This is for Bill Whittle

And also for everyone else.  I don’t get paid to do this.  The time spent is all cost, so I don’t spend much time editing.  I wanted to take this piece, or rant, of mine and really polish it, using historical links and references, but too bad– here it is.  It’s verbatim off of a members only section on gunrightsmedia.org, from a thread on medical pot and guns.  I bring Bill Whittle’s name into this post because he has, as I’ve been describing on numerous blogs, fully embraced, with relish, the left’s “guns cause harm” meme.  All the best intentions will be for naught unless we think clearly, following the truth where ever it leads.  Well here it is;



There is a direct and inseparable link between Prohibition and gun restriction. Note Operation Fast and Furious.

The authoritarians learned a great lesson from alcohol prohibition. They learned that huge amounts of power and money were transferred to authoritarians, both inside of government and outside of government (tyrants and gangsters) as a direct result of prohibition.

The first time; Americans understood that it would require a constitutional amendment, because the government is not authorized by the constitution to tell us what we may or may not consume. When Prohibition was modified (it was never ended) with another amendment to the constitution, the feds that were employed to smash down doors and brutalize people over alcohol were given another job, the very next month. Prohibition was modified in December of 1933 and the NFA went into effect in January of 1934. The former Prohibition enforcers, who were accustomed to stealing alcohol for their own use and profit could now smash down doors and brutalize people to enforce the brand new National Firearms Act,. Stealing guns and using them for their own use and profit, and making deals with gangs as before.

Just as Prohibition created a newly vitalized and powerful organized crime culture, which of course availed itself of the best weapons, so too did it give FDR an excuse to circumvent the second amendment. He pushed for and got the NFA as a backdoor to gun restriction, making the case that all this gun violence is just too much—something must be done. “Why; it’s not a ban– it’s a tax!” The shiny new ATF was originally a part of Treasury. See?

Create a situation of violence and gangsterism (Prohibition) then swoop in and “fix” it with more even authoritarianism. Works like a charm, every time it’s tried.

The authoritarians have since come up with ways to fool us into accepting federal drug laws, this time without a constitutional amendment. So now we’re right back to the 1920s, but the constitution took a hit in the process. Drug money instead of alcohol money, drug gangs paying off law enforcement instead of Al Capone buying cops– drug enforcement excuses for more power and money instead of alcohol as an excuse for more money and power. The equation is exactly the same, only this time it’s far worse. They’ve beat down former constitutional limits, this time it’s far longer lived, it’s still growing, and it’s growing right along with outrageous actions of feds working directly with Mexican drug gangs (Fast & Furious). Meet your new masters– the big, happy family of gangsters, corrupt government officials, corrupt police, corrupt foreign governments controlled by gangs, some of the worst enemies of America, the BATFE which was recently made part of the Justice Department (not even any more pretense of being a tax authority) and whole new agencies with guns, lots of funding, and protection from the President when they get caught with their pants down, all circle-jerking together, and weakening America at every stage.

Meanwhile; the Republicans are still busy, frantically trying to decide on what they should pretend to believe during the next election. You Suckers!


Now was that so hard?  I don’t believe I blamed guns for anything, or said that guns were “responsible”, I acknowledged the existence of the constitution, acknowledged the fact that corruption exists at all levels (though it’s unpopular to even think that cops can be corrupt) I blamed gangsters for their gangster crime, I didn’t use the term “assault weapon” which was fabricated by the anti-gun media and the Clinton administration, I didn’t confuse an assault rifle with a semi auto carbine, and I laid out a brief history of drugs and guns, showing that they have been inseparable since the 1930s, when FDR linked them and made up the BATF as a faux “tax” authority.  This is all one, continuing story, see, on-going for generations– we’re just caught up in it.  It’s louder now, our government is every bit as corrupt as during the 1920s and ’30s if not more so, and it’s bigger and more powerful, but as of this morning we’re still not connecting all the dots.  Now I have to go pick up my kid.


ETA; Here’s the Whittle piece.  Listen to the actual words.

10 thoughts on “This is for Bill Whittle

  1. Yup, inanimate objects are not capable of doing anything or causing anything. Just the same as guns don’t magically shoot someone they don’t magically cause themselves to be sold and trafficked illegally.

    Those things happen through the actions of humans. I just wish more would figure this out.

  2. I think I remember someone, it may be been Whittle, doing a rant on this very connection. I’ll have to see if I can dig it up.

  3. I’m glad I’m not the only one who’s made the connection between Prohibition and the gun control movement. All of this hogwash about machine guns, Saturday night specials, ‘assault weapons’, and on and on, started with passage of the Volstead Act in 1919 and has been running apace ever since. You’re absolutely right. In 1933 we traded one version for another, and what we have to show for it is broken (into) homes, broken trust, broken families, and broken promises; all to make sure nobody has a quarter gram of weed in their ashtray.

  4. Here is Whittle on guns, in general:

    The whole “what we believe” series is pretty good. Haven’t found the prohibition-crime-guns blurb I thought I remembered, yet.

  5. “Yup, inanimate objects are not capable of doing anything or causing anything.”
    Yet why does every single report, being critical of F&F, blame the availability of guns for the deaths at the hands of the Mexican gangs? Every. Single. One. I thought we dispelled that lie years ago, yet here we are glomming onto it and running with it like it’s a precious jewel—a sword Excalibur we can use to get Obama. The layers, and the tangled web, of denial are shocking.

    That brings up the more important, key subject of WHY it is that we are not able to unravel this, to work our way back through the causes and the effects, the history, the lies and the reality, the usurpations and their results, and get a picture of the rise of authoritarianism in this country. What are you all afraid of? That someone might not like you? Tell me.

    FDR gave us the BATF, which was moved from Revenue to Justice, and in the meantime we have the DEA (which does what the Prohibition enforcers [now BATF] did) and so it just keeps growing, the gangs get more powerful, and we in the pro gun rights camp are blaming the availability of guns. What. The. Fuck, People?

  6. Lyle – From what I’ve read/seen in the past, I think Whittle does know the difference tween assault rifles and semi-autos, clips and mags, etc. I think that particular blurb was aimed more at those on the middle-left softly-anti-gun folks, using terms they could relate to and understand, and was thus put into those words. Yes, it’s sloppy on a technical level, but to be totally technically precise and correct would likely come across as pedantic and nit-picky, and thus not reach the intended audience as well. I think the gist of his presentation, that Obama/Holder decided to *create* the facts to support their words to support their agenda, is accurate. Losing sight of that over some sloppy details doesn’t move the ball forward, even if technically you are right.

    OTOH, if he’s has NOT done a short presentation covering exactly what you original post was about, it would be great for him to do so, as it is more a “big picture” thing as opposed to the details of a particular event.

  7. The “assault rifle” bit is a throw away issue, really. The BIG problem is the full and enthusiastic embracing of the “guns cause crime” mantra (lie) giving F&F a “body count” and so on.

    Run the war game on that– If that argument works, if Obama, Holder et al are held to account for killing people (because they “made guns available”) the anti gun movement gets a big win that they can use for years to come. See– the availability of guns caused (or was “responsibe” for, in Whittle’s wording) murder.

    “If the availability of guns, as you pro gun people acknowledge, caused all that death, then surely we need to make guns less available. QED.”

    Are we all too eager to get those guys that we fail to see the logic trap we’re creating for ourselves?

  8. The key here is “made guns available” TO PEOPLE WHO WOULD USE THEM FOR EVIL PURPOSES.
    F&F could make guns available to all of us reading this blog, and except for some grass and hillside in Idaho (I’d for sure attend Boomershoot if I had a brand-new high-power rifle), no harm on the scale of F&F would occur. The availability of guns is virtually harmless without the depraved heart.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: