Question of the Day: Are Gun Rights Advocates The Canary in the Coal Mine?

 

The mainstream media’s coverage of the unconstitutional outrage brewing in The Land of Lincoln has been desultory at best. When Illinois legislators proposed The Mother of All Gun Grabs the legacy media treated the story as a relatively minor development. The New York Times and the TV nets got to it . . . eventually. The story never made it to the top of Google news pile. Which scares me not a little. Does the average American even care about their gun rights? I’m betting they think “Ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines? What’s the big deal?” As you and I know, it’s a VERY big deal. The loss of our Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms could lead to the end of the American dream as we know it. Seriously? Seriously. As a group, we’re sounding the alarm. Question: who’s listening?

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

108 Responses to Question of the Day: Are Gun Rights Advocates The Canary in the Coal Mine?

  1. avatarDyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    That poster and the caption is the type of in-their-face ad that Aaron Zelman would have loved.

  2. avatarW C says:

    Do you think our society is more like present-day Australia or Nazi Germany?

    • avatarjwm says:

      Well WC, considering that the government is actively seeking to remove our rights with sweeping laws allowing detention without charges, wiretapping without warrents, gitmo, ndaa and an all out assualt on the 2a what do you think? Actually nazi germany or stalinist russia, either could fit.

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        Obviously the early days before things really went full dictatorship.

      • avatarGuy22 says:

        I’ve been walking around this farm wondering if it’s time

        Time to get a gun, that’s what I been thinkin’
        I could afford one if I did just a little less drinkin’
        Time to put something between me and the sun
        When the talking is over it’s time to get a gun
        Mary says she’s worried about herself and her kids
        She’s never known anybody had a gun and her daddy never did
        Well I think it should be up to me ‘cause when it’s all said and done
        Somebodys gotta walk into the crowd and I wanna be that one
        When the party is over it’s time to get a gun

        When Gov. tries to take away your rights!
        When the party is over it’s time to get a gun!!!

        Looks like everyone is ???

        Guy22

    • avatarucfengr says:

      I remember 4 years ago people comparing Bush to Hitler because of things like the Patriot Act, secret prisons, and using drones to kill suspected terrorists. Has Obama done anything to limit those things or as he accelerated them?

      • avatarSD3 says:

        See, now you’re just being racist…

        And if you disagree, you’re clearly Hitler.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        It’s a mixed bag.

        Extraordinary renditions (aka CIA kidnappings) have effectively ended. By “effectively” I mean “there are few enough CIA kidnappings now that it’s back to normal levels compared to the wide-spread systematic program previously in place”. Ditto for the secret prisons.

        Patriot act & related: Obama is equally as bad as GWB when it comes to maintaining the expanded power of the executive branch. He hasn’t grabbed any MORE extrajudicial powers, but on the other hand, he hasn’t relinquished any either.

        Drone strikes: significantly expanded, but one could argue that it’s in place of the Special Operations and CIA assets that GWB was in favor of using in conjunction with US airstrikes.

        I voted for Obama (ducks thrown tomatoes) and I’ll be the first to say that he is a resounding disappointment when it comes to rolling back the repugnant expansion of executive power we saw under GWB.

        • avatarg says:

          My thoughts as well, AlphaGeek.

          Essentially, Obama hasn’t rolled back much of what GWB started… even the plan to close G-Bay got shutdown.

          Then there’s the passage of NDAA and the narrow defeat of SOPA.

          One can only wonder what the next president will do… Big Brother is watching?

        • avatarjuliesa says:

          Obama has expanded the wiretapping program as well as the drone strike program.

          Rendition is still going on as the WaPo reported today.

          Capturing terrorists and interrogating them is arguably more beneficial for them than hitting them and any children nearby with a Hellfire.

          I know you are a really good guy. Smart people do dumb things. I know I do. Anyone who was interested in civil liberties and voted for Obama did an extremely dumb thing, if for no other reason than that the media keeps an eye on Repub presidents, but lets Dem presidents skate on everything.

        • avatarRopingdown says:

          Juliesa: How did you know Alpha Geek was a guy?

          As for the substitution of drone strikes for a possible reduction in spec ops force levels or tempo, they’re are growing in numbers and missions. That is, additionally, a stated policy of Obama’s DoD team.

        • avatarCarlosT says:

          His Justice department has vigorously defended each of the Bush administration policies, to the point it doesn’t make sense to call them Bush’s policies any more: Obama owns them now. That would be bad enough already. But Obama’s done much worse than that. He’s established arbitrary summary execution of Americans as a power of the Presidency. That’s the President as Emperor and completely un-American. Even if he had overturned and repudiated everything Bush had ever done, even if he had been perfect in every other regard, that alone would serve to make him the most dangerous President for civil liberties ever.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          Ropingdown: probably because I’ve publicly stated so on quite a few occasions. I’m pretty sure it was in the editorial I wrote for TTAG shortly after Newtown.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          CarlosT, in general I agree with what you wrote.

          I do have one counterpoint to make, and this is NOT a defense of the policy, just an observation:

          There is a definite difference between ordering the termination of an American ex-pat, in another country, who is (according to the best available evidence) working with terrorists to commit violence against the United States, VERSUS having a law-abiding US citizen assassinated within CONUS.

          I don’t like it. I don’t approve of it. But I’m conflicted as to whether it’s the right thing to do in the defense of US interests.

          Would you approve of the targeted killing of an individual if their US citizenship were legally revoked by US courts for good cause (i.e. working in support of terrorism abroad) before the missiles launched?

        • avatarCarlosT says:

          AlphaGeek, I don’t really see a meaningful difference. The issue is due process. If we were following the Constitution, it would have been up to the administration to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that al-Awlaki was guilty of a capital crime. Whatever evidence that exists was never rebutted, it was never examined or evaluated independently, and we have only the administration’s word that it is solid.

          Instead, Obama basically just declared him guilty, then had him killed. The fact that it was overseas is irrelevant. Now that assassination is a Presidential power, all they need to do is declare someone guilty of terrorism. After all, if the terrorists are here in the US, it’s even more justified, no? And the best thing about it is you can take care of it first, then trot out the justification afterwards. “We took him out, but look at this evidence, he really deserved it!” Of course, since the deed is done, the evidence won’t be looked at too closely. And any family members killed in the process are just tough luck.

          As for a revocation of citizenship, I still wouldn’t feel comfortable with that, because that would just be a procedural work around to skip the work of actual due process.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        in a nutshell, he has accelerated them.

        guantanamo bay is still open, americans are still being spied on, drone strikes are still happening, iraq and afghanistan are still at war, and obama is utterly reluctant to take any cuts to the DOD.

        nothing has changed since 2000 when bush got into office. every year has been progressively worse than the previous one.

        the hilarity of obama’s hypocrisy is how quickly the left are to excuse his behavior, while previously bashing bush for doing the same thing. it just proves my points that liberals are largely statists just like conservatives are. a few heroes have taken a stance against their own (naomi wolf being one of them).

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          WLCE, some of what you said is flat-out incorrect.

          Gitmo is still open, but everyone involved agrees that it’s an almost impossible problem involving both domestic policy and international relations. Not making excuses for Obama — this is something that’s been openly discussed by folks of all political beliefs and the conclusion is always the same.

          Obama has been neutral on cuts to the DoD because the GOP-controlled house sets the budget for DoD. If you want to see the defense budget cut, lobby the GOP, as they’re the ones holding the purse strings.

          The war in Iraq is over, and our military has exited the country. Seriously, WTF?

          If you don’t think the left is critical of Obama, you haven’t been reading enough stuff outside the Fox/GOP bubble. Yes, like every president in history he gets a pass from his own party on some stuff. On the other hand, he has been savaged by many of the same liberal thinkers who were shouting from the rooftops about the erosion of our civil liberties under GWB.

        • avatar16V says:

          AlphaGeek, very true that some of those who bought into Obo’s promises to right the statist wrongs of Bush have been very disappointed in his continuation of those policies and have let him know it. I had hoped to see him at least rein in some of this surveillance insanity. Disappointing first term, this one is downright scary.

          FWIW, while we are “technically militarily” out of Iraq, we are still very much there. 20,000 staffers between the embassy and three consulates. 5,000+ Mercs, err, “private security contractors”.

          Not to mention the 1,000 plus uniformed and civilian advisers and trainers for multi-billion dollar weapons deals from planes to everything else we have already inked. And the multiple thousands of mercs for them as well.

          To be fair we “only” spent about $16B in 2012, and may “only” spend around $6B in 2013.

          But ‘war is a racket’ as the great Major Gen. Smedley Butler wrote. GOP supporters in the MIC are making money hand over fist. Cut defense spending? Yeah, that’ll happen.

        • avatarBeninMA says:

          I love how W C’s rhetorical question prompted a lengthy discussion about the President’s failings on other civil liberty issues.

          “The war in Iraq is over, and our military has exited the country. Seriously, WTF?”

          Obama didn’t even want to follow Bush’s timetable for withdrawal. He actually wanted us to keep our forces there longer. Iraq refused… then kicked us out. We still have thousands of armed contractors there, but you can’t exactly credit Obama with getting our armed forces kicked out against his will.

          “On the other hand, he has been savaged by many of the same liberal thinkers who were shouting from the rooftops about the erosion of our civil liberties under GWB.”

          This is a huge exaggeration. There are very few liberals, even in the bloggosphere, who spend much time on the issue (Glen Greenwald being one big exception that comes to mind). Liberals know how bad Obama has been and they’ve largely kept it to themselves. When Bush was President, his civil liberty failings were blasted all over the mainstream media. (To be fair, fiscal conservatives also gave Bush a pass on economic issues.)

          The lesson of Bush and Obama is that unless we’re prepared to criticize “our guy,” we should continue to expect more of the same. The worst thing for liberals is that, at this point, civil libertarians could rationally choose to vote for the Republican, thinking “Well, at least his feet will be held to the fire on civil liberties. If the Democrat wins, things will be even worse because there’ll be no accountability.”

          The real solution is that we need a group as strong as the NRA to protect the rest of our freedoms. When Congressmen have zero fear of backlash when voting for something like the NDAA, that tells you there’s something very wrong.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          “Gitmo is still open, but everyone involved agrees that it’s an almost impossible problem involving both domestic policy and international relations. Not making excuses for Obama — this is something that’s been openly discussed by folks of all political beliefs and the conclusion is always the same.”

          sure. impossible.

          that doesnt change the fact of what gitmo is and it is still continuing, insurmountable geo-political problem or not. each and every day it is open and used in the “war on terrorism”, american principles are violated.

          “Obama has been neutral on cuts to the DoD because the GOP-controlled house sets the budget for DoD. If you want to see the defense budget cut, lobby the GOP, as they’re the ones holding the purse strings.”

          obama has been reluctant, hiding under the guise of neutrality. that is MSM repetitive BS if there ever was repetitive BS.

          of course republicans wont give in to needs for defense cuts: they know where their bread is buttered. expect no meaningful changes to the DOD budget when there needs to be the most.

          “The war in Iraq is over, and our military has exited the country. Seriously, WTF?”

          LOL apparently you missed the state department and the PMCs they employ as security personnel as well as “advisors”. Iraq is still at war, dealing with a resurgence in anti-government forces.

          Just because the news publicized our troops crossing the border into kuwait in december, means f–k all that the war over there is over.

          “If you don’t think the left is critical of Obama, you haven’t been reading enough stuff outside the Fox/GOP bubble.”

          How interesting you mention the quibbling MSM…(and you insult me with Fox news…)

          where did i say that a NOBODY has been critical of obama? nowhere. you drew to wrong conclusions again. I said most of obama’s followers remain strangely silent at his continuation of bush policies. this is obviously true whether you follow MSN or alternative media. Liberals are generally statists just like conservatives are.

          “Yes, like every president in history he gets a pass from his own party on some stuff. On the other hand, he has been savaged by many of the same liberal thinkers who were shouting from the rooftops about the erosion of our civil liberties under GWB.”

          Right, naomi wolf being a perfect example. Like i mentioned before.

          i suggest you read my previous post again.

    • avatarWilliam says:

      Present-day Pyongyang.

      • avatarGyufygy says:

        I have to agree completely with Ben’s point about criticizing “our guy”. I have not heard very many Democrats point out the programs of Bush that Obama has continued. About the only news source I’ve seen go into it is Wired. Too bad they get the clusters when civilians with guns are brought up.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          I was thinking specifically of Glenn Greenwald when I wrote my reply above. Few would argue that he relented in the slightest when Obama continued GWB’s policies.

          Sadly, I think much of this is just basic psychology.

          First, people want to believe in the goodness of the guy they’ve worked so hard to get elected, and as long as he makes them happy on the things they consider of immediate importance, it’s easy to ignore the rest, no matter how bad it might be.

          Second, and this is just my personal theory, people react more to a change than they do to continuation of a status quo, even if it’s something that’s wrong and should be stopped. GWB was the figurehead for shocking changes that diminished our civil liberties, and people noticed that because it WAS a change.

          When Obama continued the same policies, well, nothing new since yesterday, so what’s there to notice?

          (sigh)

          It’s a great illustration of how important it is to defend your freedoms while you still have them, because it’s fscking hard to get them back once they’ve been stomped on.

        • avatarBeninMA says:

          AlphaGeek, I think the NDAA is pretty new and shocking. But it was ignored because 1) The Republican establishment, at best, doesn’t care 2) Democrats don’t want to hurt their guy, because they’ve got more important things to worry about than the Constitution

          Regarding #2 – both sides are guilty of this. If it weren’t for the NRA, I wouldn’t trust Republicans to be good stewards of the second amendment any more than I’d trust the Democrats. The key is to have an strong independent lobby outside of the partisan system. We REALLY need this for freedoms other than the second amendment.

        • avatarGyufygy says:

          I wonder how much of the lack of Change is due to pressure from the bureaucracy. FBI and CIA have thought it was their duty and mission to stick their nose everywhere. J. Edgar Hoover and the stupidity that lead to the Bay of Pigs still seem to have a hold over both agencies, and most of personnel in the DHS does not change with presidents, maybe just shifted around some. That means that each new president is goin to hear all this “super secret stuff” that “obviously” requires all these powers to combat. The CIA, at the very least since Kennedy, seems to have perfected the speech to make a new president say, “I can do what?! Teeheeeheeehee.” Soon enough, some silly covert garbage gets started, and actual foreign intelligence gathering is ignored for sexy James Bond bullshit that the Soviets constantly beat us at during the Cold War.

          TL;DR: How much is the bureaucracy to blame for nothing Changing?

        • avatarBeninMA says:

          Gyufygy, I think there’s a Washington Consensus on the major economic and national security issues and the bureocracy has a large role in determining that consensus. You only need to look at the controversey surrounding Chuck Hagel’s nomination to see just how narrow the range of acceptable opinion is. He’s not exactly Ron Paul, he’s just a typical cold war realist. His only ‘problem’ being that he has the integrity to speak the truth as he sees it.

        • avatarrosignol says:

          I was thinking specifically of Glenn Greenwald when I wrote my reply above. Few would argue that he relented in the slightest when Obama continued GWB’s policies.

          I think I’ve seen Greenwald go “WTF, Obama” once.

          Then again, most of my exposure to Greenwald is via Instapundit. IMO, he’s not worth reading regularly on his own merits.

    • avatarDyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Overall, I’d say Lenin/Stalin’s Russia.

      The Nazi party had more than the usual number of sick, sadistic homosexuals and twerps with serious issues as their leaders and functionaries. They didn’t make too much pretense of trying to over-intellectualize what they were doing with economists or economic theory.

      But the Soviets… ah, there was the party of ‘intellectuals.’ The party of “we central planners know best how to allocate resources,” or at least “we know much more than you kulaks.” The central party knew best – no matter how far from Moscow the problem was. Sound familiar yet?

      Theirs was a scientific future of mankind, because they had all these terribly smart people running the show. When somewhat useful people said something out of sync with the party line, they tried to “re-educate” them before killing them. The Nazis would just kill people who didn’t agree with them.

      That’s what we have now in DC: A bunch of people who think they are so very much smarter than the rest of humanity. Political correctness and “diversity” indoctrination is the modern version of political re-education.

  3. avatarAccur81 says:

    Not enough, if you ask me.

  4. avatarThomas Paine says:

    keep an eye on Venezuela. With Chavez dying and the public barred from owning arms, we can see what happens in real time, if it starts getting hairy.

  5. avatarRoadrunner says:

    An interesting fact: According to the book, Schindler kept a small arsenal of firearms in case of a last attempt by the Nazis on the Jews he was trying to save.

  6. avatarstateisevil says:

    Lots care. They’re voting with their dollars.

    • avatarSD3 says:

      I wish they’d vote with their votes. We might not be going thru this nut-roll if they had.

    • avatarJon says:

      And not just their dollars.

      Today I sat through an 8-hour handgun safety training class that is required for a concealed carry permit (I moved back into the state—had to take the class again). The classes are held every week, and there are usually some unfilled slots in each class.

      As of today, the classes are completely booked through the end of March.

      Moreover, three of the participants were school teachers.

      Half of this large class was female.

      Also, I had to qualify with my .45, because I can’t find 9mm or .22 anywhere.

      There are hardly any guns on the shelves, either.

      I may take some flack for saying this, but there is too much despair going on around here. While I have no doubt that Feinstein choosing January 22nd to introduce her bill is related to a big State of the Union push by Obama, my gut tells me they’re overreaching in a big way.

      Democrats barely had the numbers for the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Today we know the ban didn’t work, and we also know that the more restrictive legislation being proposed is probably in violation of the Heller and McDonald rulings. There are also far more so-called assault weapons in the hands of law-abiding Americans, and the industry is far larger than it was in 1993.

      Obama will push new gun control because he has nothing to lose. But that isn’t true for many of the House and Senate Democrats that Obama will try to bring into line. They have to run the gauntlet again in 2014, and gun owners have very long memories.

      Stop despairing, and start writing and calling your legislators. After you do that, make your gun-owning friends write and call their legislators, and keep nagging them until you know they’ve really done it.

      Our side is stronger because we’re defending a right that we treasure. Most of the prohibitionists lack our passion. Even if the statistics said that half of Americans favored stronger gun control, that half would never be the equal of our half.

      So buck up, and keep fighting.

    • avatarGreg in Allston says:

      Yes we are.

  7. avatarCarlosT says:

    The Bill of Rights has been getting fed into the shredder in earnest since 9/11. Gun rights aren’t the first target, they’re the latest target. The canary was the Patriot Act; now we’re in danger of a mine explosion.

    • avatarOHgunner says:

      Agreed. The terrorists succeeded in destroying the spirit of America with 9/11. People showed that they were willing to trade their rights for a false sense of security… And the politicians happily obliged.

    • avatarMolon Labe says:

      War on drugs has taken it’s toll on are rights . The Republicans will fold on gun control just like they did on the “fiscal cliff”. We may soon have to make a real choice between liberty or death.

      Molon Labe!

  8. avatarbontai Joe says:

    Canary in a coal mine? Jeeprs, I never thought of it that way, but yes, I agree that is what we are. Unfortunately , the majority of “miners” in the mine called America are not paying attention to the bird.

    • avatarBryan says:

      That’s because we’re getting to see the bird everyday!

    • avatarThomas Paine says:

      OMG i heard that kim kardashian is pregnant! it’s all over the news.

      • avatarIvan w/ an AR says:

        Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?! Who cares?! I’m more worried this may become the Second War of Federal Aggression!

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        OMG! $sports_team traded $player!!! WE NEED 24/7 NEWS COVERAGE FOR A MONTH! We need protests! No time to think about rights or how our politicians are butt raping us, we’ve got a game to win!

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        For what it’s worth, I thought that was very funny.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        thomas paine, very good point!

      • avatarTony says:

        Who cares. Nobody needs those things. What time does the mall open??

        In all seriousness, we’ve seen the public in this country roll over on issue after issue. Hell, look what happened in November. Our only chance is going to be motivating as many gun owners as possible to fight new legislation every step of the way. We can’t count on anyone else to actually give a damn.

  9. avatarChuckN says:

    Instead of asking simply who’s listening, I think
    we should ask ourselves how far are we willing
    to go to protect those who refuse to.

    It’s one thing to argue the obvious point that
    future generations will be lost if we don’t stand.
    However, would you stand between a tactical
    unit and a person who willfully (through purpose
    or self enforced ignorance) allowed things to
    progress to this point?

    Knowing that the antis are fully willing and
    capable of not only stepping aside but pointing
    us out makes this question a lot more interesting.

    • avatarjwm says:

      I’m not fighting for a person. I’m fighting for an ideal.

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        This just reinforces my statement on other sites that you should rig your porch with explosives. Yes, I know, critics will say that “But that’s illegal!” Guess what? If a SWAT team is kicking down your door, your best case scenario is life in prison. Most likely, you’ll be leaving in a body bag. Best to take as many of the scum down with you as you can.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          If your porch is rigged with explosives, then you’ve proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the SWAT team is at the right house.

          Also: you just advocated committing Federal felonies on a website visible to the public. Holy cow. Really? You thought that was a good idea?

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          Per the Department of Homeland Terrorism, reading books by the Founding Fathers and supporting the Constitution is indication of a felony. I’m not concerned. I know that they’ve seen my purchases online and have me on just about every watch list they have – what’s one more going to add to the list?

          Best part is, I still pass in depth Federal background checks for work and other tings.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          Also, why do you think setting up defenses in case of attack is indicative of your need to be assaulted by government thugs?

          By that reasoning, the fact that we have military defenses in the US is justification for every country to attack us.

    • avatarChuckN says:

      Okay, 1st the reference to a SWAT unit was
      more metaphorical than literal.

      2nd everyone here to some degree is fighting
      for an ideal, not necessarily for a person.
      Otherwise we wouldn’t be here debating.

      3rd; as many of us realize if the 2A goes the
      1A won’t be far behind. Arguably we are the
      ones who will be fighting for our rights
      (possibly literally). So again the question is
      how far are we willing to go to protect those
      who are actively trying to strip us (and by
      default themselves) of those rights?

      Some may act for all, others may look only
      to protect their family make a few cynical
      comments about karma. My guess is the
      question will take a lot more philosophical
      pondering and self reflection than we
      could put on a blog or might be willing to
      admit.

      • avatarSilver says:

        What logical reason would there be to protect those who got us here in the first place? Should the goal be to reestablish freedom in the nation, preserving those who stripped it in the first place is simply stupid, all emotion aside.

  10. avatarST says:

    “Does the average American care about their gun rights?”

    No.

    End discussion.

    • avatarJon says:

      It doesn’t matter if the average American cares. The average American didn’t support the American Revolution, either. It was “an irate, tireless minority.”

  11. avatarblargy says:

    In downstate IL there is nothing in the local news papers, or TV news about this at all. The lib media is choosing not to inform people of these sweeping violations of our rights. Without the internet I would have no idea that these bills were being pushed through. I’ve been telling everything I know about what is going on and no one had any idea that this was going on.

  12. avatarRobert Farago says:

    Not to go all tin hat but if TTAG goes dark (not by server meltdown) we will be a dead parrot. Extinct. Expired. Etc.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Do you have a good backup plan in place, including a second hosting provider picked out? Is the site’s critical data being backed up to Amazon or another geographically-diverse provider at least daily?

      I’d hate to see a critical resource like TTAG offline during the coming legislative battles because of hosting issues…

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        I wouldn’t go with Amazon. They caved to government pressure and shut off Wikileaks servers, they’d do it to TTAG as well.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          I wasn’t suggesting that the site be hosted at Amazon, just the backups. Amazon Glacier and S3 are both top-notch options for ensuring that you have good online backups.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      Create a forum on Reddit as a backup plan?

      • avatarGyufygy says:

        From what I understand, TTAG and some Redditors in /guns have a… troubled relationship. Don’t read there much, just what I’ve heard.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          That’s /r/guns. They could make an /r/thetruthaboutguns just fine. Hell, /r/guns and /r/firearms absolutely hate each other with a passion (4/2/2012 – never forget).

    • avatarAnmut says:

      I would suggest a backup server overseas. Do some research into what thepiratebay.org does for hosting.

  13. avatardavid says:

    Considering the average citizen voted for Oblunder (putting aside all box stuffing facts), and that those only 3% below average don’t pay income tax… I’d say no, Joe Average doesn’t care any more than they do about the next top social “role model” being arrested or winning some reality show.

    • avatarPascal says:

      PLENTY of gun owners voted for Obama. Many heated discussion on glocktalk.com about WTF they would vote for Obama. Many gun owners believe in social issues other than guns….they will be the same gun owners who will also allow us to fall. They made a choice once, their guns vs some other social justice ideal, they chose some progressive idea vs their guns and they will choose that again vs their guns.

      Many gun owners and many hunters will be complacent in the fall of 2a rights. Many in the US believe in some false progressive ideal pixie fantasy world and that redistribution is ok. We are becoming a socialist country one law at a time. The UK, Australia and all the nordic countries (where the govt must approve the name you give your son/daughter) have citizens who like to be lead by the nose by their govt. and soon too we will have the same here. The independent spirit has been crushed and so has self responsibility. Collectivism rules the day. I partially blame social media where people mostly follow than become independent and where independance is frowned upon unless you wish to be cast out by the hoard.

  14. avatarGreg H says:

    And the rest of the public is in for a shock if they think this administration is going to stop at 2A rights.

  15. avatarmike marriam says:

    We aren’t being heard! We have to be seen for fly over country to take notice. Put that picture on a million placards and walk them through DC and then we will be seen. Anything short of peace full disruption will be capitulation. We can’t delegate this to a bunch of spineless politicians.

  16. avatarSilver says:

    Perfect image.

    And no, the average American does not only care nothing about gun rights, they care nothing about any rights. They’ve proven that extensively. Give them an iPhone, they’ll give you a right.

    It’s one of those depressing little facts. Growing up, watching shows and movies and learning history, we’re made to believe that our enemies will always be external. The simple truth is the majority of Americans are the greatest enemy of this nation.

  17. avatarStacy says:

    I see a rising dictatorship more along Chavezist lines as opposed to Nazi Germany or the USSR. The left-ish government will carry out progressively worse abuse against disfavored classes, nationalize more industries and drive capital out of the country, while blaming the worsening conditions on outside influences and/or “reactionaries”. Don’t kid yourself – it can work, and has, for decades, in plenty of countries with educated populations and (at least prior to the takeover) first world income levels and standards of living.

    Keeping our guns is important. An article posted on Reason.com recently had some eye-opening statistics on gun bans in other countries. The voluntary turn-in rates are absurdly low, yet the governments never attempt anything resembling a door to door confiscation. So an armed population doesn’t prevent all government abuse, but does hold it at a certain point.

  18. avatarRob says:

    Yes. Yes we are.

    Next question.

  19. avatarTom says:

    Only someone completely dumb with zero knowledge about the 2nd World War could make such a poster. Additionally only a very naive person may think that people armed with pistols and rifles stand a chance against professional army with heavy weapons (which army also does not hesitate to kill hundreds civilians for each own soldier killed by resistance). Get back to school – maybe this would prevent some from making stupid poster and some from applausing them.

    • avatarjwm says:

      Oh wow, Tom you’ve schooled us all. My eyes are open for the first time. how could I have been so ignorant. All hail Tom!

      This is me aplausing Tom. Yay Tom.

    • avatarRopingdown says:

      In a political meltdown powered by deep divisions in culture, identity, and beliefs as to which groups caused a national crisis pistols, guns, clubs, computers and words are very adequate tools to affect the actions of components of our national political, police, and military establishment. It was not the cannons of Krupp which determined the shifting alliances 1933-1938. It would be a mistake to assume that the current structures would experience no realignments were a crisis to be large enough. This reality was true in 1927-1934 Germany (from the time Goebbels stepped of the train in Berlin), and has been true in Syria over the last many months. There is nothing a bit stupid about keeping in mind the value of an armed citizenry: They serve in several ways as a fearsome inhibitor on ambitious but illegitimate attempts to bring extreme change in social arrangements.

    • avatarLarry says:

      I think the Afghans would disagree. So to would the IRA and they were only few hundred strong. Don’t underestimate a determined foe.

    • avatarGyufygy says:

      Afghan Mujahideen (Both in the 80s and now), various insurgent groups in Iraq, Vietcong, Vietminh, American Continental Army, the list goes on. Irregular warfare is messy, deadly, nasty. It can also be effective over the long term.

    • avatarJohn says:

      Only someone completely dumb with zero knowledge about the 2nd World War could make such an ignorant statement. Additionally only a very naive person may think that people armed with pistols and rifles DON’T stand a chance against a professional army with heavy weapons.
      There. Fixed it for you.

      Every national resistance movement during WWII, from the French Maquis to the Yugoslav resistance to the Russian partisans to the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto made life hell for the professional soldiers ranged against them. They may not have ‘won,’ but they did not accept their inevitable doom without a fight. Those who believe it better NOT to resist although the odds are against them are doomed to walk passively into the maws of the gas chambers.

    • avatarMister Fleas says:

      “Only someone completely dumb with zero knowledge about the 2nd World War could make such a poster. Additionally only a very naive person may think that people armed with pistols and rifles stand a chance against professional army with heavy weapons (which army also does not hesitate to kill hundreds civilians for each own soldier killed by resistance). ”

      In the 2nd World War, Filipino and American guerrillas harassed the Japanese occupiers so badly with pistols and rifles that the Japanese were, in places like Mindano, kept confined to the cities they occupied and were unable to control vast stretches of the islands. Most of the provinces of the Philippines were outside of the effective control of the Japanese thanks to the use of pistols and rifles by a largely civilian force.
      So yes, ordinary people stand a chance against a “professional army with heavy weapons (which army also does not hesitate to kill hundreds civilians for each own soldier killed by resistance)”.

  20. avatarDavid says:

    . . . And the Nazi’s were not supposed to have certain weapons (or stockpiles past a certain point) ala The Treaty of Versailles and other treaties. Yet they broke those “rules”. In addition, rockets were not covered under any treaty and the German war machine did a pretty good job of developing theose The point is bad guys will get weapons. By trying to put one genie back in the bottle they accelerated the unleashing of another one. WWII is glaing example that arms control fails badly.

  21. avatarRalph says:

    We can be the canary in the mine. Or we can be the tip of the spear.

  22. avatarpat says:

    YES! That is why gun rights are so much a single issue voting phenomena. Its that important, and the linchpin of all our other rights. This is one of the biggest issues (and arguements/disagreements) I have with liberal minded folks.
    In the future, you really can become a bar of soap, pelvic ashtray, or lampshade when only ‘Big Gov’ and its military/police force have the power (firearms).
    Wake the hell up…..or have our children breath gas.

    • Amen brotha Pat! You nailed it! I only hope that these same folks see all the people voting with their wallets and buying guns and ammo. My fear is that we are headed in the direction of Australia towards Gun Confiscation and high fines, penalties and prison sentences for gun ownership. People who like owning guns need to start getting VERY politically active and speaking up!

      • avatarpat says:

        While being similar in many way to us (rough, independant spirited immigrants), the Ausies (who started out as a penal colony) did not have our governmental structure or founding fathers with all their wisdom. They did not have our wonderful amendments (like the 2nd) which are checks on (you guested it) governmental power.
        And what do many of the sheeple on the lib media side see when they read the few words I just uttered. Butthead to Beavis: “huh huh huh, he said PENAL”…..Beavis: “yeah, yeah, PENAL heh heh heh, FIRE, FIRE, heh heh”.

  23. avatarC says:

    Eff it. Let’s just start our own country. I’m sure we can find an island somewhere. I call dibs on president!

  24. avataruncommon_sense says:

    I love the caption for this post “canary in a coal mine”. I will use that angle to talk to people who are unaware of or apathetic about our state of affairs.

  25. avatartdiinva says:

    I have a long answer but only have time for a short one.

    No, gun rights are not the canary in the coal mine. Gun rights go at the end and not the beginning. You started giving up your rights when you accepted the principal that you have a claim on someone elses income because you want free stuff provided by the government.

    All this jibberish about drone strike and rendition demonstrates how clueless some people are. The Constitution applies to citizens and not foriegners residing in third countries. Intelligence operation are legal under international law. That is the reason the CIA runs the drone strikes in Pakistan. The use of military forces would be an act of war. The SEALS that got Bin Laden were operating under CIA control for that reason.

    One more thing. The NAZIs were not the sin quo non of evil. The communists were. The fact you immediately use them as an archtype demonstrates how much you accept the Communist narrative.

    What I see here is a bunch of cafeteria libertarians. Many of you want the government out of your life right up to the point where want something for free.

  26. avatarChubby says:

    here’ an important question……what is the typical age bracket of the people who actually show concern for the ideals of ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom’ and protecting the constitution?

    I’d say all of them are over 35……that along should tell you something…..people under 35 believe the state ‘grants’ rights…..

    ….we’re screwed.

    • avatarMark says:

      Don’t discount the fact that older folk have deeper convictions and less aversion to dying for them if necessary, since they know they’re closer to death anyway.

    • avatarSilver says:

      I’m 27, and I know quite a few others my age who are very libertarian. We may not be representative of our age group as a whole, but we’re out here.

  27. avatarNick says:

    For every year that I’ve been alive I’ve become less free as an individual citizen, and government (at all levels) has become more powerful and less representative – and the pace is accelerating. The Constitution was meant to limit the actions of the government but it’s a meaningless scrap of parchment now because “government” willfully ignores those limits. What change, realistically, does anyone see coming down the pike to change this trajectory? None.

    The Founders had a great idea and it worked for almost 200 years. We were a vibrant, great country because – for the most part – people were free, government was smaller, and decision making was decentralized. Now, the reverse is true.

    We’ve given Ben Franklin our answer – we couldn’t keep it.

  28. avatarDerryM says:

    We are the Canary, but the MSM has issued all the Coal Miners blinders, so no matter how many of us fall off our perches, we are not seen, nor heard, fully and fairly.

    IMHO all this “Gun Control Legislation” is just a sort of “Smoke and Mirrors” aimed at distracting us (and everyone else) from the faltering state of the economy. We are on the verge (next six months or sooner) of Defaulting on our National Debt and/or the collapse of the Dollar. If the current Administration gets a Draconian Gun Control Law passed in the meantime, it’s a bonus for them, as it will make it easier to take the even more drastic steps to “restore order” when resulting civil unrest creates a “threat” that will need “rectifying”. So, “it’s the Economy, stupid!” (To quote Bill Clinton, whom I never really liked, but he was right about that at the time and now by default.)

    Look at what happened with the “Fiscal Cliff”. The POTUS’s lackluster “Leadership” led to Congress Acting in an ineffectual way that appeared they “did something” at long last. But, the “Middle Class” got a Payroll Tax increase and the $250K to $399K group got to keep their money, which would have increased Revenues more than the paltry few per cent that actually got Income Tax Increases. Meanwhile spending cuts were ignored and the next Debt Ceiling conflagration looms large on the horizon. The POTUS talks about spending cuts in one sentence and about spending trillions (we DON’T have) in the next. The Stock Market is inflated like the “Housing Bubble” of 2008, the Dollar weakening and the Fed spending and borrowing at an insane rate, while the Federal Reserve just prints more (soon to be worthless) Dollars. [Read-up on "Derivative Spending" if you want to get really worried.]

    No matter how many Canaries die and Coal Miners don’t see, the MINE is about to implode and take us all with it. Speculating about resistance you will not have the opportunity, nor means, to engage in is a waste of time. Start writing your Congressmen about the economy as vehemently as you have about proposed “Gun Control” Laws (and do, by all means, continue to write in opposition to anti-RKBA Laws). Given the magnitude of the issues at play, it may be too late already to avert the coming economic disaster, but we all need to wake-up and recognize where the real danger to our Country and Liberties lies.

  29. avatargabba says:

    you gotta explain australia. do you believe that there is an ascendant fascist regime there?

  30. See here on the history of how gun confiscation came about in Australia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

    It’s already happening here! Key words; Media Campaigns and high profile multiple murders.
    I am afraid we are next!

  31. avatarO.E says:

    Innocent Americans with German heritage within the U.S were rounded up, put into concentration camps & forcefully disarmed.

    Spielberg’s fiction movie is irrelevant.

    • avatarpat says:

      I hate the use of concentration camp (which may be technically true) while internment camp is more appropriate and descriptive. After the death camps, the term ‘concentration camp’ should have a singular meaning.

      • avatarO.E says:

        Death camp is misnomer sleight designed and used by those who are responsible for conditions within the pen becoming inhumane and unsustainable all caused by the attrition of war and its making; for the sake of giving excessive unemployed the fighting chance, albeit outside of the U.S.A

        The propagandists have been covering up their great crimes with lies and distortions of truth. These white lies which to the patriotic U.S civilian are tolerable in reality and relation are matter of fact brazen falsehoods and contemptible incitement for non U.S civilians.

        • avatarpat says:

          While I get the concept that it was NO FUN to be in a prisoncamp on the losing side of a war, the crimes of Nazi Germany are well documented (systemic, targeted murder on a mass scale) and beyond repute.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.