not know history, but you need to be better than that.

UPDATE:  Frank Clarke sends the following note.

For those who say the Civil (sic) War was “all about slavery”, I like to point out that slaves in the South were “identified as free” by the Emancipation Proclamation — issued two years after a war that was “all about slavery” started — but weren’t actually free because there were no blue-clad troops to spring them.  Slaves in DC were freed by ordinance in 1864.  Slaves elsewhere had to wait until the 13th amendment in December 1865, 8 months after a war that was all about slavery ended.  It appears the DC politicians didn’t get the memo about the war being all about slavery, and Lincoln, himself, didn’t realize it for two whole years.

The Emancipation Proclamation, America’s first major PR effort, was (much more likely) a ploy to “make the war about slavery” which would operate to bring lots of Northern abolitionists down to the recruiting stations.  This, in turn, would beef up the ranks of the Union army which was then getting its clock cleaned.

Had Lincoln been keen to erase slavery, he could have done it far cheaper than ruining the South’s economy and threatening the North’s — at a cost of 620,000 dead — had he done it the way the Brits had 30 years prior; he certainly had to know about that.  The Brits outlawed slavery, then bought out all the slaveholders for cash.  It was a good deal for anyone who could see the onrushing Industrial Revolution, an event which would, in short order, make human chattel slavery an economic dead-end.

But Lincoln was not keen to empower the South with such a scheme.  Lincoln wanted to OWN the South.  The tariffs had done that.  If the South rendered itself immune to the tariffs, the Northern economy would crash.  This could not be allowed to happen.  It is related that one reporter asked Lincoln “Why not just let them depart?” and Lincoln’s answer was “Then who would pay for the government?”  That was Lincoln’s (and the North’s) motive.

Foreign newspapers of the day, Corriere della Sera, Le Monde, The Times of London, and others, universally saw the conflict as economic and not connected to slavery.  As disinterested spectators, their views are telling.

Fox8:

GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL FOREST, N.C. — A Tennesee teen last seen more than 10 days ago was found Tuesday afternoon after walking out of the Great Smoky Mountains, WLOS reports.

Austin Bohanan was found around 2:30 p.m. after walking out of the remote backcountry area near Tabcat Creek in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, according to a National Parks Service statement.

He was taken to Blount Memorial Hospital in Maryville, Tennessee.

Bohanan was reportedly last seen hiking off-trail in the remote southwest corner of the park on the evening of Friday, Aug. 11, 2017. He was reported missing around 6:30 p.m. on Sunday, Aug. 13 to Blount County authorities.

On Tuesday, four search teams consisting of rangers from the parks Search and Rescue team, officers with Tennessee Wildlife Resource Authority and individuals with the Backcountry Unit Search and Rescue team (BUSAR) had a total of 19 people searching the area. The search continued with canine teams and other special search teams.

Bohanan “had light food and water and was not anticipating spending the night in the park,” according to park spokeswoman Jamie Sanders.

He spent eleven days in the Southern bush.  He was unprepared for what faced him and he’s blessed to be alive.  The rescue team made an official statement, to the effect that “From day one, we treated the search for Austin as an emergency and appreciate the resources from across the region that came to our aid to help us actively and aggressively search through extremely tough terrain,” said Park Chief Ranger Steve Kloster. “We faced multiple challenges, including a moving target in dense conditions, but our search teams never gave up hope.”

But it was Austin who self-rescued.

On Tuesday morning, rangers explained he woke up on a ridge and saw a boat and some kayaks on Abrams Creek below. He scrambled down to the water and waved to the boaters, who picked him up and gave him a ride to safety.

That’s not to diminish the efforts of the rescue team, but the higher probability rescue in this circumstance is self-rescue.  Even the rescue team had to have water and food assistance from the community to keep going.  The search area was 6700 acres, which is 10.469 square miles.  This may not seem like a lot, but in the back country in the South, it is an eternity of land.

This is what Austin and his rescuers faced.

Steep terrain, dense vegetation, deadfall, blowdown, and almost impenetrable bush.  But we’ve discussed in detail what you should carry with you even if you’re going for a day hike thinking that you’re not going to be far from the beaten path.

(1) heavy rubberized poncho, (2) 550 cord, (3) gun, (4) tactical light, (5) fire starter [redundant means], (6) knife [serrated edge], (7) water and fast food energy, and (8) parka.

I carry this in a day pack.  For eleven days, you can add to this list a container with which you can boil water.  With the rubberized poncho and cordage, you have shelter.  With the gun and tactical light you have protection.  With the knife you have virtually everything (never leave home without a knife).

In the South he could have encountered problems with Copperheads, Timber Rattlers, black bear, feral hogs and Coyotes.  Coyotes in the West may still travel as lone predators, but in the South they have learned to travel in packs.  Many hunters in these parts have gone out at dusk only to find five or six pairs of eyes staring at them and encircling them closer and closer.  Retreat is the best option at that point, but if Austin couldn’t have retreated, he would have needed a firearm, and possibly more ammunition.

If this seems like overkill, just remember when you go into the bush.  You’re not in control of everything – the bush gets a say.  Try to be wise about the things you do control.

Into the redoubt, they are.

A manufacturing company that has been building custom rifle scopes and optics for 26 years in Southern California is relocating to Kalispell.

U.S. Optics, a leader in the firearm optics industry, announced the relocation to the Flathead Valley on its website, saying there may be a brief pause in production while it brings the new facility online, but assured customers “we will far exceed our previous production capabilities.”

The company is on track to move into its new quarters south of Kalispell in September.

The Montana Governor’s Office of Economic Development and Montana West Economic Development helped facilitate the relocation.

Ken Fichtler, chief business development officer for the Governor’s Office of Economic Development, said U.S. Optics reached out to his office in April about the possibility of relocating to Montana. The company also was considering Texas as a possible relocation site, Fichtler said, as it considered potential sites with “a closer cultural fit.

“We went up against the state of Texas in terms of incentives, culture and location,” he said, adding that U.S. Optics was impressed with the “center of excellence for this type of manufacturing” that exists in the Flathead Valley. “We were able to put together an incentive package that appealed to them.

A Big Sky Economic Development Trust Fund grant and property tax abatement were among the incentives offered.

Another drawing card to Montana, Fichtler said, is the Montana Photonics Industry Alliance, a Bozeman-based network of Montana optics and photonics companies, entrepreneurs, laboratories and universities. Montana State University’s Optical Technology Center also was a factor in U.S. Optics’ decision, he added.

Down Range Solutions Group recently acquired U.S. Optics, and will continue doing business as U.S. Optics, according to a press advisory issued in June by mergers and acquisitions division of Helena-based Ascendant Advisory Group.

According to U.S. Optics’ website, the genesis of the company’s commercial off-the-shelf product line is “rooted in custom scopes built to satisfy the needs of military and law-enforcement personnel, competitive shooters and hunters …

The only mystery here is why they would have stayed in California so long.  Like Remington (Alabama) and so many other manufacturers, they need to be in a culture where they can thrive.

Stag Arms still operates in Connecticut, Kimber still operates in New York, Rock River Arms still operates in Illinois, Springfield Armory still operates in Illinois, and Mossberg still operates in Connecticut.

Why?  Do they want to go out of business and have to lay off all of their employees?

PJM:

Make plenty of noise while you’re in the wilderness. Bears don’t like surprises, and will generally shuffle off in another direction if they hear you coming. Traveling in a group helps to make more noise. And most importantly, pay attention to the environment. If you see or hear signs that a bear is close, stay calm, backtrack, and get away from the area. If you’re camping, hiking, or otherwise visiting “bear country,” do yourself a monumental favor by packing bear spray.

In the entire article I see no mention of a rifle, shotgun or large bore revolver.  Therefore, the author must be trying to get somebody killed by a bear.  What else could you conclude?

I don’t even go into the woods in the Southeast without a gun, much less would I go around brown bears without one, or more.

NYT:

In a classroom on the campus of the Border Patrol Academy here at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Andrew Andrade, an instructor, is guiding a group of future Border Patrol agents through an intensive Spanish language-training course.

Across campus, Ryan Choi instructs another group of Border Patrol trainees in self-defense tactics. “It’s not like the movies,” he said as the trainees paired off. “They aren’t going to stand up and fight, they’re going to charge you.”

In another part of the campus, a Border Patrol instructor enters a building set up to look like a barn where he finds two men counting money with what appears to be packages of drugs. One of the men yells at him in English, while the other man yells in Spanish. Both men move around, gesturing wildly with their hands. Dan M. Harris, chief of the academy, stands nearby urging the instructor to size up the situation. This simulated encounter is used to teach new trainees to consider all options before using deadly force.

“We have to slow it down and think,” Mr. Harris said. “We can’t just pull our gun and shoot someone to get out of bad situation. We have to use our brain.”

Hmm … so let me think about this.  Cops all over America policing U.S. citizens pull their guns out all of the time, and oftentimes let go a barrage of rounds, sometimes hitting their target, sometimes not, sometimes killing innocent people, all because of “officer safety.”  They must get home safely at the end of their shift, no matter what, even if innocent people perish at their hands.  They do this with utter impunity, with no accountability by the courts, the people, or their blue-costumed buddies.  Every little Podunk town now has a SWAT team with tacticool officers who want more than anything to go raid somebody’s house.

And yet the border patrol must think before unholstering their weapons in the middle of an invasion across our borders.  What’s wrong with this picture?  I think I’ve seen it before in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Yes, I know I have.

Rolling Stone:

In 1980, the nation’s gun-violence epidemic hit close to home for Rolling Stone when John Lennon was gunned down by Mark David Chapman. For the magazine’s founder, the slaying in New York sparked a now-four-decade commitment on the gun issue. “It all started with Lennon,” says Jann S. Wenner. “That tragedy. Trying to make sense of it. Or make something good come out of it.” Within months, Wenner had launched the Foundation on Violence in America, a nonprofit that began a public-education campaign, including PSAs starring Oprah Winfrey and Walter Cronkite. But momentum quickly stalled. “It became obvious that the beginning and end of this was the NRA,” Wenner says.

So I guess nobody mattered except John Lennon.  Nice people, they are.  But what they ran smack into was us.  The NRA is sometimes effective, sometimes not, and could be much more effective if they would end their stupid rating awards to politicians for poor voting records.

What Rolling Stone gets wrong on this is what all of the other progressives get wrong.  We won’t let them take our guns, no matter what else obtains.  The NRA thinks the way they do because we do, not vice versa.  The NRA is merely a manifestation of our political power, but there is so much untapped power there.

Rolling Stone lost.  Don’t put a pretty face on this, guys.  It makes you look stupid.

If you will recall, I discussed signage in Mount Mitchell State Park that led me to file a complaint.  I had an extended email conversation with Bryan Dowdy with the North Carolina State Park Service.  It is reproduced below.

Mr. Smith,

Your email complaint was forwarded to me for a reply.

The ‘Welcome To’ sign as pictured in your post is correct.   Per North Carolina Administrative Code, 07 NCAC 13B .0901(a) and (b), FIREARMS;  The possession of firearms whether they are openly carried or carried concealed are prohibited in / on all North Carolina State Parks lands and waters unless a person has a valid concealed handgun permit and thus that person may possess a concealed handgun provided they are adhering to the requirements set forth in G.S. 14-415.11.  There are three exceptions to this Rule in that the State Park lands and waters at Falls Lake, Jordan Lake and Kerr Lake State Recreation Areas are owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and subject to separate federal regulations governing firearms.

I have included the applicable NC Administrative Code below for your information.

Additionally, we do not permit hunting on State Parks lands (including at Mount Mitchell State Park) so anyone openly carrying a weapon or hunting black bear or other animals on the State Park would be unlawful.  You may be confused with the US Forest Service lands and/or North Carolina Wildlife Game lands which border State Park lands around Mount Mitchell State Park which do allow limited hunting.

SECTION .0900 – FIREARMS: EXPLOSIVES: FIRES: ETC.

07 NCAC 13B .0901 FIREARMS: WEAPONS: EXPLOSIVES

(a) Except as provided in Paragraph (b) or G.S. 14-269, no person except authorized park employees, their agents, or contractors, shall carry or possess firearms, air guns, air soft guns, paint ball guns, bows and arrows, sling shots, or lethal missiles of any kind within any park.

(b) A person with a valid concealed handgun permit issued by one of the United States that adheres to the requirements set forth in G.S. 14-415.11 may carry a concealed handgun on the grounds and waters of a state park. Persons acting under this exception should take notice that certain Division managed properties are owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and subject to separate regulations governing firearms. Accordingly, concealed handguns are prohibited at Falls Lake, Jordan Lake and Kerr Lake State Recreation Areas.

(c) The possession or use of cap pistols is prohibited. The possession or use of dynamite or other powerful explosives as defined in G.S. 14-284.1 is prohibited.

(d) The possession or use of pyrotechnics is prohibited except for pyrotechnics exhibited, used, or discharged in connection with an authorized public exhibition and approved by the Director of the Division of Parks and Recreation, or designee. Persons wishing to possess or use pyrotechnics in connection with a public exhibition, such as a public celebration, shall file an application for a special use permit with the park superintendent. All applicants shall enter an indemnification agreement with the Department and obtain general liability and property damage insurance, with limits as determined by the Secretary or designee, which are reasonably necessary to cover possible liability for damage to property and bodily injury or damage to persons which may result from, or be caused by, the public exhibition of pyrotechnics or any act(s) or omission(s) on the part of the applicant(s) or the applicant’s agents, servants, employees, or subcontractors presenting the public exhibition. The Division Director or designee may deny an application as deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, or to protect the natural resources of the park unit.

History Note: Authority G.S. 14-269; 14-410; 14-415; 14-415.11; 14-415.24; 113-8; 143B-135.16; 143B-135.43;

Eff. February 1, 1976;

Amended Eff. October 1, 1984; January 1, 1983;

Temporary Amendment Eff. July 2, 1997;

Temporary Amendment Expired September 29, 1998;

Amended Eff. January 1, 2014; April 1, 1999;

Transferred from 15A NCAC 12B .0901 Eff. April 1, 2017.

Thank you for your inquiry and we hope this information adequately addresses your concerns.

Sincerely,

Bryan Dowdy

---

Bryan,

Thank for your thoughtful reply.  You are correct about hunting – I was thinking about area appurtenant to the state park.  I appreciate the correction.

However, the administrative code to which you referred simply does not say what you said it says.

It discusses concealed carry, and since when I recently visited Mt. Mitchell I have a CHP, I complied with the law as written.  However, the admin code is simply a recapitulation of already existing laws concerning the carry of concealed handguns throughout NC.

The admin code simply does not say that open carriers must be permitted, and that still appears to me to be in contravention of state law.

Sincerely,

Herschel Smith

---

Mr. Smith,

Subsection (a) of NCAC 07 NCAC 13B .0901 FIREARMS:,  clearly states that no person except authorized park employees, agents, contractors shall carry or possess firearms unless they have a concealed handgun permit or fall within one of the categories in G.S. 14-269 (e.g. law enforcement officers, retired law enforcement officers, active duty military when acting under orders to be armed, etc.).   This prohibition is defined as open or concealed carry of any firearm.

This original Administrative Code prohibiting the possession or carrying of any firearms, open or concealed has been in place for at least 30 years with the exception where we amended the Rule in January 2014 to allow persons with Concealed Handgun Permits to possess a concealed handgun on State Park lands.

(a) Except as provided in Paragraph (b) or G.S. 14-269, no person except authorized park employees, their agents, or contractors, shall carry or possess firearms, air guns, air soft guns, paint ball guns, bows and arrows, sling shots, or lethal missiles of any kind within any park.

Sincerely,

Bryan Dowdy

---

I understand your position Mr. Dowdy.  I don’t want this to be contentious, I just want clarity and I think we’ve achieved that.  One final question, sir.

I note that you’ve referred to administrative code, not general statutes of NC.  To me, this is an important distinction.  I work in an area where we must comply with the CFR, but everything is open to interpretation since these are “rules” and “regulations” rather than “law.”  As such, Congress never voted on them – they merely empowered someone else (i.e., the executive) to make such rules.

I take it that you see the administrative code as regulations / rules, but your agents apply those regulations as laws?  If so, then you have effectively banned unpermitted carry when it is not banned by state law (as long as said carry is open).  I see that as a constitutional and legal issue ripe for litigation.

Thank you for the exchange sir.

Herschel Smith

My readers and I have discussed the difference between “law” and “regulation” in excruciating detail before, so there is no reason to recapitulate that conversation.

To date I have not received a response to this last email.  As you can see, my charge is that the NC State Park Service and appurtenant groups (NC DoJ) have promulgated regulations (i.e., that all carry of weapons in state parks must be permitted, whether open or concealed) that are simply not supported by state laws, since North Carolina is a traditional open carry state.

At least, contrary to Wake County Sheriff Donnie Harrison, he doesn’t assert that open carry is disallowed in state parks.  This is smart and complies with North Carolina law, but the requirement for permitting in state parks for open carry simply does not.  This is ripe for litigation in my opinion.

WRAL.com:

Wake County Sheriff Donnie Harrison said, for example, that visible sidearms wouldn’t be allowed at a similar rally in North Carolina.

“Protests, you cannot carry,” Harrison said, adding that gun owners need to know the nuances of the law.

Those who carry guns openly can’t do so at organized sporting events. Schools are off limits, and so are state and federal parks.

Upon reading this, I sent a note to Wake County Sheriff Donnie Harrison, and since the note didn’t mirror to my own email address, I will reproduce it here as best I can remember.

“Mr. Harrison, as best as I am aware, and I have recently discussed this with a ranger who represents North Carolina on these issues, you are flat wrong on the open carry of weapons in North Carolina state parks.  Furthermore, you don’t control the regulations for national parks, and no such regulation exists for national parks, except that you must comply with the laws of the state, and North Carolina is a traditional open carry state.

You have communicated material false information to readers.”

I have yet to receive a reply.

Ammoland:

… individual attempts to perform drop tests outside of professionally controlled environments should not be attempted.  “SIG SAUER is committed to producing only the finest products,” said Ron Cohen, President and CEO of SIG SAUER. “Safety and reliability have been and always will be paramount to the SIG SAUER brand.”

That sounds rather contradictory to me.  Furthermore, the Sig CEO didn’t do himself any favors when he said that no gun is drop safe.

He’s made three points here, and he’s wrong on every single one of them.

The first is that any gun will fire if dropped from high enough, and if it lands just the right way on an unforgiving surface. This is untrue. Many good modern handguns would likely disintegrate on impact before the forces involved induce firing. My Sig P250 – the P320’s dad – has a firing pin block that would probably put it into this category. I would love to see a test where a P250 can be made to fire as a result from any drop, at any angle, from any height.

The second point is that we’d ‘legitimize mishanding’ if guns were drop safe from typical distances. This is so stupid it actually causes my teeth to hurt. Back when the double-action revolver was the standard police firearm and the most common civilian firearm, mishandling was not ‘legitimized’ by their intrinsically safe design.

Finally, he asserts that guns are ‘inherently’ unsafe if dropped under ordinary circumstances, and by extension, we should have no expectation that they should be. This is again incorrect; it is entirely reasonable to expect that a modern handgun, when dropped in a typical way, will not discharge on impact. Most guns meet this standard, at least if we define ‘typical’ as a drop from waist height on to a hard surface, at any angle. Nobody is complaining that their p320 will fire if it falls from an aircraft. We are complaining because it might fire if it slides off the kitchen table.

I can’t imagine how Sig’s lawyers could have approved a statement like this.

At least the statement is a self inflicted wound.  I don’t know about the gun, since I don’t shoot Sigs.