Category Archives: Freedom

Quote of the day—Frederick Douglas

Posted on by

The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims have been born of earnest struggle. The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all absorbing, and for the time being putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it does nothing. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.

This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress. In the light of these ideas, Negroes will be hunted at the North, and held and flogged at the South so long as they submit to those devilish outrages, and make no resistance, either moral or physical. Men may not get all they pay for in this world; but they must certainly pay for all they get. If we ever get free from the oppressions and wrongs heaped upon us, we must pay for their removal. We must do this by labor, by suffering, by sacrifice, and if needs be, by our lives and the lives of others.

Frederick Douglas
From here.
[In Great Thoughts by George Seldes a portion of this quote was attributed to a March 30, 1849 letter to Gerrit Smith. But I found that letter in the papers of Douglass and it says nothing even related. I have been unable to find the original date and context of this quote even though portions of it are widely quoted.

I especially like the sentence “Men may not get all they pay for in this world; but they must certainly pay for all they get.” One could make the claim that the entire basis for the Second Amendment is to increase the cost for oppression. It may be that it cannot fully prevent it but it can dramatically increase the cost. And those that would oppress us, even if they may be able to succeed, must be forced to pay a cost. If they do not pay then there is no limit to the oppression they will inflict.

The Colorado Senators who lost their seats in the recall elections because of their oppressive gun control laws and arrogance is a lesson to those who believe oppression is cost free. If they win a battle then make them pay a heavy price.

H/T to Carl Stevenson for his comment which included part of this quote.—Joe]

Hunting with suppressors?

Posted on by

Perusing the WA  hunting regs, I see nothing at all about using suppressors. In the part about Prohibited Hunting Methods it talks about caliber, crossbows, shooting across roads, etc. But nary a word can I see about suppressors. Is it legal? Anyone know for sure?

Quote of the day—Matthew Willington

Posted on by

Matthew Willington (@MD_Willington)
Tweeted on October 10, 2013 in reference to this post about liberals getting special privileges from the D.C. police.
[Almost for certain Matthew was referring to this line in Animal Farm:

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

Animal farm is one of the few books I have read more than once. It is a really, really good book and a fairly quick read.

In the past few days I’ve been listening to the book Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto*, thinking about conversations I have had with Marxists, and our current government situation. It appears, and Mikee independently posted the same conclusion, the “liberals” (communists) in our government act as if and work toward the condition of there being no limits on the power of government. The Bill of Rights is considered “loopholes” that citizens “hide behind”. The listening in on our telephone calls, the storing of all our Internet traffic, the tracking of all our vehicles, the tracking of our cell phones, the abuse of the IRS, the search and seizure of property, the requirements of financial disclosure, and much, much more is strong evidence they want there to be nothing to “hide behind”. They are working toward a society where there are no limits to what the state knows about you and what it can do to achieve the ends of those in power.

What many people don’t consciously realize is that the greater the value of some the greater security it much have to protect it. If you leave a penny on the sidewalk there is a good chance that if it is in a puddle of water it will still be there if you come back for it the next day. If you put $1000 in plain view in your locked car near that same sidewalk it is likely to be gone by morning.

The 20 year old beater car needs less security than the new Mercedes. The piggy bank of a child needs less security than an ATM. The ATM needs less security than Fort Knox. The financial information at your accountants office requires less security than the computer system that contains the financial information of an entire nation. The personal information in the medical records of your doctors office needs less security than the computer system that contains the personal information of an entire nation.

Government power is something of great value to those that control it and extraordinary measures must be used to secure against abuse. The enumerated powers, the multiple branches of government, the reservation of powers for the states and the people, and the Bill of Rights, were all intended to secure government power from abuse.

It is extraordinarily clear government power is expanding without the bounds intended and is being abused with the abusers suffering no consequences. The IRS, Fast and Furious, and NSA, scandals are just the tip of the icebergs. We are in a positive feedback loop. The more power government gets the greater the attraction to those that abuse it. Those that abuse it want more power and less controls. The Marxists who want more government power and claim, “We just need the right people in control” either do not understand the issues involved and/or are the very people who should not be in control.

Scary times are here now and far more scary times are ahead. Read Animal Farm and 1984 as they were intended to be read. They are warning of the dangers of government power. They are not instructions manuals.—Joe]

* I’m annoyed by his claim there can be no morality without belief in god(s) but other than the religious parts it’s a good book so far.

Park Service Milgram Failure

Posted on by

The National Park Service is failing a giant national-scale Milgram obedience to authority experiment. They are doing things, blocking off people from open air parks like the WW II memorial, even while individual rangers are saying that it turns their stomachs. Yet they still do it, saying they were told to, and they had no choice. It’s so bad even the Legacy Media is being forced to cover it and acknowledge it’s happening. This is government by spite, pure and simple. And the uniforms carry out their orders, even while complaining about it. And people say “you will never need guns, it can’t happen here.” Sorry to say this, but… it IS happening here, right now.

The rangers, and the rest of the government employees, DO have a choice. A hard choice to be sure, but it’s a choice they MUST make. And they are choosing poorly.

Quick update: Other than massive civil disobedience, and semi-politely getting in their faces and telling them personally they are failing the Milgram test badly, that they have become a cancerous tentacle of political dysfunction that is TRYING to infect and damage the population for spite, and calling / writing your congress-critters, what’s the best response to these toxic leprechauns?

“If I were in charge!”

Posted on by

I get these emotional appeal type e-mail forwards every day. I usually delete them without reading them (just so all you forwarders know, and besides; I get the same information, if it’s even real, days to weeks, to sometimes years, before you apparently did). This one caught me eye as something that needs to be addressed though;

“PUT ME IN CHARGE . . .

Put me in charge of food stamps. I’d get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho’s, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I’d do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we’ll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your home” will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a “government” job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the “common good..”

Before you write that I’ve violated someone’s rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be “demeaning” and ruin their “self esteem,” consider that it wasn’t that long ago that taking someone else’s money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

If we are expected to pay for other people’s mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

AND While you are on Gov’t subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov’t welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.”

Followed of course with the obligatory;

“Now, if you have the guts – PASS IT ON…”

Oy. I guess we’re supposed to respond with a hearty; “YEAH! You Tell ’em!” and then go back to our search for other emotional stimulants, such that by the end of each day we’ll need to get drunk or bury our faces in the television to calm down.

Uh, no. I responded to the forwarder thusly;
“This is all assuming that the government is rightly and should forever be in charge of “charity” by way of coercive redistribution, which of course is the problem from the start. It shouldn’t.

‘Put me in charge’ she says….

No, Young Grasshopper; PUT THE CONSTITUTION BACK IN CHARGE. PUT THE FOUNDING PRINCIPLES BACK IN CHARGE and then we won’t have those in government usurping the very concept of charity and turning it into something horrible.”

Oh, and just as a side note; If you can’t vote as long as you’re on government subsistence? Heh! No problem; we’ll just make sure everyone is forced onto government subsistence. The Progressives are working on that right now anyway, and so long as you’re dependent on them, vote or not, you’ll have to do what they tell you.

This is the difference between Democrats and Republicans on one side, and libertarians/objectivists and Christians on the other. The former see the problem as an issue of WHO is in charge, while the latter see the issue as being whether or not the guiding principles are in charge. Whoever wrote the forwarded e-mail is every bit as clueless as any card-carrying, ideological Marxist, and most likely is a die hard Republican; take all of the leftist assumptions, make them your own, and wish you were in charge of administering them so you really SHOW THEM, BY GOSH AND BY GOLLY, GEE WHIZ!!!. I’d tell such people to go to hell, but they’re almost certainly already there, so even if they were genuinely inclined to take my advice it would make zero difference.

I’ve tried to say this in several different ways already, but we’ll give it another try;
That which irritates you owns you. It has converted you over to its purpose. This e-mail forward is a PERFECT example of that, and think how many cultures have been trading one tyrant for another, for another, for yet another… Get it?

Pre conditioning

Posted on by

I get a lot of e-mail spam, and I work in the firearms accessory business, so when I saw a message from a car dealer I read it as “Full Auto Inventory Clearence”.

“Hmm. Someone must have a lot of machineguns…”

Actually it read; “Fall Auto Inventory Clearence” but my pre conditioning made me read it wrong.

That’s just a tiny example of pre conditioning determining someone’s perception. It happens all the time to most of us, in some way or another.

We played a trick on my brother years ago. We wired up a whistling sky rocket firework and clamped it under his work bench. When he came in, we told him we suspected something was wrong with his bench lamp. When he turned on his bench power and all hell broke lose, he was scrambling in a panic, amongst the fire, the smoke and noise, to turn off his bench lamp. We had pre conditioned him to respond in a completely useless (and funny – to us) manner.

Yeah, funny funny hah hah, but this sort of thing is done to us in politics and social engineering, and we do it to ourselves.

Quote of the day—Gerry Spence

Posted on by

The police, as in every police state, would simply level their charges and lead the defendant to his blind-folded stance before the firing squad. During Randy Weaver’s trial, an agony for him that he endured for nearly three months, I found the minions of the law—the special agents of the FBI—to be men who proved themselves not only fully capable, but also utterly willing to manufacture evidence, to conceal crucial evidence and even change the rules that governed life and death if, in the prosecution of the accused, it seemed expedient to do so.

Gerry Spence
From Freedom To Slavery: The Rebirth of Tyranny in America
First St Martin’s Griffin Edition: May 1996
[The 1990’s were exceedingly dark days for gun owners. The shooting of Randy Weaver’s son and wife by Federal agents and then the trial of Weaver and Harris could be considered the turning point. The egregious behavior and arrogance of the Feds enraged gun owners and inspired thousands, if not millions, of people who had never owned guns to purchase them. The Weaver shooting took place less than 20 miles from where I lived at the time and I was among those that became a gun owner shortly thereafter.

This blog, Boomershoot, and a great number of significant events in my life were the result of what happened at Ruby Ridge.

That was over 20 years ago and many of the freedom activists I know don’t remember the events or that it even occurred. And many that do probably don’t understand the significance of that event in today’s fight for freedom. The Federal government learned some important lessons as a result of that incident and the response of the American people. The “militia movement” was part of that response and it was a real wake up call to the Feds.

But I’m not sure it was the lesson we wanted the Feds to learn. My impression is they learned it was too risky to begin using naked force to subjugate the people. They did not reverse course.

They grudgingly accepted we have at least some narrowly defined right to keep and bear arms but attacked our economic base, our privacy, and regulate the minutia of nearly every activity. The “assault weapon” bans, TSA and Obamacare are just the most obvious infringements of our freedom.

There are probably 10s of thousands of regulations which by themselves would be laughable and easily dismissed if it weren’t for the fact they are each tiny links in huge and heavy chains that enslave us through the daily sapping of our time and money to avoid committing numerous crimes each day. Ultimately these laws can, and probably will, be used to create the police state Spence warns us of. And it will all occur with firing only the occasional, and almost entirely ignored, shots.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield

Posted on by

The Democratic Party is no longer the party of Thomas Jefferson. It’s the party of King George III. And it doesn’t like the idea of armed peasants, not because an occasional peasants goes on a shooting spree, but because like a certain dead mad king who liked to talk to trees, it believes that government power comes before individual liberty. Like that dead king, it believes that it means this for the benefit of the peasants who will be better off being told what to do.

Daniel Greenfield
September 22, 2013
The Central Planning Solution to Evil
[H/T to Caleb.

I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Matthew May

Posted on by

I will not submit to a cabal who read George Orwell’s 1984 not as a terrifying warning, but as an instruction manual. Nor will I submit to the dictates of those who attempt to trample the right of free speech of others in the halls of government who are warning us about the looming tyranny. I refer to those sons of liberty who, as Camus wrote, “are not all legitimate or to be admired. Those who applaud it only when it justifies their privileges and shout nothing but censorship when it threatens them are not on our side.”

Matthew May
September 30, 2013
I Will Not Comply
[H/T Tyler Durden.

With the NSA listening to and recording every phone conversation, reading and storing every email message, the post office taking pictures of every envelope, and the government mandating the details of relationships (with insurance companies), police officers told to not wear their uniform and gun onto school campuses (H/T Ry), and people seriously advocating absolutely crazy stuff, how can we not think we are in a Orwellian dystopian universe? The Jews in 1939 Germany couldn’t really believe it was happening. It was crazy to believe people would do the things they were doing. It just couldn’t be real. But it was real. And it’s real now. Believe it.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Charles Krauthammer

Posted on by

Sarah Brady is doing God’s work. Yes, in the end America must follow the way of other democracies and disarm.

Charles Krauthammer
April 8, 1996
Both Sides Blowing Smoke In Gun Debate
[This was nearly 20 years ago and some people still believe this. What they don’t seem to grasp is that totalitarian societies are much more likely to be disarmed than democracies. Either that or they yearn for a totalitarian society and wish to enable it.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield

Posted on by

Helpless people must find something to think about while waiting for their kings and princes to do something about the killing. Instead of doing something about it themselves, they blame the freedom that left the killer free to kill, instead of the lack of freedom that prevented them from being able to stop him.

Daniel Greenfield
September 22, 2013
The Central Planning Solution to Evil
[H/T to Caleb.

Another way to think about it is that the political jurisdictions in this country that heavily restrict firearms and have high crime rates are in an awkward position between freedom and a centrally planned police state. You may be able to achieve low crime rates in a benevolent police state but run a high risk of poverty, political corruptions, gulags, reeducation camps, and genocide. Or, you can have the appearance of chaos, the uncertainties, and the insecurities of a free society.

The question is, “Which way will those states, and this country, teetering on the edge of a police state, trend toward in the next few years?—Joe]

Quote of the day—DumbGeezer

Posted on by

To them Stalin is a feature, not a bug.

DumbGeezer
September 2013
Comment to Dr. Grover Furr – An Example of Recto-Cranial Inversion
[I believe there is more than sufficient evidence to support this hypothesis.

Do not forget that in every genocide the victims outnumber the perpetrators by at least 100:1 and that you have an inalienable right to keep and bear arms and use them in defense of innocent human life.—Joe]

Say WHAT?

Posted on by

They just keep coming.

I’m still wondering about Fast and Furious, and we’re what, a couple dozen scandals removed from that now, each one taking the former one off the main headlines? You couldn’t make this stuff up– It would be taken as way too far beyond believability.

Quiz

Posted on by

1. In your best, logical assessment, America’s enemies would rather see American citizens;
A) armed.
B) disarmed.

2. In your best, logical assessment, America’s enemies would rather see U.S. Military personnel;
A) armed while on and off duty inside U.S. military installations.
B) disarmed while on and off duty inside U.S. military installations.

3. In your best, purely logical assessment, America’s enemies;
A) approve of the second amendment to the U.S. constitution and would like to see it protected and enforced.
B) disapprove of the second amendment to the U.S. constitution and would like to see it limited, eroded and degraded as much as possible.

4. In your best, purely logical, most detached and rational assessment, America’s enemies would rather see American citizens generally;
A) capable in the use of arms, having arms and ammunition of their own, being self sufficient and largely independent individually, largely fearless and moral, hopeful, principled, and more able to help their friends and neighbors in times of need such that outside help from official authorities is not crucial to survival.
B) ignorant in the use of arms, having no arms or ammunition of their own, being largely dependent on government programs for their sustenance, medicine, energy, education, transportation and protection, largely fearful and demoralized, unprincipled, and less able to help their friends and neighbors in times of need such that outside help from official authorities is crucial to survival.

You will be graded on your answers.

Random thought of the day

Posted on by

Barb and I frequent have talks about “crazy people”. This morning was one of those times. I don’t remember exactly what she said but something she said gave me a new insight and I told her my new hypothesis.

We get frustrated, grumpy, and angry from dealing with people that aren’t entirely in touch with reality. I’ll bet they feel the same way when their world view doesn’t match reality and they try to deal with us.

Then this afternoon Lyle left the following comment on a blog post:

when you take an irrational position and hold that it is rational, when you look at sane people and consider them insane, when you look at justice and consider it injustice, when you take on the victim mentality and blame the self sufficient, then slowly but surely, reason and sanity themselves become your enemies, and insanity your friend, for reality makes you face your faults and insanity protects you from facing them.

There is more. It’s as if he read my mind and extrapolated.

Another defeat for criminals…

Posted on by

…both inside and outside of government. This time in Illinois.

I give more money to the SAF than anyone else outside my family.

More on voter suppression

Posted on by

Heh!

We’re being asked (told?) to believe that the voters who wanted Progressives in office “couldn’t get to the polls” (Where are they? I don’t know. What IS a poll anyway? Where am I? Who am I? Who are you? What planet is this? Vote for Who? Why? What’s happening and is there any way of stopping it?) while those who wanted freedom didn’t have any trouble at all finding those pesky, shifty, sneaky, evasive polls, even after the Progressives massively out-spend those who prefer freedom.

Well there you have it. When Progressives win it’s grass-roots democracy in action– a beautiful expression of The American Way and what could ever be better or more wonderful than that. When Progressives lose it’s big money corporate-funded voter suppression by mean people who suck and are probably terrorists.

More on redistribution

Posted on by

Charity is a vitally important component to any civilized society and as such, government should be kept completely out of it.

The first amendment touched upon the concept that a most highly important societal aspect or institution should be hands-off (no government involvement) but it is not well understood. We tend to focus on the particulars (religion, speech, the press, redress and assembly) but ignore the principle behind it.

A good 9/11 QOTD

Posted on by

Religious tolerance: If your religion requires you to kill me to get to heaven, I don’t have to tolerate that.

h/t Random Nuclear Strikes

Entitlement attitude

Posted on by

From the Seattle Police Department:

Around 1 pm Thursday, two teens were sitting on the steps of Franklin High School when a woman climbed out of a blue Audi parked on the street, approached the teens, and asked to use one of the teens’ cell phones.

One of the teens reluctantly handed her iPhone over to the woman, who walked off with the victim’s phone, climbed into the Audi and sped away.

The victim immediately went inside the school and called 911.

Patrol officers spotted the Audi near Rainier Avenue and S. Othello Street, pulled the car over and contacted the two 18-year-old women inside.

One of the women in the car then pulled the victim’s iPhone out of her purse, handed it back to officers., and said [s]he had taken it because her phone had died and she needed a new one.

Officers booked both women into the King County Jail, where they’re undoubtedly enjoying the jail’s excellent cell coverage.

Interesting response. Did the thief actually believe she was entitled to replace her phone in this manner? I think a case can be made that people have been getting “free” stuff from via government theft for so long that some believe they are improving the system by removing the middle-man.