Quote of the day—Ron W

The main aspect of slavery down through history was that people victimized by slavery were unarmed, disarmed and then kept that way. Anyone who wants to disarm you while they remain armed are for slavery!

Ron W
October 13, 2014
Comment to White slaves
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

5 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Ron W

  1. Thats all it’s ever been. Control. Hence FDR (who admired Stalin) and the NFA. Or as I’ve come to put it; No government ever attempted to disarm the citizens out of compassion.

    It’s totally predictable and I would go so far as to say inevitible, which of course is why the founders thought to include the unalienable right to keep and bear arms in the Bill of Rights– they KNEW it would be under attack. It always is.

    Now the wierd part is that we observe so many people yelling “Control me! Control me!” The only explanation I have is that they’ve been conditioned to hate/suspect/fear their neighbors and/or themselves so much they’d rather be controlled along with everyone than see anyone free. Whatever it is, it’s as common and as old as dirt, and it’s as deadly as it is common.

    • People are lazy. Look at kids. They expect you to dress, feed, clothe, house, and entertain them, offering nothing return. The don’t want to do the most trivial of chores without whining. When you kick them out, they want someone else to do the same. The go to college and live in the dorm, eating at the cafeteria which is all prepaid by the loans, so they see none of the work or cost associated with it. The reach 22 years of age, their brain is fully developed, and they have never had a real do-or-die responsibility in their life, only an endless series of possible do-overs if they blow it. Cradled for two decades in a total cocoon, they want it to continue. What do you expect?

    • On the Founders and the Bill of Rights: that depends on what precisely “Founders” refers to. If it means “those who signed the Declaration of Independence” or “those who fought in the Revolution” it is rather different from “those who signed the Constitution”.
      Remember that the Constitution was offered for ratification without any Bill of Rights. The justification for this was that a BoR would be redundant since the Constitution did not grant any power to the central government to do the things that people worried about. The Bill of Rights came into existence due to pressure from several of the states during ratification; some say, with justification, that that ratification was conditional on the BoR. (That’s not literally true, but it is arguably morally true.) [For details, see “Ratification” by Pauline Maier. Nice book; it describes the sometimes Chicago-style political machinations that were involved in getting the Constitution ratified.]
      During the ratification of the BoR, that same “redundant” argument came up again. For example, in Massachusetts there was opposition to the 2nd amendment on the grounds of redundancy.
      Fast forward a century or so and we have the spectacle of the central government stomping all over its limits, ignoring not just the plain letter of the Constitution, but also that supposedly “redundant” Bill of Rights.

  2. So let’s take a play from their book. Anytime someone says anything about “gun control” or worse, “common sense gun control”, our response is, “Oh, so you’re for slavery?!” – no facts, just accusation. Should they demand evidence to back it up, we are in a better position because there ARE facts to back it up.

Comments are closed.