Chuck has another video out – this time his take on why he needs his assault weapon. After all, “…to blame assault weapons for these tragedies would be like blaming airplanes for the 9/11 attacks. The problem lies with the perpetrator and not the tools used to commit the crime” “Our Founding Fathers wanted every … Read more
I never formally placed libertarians into two classes. However, I did recognize a difference but considered one as libertarian and the other as conservative, conservative in the Anglo-American sense: conserving American’s independence, the recognition of unalienable individual rights coming not from man but beyond, and the freedom from tyranny in every form. Doing so because it’s right, and not doing so is a violation of nature, virtue, and morals. I looked at libertarianism as more of a technical means to getting to this conservative moral ground. So, as is usually the case when I read something from Robert Higgs, I’m forced to reconsider my understanding. Higgs’ essay, “Freedom: Because It Works or Because It’s Right?” discusses “…two broad classes…” of libertarians, “Consequentialists versus deontologists”.
Libertarians divide into two broad classes: those who espouse a free society because it gives better results than an unfree society, and those who espouse a free society because they believe that it is wrong to deny or suppress a person’s right to be free (unless, of course, that person is suppressing the equal right of others to be free). “Consequentialists versus deontologists” is the oft-encountered labeling of this difference. It is unfortunate that so much energy has been devoted to infighting between these two groups.
“For Conservative thinkers believe that man is corrupt, that his appetites need restraint, and that the forces of custom, authority, law, and government, as well as moral discipline, are required to keep sin in check.”
-Quintin Hogg
John Adams
“Experience has ever shown, that education, as well as religion, aristocracy, as well as democracy and monarchy, are, singly, totally inadequate to the business of restraining the passions of men, of preserving a steady government, and protecting the lives, liberties, and properties of the people.”
Or as I saw on one post “the only packing anti-gunner I know” – she’s got her CA carry permit and weapon and has said why she has it (…”I’ll take them with me!”). Certainly, a lot of gun owners (or would be owners) right after the Newtown tragedy felt that the gun-loathers (and those that loath those that have and use guns) would try another disarmament grab (regardless of what Senator Chuckie Schumer said). But when they heard what NY Governor Andrew Cuomo said about signing legislation that had confiscation in it, and the new bill that Feinstein that all but outlaws most modern firearms AND calls for outright confiscation (“…until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government“).
As I have posted before, I generally DVR the regular Sunday morning talking head shows to listen to what the Progressive Libs have to say. Most of the times, except for the Fox show, the Conservatives are out numbered. So I was rather surprised at last week’s Closeup (WMUR 9, hosted by Josh McElveen – yes, first chance I’ve had to transcribe the audio).
The topic, naturally was about gun control. Ralph Domico of Reilly’s Gun Shop and GoNH, and attorney Penny Dean represented gun owners. Former NH State Senator Burt Cohen showed up to represent the typical gun hater that is clueless about why he wants to banguns.
Over at Instapundit (emphasis mine): “For ten years we have been told that the Bush tax cuts applied mostly to the rich. Now it is imperative that we extend them further or the middle class is going to take a big hit.” It never really turns out as Liberals / Progressives / Democrats yammer about, … Read more
Bill Binnie has been buying up media in New Hampshire. WBIN-TV! He just scooped up some radio stations. And hey, wouldn’t a major Granite State newspaper be a great edition? I think so, so how about the Nashua Telegraph?
That’s right, the family that owns that liberal bird-cage liner (based out of Pennsylvania–say hi to Mike Brunelle for me) is getting out of the Newspaper business, including the Bedford Journal, the Hollis Brookline Journal, the Merrimack Journal and Milford Cabinet, liberal rags to the last.
Every time that the topic of illegal immigration comes up, the Proggies all exclaim “But we CAN’T deport all 12 million “undocumented workers!!!” when it comes to enforcing just our current immigration laws – you all but admit that Government can’t find them all? Their only solution is to just amnesty them So, all you … Read more
A doctor, a lawyer, and a mathematician were having a conversation about the relative benefits of wives and mistresses.
The doctor insisted that, from a health perspective, it was far better to have a wife. He talked about stress, relaxation, routine, and other factors.
The lawyer contended that it was better to have a mistress, because that way you retain more of your legal rights, she doesn’t own half your property, and so forth.
The mathematician said that he could see both sides of that argument, but really he thought it was best to have both.
“Both?”, the doctor and the lawyer exclaimed. “Why?”
Imprimis: In a discussion with Hugh Hewitt, on the weakness / tyranny of Progressivism: No, and I don’t mean that. What I mean is that the principles of Progressivism that animate our government today, which are antithetical to the principles of the American Founding, lead to policies that cannot work, will not work, and result … Read more
Q: This movie has a fair amount of gun violence and can be a bit flippant about it. Does that give you pause in the wake of what happened in Connecticut?
A: I don’t think movies or video games have anything to do with it. I don’t think [stopping gun violence] is about more gun control. I grew up in the South with guns everywhere, and we never shot anyone. This [shooting] is about people who aren’t taught the value of life.”
It seems that Progressives like Diane Feinstein have not understood that simple phrase. The problems that we see in mass murders (or single murders, or any other crime committed against another) is either one of a mental illness (who shoots their Mom or defenseless little kids as in Newtown?), or the latest where that previously incarcerated oldster (for killing his mom with a hammer) proclaimed “do what I do best – kill people – just plain black as night Evil. Or those that simply wish what others have for either the reasons of “I want what they have” and justify it with “they don’t need it” (just like Progressives / Liberals / Democrats) – its about control.
Diane Feinstein combines that latter part, control, with another. That is, Progressives so untrust their fellow citizens, they feel that they have the mandate to take away “all the toys” because we, the “unprogressed”, “uncivilized”, “uneducated”, stubborn, selfish, should-be-demonized ungrown-up child-citizen should not be allowed to have guns simply because those things either 1) insult their sensibilities (as guns do) or 2) have a longer range motive in mind.
As to #1, if “we” won’t cooperate and compromise with the Progressives as they head us from being the Land of the Free to that of the Land of We Submitted to Despotism, they will keep at changing the laws and changing the regulations to enforce their way to their Utopian version of Freedom (“you are free to do what we allow you to do – it’s not just for the common good but it’s good for you too – you’ll see!). Yes, it was enable citizens to protect themselves and their families at a personal level.
Once again, we see yet another Progressive downplay the values by which the government is to act by and to be held against. Education Secretary Arne Duncan:
“I want to talk to gun owners and hunters and sport shooters and ask them, what should we do? I want to talk about community and responsibility, and I want to talk about values — because we have common values that go far beyond the constitutional right to bear arms.
A number of things come immediately to mind:
First, your responsibility IS to the Constitution. Period. First. Last. You are the Government – stick to what the Government must obey (be it ever so hard for the Obama Administration to do that)
Second, an oh so soft slither around the fact that the Second Amendment is not about hunting and it is not about sport shooters.
Third, this IS about you trying to not have to talk about the Constitution – because it limits you.
Fourth, you don’t WANT that limitation – so you all (Obama Administration) are trying get people to emote instead of think, to think in the moment instead of long term and “what brung us to this place in the dance” -the sense of Federalism and a limit on what Government can do in manipulating Society.
Fifth, it is because, in large part, that you Progressives have swapped out traditional values for Progressives ones that we are in this pickle.
Yes, I just said it. I lay it all on the Progressives with the denigration of hard work and the traditional work ethic that made a lot of people no longer ashamed to be on the dole. I blame them for the substitution of absolute values for a secular humanism whose values can change from day to day – situational ethics run amok. I blame them that Progressives believe that the rest of us cannot function in Society (ever closed to the irony, these “self-assured incompetents” of the poor and worse job that Big Government is delivering) without the guiding hand of themselves. I blame them for the spiritual emptiness that they are wreaking in the country. I blame them for the financial disgrace (with many helping hands of Republicans who merely wish “to get things done” without counting the cost).
“Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” —George Orwell
In my last post just only hours ago, I posited the notion that Gun Guntrol advocates are, in fact “Coming for our Guns.”
“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun, but permit it.” —NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo
During a radio interview New York Governor Andrew Cuomo stated, “Confiscation could be an option,” referencing semi-automatic rifles, liberals like to call, “Assault Weapons.” Cuomo told WGDJ-AM of his gun control proposals that he will outline at his State of the State Address on January 9.
Gov. Cuomo said:
“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting.’ There is a balance here, Iunderstandtherightsofgunowners.”
“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun, but permit it.”
Governor Andrew Cuomo is a liar. Saying he understands
I agree with author Jim Rawles when he commented on Her Majesty Feinstein’s proposed legislation: ‘If this is enacted, we can expect a nationwide shortage of 8″ diameter PVC pipe threaded end caps!’
Over at my other haunt, NH Insider, my Fridge mag cross-post elicited the following response from Democrat Jim Splaine on the matter of gun ownership, which exemplifies the reason why any discussion with Democrats on any subject is unlikely.
Why can’t we have a real discussion about this issue? Just like the myths of an “$800 million deficit,” or that “Obamacare is socialized medicine” (whereas it’s mostly privatized), or that “gay marriage is a slippery slope,” there a new myth a-brewing among the Tea Partiers and right-wingers that President Obama and the Democrats are after everyone’s guns.
Real discussions begin in reality. Democrats refuse to begin in the real world preferring the one they’ve created to explain what they claim to believe. And you can’t negotiate with madmen.
Following up on GraniteGrok postings HERE, HERE, and HERE regarding Senator Dianne Feinstein’s bill to ban guns in America, this is worth reproducing verbatim from Instapundit:
I never formally placed libertarians into two classes. However, I did recognize a difference but considered one as libertarian and the other as conservative, conservative in the Anglo-American sense: conserving American’s independence, the recognition of unalienable individual rights coming not from man but beyond, and the freedom from tyranny in every form. Doing so because it’s right, and not doing so is a violation of nature, virtue, and morals. I looked at libertarianism as more of a technical means to getting to this conservative moral ground. So, as is usually the case when I read something from Robert Higgs, I’m forced to reconsider my understanding. Higgs’ essay, “Freedom: Because It Works or Because It’s Right?” discusses “…two broad classes…” of libertarians, “Consequentialists versus deontologists”.
Or as I saw on one post “the only packing anti-gunner I know” – she’s got her CA carry permit and weapon and has said why she has it (…”I’ll take them with me!”). Certainly, a lot of gun owners (or would be owners) right after the Newtown tragedy felt that the gun-loathers (and those that loath those that have and use guns) would try another disarmament grab (regardless of what Senator Chuckie Schumer said). But when they heard what NY Governor Andrew Cuomo said about signing legislation that had confiscation in it, and the new bill that Feinstein that all but outlaws most modern firearms AND calls for outright confiscation (“…until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government“).
As I have posted before, I generally DVR the regular Sunday morning talking head shows to listen to what the Progressive Libs have to say. Most of the times, except for the Fox show, the Conservatives are out numbered. So I was rather surprised at last week’s Closeup (WMUR 9, hosted by Josh McElveen – yes, first chance I’ve had to transcribe the audio).
Good stuff! The outbreak of fear and trembling over the surging Free State Project freedom-fighters also helps expose the bigotry and narrow-mindedness of Statists, including even elected representatives.
