We’ve had enough of the liberty grabber left’s assault on our inalienable human rights.
They’re back at it again. Like the brainless zombies of every movie of the genre, the liberty grabber leftists are back at it, trying to eviscerate the people’s inalienable human rights. On Wednesday, they had a day long extravaganza on the topic of liberty control, with a narrow range of proposals that centered around the set-up for gun confiscation or the tyrannical act itself. All of the ‘democratic’ presidential candidates being ever so benevolent in parceling out the last vestiges of everyone’s civil liberties.
It’s no coincidence that the national socialist left became obsessed with gun confiscation in parallel with their collectivist coming out party. The left’s base ideology can only be implemented with a monopoly on the use of force. This is why they continue to push this issue and why we need to keep pushing back. In this particular case, this is directed more towards the pro-liberty side in correcting some errors in resisting the obsession of the left in depriving the people of their inalienable human rights.
It’s liberty control, not gun control.
Those of us on the pro-liberty right need to understand the extreme importance of language and the specific words we use. The national socialist left knows this that is why they try to control the free-speech. There are those that use the phrase ‘people control’ and this does a better job in framing the debate than referring to inanimate objects. However, that phrase does not properly show the danger to liberty. While we are reticent in criticizing our own side, there are times when a simple word change can make all the difference.
This is a debate over freedom, not inanimate objects of aluminium or steel. This is why is it is close to infuriating when conservatives use nonsensical terms such as ‘anti-gunners’ when referring to the national socialist left. Those people also oppose other parts of the Bill of Rights, but we certainly don’t refer to them as ‘anti-free speechers’ or something equally absurd.
Using the term ‘gun’ instead of ‘liberty’ automatically frames the debate in favor of the left.
Using the incorrect term misdirects the object of the discussion. It allows the left to criticize the right as misguided worshipers of inanimate objects instead of the cause of liberty. Firearms are merely a manifestation of the inalienable right of self-preservation.
It’s unfortunate, but many people are afraid of guns for various reasons. Using the term ‘anti-gun’ plays right into the hands of the left in this regard. This is a debate over liberty, not objects that some think are scary looking. Ask someone if they are ‘anti-gun’ and they can say sure without a hint of guilt. Ask them if they are ‘anti-freedom’ and that will stop them short.
This is why using the word liberty instead of gun can make all the difference.
There is no proper way to properly craft gun confiscation SWATing laws.
While we are reluctant to criticize those of our side, and while she gave a good account of herself in front of congress on the false issue of ‘assault weapons,’ Amy Swearer of the Heritage Foundation is wrongly pushing the idea of gun confiscation SWATing laws. Her contention in this piece entitled: The Right Way to Craft Red-Flag Laws, neglects the danger to due process as well as other civil liberties.
On several levels, one is the oft-repeated point that laws to handle these situations are already on the books. The key difference between the laws for involuntary commitment and ‘red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing laws is that they protect due process. The law has to protect our basic civil liberties – not just claim to do so. Again, there is no need for these laws, and they are abhorrent to the basic precepts of our Constitutional republic. As others have said, one cannot be supportive of the 2nd Amendment and ‘red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing laws. As reported in Bearing Arms, these laws are shockingly being used against children. As proven by Politifact law enforcement officials are using Florida’s so-called ‘red flag’ law to remove guns from people five times a day.
These are laws that turn the presumption of innocence on its head, with the ability of some to use a one-sided argument to punish any gun owners, who then have to prove themselves innocent.
We’re two steps to confiscation: Enough with the compromise talk.
We won’t mention any names, but those who even broach the idea of compromise need to understand that our backs are up against the wall. We no longer have anything we can compromise on since we’re done the same so many times before. The liberty grabber left currently has three major obsessions:
- ‘Universal’ background checks.
- ‘Red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing laws.
- A ban on undefined ‘assault weapons’.
We’ve already addressed ‘red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing laws and most leftists have pulled back from being open on their dreams of gun confiscation. That leaves the discussion to just ‘universal’ background checks. These unconstitutional abominations are just one step of two in their gun confiscation quest. They also won’t work as advertised because of the simple fact that criminals don’t obey the law. These useless impositions on our liberty are nothing but a pretext to gun registration and then confiscation.
The Bottom-Line: We cannot compromise any further, our backs are up against the wall.
In many ways, it’s mind boggling that at this point that any patriot of the pro-liberty right would even consider a compromise with the liberty grabbers on the left. Compromise on ‘universal’ background checks, and the narrative will instantly change to demand for gun registration/licensing schemes that would require governmental permission to exercise an inalienable human right. The next ‘compromise’ will be gun confiscation.
Gun confiscation SWATing laws are, of course, a small-scale version of the left’s cherished dream of wholesale gun confiscation. This would be a throwback to the days of the old Soviet Union or national socialist Germany, where people could take revenge by having their neighbor arrested for the wrong kind of speech or ideas.
Some may wonder why we don’t compromise on our inalienable human rights. Those ‘compromises’ won’t solve the problem and they will be back for more. The simple fact is that we cannot compromise. Any further moves will mean the loss of everyone’s liberty.
We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.
[gravityform id=”2″ title=”true” description=”false”]