Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. That psychic discomfort is the price we pay for basic civic peace. It's worth it. It's a pragmatic principle. Defend everyone else's rights, because if you don't there is no one to defend yours. -- MaxedOutMama

I don't just want gun rights... I want individual liberty, a culture of self-reliance....I want the whole bloody thing. -- Kim du Toit

The most glaring example of the cognitive dissonance on the left is the concept that human beings are inherently good, yet at the same time cannot be trusted with any kind of weapon, unless the magic fairy dust of government authority gets sprinkled upon them.-- Moshe Ben-David

The cult of the left believes that it is engaged in a great apocalyptic battle with corporations and industrialists for the ownership of the unthinking masses. Its acolytes see themselves as the individuals who have been "liberated" to think for themselves. They make choices. You however are just a member of the unthinking masses. You are not really a person, but only respond to the agendas of your corporate overlords. If you eat too much, it's because corporations make you eat. If you kill, it's because corporations encourage you to buy guns. You are not an individual. You are a social problem. -- Sultan Knish

All politics in this country now is just dress rehearsal for civil war. -- Billy Beck

Friday, June 27, 2008

Complete Silence

Complete Silence

It's been almost 48 hours since the Heller decision was delivered. The Brady Campaign has made a statement. The Violence Policy Center has made a statement. The ACLU has made a statement.

But there is one organization that, for as long as I can remember, has stated that there can't be an individual right to arms because the State must have a monopoly on violence:
The rule of law, the state's monopoly on violence, and the state's internal sovereignty all mean the same thing.


Any hint of protection for a fundamental or procedural right to be privately armed outside of a military or militia context would validate not just a malignant, anarchic vision of social and political life but also an insurrectionist doctrine. The Constitution becomes perverted. It defines treason as the waging of war against the United States and then secures a civil right to commit the same. Several amici refer to the insurrectionist doctrine but do not emphasize the centrality of this in gun right ideologies, how widely it is adhered to, and its constitutional impermissibility. The right of armed self-defense includes the right of armed self-defense against the government itself, the same government the gun rights claimants want to secure the right.
The Potowmack Institute has been silent since March 5, 2008, just before oral arguments were heard.

Personally, I'm with commenter "dr mac" from a post at SayUncle:
If 4 of 9 SCOTUS justices can so easily cast aside the Bill of Rights then I will always hang on to my guns, thank you very much.
I think "insurrectionists" make him nervous or something. I suppose Mr. G. Eyclesheimer Ernst thinks we should all be "good citizens" and go along with whatever the government tells us needs to be done because they know better, even if that includes killing people the government doesn't like and cremating them in big ovens.

After all, the government has to have a monopoly on violence!

Like hell.

So, wazzup Mr. Ernst? Cat got your tongue? Or have you packed to go to Mr. Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe? You know, where the government has a monopoly on the use of force.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.