Letter: Misrepresentations of anti-gun activists

Graphic by Lori Deaton

Having read the letter to the editor [“Curb Gun Violence Via the Voting Booth”] and position of Asheville City Council in the March 7 issue of the Mountain Xpress [“Bridge Over Troubled Water: Asheville Hears from McGrady”], I am once again confronted with the ignorance and misrepresentations of the anti-gun activists.

In the letter writer’s case, he uses the standard inflammatory language, equating opposition within the legislature to his misguided opinion as “collusion with murder” with the usual tired insinuation of being bought off by the NRA, all for following the Constitution as they are required by their oath of office. The funding and promoting of the victims of the most recent tragedy as political props in the one-sided, scripted “discussion” by left-wing individuals and anti-gun activist groups, with the collaboration of the media, is of course unmentioned.

He also has little understanding of the so-called “assault weapons” bill, as well as what an “assault weapon” actually is. An “assault weapon” is a medium-range, fully automatic weapon capable of sustained rapid fire with a single trigger pull. These weapons were banned for importation, manufacture and sale new to the public in 1986, yet those manufactured and sold before that date are still legal to own and transfer, even today, upon paying the $200 tax and qualifying for the class III federal license.

An AR-15 (as in Armalite, the original manufacturer) is a replica in appearance, but not function, being no difference in function than your granddad’s self-loading hunting rifle. To use the term “combat assault weapon” is like calling a Prius a Ferrari, just because they have somewhat similar appearance. His take on the “Brady Bill” is a misrepresentation as well. Nothing in the bill prohibited the ownership or transfer of this class of weapon, as misidentified, and with features described by the legislation for maximum public relations value in fooling people who can’t recognize the deception of the anti-gun left.

[The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, passed the year after the Brady Law] only prohibited the manufacture of weapons with similar features as described in the bill, something the firearm manufacturers got around immediately by making changes to the appearance of the weapons to comply with the “feel good” legislation without much substance. All standard-capacity (now called “high-capacity”) magazines for the weapon owned or manufactured previously were similarly exempt. The media did their job in deceiving the public into believing these firearms and components were all now “banned.”

City Council’s resolution, worthless as it is, repeats the same ignorance expressed by the letter writer in that they think they can ban “possession” of these semiauto rifles with a “scary” appearance, in clear violation of the constitutional ban on ex post facto law (Sec. 10-1). An ex post facto law is “one that makes a crime of an act that was not a crime at the time it was committed” (Commonwealth ex rel. Wall v. Smith). Perhaps the city should retain competent counsel before making further foolish resolutions.

Something the Council can do to make schools safer is look into the other thing common to school shootings: SSRI class anti-depressants like Prozac. The majority, if not all of the shooters were on these drugs that the manufacturers had to put a black box warning on, warning of suicidal and homicidal ideation associated with their use. There is also a warning for “depersonalization,” like the person is watching someone else do the actions that they themselves are doing. Ask your pharmacist for the warning paper attached to the bulk bottles from the manufacturer, not the printout the pharmacy will supply when asked for details about the drug.

The media have absolutely nothing to say about this connection, beside using the general, nonspecific term “mental health” and focusing on the guns. Perhaps because of the huge expenditures the pharmaceutical industry has for advertising in these same media companies. For further examples of violent acts by SSRI users, see [ssristories.org].

— Jim Reeves
Weaverville

 

SHARE
About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

47 thoughts on “Letter: Misrepresentations of anti-gun activists

  1. luther blissett

    “no difference in function than your granddad’s self-loading hunting rifle”

    Gun people want to talk gun “functions”. Let’s talk about how the bullets function on the human body instead.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/

    SSRIs are prescribed in other countries. Can you point us to the warning papers that accompany guns? Because if you’re sincerely asking for firearms to be regulated like pharmaceuticals, you’ll find a lot of allies you didn’t expect.

    • Notalib

      Hello, that’s what guns are for. To shoot bullets. To hunt and humanely dispatch the animal. To stop criminals – I mean that’s why cops have guns right. Who will you call when criminals broke into your house and try to hurt you or your family? You want good guy with guns to help defend yourself. Yet you want to ban guns and oh the scary boolits.
      You know what else guns and bullets are good for? Let me give you a hint. 1776. Yea we use those guns and bullets to shoot the redcoats. Yea those soldiers know what bullets do to human body.
      Also civil war. The war that ended slavery aren’t fought with sticks and stones. Took brave men with guns to fight that war.
      We know the effect of alcohol in excess amount do to human body and impact from a moving vehicle at high speed but I don’t see a ban on either of them. Yet a combination of those kill many motorists and innocents alike.
      Oh crap I just gave you loonies reason to ban alcohol and cars now. Ban everything !! Make it mandatory to wear bubble wraps outdoors and be sure to notice those trigger warnings when you’re out in society.

      • luther blissett

        You could have just said “I care more about guns than stopping everyday gun carnage and the occasional massacre” which will be the default position until it isn’t and then you’ll have to find another hobby.

        • Lulz

          LOL you just admitted that leftist do want to take guns aaway. Do you have means to repeal the 2nd? Or how about the Miller case? Cause people are getting fed up with communist who need to lie and claim that it’s within the “law” lulz. Communist somehow believe that passing crap out of the blue makes it lawful LOL. I got it lulz. We’ll elect Fisher and he can kill gunowners if they don’t obey. Cause that’s what will happen.

        • Notalib

          I care about kids, I’m a parent myself. Can your liberal head wrap that around- I love my kid and I love my individual liberty awarded by this nation’s constitution to have guns. and I care about having rightful discussion about gun rights and gun use and misuse. Like thE author said there’s a lot of bias and lies by the left regarding honest gun discussion aimed at tugging your emotional heartstring . The fact you said I don’t care about kids meant that you bought it hook line and sinker. You paint us as baby killing nra camo paint wearing assholes.
          Why don’t you call for armed police and guards in schools? There’s an incident in Maryland where an officer shot a school shooter. But your liberal msm probably skipped on reporting it to further the lies and agenda they have.
          The answer for school safety isn’t creating it as a gun free target rich environment for psychopaths.

        • bernard b carman

          and luther blissett could have said, “i have no valid argument for my desire to violate your Natural Right to Self-Defense , because i already know Nazi-esque gun regulations have already served to cause mass shootings via ‘Gun Free Zones (aka: Helpless Victim Zones'”.

          but he hasn’t. rather, like so many other collectivists, he has elected to perpetuate the various lies being committed by the gun grabbers like this corrupted LEO who has no business running for a public office to take an oath he plans to violate.

          simply pathetic.

          • luther blissett

            What causes mass shootings? Guns plus a bunch of disaffected (mostly white) men. Not SSRIs or video games or the lack of armed elementary school teachers. If you have a plan to get disaffected white men off the streets, I’m all ears.

            In the meantime, it remains easier to buy a semi-automatic rifle than pseudoephedrine.

          • Jim Reeves

            Hey Luther, boy is there a candidate for sheriff you can get behind! He would like to shoot white guys with guns, with other guns! He thinks it might be a hoot! Just to prove guns are bad, and WE the rabble shouldn’t have them! (oh wait, he’ll be back at the office instructing his officers to walk into a potential gunfight at every door, like every Nuremberg defense claiming “just following orders” petty party functionary through history.) Don’t worry about us though, we “bitter clingers”will be fine.

          • Lulz

            LOL why are 99 percent of mass shooters also the byproducts of single mothers lulz? That’s like the real 99 percent LOL.

      • Lulz

        LOL they want statues of Jefferson taken down. You know that the Bill of Rights and the Constitution arent far behind. Don’t know how they’ll assume that taking rights away will mean compliance with THEIR laws but insanity reigns supreme.

        • bernard b carman

          LUTHER your attempt at argument is foolish… no, make that STUPID. Do you seriously think blaming mass shootings on either “guns” themselves or “white men” gains any merit in the discussion? SERIOUSLY???

          What instigates mass shootings are “Gun Free Zones” (aka: Helpless Victim Zones). it’s now even on record from a mass shooter who failed to commit suicide that he opted to attempt his shooting at a “Gun Free Zone” school with NO security, rather than the school with security. (as if anyone is so stupid to figure this out without such a confession)

          https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/inside-an-accused-school-shooter’s-mind-a-plot-to-kill-‘50-or-60-if-i-get-lucky-maybe-150’/ar-BBJPozl?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=ientp

          The shooter admits his goal was to murder as many people as possible, and chose Townville Elementary because it had no armed security:

          “I think ill probably most likely kill around 50 or 60,” Jesse declared. “If I get lucky maybe 150.”

          “I HAVE TO BEAT ADAM LAZA . . .” he wrote nine days before the Sept. 28, 2016, shooting in a misspelled reference to the Sandy Hook killer, Adam Lanza. “Atleast 40.”

          Two days later, he debated whether he should attack his middle school, from which he’d been expelled, or his elementary school, just up the road. He decided on Townville Elementary because it was closer and had no armed security. Jesse, who considered himself the victim of an unfair world, announced online that he would kill kids he didn’t know and had never met “before they bullie the nobodys.”

          This AGAIN exemplifies the FACT that tyrannical gun regulations known as “Gun Free Zones” have encouraged mass shooters to feel as though they would be more successful in their plans of mass murder.

          If the American people really want to minimize mass public shootings, END GUN FREE ZONES!

          If you have any other totally stupid comments to share, you might as well save your breath, because we don’t subscribe to the deceit of collectivist tyrants and domestic terrorists like you who desire to disarm law abiding Americans.

          • luther blissett

            It’s instructive how you choose to quote from that piece. I’ll quote a different bit:

            “Jesse acknowledged in an interview with investigators that he’d shot far fewer kids than he’d intended. The problem, he explained, was the weapon. He’d only had access to the .40-caliber pistol his father kept in a dresser drawer. It had jammed on the playground, just 12 seconds after he first pulled the trigger.

            “The weapon Jesse really wanted, the one he’d tried desperately to get, was, the teenager believed, locked in his father’s gun safe: the Ruger Mini-14, a semiautomatic rifle…”

            Weird how you missed that.

    • Jim Reeves

      Luther, If you really believe pharmaceuticals are highly “regulated” then government “solutions” have failed miserably yet again. How about 1,934,305 deaths from adverse drug reactions, 729,926 from SSRIs alone, 415,456 from prescription drugs, 301,194 from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 296,259 from opioid pain relievers, etc.,etc., since the year 2000. How many marches have there been to protest the FAR larger number of deaths due to the big pharma / FDA collaboration. You really need to get a better argument, this is too easy. http://pharmadeathclock.com/

  2. Lulz

    LOL they see the term ban and assume the ’94 legislation banned certain rifles. It did no such thing, But you have laws written by college level buffoons who’ve never shot a gun and in the case of a Sanders, never worked until 45. These are the cronies who for some odd reason leftist look towards for solutions. In reality though cronies only are about taking something away from one and giving it to another.

    • Lulz

      LOL goes against the narrative of white supremcy. Can’t speak truth in lala land.

      I told people when they banned smoking in private establishments that it would only work against freedom. In a way where people don’t like something and they just ban it away. Notice now that smoking bans are not about second hand smoke but ostracizing and shaming smokers? Same goes for gun owners.

  3. bernard b carman

    message to all you tyrannical collectivists who have no regard for our Natural Rights in WNC who champion a Nazi-esque semi-automatic firearm ban: MOLON LABE!

  4. Notalib

    Wow Luther wow. Gee…. guns cause shooting really? Spoons cause obesity? Typical liberal mentality. Blame something then ban it because it made you unsafe. Guess I forgot you people need your safe spaces.
    Bad people will find anything to commit crime. I agree mass shooting is bad and so do many legal rightful gun owners with half a brain. So on gun free country like China, are they crime free? So nobody would use knives, baseball bats, hammers to commit crime? Because only guns are bad, right?
    300 MIL US population, 30 K plus gun deaths and 2/3 are from suicides, which could easily be done by one hanging or cutting himself in the wrist or jumping off bridges/ buildings, etc.
    So not counting suicides, it’s about 10 K and most of them are from incidents involving police and happens in cities where guns are banned, like Chicago for example. And then some nutjobs occasionally did something horrible with guns.
    Compare the numbers with crimes with fatality involving hammers , hands, baseball bats

    • bernard b carman

      VERY WELL SAID “Notalib”! 8-)
      will these collectivists ever pull their heads out of their (you know where’s)…?

    • luther blissett

      “So not counting suicides”

      Yeah, because who cares about making it very easy to kill yourself, especially if you take out one or two others along the way?

      https://www.theonion.com/nra-calls-for-more-common-sense-gun-deaths-1824088427

      “We’re calling on law enforcement to kill more African Americans during traffic stops and more people with mental health issues to use guns for suicide—the kinds of gun deaths that we as Americans can live with.”

      • bernard b carman

        Those of us who care about human life care about the fact that collectivists have encouraged the corrupt STATE to create “Gun Free Zones” which makes it VERY easy for murderers to be successful, yet you ignore facts and continue to clamor for more dangerous regulations.

        What individual with a sound mind would continue to push for further gun regulations which have proven to put people’s lives in danger?

        Are you collectivists not even capable of being honest?

  5. Phillip Williams

    As the downeasters up in Maine say “Ayuh”! There’s a Yankee State with some of the most relaxed gun laws in the Nation. Haven’t heard of many shootings of any kind up that way…..

  6. Kern

    Lets begin with the Gun Free Zones Act enabled by then Senator Joe Biden: Joe Biden introduced the bill that made schools gun free zones: The Gun-Free School act of 1990, which passed as section 1702 of the Crime Control Act of 1990 and signed into law by G. H.W.Bush

    The Supreme Court, in United States v Lopez, originally found the Act was an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional authority under the Commerce Clause. Then U.S. AG Janet Reno proposed changes to the Act that have since held up to scrutiny by lower courts. These changes were part of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997,
    School shootings have gone up since then.
    The safest thing to do is to repeal the so-called “safe” gun free zones act. The MAJORITY of mass shooting have occurred in School and also Theater gun free zones.
    Interestingly, when the school kids were asked what is an “assault weapon”, they really did not know.
    Shame on news media for using our children who do not know WHY we have the Second Amendment: this has nothing to do with hunting, but everything to do with a tyrannical government taking over a country. Lets see: Cambodia, Germany, Italy, Banana Republics and the list goes on.
    Removing guns is NOT the answer. We already have a substantial crime rate in Asheville, if guns are taken away in Buncombe County, the average homeowner can expect home breakins at any time.
    Kennesaw GA, Nelson GA, Nucla CO, Gun Barrel City TX, Virgin UT, These town are making a statement that mandatory gun ownership will deter crime. (and don’t bother to check Snopes…Snopes does not have a clue)

    • Lulz

      Communist will at first pass “laws” to register guns and mags. When only a small do, the rest become felons overnight. Then Fisher can kill people at will.

      • Notalib

        I need to do better than that…. well that just your sorry opinion. Facts don’t care about feelings or opinion.
        Point is ppl showed up in protest and let their voices heard. Washington marched his troops. Long story short, whiskey tax was repealed later on because men with guns once stood up against something that they think isn’t right. They exercised the first backed by the second.
        I’ll raise battle of Athens. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

      • Kern

        Second amendment is having an armed citizenry capable of repelling government tyranny…govt troops…running havoc over the citizens. re: Boston…citizens kept guns and ammo…ball and powder…in central armory controlled by the British. It was the farmers who had their firearms and started the “revolution”. Anyone feel free to expand on this.
        Simply put: In my opinion, this nation is in trouble when the children do not understand basic history, Second Amendment, Constitution, and all that. And purposefully, this is not being taught in public schools.

        • luther blissett

          So in the spirit of the founders’ suspicion of standing armies, you want the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps abolished?

          This is all chaff. Either you think 30,000 lives per year is a price worth paying for the Second Amendment as currently interpreted, or you don’t.

          • Lulz

            LOL how many by “assault” rifles? But now it’s about all guns.

          • bernard b carman

            yes, actually! the American founders forbid standing armies for such reasons. Thankfully, upwards of 30% of today’s LEO & military actually DO understand their Oath of Office to defend the US Constitution — which doesn’t grant us our Natural Rights but acts as a LEGAL guarantee of our Natural Rights… too bad the Federal, State, and local governments routinely and ILLEGALLY violate the US Constitution along with our Natural Rights.

            so basically what i’m saying is, if the collectivists continue taking over “Neo-Amerika” (aka: UN-Constitutional America) and pass more anti-liberty illegal gun regulations — including all out bans on semi-automatic firearms — there will be a new very bloody civil war and revolution.

            i guess we all know you’ll be on the side of tyranny!

        • Phillip Williams

          Really love all of these notes and memes about how an armed citizenry proposes to stand up against tanks and helicopters, etc……first off, these folks need a reality check . The ENTIRE military forces of the United States – Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps – including their Reserve and National Guard components – consist of a bit over 2 million personnel. Bear in mind that not all of these service men and woman are combat troops – many are support personnel – cooks, clerks, mechanics, drivers, etc (the USMC is the ONLY service that fully trains all of their recruits as infantrymen – and there are only about 234,000 of them). Also consider that they are stretched thin – the regular service was bled out years ago and all have been heavily relying on the Reserve Components to carry on the GWOT since 9/11.

          Now imagine this or any future US government being stupid enough to order the military to attack our own citizens – over really anything – but especially over trying to confiscate firearms. Do you really, really believe that most officers and enlisted people would obey an illegal order? Or would they be willing to engage where their families and friends lived? Or that 2 million service personnel, pulled back in from duty all over the world, would really be able to do much over the land mass of CONUS against over 200 million of their armed fellow citizens – even if said citizens were only armed with shotguns and hunting rifles – and of course, the good old home ground advantage that served Afghans armed with 70 year old Lee-Enfield rifles so well against Soviet tanks, helicopters and Soldiers armed with AK47’s and RPGs???

          And somehow I don’t see a massive rush of young folks towards the recruiting offices to join up to fight fellow citizens….This is why the citizenry IS the “militia” – hopefully never to actually fight the government, but to deter the government from thinking too hard about doing something really stupid.

          • bernard b carman

            Phillip, in your post you cite why we won’t have to battle a tyrannical STATE by ourselves as citizens — there are too many LEO’s & military personnel who actually do take their oath of office seriously. Regardless, it’s up to those of us with wisdom regarding our Natural Rights to educate others, especially LEO’s & military. After all, we cannot expect such truth to be taught in the government school system! 8-)

          • Phillip Williams

            Yes – I agree with you Mr. Carman – unfortunately, there appears to be a significant slice of the population who refuse to listen to any thoughts or opinions that don’t line up with theirs. So many who preach “diversity” only mean in physical terms such as gender, skin color, etc…. And it is true – the military officer’s Oath of Commissioning, while it does require a pledge to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, does not contain the word “obey” anywhere. As an officer, you are expected to challenge and even disobey illegal, immoral or unethical orders, even at the cost of your career.

      • bernard b carman

        tyranny = violations of Natural Rights.

        every individual has the Natural Right to Self-Defense. any Nazi-esque gun ban is a violation to this Natural Right which government has has just authority over — PERIOD.

        President Washington acted as a tyrant with regard to the Whiskey Rebellion.

        this domestic terrorist R. Daryl Fisher, Buncombe Sheriff “candidate”, perfectly exemplifies why the 2nd Amendment exists as a foundation of our national Civil Law.

        consider educating yourself about the difference between Natural & Civil Law, along with the difference between Natural & Civil Rights.

        Natural Rights Coalition — Principles
        https://sites.google.com/site/naturalrightscoalitionsites/principles

        • bernard b carman

          https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tyranny
          Definition of tyranny
          1 : oppressive power
          every form of tyranny over the mind of man —Thomas Jefferson
          especially : oppressive power exerted by government the tyranny of a police state
          2 a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler; especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state
          b : the office, authority, and administration of a tyrant
          3 : a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force
          living under the tyranny of the clock —Dixon Wecter
          4 : an oppressive, harsh, or unjust act : a tyrannical act workers who had suffered tyrannies

          ———

          all of these exemplify violations of our inalienable individual Natural Rights.

          Natural Rights Coalition — Principles
          https://sites.google.com/site/naturalrightscoalitionsites/principles

          We the People have declared our Natural Rights a very long time ago, and we are RE-declaring them now!

          collectivists don’t have to agree — they are entitled to their Natural Right of Self-Ownership & Free Will… they are just NOT entitled to FORCE their collectivist opinions upon the rest of us via the STATE.

        • bernard b carman

          TYPO correction: any Nazi-esque gun ban is a violation to this Natural Right which NO government has just authority over — PERIOD.

  7. bernard b carman

    how many millions of innocent unborn babies are murdered each year in “Neo-Amerika”? perhaps we should be talking about banning scalpels…?

    • Huhsure

      Or perhaps ban arguments that try to equate gun-murder with constitutionally legal medical procedures?

      • bernard b carman

        The US Constitution was designed to limit government and protect the unalienable Natural Rights of the individual. Therefore, there is no legitimate “legal medical procedure” which allows for murder. Any such legislation is bad law resultant from corruption and should be resisted via civil disobedience and jury nullification.

        The fact that you would suggest banning free thought parallels your draconian viewpoint that murder is A-OK so long as the STATE says it is.

        The fact is that murder occurs regularly in “Neo-Amerika”, yet collectivists elect to only clamor against murder which occurs with guns. This is, of course, illogical and dishonest.

        • Huhsure

          Abortion is a legal medical procedure. You don’t think it should be, fine, but you can’t argue with the objective fact of the matter.

          Abortion is not murder. You think it should be called murder, fine, but you can’t argue with the objective fact of the matter.

          You want to argue from a neighboring reality, fine, but people are going to call you on it.

          • bernard b carman

            slavery was “legal” also in the colonies and in early America, in spite of the Declaration of Independence boldly stating otherwise to a world of nations who have routinely also “legalized” slavery in various times. that doesn’t mean slavery being “legalized” doesn’t violate the Natural Rights of those being enslaved.

            the objective FACT of the matter is that abortion IS murder — it terminates the LIFE of an unborn human being. this is even scientifically provable for those apparently unable to not understand what is in plain sight — a developing unborn baby in the womb. the development occurs throughout the entire span of ~9 months, the brain even forming within the first trimester.

            it matters not what bunch of corrupt and/or insane SCOTUS “justices” said in ONE case decades ago with regard to their OPINIONS. sure, corrupt society allows the murder to occur, but that doesn’t make it right. that same society allows all sorts of Natural Rights violations to occur routinely, but that doesn’t make those violations right.

            another fact the pro-death camp conveniently ignores is that adjudicating over the crime of murder is outside the just and legal authority of the Federal government — murder is a matter for State and/or local governments. but as with so many other areas of government overreach in general and at all levels, the Federal government acts outside of its legal authority, specific powers, and limits as outlined limits as outlined by the US Constitution. such is why i call this nation “Neo-Amerika” — government at all levels are not operating under legal constraints. it’s a runaway government.

            collectivists apparently like yourself believe that the source of their understanding of so called ambiguous “rights” originate with the STATE. such is the OPINION of most all tyrants throughout human history.

            by contrast, individualists understand that each one of us has Natural Rights as an extension of Natural Law. the connection between Natural Law & Natural Rights is pretty simple to understand — murder is against Natural Law because every individual has the Natural Right to Life; theft is against Natural Law because every individual has the Natural Right to Property; etc.

            Civil Law is NOT the source of our Natural Rights, but rather our Civil Rights. yet wherever Civil Law is unjust wherever it violates Natural Law and Natural Rights by extension.

            in a free society, Civil Law must not only never violate but must be designed to uphold and protect Natural Law because the entire purpose of the STATE is to protect the Natural Rights of ALL individuals. so long as a nation’s STATE is doing so, and Civil Law is not violating Natural Law and Natural Rights by extension, peace, prosperity, and liberty will be maximized in that society.

            as i’ve stated earlier on this thread, you can have whatever opinions you desire. like firearms, you might also believe alcohol & drugs should be regulated by the STATE, but that is your OPINION. once you take action to get the STATE to force your OPINION upon another individual which happens to violate their Natural Rights in any way, you become an enemy to the US Constitution and therefore a domestic terrorist.

            you collectivists cannot justly FORCE your OPINIONS upon other individuals through the power of the STATE — PERIOD.

            you collectivists can also get the corrupt STATE to “legally” recognize twenty some odd genders, but that doesn’t make it REALITY, it just exemplifies confusion, dishonesty, and corruption.

            you sit there claiming i am ignoring reality, yet it is you and your ilk who deceitfully ignore reality — like calling semi-automatic firearms “assault weapons”, or claiming “no one wants to take our guns” when even the local AVL domestic terrorists (mayor & council, and some wanna be Sheriff) have recently publicly gone on record saying so, let alone the various gun grabbers unfit to hold office who have stated the same over the last few decades.

            so yeah, we’re calling you and your ilk out on your deceit and dishonesty, because with all the insanity being spewed out into social and MSM, only a fool would believe ignorance can any longer be claimed. perhaps insanity wold be a better plea at this point.

            suggestion to all collectivists: educate yourselves.

            Natural Rights Coalition — Principles
            https://sites.google.com/site/naturalrightscoalitionsites/principles

    • luther blissett

      Which is nice, but we’ve done CCP here before. If you’re arguing for the same regulatory framework for high-velocity, high-capacity rifles — and funding enforcement of those laws, including breath tests for carrying when under the influence — you’ll find a lot of allies you didn’t expect.

      • bernard b carman

        And again, how are any such ILLEGAL gun regulations going to minimize criminal activity when criminals do not obey laws?

        Did alcohol prohibition deter alcohol consumption or accessibility? No. In fact, it increased alcohol consumption and inspired the creation of organized crime syndicates.

        Did drug prohibition deter drug consumption or accessibility? No. In fact, on one hand it served to grow crime syndicates, including those operating within the “Neo-Amerikan” government. On the other it allowed BIG PHARMA to purchase legislators in order to corner the market on drugs.

        Did ANY gun regulations deter violent criminals from accessing firearms or carrying out their horrific plans? No. In fact, “Gun Free Zones” encouraged violent criminals to be more successful in murdering helpless unarmed and unguarded victims.

        So again, what is your “argument”?

      • bernard b carman

        BOTTOM LINE: We the People are sovereign. We do not NEED any so called “permit” from the corrupt STATE of this fallen nation to carry, concealed or otherwise. We will continue to resist any such violations against our Natural Right of Self-Defense. We will continue to educate more LEO’s & military personnel regarding Natural Rights and their oath of office which they took to protect and defend the US Constitution, the legal guarantor of our Natural Rights against enemies — both foreign AND domestic. We will continue to call for the removal of any public servant who dishonors their oath of office, and when they threaten us we will continue to respond accordingly: MOLON LABE!

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.