Gun Control 2013 (updated 13jan13)

George Rebane

The 14dec12 Newtown massacre has been blown into a celebrated “crisis” for the nation’s gun ban contingent.  And President Obama has made certain that this crisis will also not go to waste in his overarching program that is fundamentally transforming America.  He gave VP Joe Biden the job of fashioning the next set of regulations that will further criminalize law abiding citizens who own and bear guns.  Remarkably (or not), Biden will present his panel's rapidly reached conclusions and resulting recommendations within the next few days.

The Second Amendment is one of the two or three major dividers in our ideologically polarized country.  And its public debate (mirrored in these pages) shines a bright light on the enormous differences that separate our self-declared progressives from those who consider themselves to be classic liberals and libertarians – more compactly labeled our Left and Right.

The major element of debate about the extent of public ownership of guns is their beneficial functions, if any, in a free, open, and liberal society that intends to remain so.  These functions are summarized in gun uses for 1) self-defense, 2) sport (including hunting), and the maintenance of 3) par force (q.v.) against a government turned rogue.

The following factors enter the debate as propositions and even axioms (self-evident truths).  This list is arbitrarily ordered and no doubt incomplete.

1.    Self-defense is not a salutary function of a private citizen.  Maintaining the safety of a citizen in his person is the role of the state through its local constabularies.  (Private individuals defending themselves are “practicing vigilantism” and “taking the law into their own hands”.)
2.    Sporting uses of firearms builds and reinforces the darker aspects of human character, and does not benefit the maintenance of an amiable society.
3.    The sport killing of animals is a barbaric throwback that needs to be eliminated from civilized society.
4.    The Bastiat Triangle of rights is not required to maintain liberal systems of governance.  It is a throwback to an age that no longer exists or informs us.
5.    The Bastiat Triangle is fundamental to any and every constituting formalism that unites a free people in an enduring manner.  Our Founders embedded these rights in our Constitution.
6.    It is the role of the federal government to interpret the Second Amendment and to enforce its uniform interpretation across the land.
7.    All governments not actively kept in check by their governed tend toward autocracy (usually through democratically initiated and subsequently forced redistribution of wealth, dispersing favored entitlements, and debasing the currency).
8.    Powers and collective functions in society should accrue without limit to the highest levels of government because it has the broadest purview of social needs and can assemble the qualified elites to exercise them for the greatest good.
9.    Powers and collective functions in society should accrue within limits to the lowest levels of government because these have the most accurate and immediate purview of local social needs, and can execute them with minimum impact on individual liberties.
10.    The main role of liberal and broad ownership of weapons in a free society is to enable citizens to band together as the check of last resort against a rogue government.  Government should always be at the mercy of its citizens, deporting itself accordingly by enabling its own renewal and, if necessary, replacement through established legal and facile means.  Government’s main role is to maintain the sovereignty of the nation (a nation and its government are not the same).
11.     Government is the final and proper repository of its citizens’ values, mores, and social goals.  Opposition to government, especially one based on its citizens’ use of force, is sedition, and should be dealt with swiftly and severely for the greater good of society.  To maintain the peace, government is justified to use all means necessary (especially as it pertains to gun ownership) to prevent its restraint or its replacement by its citizenry.
12.    For the greatest social good, democracy should be unbridled, practiced nationally, and applied over the broadest bases to let the people decide all levels of public policy and public norms.  The collective always makes the wisest decisions, especially as these affect the permitted individual behaviors in a just society.  The current will of the people should not be inhibited by dated and outmoded maxims.
13.    For the greatest social good, democracy should be bridled, practiced locally (in a distributed manner; see also subsidiarity), and applied in the large through republican mechanisms founded on an established, broadly understood, amendable, and durable basis (e.g. the Constitution) for the nation’s laws.  Collective will is both volatile and unreliable, and therefore should be invoked judiciously and exercised prudently in order to sustainably provide for the broadest liberties of a free people.

So now we have an orchestrated public policy circus going on in Washington through a panel headed arguably by the administration’s chief political clown.  And after the charade of meeting with parties "expressing all viewpoints", the panel will rush out its politically polished recommendations that will have no bearing on preventing the kind of events that gave rise to this latest rush to judgment.  However, it will provide a framework for gun ban acolytes nationwide to ratchet down another notch or two the people’s right to own and bear arms.

The lamestream will play its compliant role and trumpet the imagined ‘benefits’ of the new provisions while lamenting that more was not done to roll back the nation’s ‘gun culture’.  It will do this by sticking a mike in the faces of the bereaved loved ones and our progressive pundits whose intellectual peaks will again be revealed by arguments such as - ‘But what if it were your child who got shot; wouldn’t you do everything possible to prevent that from happening again?’  Their elicited correct answer is one that appeals to simple minds who have little ability to see that their concern is not even being addressed, and in the larger sense that their wellbeing is jeopardized by a growing Leviathan.

A saner society would make its decisions based on realities and facts relating aggregate probabilities and likelihoods, not on emotional pyrotechnics based on low probability anecdotal happenings.  But this is not to be, for in the final argument the socialist sees no utility in the widespread ownership of weapons.  In fact, to them that ownership is only a liability that obstructs all intents and means to achieve a centrally managed society that can ultimately be populated by enlightened and correctly behaving altruists whom Marx labeled “the communist man”.  And this part of the debate, dear reader, is something that will scarcely see the light of day in this ‘land of the free and home of the brave’.  The focus will remain fixed on the proper needs of deer and duck hunting.

[13jan13 update]  In my sixty years of observing our country’s Presidents, never have I seen the likes of Barak Hussein Obama.  If America survives, I believe history will remember him as the nation’s greatest divider.   We now have Americans starting to build redoubt communities where the like-minded will gather to practice their life styles and be in a place to defend their way of life if/when the time of troubles comes to this land.  The latter looks more and more likely as Obama enlarges his imperial presidency.

The Citadel is the name of one (the first?) of these redoubt communities that is now taking applications for residents of a fortress like city to be built in western Idaho.  More here.

Also heard on the grapevine – Obama’s hard left is beginning to have second thoughts about his promoting a big ratchet on the road to an international gun ban.  The response to the emotional nonsense coming out of Washington after Newtown is without precedence.  Tens of millions of guns and accessories (e.g. large cap magazines) have been sold, ammunition is gone from gun shop shelves, and waiting lists are long for the AR type long guns.  Prices have gone through the roof.

This coming Saturday 19 January 2013 there will be nationwide demonstrations in support of the Second Amendment at local gun stores and shooting ranges.  As a lifelong NRA member, shooting enthusiast, and promoter of an armed citizenry, I intend to throw in my ‘stubborn ounces’ in opposition to the latest managed hysteria to disarm America.

You say the little efforts that I make
will do no good; they never will prevail
to tip the hovering scale
where justice hangs in balance.

I don’t think I ever thought they would.
But I am prejudiced beyond debate
in favor of my right to choose which side
shall feel the stubborn ounces of my weight.
(Bonaro Overstreet)

Comments

[George Rebane]

DougK 918am - Perhaps you also missed this in the above comment stream.

"On 'The Great Divide ...' piece I posted the following comment re gun control. It is the argument that the Left never wants to address about the purpose and function of par force.

MichaelA 1029am - Right on schedule. That argument against the 2nd Amend and the continued viability of the Constitution is a classical liberal shibboleth. It assumes that any rebellion will be a stasist standoff between a permanently underarmed populace and a permanently superior state sponsored military, with its foregone outcome. This is a gross error that has been disproved an uncounted number of times, and as recently as by the Arab spring uprisings and the current civil war in Syria. And please reread my par force paper so we don't have to go around this 'hydrogen bomb in the basement' nonsense again.

A rogue government will immediately seek to brand armed citizen resistance against it as fomented by foreign terrorists or a sedition by a minority (the latter is technically correct). Any successful resistance must stay alive long enough to get its message out to the nation, and to the armed forces. Anyone who has been in the US military knows how that institution will respond when asked to engage underarmed citizens willing to lay down their lives for liberty.

As history has shown, it is all in how well any resistance can go through its fragile birth and make its cause known. That is why tyrants and pre-rogue governments want a disarmed populace so that massive arrests can take place quickly and quietly. It was ever thus. Posted by: George Rebane | 09 January 2013 at 11:12 AM

Posted by: George Rebane | 12 January 2013 at 09:01 AM"

[Douglas Keachie]

George, the corporations have already bought out the government, and your militias have done nothing to stop them. Those corporations have bought and paid for exactly the government they want, the one that will keep the little people thinking they actually control things, at least in a very limited way.

[Gregory]

"MichaelA 1029am - Right on schedule. That argument against the 2nd Amend and the continued viability of the Constitution is a classical liberal shibboleth."

What 1029AM? And let's be clear that progressivism and classical liberalism (aka libertarianism) are not equivalent, and I suspect your attempt at a shorthand for 'typical progressive' came out 'classical liberal' in a gross error. In short, the 2nd is a statement of classic liberalism through and through.

[Ryan Mount]

Have you guys review Obama's executive orders from yesterday? To be honest, other than expanded background checks, which probably ain't a bad thing, there's not really much there.

Oh, there are a few strange things like having the CDC resume gun violence research (probably not a bad idea) and the extra-crispy weird thing about making doctors government reporters, but other than that, there's not much there, there.

It's kind of a Potemkin Village, if you know what I mean.

- Banning high capacity magazines? Simply print one with a 3D printer* or carry 3.

- Ban "Assault" rifles? Whatever, most (as in the vast majority) crimes are committed with hand guns anyway.

- New AFT head? Pffft. He'll get busy not enforcing the new laws.

- No armor piercing bullets? LMAO. They were already illegal. So I suppose they are extra illegal now?

I feel safer already. We're such fools.

* Not making that up: http://news.techeye.net/security/3d-printers-can-now-produce-30-round-magazines

[Russ Steele]

Oh No!

LiveLeak.com – NBC Admits No Assault Rifle Used At Sandy Hook

There were four handguns in the school, and no rifle. Perhaps Lanza hid the rifle after he shot himself in the head.

The Cuomo/Feinstein/Obama rifle grab is apparently based on a big lie, like the one from 1938 in Germany.

H/T Real Science

[Gregory]

Russ, this appears to be 'truther' BS, based on artfully cut NBC news feed from the early coverage.

It's a shame Goddard/Real Science got sucked into it.

[Gregory]

Apparently, Big Sis is buying 7,000 Personal Defense Weapons (PDW). These are the fully automatic versions of those yucky "Assault Weapons" that DiFi and the President want to ban.

The old name for a PDW was "assault rifle". Think M16, AK47. Newspeak at work.

"The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.

Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.

The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

You just can't make this stuff up.

[Gregory]

link
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/26/if-assault-weapons-are-bad-why-does-the-dhs-want-to-buy-7000-of-them-for-personal-defense/

[Gregory]

"The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components. This Statement of Work delineates performance criteria and testing to be used for the evaluation of the firearm.

2.0 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
2.1 General. This Statement of Work lists all performance requirements for the acquisition of a DHS 5.56x45mm NATO personal defense weapon."

https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=09c3d5e933bc24416b752b57294a17b3

[George Rebane]

Gregory 350pm - Thanks for that relevant update. It also adds to my previous posts on various govt departments starting to pack heat that never had any reason to before, and still don't. Except if you consider auxiliary uses for such force being available throughout govt departments and agencies.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/09/homeland-security-muscles-up.html

And now we have secondary media beginning to report on the administration taking steps to assure a more compliant military when (not if) the civil strife starts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzT6X3_Bg9o

[Gregory]

The more it rattles around, the more I am appalled at the chutzpah of the Feds inventing a new term, "Personal Defense Weapon" for what the DoD has been calling "Assault Rifle" for years, all the while semi-automatic civilian versions, capable of only one shot per discrete trigger pull, are being derided as being battlefield weapons only good for killing large numbers of people in a short amount of time.

From the wiki...

"Newspeak is closely based on English but has a greatly reduced and simplified vocabulary and grammar. The totalitarian aim of the Party is to prevent any alternative thinking—"thoughtcrime", or "crimethink" in the newest edition of Newspeak—by destroying any vocabulary that expresses such concepts as freedom, free enquiry, individualism, resistance to the authority of the state and so on. One character, Syme, says admiringly of the diminishing scope of the new language: "It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words."

The Newspeak term for the English language is Oldspeak. The Party intends to replace Oldspeak completely with Newspeak before 2050 (except among the Proles, who are not trained in Newspeak and whom the Party regards as barely human and unimportant)."

[George Rebane]

In 1949 Mao inherited (conquered) an illiterate country that had to be carefully managed in building the desired communist state. That required that mass communication through the printed word (newspapers, leaflets, posters, ...) be available. A literacy program was started which taught people about 2,000 carefully selected ideographs (Chinese has over 800,000) which would allow them to read the Party's messages, but which did not support communicating rebellion in a facile manner. It was the first large-scale application of Orwell's 'newspeak'.

[Gregory]

Digging, PDW is not a new term and dates from the '80's, but they went nowhere. Basically sawed-off assault rifles with shorted cartridges... the .22 centerfire cartridge for those things were typically 5.56 x 30mm. The round this RFP calls for is the standard M16 round whose case is 50% longer, the 5.56 x 45mm NATO.

So, an old term that they've found a new use for.

[Walt]

It will be fun to see just who qualifies as a " gov official".
That's all we need. Untrained people running around with full auto weapons.
There have been many instances of Gov. official on gov. official attacks.
So just because your a public servant with a little clout you get to possess
an automatic weapon?
I feel SOOO much safer now.

[boots jcp]

Right now it sounds like BlogEngine is the best blogging platform out there right now. (from what I've read) Is that what you are using on your blog?

[Michael Anderson]

Hi boots jcp, my "blog engine" is like Todd's TSA presentations...only available via X-Ray and diminished when exposed to sunlight.

Your mileage may vary.