Check Your Premises

I thought we knew what we were fighting for, and against.  I thought we were in favor of the right to keep and bear arms.  I thought we understood what a right means and how it works in the world.  Instead, it seems we have Chief Runs-with-a-Premise in charge of setting our narrative (and the fact that it seems we even have a narrative, meaning repetitions of the same fool nonsense over and over, is fairly disturbing in itself).

I thought we had dispelled the left’s highly imaginative premise that says a criminal can’t get a gun (and therefore can’t hurt anyone) unless our “lax” gun laws “allow” criminals to get guns, but it turns out that most of us are embracing that very premise with regard to Fast and Furious, and embracing it with relish.

Posit; You see a video of some jihadists sawing the head off of a captured American.  Is your first reaction; “Well Goddamit, I want to know who made that saw!!!  We must also find out who sold that saw and see to it that they are punished.  Enough is enough!  Enough of these lax saw laws!  The National Saw Association is just as guilty of murder as anyone!”  Really?

No, Young Grasshopper; check your premises.  Please.  It’s not about where the saw came from is it?  Yet that’s the very case you’re making against Obama, Holder and the gang.  You are ceding one of the primary, false premises to the Enemy.  Stop it!

The Mexican drug gangs get their guns any damn where they want to, and they sure don’t need anyone in the U.S. for that.  They will kill one way or another, and they will get their guns one way or another (and our drug Prohibition law will ensure that this never stops– Oh yes, our drug laws, gun laws and gang are inseparable, though you thought this three way, authoritarian-feeding racket was all about “helping people”, reducing crime, or some such blather).

Grasshopper; are you listening?  Snap out of it, Man!

The point is; Our President along with his carefully hand-picked attorney general, the BATFE and the FBI, collaborating with Mexican gangsters, initiated a fraud against the American people.  They initiated and perpetrated a fraud so as to garner support for more infringements on Americans’ right to keep and bear arms.

If you want to point out the deaths from infringements on Americans’ gun rights, point to the multitudes who’ve been victimized in gun free zones, or anywhere or any time someone who would have had a gun for defense was prohibited by law from having a gun for defense, and died or was seriously injured or otherwise victimized as a result.  THAT is your body count.

We need look no farther than here;
Read those words very, very carefully.  I now doubt that many of you have been paying a lot of real, serious attention.  I believe that you’ve been caught up in the game, or with your blogs and radio show businesses, or something else I don’t know about.

Read.  The.  Words.

Forget about what you feel, or the business aspect, or the silly political game or whatever it is you’re playing, or what you want to see and hear verses what you actually see and hear.  I’ve been seeing a trend among our ranks– a lot of assuming, inferring and…I don’t know what to call it except failing to understand the basics and failing to see and hear what’s being written and said, and I don’t like it.  I don’t want to be everyone’s friend, or accepted in this or that group or whatever, so I can say it– you’re missing the point and it’s sad.

And you Republicans; Why is it so damned difficult to see a crime, CALL IT a crime, and prosecute it as a crime?  Seriously.  Wasn’t that supposed to be your job?  I mean, isn’t the fact that we have downright criminals in high places in our government pretty much an overriding concern?  Get busy, you slackers!  Or do you have too much to hide, yourselves?  Or are you just cowards?  I think we’ve had just about enough of cowards in government, haven’t we?

ETA: It seems the DOJ took down the link, so here are the words, right in your lap;

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

7 thoughts on “Check Your Premises

  1. I made the same point in a comment to this blog, it didn’t gain any traction. Gunnies are using the ”guns kill people” argument against Holder. It may score points politically, but the logical inconsistency is clear.

  2. Ok, maybe I really don’t get it.

    I know that “the guns” didn’t kill Agents Terry and Zapata, it was criminals. But isn’t it relevant that the firearms used by those criminals were supplied by Federal law enforcement agencies apparently at the behest of the DOJ, and possibly the president himself?

    Or is your point that the whole Fast And Furious thing is just a sideshow, a distraction?

  3. perlhaqr; Guns don’t kill people. Gangsters kill people. Obama and Holder, et al, perpetyrated a fraud, planning for a time when these guns would show up at crime scenes (and who leaves their guns behund at the scene fo a crime?) in hopes of using that as justification for more gun restrictions.

    Did Obama, Holder et al kill anyone? Probably not, but they know it would happen because it wsa already happening– they just wanted U.S. gun store guns involved. Gangsters (empowered by U.S. drug laws) killed people.

    As simply as I can put it; Obama, Holder, et al probably didn’t kill anyone, but they committed a fraud, in a conspiracy with Mexican gangsters, as an attempt to subvert our right to keep and bear arms. They attempted to create the appearence of a crisis, so they could swoop in and “fix” the crisis by violating gun rights in the U.S. That’s what government does.

    In this case the “crisis” was the Mexican Gun Canard– the false notion that the availability of guns in the U.S. is responsible for the gangster crime along the border. The MGC was floated in the media for about two years beforehand, and was proven to be false, so Obama and the gang set out to make it true. “You Mexicans aren’t using enough guns from U.S. gun stores to help us make our case, so here– have some guns from U.S. gun stores– use ours, not yours, nod nod, wink wink.

    Now, is it really relevant whether the jihadists used a saw from a government warehouse, a stolen saw, a home-made saw, or a saw from Bob’s Paint and Hardware? No. But if there was a plot to put Bob’s Paint and Hardware out of business by making sure jihadists saw off people’s heads using saws from Bob’s Paint and Hardware, then it becomes and issue. An issue of fraud and consipracy.

    The jihadists are murderers either way. Same with the drug gangs– but we don’t want our government working with them, to fabricate a premise, to subvert American constitutional rights. It’s not to the level of the burning of the Reichstag, but the concept is the same.

    Yes; the whole thing is totally insane no matter how you look at it, but that actually helps the Enemy. It’s just too “unthinkable” and so a lot of people aren’t going to see those ten foot high letters on the wall in front of them. “It could never come to this, surely…” That always works in the favor of the worst scumbags in history. Few ever believe it’s happening, while it’s happening.

  4. Lyle,
    I think there is a difference between the common commercial sale of guns to customers, and the orchestrated sale of guns to violent murders. If my neighbor comes to me and asks to buy one of my pistols to murder somebody, and I sell it to him, that makes me an accessory to that murder. This is what F&F is akin to. ATF knew that those guns would be used to commit murder in furtherance of the drug trade. But they arranged the sales anyway.

Comments are closed.