Monday, January 05, 2009

Buy Buy Buy!

From Michael Gaddy at Lew Rockwell:
Americans are purchasing firearms and ammunition in record numbers, not because they believe 2009 will offer unusually good duck hunting, but because they fear the fallout from the coming economic storm and the state’s reaction to that fallout.

The larger question is: how many of those who have gone out and purchased firearms and ammo will actually use them? I believe a large number would bring those weapons to bear against criminals who would steal and threaten their families and property, but, how many would use them against the criminal state as it moves to seize their weapons, as was done in New Orleans, when the next "emergency" occurs, be it an economic meltdown or terrorist attack?

17 comments:

alfsauve said...

A question asked by the novel, "Enemies Foreign and Domestic" by Matthew Bracken. You find yourself asking what is my "line-in-the-sand", what am I willing to sacrifice, and what is my roll to play?

Grumpy Old Man said...

New gun owner here, purchased Christmas. Reason, the increasing chaos and social collapse now accelerating with collapse of our fiat financial system.


Taking it very seriously, bought a traning course from Tactical Response, a pass to the local indoor range, and 3,000 rounds, of which 1,500 have now been spent.

A lover of freedom said...

Michael, I've thought to make a post on "thuggies" and have not yet developed a thesis on that subject. I've directly alluded to things a thuggie may be or choose to do in other posts, but I have not expanded upon that thought. It's a sensitive subject that requires a written word of much thought and review worthy of being published in many venues.

What is a thuggie when it comes to law enforcement...the time to reach across the table is now, before they are called on to kick in our doors and confiscate our goods contrary to our good law and Constitution. Law enforcement very much needs to be educated in the foundation of law and it's purpose and meaning and how it secures our liberty in freedom...and not how it may be perverted to enable them as individuals to be above the law and have defense that "I was just taking orders".

Perhaps you and your scholarly sweetie (an attorney you've said) could lay out an education for both the citizen and the citizen who is a law enforcement officer that is not legal advice but is legal history. We both have many friends who are or who have been in law enforcement, but they have been focused on enforcement of laws by method of (?) instruction. That is to say they are in a chain of command and have been taught and led what is not legal and how and when to enforce law on the basis of trespass of the law, but not necessarily an understanding of the meaning of law.

Dangerous ground. But I know that law enforcement should expect that they too can act illegally, on orders, and expect to be prosecuted. The Nazi's had no defense in "just taking orders". Why so should our fellow countrymen, in whom we entrust the enforcement of order within our freedoms, be allowed to escape with such a thin defense as used by the Nazis when they act in like manner as both dishonorable men and political theives use them to steal our freedoms?

It should be understood that defending one's self and one's freedom has historically allowed the use of deadly force and that only in a society perverted from the ideals of individual liberty and freedom that it can be thought self-defense of life and liberty is a crime.

Anonymous said...

Just a question for "A lover of Freedom."

Do you actually and seriously think that education and talking to them would prevent the folks you refer to as "thuggies" from kicking in your door, especially when they're wearing a uniform and acting behind the authority and sanction of a badge issued by the government?

Do you really and seriously believe that engaging such folks in a philosophical discussion about the nuances between the foundation of laws and the enforcement of laws would prevent them from acting with gusto when given the order to kick in your door, roust you, and shoot you if you resist?

Wait, wait....what about the foundation of the law and Hobbes' concept of the social contract??? CRASH..bang, bang, bangity-bang-bang.

The Saj said...

Probably more than most people realize.

But I do wonder what good an AR/SKS is against a Predator remote attack drone?

Anonymous said...

These folks are discussing the line in the sand:

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2008/11/placeholder-for-now.html

Anonymous said...

How many will use them(against a criminal state)? Depends: if the regime makes sudden, drastic, and obviously unlawful moves, many would actively oppose it. On the other hand, if changes are incremental, and can be plausibly characterized as "necessary", or even as "reform", however controversial, most Americans (possibly including myself) will be inclined to hesitate in actively resisting. As for the authorities feeling restrained because of the supposed invalidity of the "Nuremburg Defense" (I acted under orders), dont bet on it. Remember, the Nazis had just lost a war, and the winning side was acting as prosecutor, judge and jury. The side that feels stronger(who do think that will be?) wont care.

Kristopher said...

But I do wonder what good an AR/SKS is against a Predator remote attack drone?

What good is a Predator attack drone against a sawed-off twelve gauge in some wannabe tyrant's face?

Google "Asymmetric Warfare" and start reading. Cold Dead Hands is bad tactics. Think like Ho Chi Mhin instead. If the cops bust in your door and find guns, You Are Doing It Wrong.

Anonymous said...

Cities and states across the U.S. have onerous gun laws on the books and the revolution hasn't happened yet.

Wolfwood said...

Oh Lord. More Ft. Sumter-ism. There seems to be positive glee among some that they may get to shoot their guns at people (evil-doers, no less!). It's like they're hoping their door gets kicked in so that they can break out the SKS and play Bruce Willis (or rather, they're hoping someone else's door gets kicked in so they can do it...).

Drop the fantasies of shooting marauding cops, your/someone else's elected officials, or a marauding gang of thugs. It's not going to happen, and if you ever face anything like it the odds are good that you'll end up like Randy Weaver and his family. Gun owners aren't the Viet Cong or the (p)IRA, and no aggrieved person is going to be sticking a pistol in anyone's face (I'll let any rebuttals talking about Oswald or Sirhan speak for themselves).

"Asymmetric warfare" here doesn't mean shotgun vs. Predator, but rather unions, lawsuits, and such. Politicians want to be in office, and that's where to hit them. Threats of violence only turn ordinary citizens against the RKBA cause. There's a time and a place for armed resistance, but it's only after other avenues have been exhausted (or are otherwise unavailable).

hairy hobbit said...

just turn them in now wolfwood. File for an injunction against future gun laws too while you're at it. When they start going door to door, again, means that too damn many people were too preoccupied moaning about other peoples lines.

Go watch the video of the cops taking down the old woman post Katrina. That's what it will be, national guard troops "not wanting to think about what they'd have to do" while all hell is breaking loose they'll go door to door following orders. AGAIN! DO you really think any of the laws they passed after that will stop them when the damn constitution didn't stop them last time?


Also, even after the obamanation adds the 600000 new fed stooges we still outnumber the bastards. It the OTHER lawless folks you really need to worry about most.


And if you're worried about predators, well, go find some robotics site, hit the hobby store and start building your own.

Anonymous said...

One thing everyone needs to remember, as Graves so aptly demonstrated in Once and Future King, does might make right?

As the LEOs as they perform the conga line of death through your front door.

Reason will not work, a clear understanding that we will prosecute anyone who knowingly or willingly violates state or federal laws or constitutions - might. The prosecutors are on their side, remember?

Running out of options here . . . .

Anonymous said...

A fellow just needs to move to Jefferson.
http://townhall.com/columnists/DouglasMacKinnon/2007/12/20/can_i_keep_my_guns_in_the_new_country_of_%e2%80%9cjefferson%e2%80%9d

Anonymous said...

could you pass this on.. thanks

University of Iowa Law school hosts attorney who led Supreme Court fight against gun ban

Alan Gura, the attorney whose argument persuaded the Supreme Court last year to strike down one of the country’s most stringent firearms bans, will discuss his litigation in the case when he visits the University of Iowa College of Law Monday, Jan. 12.

For more information on this event, contact Tim Hilton at timothy-hilton@uiowa.edu or call 417-718-3487. For special accommoda-tions to attend this discussion, call 319-335-9034.

A lover of freedom said...

Some, yes. They will balk and find other things to do, reasons not to participate, lessen the hostility. Also it would help to educate the populace about where the line is drawn...right now most people are sheep with no idea what their rights really are.

Wolfwood, your cynicism is heavy in your writing and leads a reader to believe people want this. My wife is prepared for a car jacker...does she want that, is she fantasizing about reaaranging someone's face...no, but it happened to her sister who was raped, murdered and found 3 months later in a sugar cane field. To generalize, albeit demonize, by lumping all persons as one to fit a personal belief is to err.

Preconceived notions about a person's motivations can be no less bigotry than racism.

Scott said...

In any worthwhile fight, Wolfwood, some will sacrifice their lives. I think that many of us have accepted that. Much as the men that joined the Continental Army in order to fight British tyranny did.

seeker_two said...

If it comes to it, expect the next revolution to look less like Yorktown or Gettysburg and more like Belfast or Kosovo. Taking on armies on an open battlefield is a thing of the past. Unconventional warfare (w/o Geneva Convention protection) will be the rule. And a lot of people will get hurt.

I'm not proposing for or against...just want everyone to know how messy things could get....