Connect with us

Education

Hidden History: The Disarmament of Boston

Published

on

The first shots were fired in the American War for Independence on April 19, 1775, when 700 British Redcoats, led by Major John Pitcairn, attempted to seize American arms at Lexington and Concord (American Bar Association, 2012).

The patriots, however, had already moved their supply of arms to safety.

After an initial, successful battle against the patriots at the bridge at Lexington and Concord, the Redcoats were ambushed and eventually outnumbered 2:1 by American re-enforcements arriving from surrounding towns (Charleston Law Review, 2012, p. 310).

While some American fighters had arrived organized – illegally-formed local militias – a large number arrived and fought on their own, even taking up sniper positions whenever possible. Patriots who joined the fight even included a number of women and the elderly. Before long, the armed Americans harried Pitcairn’s Redcoats back into Boston (Charleston Law Review, 2012, p. 310).

“One British officer reported: ‘These fellows were generally good marksmen, and many of them used long guns made for Duck-Shooting.’ On a per-shot basis, the Americans inflicted higher casualties than had the British regulars” (American Bar Association, 2012).

Boston, where the Royal Governor, General Thomas Gage’s Red Coats were stationed, was now surrounded by armed American patriots.

Since their attempt to seize American’s arms at Lexington and Concord had gone badly for the British, and now finding themselves surrounded by armed patriots, Royal Governor Gage devised an alternate plan for disarmament.

On April 23, 1775, General Gage made an offer to Bostonians trapped within the city: turn in your arms and you can leave Boston.

“The Boston Selectmen voted to accept the offer, and within days, 2,674 guns were deposited, one gun for every two adult male Bostonians,” (American Bar Association, 2012). Arms collected included: “1778 fire-arms (muskets or rifles)… 634 pistols… 973 bayonets (bayonets attached to the long guns)… and 38 blunderbusses (short-barreled shotguns),” (Frothingham, 1849).

However, after “having collected the arms, Gage then refused to allow the Bostonians to leave. He claimed that many more arms had been secreted away than surrendered,” (American Bar Association, 2012). While inhabitants of Boston were supposed to receive certificates permitting departure from Boston, this rarely occurred in practice. Indeed, before long, “passes to leave issued by Gage quickly dried up,” (Halbrook, 2008).

Further complicating the matter was the fact that those Bostonians who were permitted to leave, were prohibited from taking any belongings with them (Halbrook, 2008).

The situation for Bostonians worsened over time, as food shortages began to take effect.

As one Bostonians wrote, in a letter to an acquaintance in Philadelphia (New England Historical Society, 2014):

You request my writing freely, which I must be cautious of, for reasons which will naturally occur to you. As to the inhabitants removing, they are suffered to go out under certain restrictions. This liberty was obtained after many town meetings, and several conferences between their Committee and General Gage. The terms mutually agreed to were, “that the inhabitants should deliver up all their arms to the Selectmen.” This was generally done, though it took up some days. On this occasion the inhabitants were to have had liberty to remove out of Town, with their effects, and during this, to have free egress and regress. But mark the event: the arms being delivered, orders were issued by the General, that those who inclined to remove must give in their names to the Selectmen, to be by them returned to the Military Town Major, who was then to write a pass for the person or family applying, to go through the lines, or over the ferry; but all merchandise was forbid; after a while, all provisions were forbid; and now all merchandise, provisions, and medicine. Guards are appointed to examine all trunks, boxes, beds, and every thing else to be carried out; these have proceeded such extremities, as to take from the poor people a single loaf of bread, and half pound of chocolate; so that no one is allowed to carry out a mouthful of provisions; but all is submitted to quietly. The anxiety indeed is so great to get out of Town, that even were we obliged to go naked, it would not hinder us. But there are so many obstructions thrown in the way, that I do not think, those who are most anxious will be all out in less than two or three months — vastly different from what was expected, for the General at first proposed, unasked, to procure the Admiral’ s boats to assist the inhabitants in the transportation of their effects, which is not done, and there are but two ferry-boats allowed to cross. They have their designs in this, which you may easily guess at. We suffer much for want of fresh meat.

“After several months, food shortages in Boston convinced Gage to allow easier emigration from the city,” (American Bar Association, 2012).

In the end, it was the “seizure of these arms from the peaceable citizens of Boston who were not even involved in hostilities,” which ultimately “sent a message to all of the colonies that fundamental rights were in grave danger” (Halbrook, 20008).

Citations:

  • “The Founder’s Second Amendment: Origins of the Right to Bear Arms”, Stephen P. Halbrook, 2008.

Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Danny

    March 30, 2018 at 8:07 am

    These young ppl need to realize they are being lied to by the democrats. If the democrats convince them to give up their roght to arms they will lose their other liberties a very short time later. If you young ppl give up your 2nd amendment then you will lose your freedom of speech directly after that. Look at the UK and Australia they are being jailed for saying what they think and going against the Muslims and others. There will be no more rally’s and protest of all the rights that are taken after your 2nd is gone. You better study history.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

George Washington University students triggered by their mascot

Published

on

George Washington University students triggered by their mascot

George Washington University is the home of the Colonials. You know, those people who came to America from Europe and eventually fought against the oppressive government of England in order to win independence for America. These heroes of the American Revolution are now being condemned by the students of George Washington University itself.

While the movement and attached petition haven’t reached a tipping point, the idea of changing the mascot to the “Hippo” is gaining momentum. Why? Well, we’ll let the students themselves tell you what they think.

This video by Campus Reform takes us into the wacky world of triggered college students who are so much in opposition of the people who made this country possible that they’d rather be named after the “river horse” of sub-Saharan Africa.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Education

Blocking Ben: GCU the latest school succumbing to leftist hordes

Published

on

Blocking Ben GCU the latest school succumbing to leftist hordes

Many secular universities in America have made a habit out of ending dialogue before it begins by blocking conservative events and speakers, with DailyWire editor Ben Shapiro as the most common target to ignorantly sweep under the rug. This practice is spreading to faith-based schools as Grand Canyon University joins the ranks of those who are unwilling to face the leftist hordes.

Their statement about their decision does nothing to justify it and many are noting they didn’t actually give a reason, opting to boast about their accomplishments instead.

Their Tweet of the statement was “ratioed” and the comments aren’t letting up a day later.

Here’s the biggest problem. What Shapiro brings to any campus where he speaks is cold, hard truth wrapped in an entertaining and often contentious series of debates as students who disagree with him try to paint him as Hitler, a fascist, and even a white supremacist. I covered why these accusations are far from reality in a post and video I did the last time his voice was suppressed:

The real danger of quashing voices like Ben Shapiro’s on college campuses

http://noqreport.com/2018/12/31/real-danger-quashing-voices-like-ben-shapiros-college-campuses/It isn’t just Shapiro, but he’s conspicuous for two reasons. First, the unhinged hatred towards him is not congruous with his level of offense. Yes, he will offend people sometimes as the truth invariably does, but he’s not David Duke or Louis Farrakhan. Somehow, he’s able to stir up such positive and negative responses on college campuses that one might think President Trump himself was making an appearance.

The second reason he’s conspicuous is because his protesters don’t have valid reasons to protest him. They’re forced to pull from their own irrational fears of him that have been conjured up out of fiction. He’s a devout Jew, yet protesters call him Hitler. He’s adamantly opposed to authoritarianism, yet protesters call him a fascist. He’s one of the most targeted journalists in America by white supremacists, yet for some reason protesters seem to think he’s a white supremacist.

The decision by GCU to prevent Shapiro from speaking is the next iteration of a systematic movement within the higher education system to indoctrinate social justice warriors rather than to nurture productive members of society. GCU may or may not be part of this movement, but they’re willful participants by succumbing to the pressure from the hordes. Therein lies the real challenge to America’s future.

Perhaps you haven’t heard of the “hordes.” Maybe you think you have, but you’re probably mistaken. The leftist hordes are not simply comprised of local protesters who do everything they can to disrupt the conversation and prevent students from hearing the truth. Those are the public-facing front line pawns of the hordes. The real dangers to freedom of thought are the power players who rally opposition against Shapiro and other conservative speakers by threatening to pull funding, contact alumni, and tarnish a university’s image in the press. They aren’t going on CNN or writing in the Washington Post. These are powerful people who have direct lines to university leaders around the nation. These are the people that you never hear about.

They don’t want you to hear about them.

It’s unfathomable that so many schools would be concerned about protests. Therefore, we have to assume the pressure is coming from somewhere other than on-campus underground Antifa groups who meet every Wednesday over pizza and beer. There’s a coordinated effort to prevent students from thinking. To do this, they act to prevent speakers like Shapiro from making students think. That should truly concern us all.

We can insult individual universities all day, but until we address the powers behind these attacks on Shapiro and the freedom of thought he brings to campuses, this problem will continue. Coordinated threats are being made. There can be no doubt of that.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Collectivism 101: The origins of the epic fraud of socialism

Published

on

By

Collectivism 101 The origins of the epic fraud of socialism

It’s time to finally reject the something for nothing scam from polite society.

There are times when you have to wonder if people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez know they’re helping perpetrate history’s biggest scam operation. Most assuredly the terms swindle, fraud or shakedown are the nicest ways of referring to a set of ideas that have seen 400 years of death and oppression. As JD Rucker pointed out, today’s socialists no longer have an excuse to favor their ideology of societal slavery over Economic Liberty.

It should be obvious to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence that the results of Economic Liberty far exceed the fraud of socialism. Nevertheless, there are those who still insist on wanting to enslave their fellow-man for their selfish needs while trying to assert a false sense of moral superiority. How people who think they are owed a living simply because they exist is hard to fathom. At its core, socialism is predicted on the fraud of getting something for nothing. While Leftists excel in dressing it up as “Social Justice’ its basic tenets are of taking from some to set up a dependent majority.

The origins of history’s biggest fraud

How did this colossal fraud get started? How did the idea of enslaving people become enshrined as their ‘Liberation’?

To do this we need to look back at how human civilisation developed and prospered. In the beginning, mankind was very much like the rest of the animal kingdom having to work in order to survive, roaming the wild hunting and gathering food.

Then came one of mankind’s greatest inventions: farming. This meant staying in one place, planting seeds, harvesting crops and domesticating animals instead of wandering around. Property rights were a natural outgrowth of this great advance, since farming only made sense if one could reap what they had sown. [Galatians 6:7] Farming and property rights further meant that one could build permanent homes and store away food for use later on, transforming the struggle to survive from that of satisfying immediate needs to delaying or forestalling them. These incredible advances changed everything.

The products of their labor could be voluntarily exchanged – traded – leading to mankind’s other great achievements. Trade meant that humans could specialize in what they did to survive, with some farming while others made tools or other necessities.

Staying in one place meant that humans could gather together. Specialisation meant that people could use voluntary exchange to trade in the fruits of their labor to their mutual benefit. This also meant that people could also exchange recollections of the past or new ideas, so one wouldn’t have to literally reinvent the wheel. The advances that began with farming and property rights placed humans far above the animal kingdom to become its master.

It all worked fine until some people decided they wanted something for nothing.

There will always be a small segment of society that would rather live off the fruits of someone else’s labour instead of producing their own.

  • Those who took other people’s property directly were the first criminals.
  • Those who took other people’s property through government were the first Leftists.

The early Leftists felt they needed to differentiate themselves from common thieves, even though they had a natural affinity because of their mutual interest of living off other people’s work. Oddly enough, those who parasitically feed off the efforts of others in society are considered to be sinister and weak.

The early Leftists had to somehow justify their outright theft of other people’s property. In order to do this they created the mythical idea of collective property ownership, partnered with the absurd concept that there is a fixed amount of ‘wealth’ and that there are some who have too much of it. Never mind that both of these concepts made no sense, since individuals around the world are constantly creating wealth.

They also justified the stealing property as being morally correct over its original production. This is how they feign magnanimity by taking other people’s money while someone keeping what they have already earned as being ‘greedy’. What better way to be absolved of outright theft [not to mention oppression and mass murder] than to self-declare one to be morally superior for the very act of outright theft? Leftists will tell you that they are morally superior since their moral superiority determines that they are morally superior.

Later on these people would be known as socialists, communists, Marxists, communards, Statists, Bolshevists, Trotskyists Fascists, Democratic Socialists, National Socialists, Progressivists, Stalinists and over 30 other synonyms. Since it’s always a hallmark of honest people to avoid aliases.

Spotting the fraud of socialism

Every living being since the beginning of time has had to exert effort in order to survive. Nevertheless, there are some in society who would rather swindle their fellow-man instead working. Those who do this under the guise of government and moral superiority all known as Leftists.

Spotting this fraud is easy if one knows what to look for. Generally it will be some sort of allusions to getting something for nothing dressed up in the fraud of moral superiority. The free stuff offered can range from free college, free healthcare, free housing to free money. This can also involve allusions to safety if other people are deprived of the right of self-defense.

There is a reason why a decent society punishes theft since is very detrimental to the public order. To hear the Left talk of it, this is somehow different if the government does it. This must be rejected for the same reason that criminal theft is penalised.

The takeaway

At this point in history, we know that the something for nothing scam of socialism will never work. Those who persist in trying to perpetuate this fraud should be easy to spot and avoid. This would be anyone offering something for nothing. They should be asked where are they to get these wonderful gifts without enslaving others. If they cannot properly answer the question they should be rejected no matter what they call themselves.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help
 


Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report