The Truth About Guns does not encourage nor condone shooting another human being unless that someone poses a direct, credible and imminent lethal threat, and imminence is imminent. It doesn’t matter if the person or persons posing the threat are criminals, crazies or government representatives. Self-defense. That’s as far as we go. That said, war. Also: we’re not afraid to report the fact that gun bloggers (including yours truly) predict that slave state gun grabbing will end in tears, as the Brits are wont to say. Not without provocation but still . . . Over at naturalnews.com, Mike Adams takes it all a step further. What if the United States Supreme Court refuses to strike down civilian disarmament laws? Uh-oh . . .
If, somehow, the U.S. Supreme Court finds these new state gun restrictions laws to be “constitutional,” such a decision would be equivalent to a declaration that the court has openly abandoned its only real duty, which is to halt overreaching laws that violate the individual rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.
At this point, there would be widespread realization that the judiciary is an occupying enemy force acting in violation of their sworn oaths of office. If such a scenario unfolds, I theoretically predict, but do not condone, the likelihood that disgruntled individuals, having been stripped of their freedoms by a clearly illegal and unconstitutional judiciary, would take it upon themselves to assassinate U.S. Supreme Court justices who violated the Constitution as well as key high-level members of the federal government. Again, I’m not condoning this nor advocating it, because I do not believe violence is the appropriate path to a long-term solution in all this. However, I cannot deny the possibility of a decentralized, spontaneous armed response to the “long train of abuses” that liberty-loving Americans continue to suffer under today.
With my tin hat flattened and safely stowed in a kitchen drawer, with my friends close and my Glock 30SF closer, I have a hard time imagining any scenario where gun guys would target members of America’s highest court—never mind successfully. I pray to God nothing like that ever happens, nor would I do anything to encourage it. Period. But the discovery that this idea is out there, somewhere, is deeply worrying . . .
I know what you’re thinking: TTAG shouldn’t be publishing this “information.” Giving the idea the oxygen of publicity aids and abets those in government who want to paint The People of the Gun as terrorists; a designation that would give the DHS, ATF and God knows who else the power to trample all over the Constitution (thank you Patriot Act) and rain merry hell upon us.
Obviously, I hold a different opinion. American gun owners are already on the government’s radar. Sitting in their crosshairs. Anyone who thinks that the new and “improved” universal background check system under consideration in Congress isn’t designed to more easily monitor law-abiding gun owners, for example, hasn’t been paying attention. Or suffers from willful ignorance.
Anyway, while it may not be particularly helpful to rattle the beast’s cage, why not? What was it Jefferson said? “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” Also something about not going quietly into that long good night.
More to the point, then what? What happens after the Supreme Court [theoretically] has to duck and cover? Oh wait. Adams wants us to consider the prequel.
At some point, the law-abiding citizens of America, when repeatedly oppressed, provoked and denied justice under law, will reluctantly decide that “following the law” is irrelevant. They will take up arms and begin to physically fight for the liberties that are being incrementally stolen from them by tyrants at both the state and federal level.
Globalists appear to be attempting to trigger precisely this reaction. The gambit is to see if a small reactionary group of “terrorists” (i.e. anyone with a gun who fights against oppression) can be cajoled into committing acts of violence that would justify the declaration of Martial Law and a nationwide gun confiscation domestic military action. If such an act of resistance cannot be provoked, it can always be engineered and pulled off by the FBI which is already well-practiced at staging terrorists attacks in the USA, then recruiting hapless stooges to frame as “terrorist masterminds” to be arrested.
This is where the “stuff” really hits the fan, because we’ll see all-out war between various factions of gun grabbers vs. gun defenders. Big-city police will attempt to shoot and murder sheriffs. Patriot groups within the U.S. military will mutiny and take over entire units to protect and defend the Constitution. A military coup might target top administration officials in Washington D.C. Regional wars might break out between urban (gun control) and rural (gun rights) communities. And the big kicker? Obama might call in the United Nations to aid in “halting the terrorists,” setting off an international war against America and the Constitution. (This may be Obama’s ultimate end game.)
Now that’s just silly. The U.N. bit I mean. The blue-helmeted boys may not be the world’s worst troops (unless you’re talking about raping children), but they’re certainly in the top five. U.N. “peace keepers” are a piss-ant part of an armed forces welfare system for militarily-challenged nations. Besides do we have to involve everyone in this just-because-you’re-paranoid fantasy?
Back on planet earth, Adams’ prequel to his prequel makes a lot more sense. The author reckons gun control laws in slave states will create a black market—with subsequent backlash. A vicious circle.
Driving guns into the underground economy will effectively construct a huge infrastructure of underground gun production, distribution and delivery, allowing anyone who can buy pot right now to be able to buy guns in the near future. Gun shops that presently follow federal laws for background checks will be put out of business and replaced by underground gun smugglers who follow no laws whatsoever.
In response, the federal government will multiply the budget of the ATF and declare a “war on guns” that will be roughly as successful as today’s miserable “war on drugs” — a police state fiasco that has done nothing more than fill the prisons with innocent victims while justifying the outrageous growth of police state agencies like the DEA.
Now that I can see: a festering wound that grows more fetid over time that eventually leads to . . . a rollback in civilian disarmament, either through the courts (yay) or the ballot box. Then again, will the courts strike down slave state prohibitions? Or will this thing spiral out of control over guns and other liberty-related issues? Watch this space. And for God’s sake, keep your powder dry. [h/t DK]