Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)

    Safer Streets 2010: Which gun laws to repeal first, Part II

    Safer Streets 2010:

    Which gun laws to repeal first, Part II

    By John Longenecker
    Sunday, October 31, 2010

    My Safer Streets Newsletter and Commentary before the mid-term election has guest contributors Dick Morris, David Codrea, Michelle Malkin, and CANADA FREE PRESS Publisher Judi McLeod. Register here to receive the newsletter. ... XYDQ%3D%3D

    In Part I, I enumerated the first gun laws to be repealed should we elect people who will actually want to reduce government. Gun laws do not belong in a country where the people are the sovereign. All gun laws are a challenge to that sovereignty and herald other challenges to come. [Gee, do ya think so by now . . .?] Simply put, gun control is essential to bigger government and must be the first thing to tackle for any candidates running on a smaller government values system.

    Or, promises of reducing government will not be kept.

    Why not? Because gun control has to be fairly established before crisis can be claimed, as crises and mandates have grown so. Once crises are claimed, mandates follow. [Gun control creates a void in self-defense in the bigger cities; crime grows; crisis is claimed; mandates are imposed.] For too many in the electorate, this has seemed reasonable as the stealth of it all has not been seen. But if the electorate connects how crime cultivated under gun control relates to all sorts of stupid and costly programs which follow, then you have an awakening.

    I hope.

    In order for the turnout of liberty to succeed in the mid-term November 2nd, even liberal pundits know it won’t be enough to refuse to tolerate liberalism any longer; It has to be a return to official recognition of our sovereignty over officials. Otherwise, my friends, we can’t rationally expect any change.

    What laws to repeal next? Stupid technologies and programs alleging to fight crime, but which lack one important element: these are not where crime is fought.

    Let’s start thinking like a people living in a republic before an upcoming election, and see if our candidates promising to make things right will reject these three:

    1. Microstamping is a suspect technology purported to identify a gun owner from ejected cartridge casings. Microstamping has such a poor understanding of guns and crime, not to mention rights of the innocent, that it must be ejected as hostile to the people, predatory to the public at large as a boondoggle. I’ve written more thoroughly on Microstamping in previous articles.

    Like most technologies, Microstamping continues to pursue an after-the-fact paradigm, or chasing crime. That is not where crime is fought, and the more obstacles you lay down for the citizens who rightfully meet violence [the more void you create] the more you aid the criminals and promote the boondoggles which redistribute the wealth.

    2. Magazine capacity. The first response from the gun control crackpots is that the number of rounds in a single magazine kills more kids on school grounds. But this regulation merely joins 20,000 other gun laws, most of which murderers have already broken before they even get on campus. [Laws against persons already prohibited from acquiring, possessing and carrying a gun at all is the epitome of the failure of gun control. Gun control cannot touch known criminals, especially the repeat offenders.]

    Gun control has no successes to report. No matter what law you write, gun control (such as magazine capacity) does not prevent shootings. It only vexes the electorate.

    3. Gun registration. If we were free people living in a republic, we would politely say that the public servants don’t need to know where the guns are. Not only has registration been studied by constituents who are satisfied that registration is useless, such as here and in Canada, but registration has most consistently been the first advance steps to greater abuses of due process in other, non-gun areas. Rinse and repeat.

    Defiance of the sovereign begins with gun control, and gun control begins with registration. In my surmise, gun control has been a test of what free peoples will tolerate. It then simply makes its way into defying the sovereign wherever it wants. Where the government is the servant and the people are the sovereign - as in a republic - officials have no need to know where the guns are.

    The bottom line is that the people are the sovereign, and officials are not for the hours, days and years they serve. That is to say, you cannot have it both ways in public office. Officials have no legal authority writing gun laws. Gun control activists also have no authority to smother or regulate a civil right which backs our sovereignty. It is not among the powers of servants and it is not among the rights of anti-freedom citizens to smother another’s right.

    The second amendment is just as absolute as the freedom from being owned by another. It is against the interests of the United States even to suggest either, even a little bit.

    Don’t forget to see Part I…

    John Longenecker is author of Safer Streets 2010, the e-book available at’s Kindle Catalog.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    micro stamping and gun registration are imporant crime fighting tools ...

    yes guns can end up lost or stolen .... but some attempt at tracking down the orgin of a weapon used in a crime is better than no attempt ..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts