Concealed Carry Of Weapons Superior To Taking Weapons

[anygunanywhere]

For your reading pleasure.

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/31/con ... 8-is-huge/

Concealed Carry Of Weapons Superior To Taking Weapons, Part II: S. 388 is Huge.

By John Longenecker

Huge for all Americans.

Let me say something to you right now: as a solution to social crisis, liberty is always better than takings. Always better than nearly any social program out there.

The formula for bureaucrats is interference. The measure of success on their personal score card is substituting constituent dependency on their agencies for the joy and happiness of personal independence. With me so far?

The largess of officials is a reflection of their self-indulgent, feel-good desires, often well-intentioned, sometimes hostile to the U.S., always indifferent to the real needs of people, sometimes the best thing being to leave them alone.

Government’s job isn’t to nanny people, but as executives to protect citizen rights and the nation.

The official solution to shootings, other criminal violence and various crises is always the takings, the interferences, the restrictions, and more of the self-indulgent feel-good things that pass for compassion, but which are actually indifferent to our homes and communities, namely by punishing those who didn’t do the shooting. This includes non-gunowners. Stay with me.

Gun control is one such example as something that affects not only liberty nuts, but the non-gun owners as well, more persons who didn’t do the shooting. The key is to understand how gun control figures in the entire spectrum of self-indulgent social programs imposed on all of us.

With regard to S. 388, introduced by U.S. Senator John Thune (R - S.D.) the idea is more intuitive than counter-intuitive as gun control has been.

I’m going to say now why this is huge.

Take a peek into the head of the average officials. With some exceptions, such as U.S. Representatives Dr. Ron Paul and Mr. Thune and other brave and insightful representatives, the majority of officials believe that their interference and cultivation of dependency on agencies is leadership.

Gun control breeds violence by intimidating the honest in choosing between abuse at the hands of the criminal and abuse at the hands of the system. It is personally important to officials for constituents to depend on them, and this illness is at the heart of many social programs. It is why many programs seem unreasonable on their face and why they don’t work. They are conceived for the most selfish of motives – self-indulgence – and have little accurate read of the actual core of the crisis. It’s not as if we are subjects, it’s worse: it’s as if we are their pets.

But if you unwind violence instead of unwinding liberty and growing violence – if criminal aggression is answered by the individuals in the best legal and tactical position to answer it, namely the target – then the public can impeach and unwind many, many of the unwelcome social programs cultivating that dependency on officials.

In short, and I’ve said this before – liberty can take care of itself. Just quit dreaming up programs to compel more and more dependency on agencies.

Answering violence with personal authority can expose the fraud in many seemingly unrelated social programs.

If you think you can dissolve them one-by-one in Washington, keep trying. But there is a key to unlocking and humiliating many of these for what they are: predatory.

By understanding that many social programs are theoretically based on violence, and if so-called violence – what more reasonable people limit to criminal aggression – is met by the individual who refuses to be a victim, then you might re-examine social programs for their usefulness.

Imagine not only carrying your weapon wherever you have a right to be because you may need it on short notice and because you are in authority – but imagine canceling many social programs that depended on you and millions of other Americans being hurt by criminal violence.

Dependency is unAmerican, and it is the modern slavery for all races here. All of us.

Repealing all gun laws – all 22,000 of them – can impeach many of the modern social programs tied somehow to crime, violence and the mischaracterization of our values. This is the heart of gun control in America. Gun control is not meant to be anti-violent – it is meant to stop independence in order to grow dependency on official agencies.

It is a transfer of wealth.

Remember that you not only have the legal authority and the right to instruct your officials and to vote, but you have the legal authority and right to use up to lethal force in self-defense when facing grave danger alone.

Remember that many thugs prefer to strike when they believe you are alone. That doesn’t mean without friends, it means without first responders. It means unarmed.

Use that authority. 22,000 gun laws boondoggle, punish and intimidate the sovereign citizen into believing otherwise. It makes people choose not to own a gun. To choose not to be independent.

It’s not really frightening that so many have guns – what frightens some is their legal authority and the responsibility, the real liberty, that comes with it.

The thing that makes the liberty nut so nutty is the joy that comes with the responsibilities of freedom.

In a word, Independence. It’s more fun to be a grown-up than a kid. Adults in authority don’t need nannies.

I’d love to say, You’re Fired!

Repeal all gun laws. Because so many unwelcome social programs depend on your dependency on them.

Anygun

[KBCraig]

For your reading pleasure.

Frankly, 'twarn't all that pleasurable. I think I agreed with him... but "obtuse" and "rant" don't blend well, so it was hard to tell.

For starters, he could have offered a brief synopsis of the bill in question, for those of us who don't memorize them all.

Kevin

[casselthief]

I'll have to agree, a synopsis of the bill would have added a little bit to the piece.
However, contradictory to your claim, I found the work to be thought provoking, well written in it's literary form, and insightful to a way of thinking I had not previously undertaken.
I like the parallel between social programs and dependency upon a master.
I agree, in that I believe to relinquesh all control of one's own life, be it by giving up, hands in the air, or by giving in, with a boot against your head, you allow yourself to become a victim, and end up living in that victim mentality.
and I despise the victim mentality, and encourage strength, responsibility, and above all, independence.

[/opine]