17-04-2004, 19:56
Open Letter To Liberals Favoring Gun Confiscation
by Liz Michael
I know a lot of liberals. Hell, some of my best friends are liberals.
And to those liberals, who so often favor gun control and gun
confiscation, I have just one simple question....
Have you lost your bloody minds?
Let me tell 'ya a little story 'bout a man named Adolf. In the 20's the
National Socialists were heavily armed (heavily for that day, anyway).
The Bolsheviks were also somewhat armed, not to the degree of the Nazis.
They were both probably better armed than the regular army, which was
through the Treaty of Versailles, rendered next to useless.
German gun control didn't begin under the Nazis. It began in large
measure because of the Nazis. They did not demand it, though. It was
being aimed AT them. Yes. You heard me right. Check your history. The
political establishment of the Weimar Republic wanted gun control to
control undesirables in the population. To disarm them. They all thought
it was a peachy idea.
It didn't work. German gun control was aimed at the Nazis and the
Bolsheviks, the radical parties of the day. Because the National
Socialists weren't about to obey laws that were not in their interest,
gun control only wound up disarming what little armory was already in
public hands.
What happened? One of the groups who refused to disarm ultimately took
over the country. And there was absolutely nothing their opponents could
do about it. Because they were without an army and without many firearms.
Now, the Weimar Republic is not a direct comparison to today's United
States. But fast forward to today. There are a lot of people, most of
them liberals of some type, who say one of the major reasons they want
to disarm Americans is because of guns in the hands of "them crazy
rednecks," like me. (Even though I'm Black, Indian and Jewish) Well,
let's assume for a minute you get your wish. Let's say that HCI and the
Brady bunch get everything they want in their political agenda passed
into law. Who is and is not willing to obey those laws is of prime
strategic importance to the liberal agenda.
Under a gun confiscation, who will likely surrender arms and who will
utterly refuse to, cuts sharply across political lines. The liberals
will probably cooperate, for the "good of the children," or "the
environment," or whatever pabulum of the day they're being fed. Maybe a
few radical anarchists won't. But most of your mainstream Democrats will
comply. After all, they TRUST the government to take care of them.
However, the groups who will not are the conservatives and the
libertarians. The conservatives, who prominently feature the Religious
Right caucus. The Patrick Buchanan anti-immigration caucus. The anti-gay
caucus. And the libertarians who plain and simply represent the "leave
me the hell alone" caucus. The libertarians who would if they had their
way gut as many liberal government programs as they possibly could.
Of course, the criminals will not comply. Not ever. They never do. They
will, of course, profit from the illicit traffic from those who feel the
need to have a weapon without the permission of a government bureaucrat
or local police official. But I'm not really talking about the criminals
here.
So what would happen under strict gun control is that the political
groups most likely to be armed to the teeth are the conservatives and
the libertarians, and the Religious Right and Buchananites with them. To
a distinctly disproportionate degree.
Now, if you are a liberal, ask yourself this question.... do you really
feel comfortable about that. Do you really WANT the conservatives to
have significantly more guns than you? Because that group of armed
individuals will be able to throw out any election they wish: you all
complain Bush stole the 2000 election. Well, son, under strict gun
control, you ain't seen NOTHIN' yet!!!
And they would likely, in the case of an armed insurrection of any
serious import, be the people who take over the government. Either that,
or a very organized somewhat fascist element within the government will
defeat them, and take power themselves. Where would the liberals fit in
the picture? Disarmed, with no power, no agenda and no voice, with their
pet programs likely in shambles, with both camps of a civil war who hate
them.
The SINGLE STUPIDEST thing that liberals could do for their causes is
pass gun control. They would be writing their own death warrant, just as
the Weimar Republic did.
I reiterate the question. Does anyone here want their activist movement
fully disarmed, and completely trusting the other side in power without
the check and balance of the potential for armed revolt?
Let me guess: some of you reading this right now are thinking with your
gut. And your gut is telling you: "the more I read of your essays, Liz,
the more I see the need for strict gun control. So people like YOU won't
have guns."
People like ME won't have guns.
That's a real belly laugh.
People like me, understand, as Mao understood, that power flows from the
barrel of a gun. So people like me will NEVER not have guns.
Your gut feeling is the same gut feeling the Weimar Republic had about
the Nazis. I'm not going to challenge your feeling. If you understand my
politics, REALLY, it's in fact, nearly laughable, as someone like Hitler
or Stalin is practically the diametric opposite of myself. But let's go
with your feeling for a sec. Say I am the danger. Me and my
"conservative libertarian anarchist radical antigovernment whatever"
thugs are going to march down and destroy America. So what then.... "WE
GOTTA TAKE EVERYBODY'S GUNS!" you say. And let's pretend for a bit that
you manage to get legislation to that effect. Who will obey it and who
won't?
I'll tell ya, who, my liberal friends. You will obey it. The liberals
will dutifully obey.
I won't obey it. The libertarians won't. The radicals won't. The
conservatives won't. The religious right won't. The gay haters won't.
You may think they will but you don't know them like I do.
I won't obey it because in the end, in addition to saving my own ass,
and the asses of people who think like me, I may have to save YOUR asses
as well.
Who will have more power, liberal friend, at that point? Who will have
more power? The liberals or the conservatives? The left or the right?
Because at that point, my side, and whoever happen to be my allies,
whatever you think of my side, will have all the guns. Yes, the
government will have them, too. But do you really think that the
government agencies with the most arms give a rat's ass about the
liberal agenda? Do you REALLY think the GOVERNMENT... do you really
think that government agents at this point in time, care about benign
things such as gay rights, women's rights, racial minority rights and
human dignity?
At that point in time, the only real battle left will be between the
government and the conservatives and their allies. Unless, the
conservatives take the government and consolidate absolute power, which
Hitler did. So you either will have a government dominated by the
conservatives, or dominated by FBI-CIA-DEA types.... or you will have a
government in shambles due to a domestic rebellion.... and remember that
libertarians LIKE to see governments in shambles. And you will have
encouraged the only Americans willing to oppose these people to disarm
themselves.
At that point in the equation, liberal friend, unless your side is
armed, your side won't count. Your side will not only be irrelevant, but
to quote former California Governor Pete Wilson, it will be "fucking
irrelevant." And if you disarm Americans, remembering that we won't
disarm, you will have no power, and we might very well have all of it.
In the light of what I've just written, liberal friend, let me ask you
again. Do you want to disarm the American people so that they will not
be able to fight back against a tyrannical government? Or do you want to
trust whomever comes to power to not be a tyrant. Germany did the latter
and got the Third Reich. What will YOU get?
By the way, lest anyone have a cow, I do not believe conservatives and
libertarians can possibly be equated with the Nazis. But I'm comparing
the Weimar Republic to America of today, in one aspect, and one aspect
only, and that is exposing the fallacy that the political enemies of the
ruling government can be successfully disarmed by disarming the society
at large, which is what we're really talking about. I am responding
specifically to people who say that the NRA, the GOA, myself, and many
of our allies are so dangerous that we need to be disarmed, and that
that could be accomplished by disarming the populace as a whole.
Targeting the most military styled political enemy you have in a nation
with general gun control against everyone actually strengthens the
political enemy.
I can also use Weimar Germany and probably a 100 other examples to
demonstrate that in most conflicts, that when the "gunphobics" decide to
square off against the "gun lovers," the gun lovers almost always win.
To beat us, you have to become just like us. Ultimately, to successfully
disarm us, you will have to pick up a gun and make it so. Or hire
someone and pay them to do the same.
This is why I am so adamantly against the gun controllers. Because I
know that. I know ultimately that for them to win, they will have to
turn into far worse than whatever they perceive we are. You still think
you all will simply talk us out of it or legislate us out of it, but I
know better. I know that either you will lose to us or you will beat us
by becoming monsters. And I know there will be no other choices.
Remember what I said, people. Nothing you do will cause the hardcore
conservatives and libertarians to disarm. Probably, gun control will
only cause more of us TO arm. Because we know what happens next if we don't.
Governments in the 20th century have killed 100 million people. Almost
all of those governments had one thing in common..... they stripped
their eventual victims of firearms. Almost every people who have tried
to appease a tyrant have lived to regret it. There is a more important
spiritual lesson, in your zest to avoid the sword, that some of you have
forgotten.... "Put not your trust in princes." By disarming, you are
trusting the princes.
I don't trust the princes. Do you?
Hitler probably would have come to power anyway in Germany. However,
with a disarmed populace, he came to power with a minority of the vote,
and without a check and balance against his power. Had there been an
armed populace, he might not have been able to consolidate absolute
power. Probably no World War II. Probably no Holocaust. Guns in the
right hands could have stopped it all.
Anyone in today's political climate personally strike you as dangerous?
It doesn't really matter who it is, or what party they belong to. Just
understand this: gun control strengthens their hand. YOU personally
disarming strengthens their hand.
Again, I'll re-ask the question of those who support gun control. Have
you lost your minds?
by Liz Michael
I know a lot of liberals. Hell, some of my best friends are liberals.
And to those liberals, who so often favor gun control and gun
confiscation, I have just one simple question....
Have you lost your bloody minds?
Let me tell 'ya a little story 'bout a man named Adolf. In the 20's the
National Socialists were heavily armed (heavily for that day, anyway).
The Bolsheviks were also somewhat armed, not to the degree of the Nazis.
They were both probably better armed than the regular army, which was
through the Treaty of Versailles, rendered next to useless.
German gun control didn't begin under the Nazis. It began in large
measure because of the Nazis. They did not demand it, though. It was
being aimed AT them. Yes. You heard me right. Check your history. The
political establishment of the Weimar Republic wanted gun control to
control undesirables in the population. To disarm them. They all thought
it was a peachy idea.
It didn't work. German gun control was aimed at the Nazis and the
Bolsheviks, the radical parties of the day. Because the National
Socialists weren't about to obey laws that were not in their interest,
gun control only wound up disarming what little armory was already in
public hands.
What happened? One of the groups who refused to disarm ultimately took
over the country. And there was absolutely nothing their opponents could
do about it. Because they were without an army and without many firearms.
Now, the Weimar Republic is not a direct comparison to today's United
States. But fast forward to today. There are a lot of people, most of
them liberals of some type, who say one of the major reasons they want
to disarm Americans is because of guns in the hands of "them crazy
rednecks," like me. (Even though I'm Black, Indian and Jewish) Well,
let's assume for a minute you get your wish. Let's say that HCI and the
Brady bunch get everything they want in their political agenda passed
into law. Who is and is not willing to obey those laws is of prime
strategic importance to the liberal agenda.
Under a gun confiscation, who will likely surrender arms and who will
utterly refuse to, cuts sharply across political lines. The liberals
will probably cooperate, for the "good of the children," or "the
environment," or whatever pabulum of the day they're being fed. Maybe a
few radical anarchists won't. But most of your mainstream Democrats will
comply. After all, they TRUST the government to take care of them.
However, the groups who will not are the conservatives and the
libertarians. The conservatives, who prominently feature the Religious
Right caucus. The Patrick Buchanan anti-immigration caucus. The anti-gay
caucus. And the libertarians who plain and simply represent the "leave
me the hell alone" caucus. The libertarians who would if they had their
way gut as many liberal government programs as they possibly could.
Of course, the criminals will not comply. Not ever. They never do. They
will, of course, profit from the illicit traffic from those who feel the
need to have a weapon without the permission of a government bureaucrat
or local police official. But I'm not really talking about the criminals
here.
So what would happen under strict gun control is that the political
groups most likely to be armed to the teeth are the conservatives and
the libertarians, and the Religious Right and Buchananites with them. To
a distinctly disproportionate degree.
Now, if you are a liberal, ask yourself this question.... do you really
feel comfortable about that. Do you really WANT the conservatives to
have significantly more guns than you? Because that group of armed
individuals will be able to throw out any election they wish: you all
complain Bush stole the 2000 election. Well, son, under strict gun
control, you ain't seen NOTHIN' yet!!!
And they would likely, in the case of an armed insurrection of any
serious import, be the people who take over the government. Either that,
or a very organized somewhat fascist element within the government will
defeat them, and take power themselves. Where would the liberals fit in
the picture? Disarmed, with no power, no agenda and no voice, with their
pet programs likely in shambles, with both camps of a civil war who hate
them.
The SINGLE STUPIDEST thing that liberals could do for their causes is
pass gun control. They would be writing their own death warrant, just as
the Weimar Republic did.
I reiterate the question. Does anyone here want their activist movement
fully disarmed, and completely trusting the other side in power without
the check and balance of the potential for armed revolt?
Let me guess: some of you reading this right now are thinking with your
gut. And your gut is telling you: "the more I read of your essays, Liz,
the more I see the need for strict gun control. So people like YOU won't
have guns."
People like ME won't have guns.
That's a real belly laugh.
People like me, understand, as Mao understood, that power flows from the
barrel of a gun. So people like me will NEVER not have guns.
Your gut feeling is the same gut feeling the Weimar Republic had about
the Nazis. I'm not going to challenge your feeling. If you understand my
politics, REALLY, it's in fact, nearly laughable, as someone like Hitler
or Stalin is practically the diametric opposite of myself. But let's go
with your feeling for a sec. Say I am the danger. Me and my
"conservative libertarian anarchist radical antigovernment whatever"
thugs are going to march down and destroy America. So what then.... "WE
GOTTA TAKE EVERYBODY'S GUNS!" you say. And let's pretend for a bit that
you manage to get legislation to that effect. Who will obey it and who
won't?
I'll tell ya, who, my liberal friends. You will obey it. The liberals
will dutifully obey.
I won't obey it. The libertarians won't. The radicals won't. The
conservatives won't. The religious right won't. The gay haters won't.
You may think they will but you don't know them like I do.
I won't obey it because in the end, in addition to saving my own ass,
and the asses of people who think like me, I may have to save YOUR asses
as well.
Who will have more power, liberal friend, at that point? Who will have
more power? The liberals or the conservatives? The left or the right?
Because at that point, my side, and whoever happen to be my allies,
whatever you think of my side, will have all the guns. Yes, the
government will have them, too. But do you really think that the
government agencies with the most arms give a rat's ass about the
liberal agenda? Do you REALLY think the GOVERNMENT... do you really
think that government agents at this point in time, care about benign
things such as gay rights, women's rights, racial minority rights and
human dignity?
At that point in time, the only real battle left will be between the
government and the conservatives and their allies. Unless, the
conservatives take the government and consolidate absolute power, which
Hitler did. So you either will have a government dominated by the
conservatives, or dominated by FBI-CIA-DEA types.... or you will have a
government in shambles due to a domestic rebellion.... and remember that
libertarians LIKE to see governments in shambles. And you will have
encouraged the only Americans willing to oppose these people to disarm
themselves.
At that point in the equation, liberal friend, unless your side is
armed, your side won't count. Your side will not only be irrelevant, but
to quote former California Governor Pete Wilson, it will be "fucking
irrelevant." And if you disarm Americans, remembering that we won't
disarm, you will have no power, and we might very well have all of it.
In the light of what I've just written, liberal friend, let me ask you
again. Do you want to disarm the American people so that they will not
be able to fight back against a tyrannical government? Or do you want to
trust whomever comes to power to not be a tyrant. Germany did the latter
and got the Third Reich. What will YOU get?
By the way, lest anyone have a cow, I do not believe conservatives and
libertarians can possibly be equated with the Nazis. But I'm comparing
the Weimar Republic to America of today, in one aspect, and one aspect
only, and that is exposing the fallacy that the political enemies of the
ruling government can be successfully disarmed by disarming the society
at large, which is what we're really talking about. I am responding
specifically to people who say that the NRA, the GOA, myself, and many
of our allies are so dangerous that we need to be disarmed, and that
that could be accomplished by disarming the populace as a whole.
Targeting the most military styled political enemy you have in a nation
with general gun control against everyone actually strengthens the
political enemy.
I can also use Weimar Germany and probably a 100 other examples to
demonstrate that in most conflicts, that when the "gunphobics" decide to
square off against the "gun lovers," the gun lovers almost always win.
To beat us, you have to become just like us. Ultimately, to successfully
disarm us, you will have to pick up a gun and make it so. Or hire
someone and pay them to do the same.
This is why I am so adamantly against the gun controllers. Because I
know that. I know ultimately that for them to win, they will have to
turn into far worse than whatever they perceive we are. You still think
you all will simply talk us out of it or legislate us out of it, but I
know better. I know that either you will lose to us or you will beat us
by becoming monsters. And I know there will be no other choices.
Remember what I said, people. Nothing you do will cause the hardcore
conservatives and libertarians to disarm. Probably, gun control will
only cause more of us TO arm. Because we know what happens next if we don't.
Governments in the 20th century have killed 100 million people. Almost
all of those governments had one thing in common..... they stripped
their eventual victims of firearms. Almost every people who have tried
to appease a tyrant have lived to regret it. There is a more important
spiritual lesson, in your zest to avoid the sword, that some of you have
forgotten.... "Put not your trust in princes." By disarming, you are
trusting the princes.
I don't trust the princes. Do you?
Hitler probably would have come to power anyway in Germany. However,
with a disarmed populace, he came to power with a minority of the vote,
and without a check and balance against his power. Had there been an
armed populace, he might not have been able to consolidate absolute
power. Probably no World War II. Probably no Holocaust. Guns in the
right hands could have stopped it all.
Anyone in today's political climate personally strike you as dangerous?
It doesn't really matter who it is, or what party they belong to. Just
understand this: gun control strengthens their hand. YOU personally
disarming strengthens their hand.
Again, I'll re-ask the question of those who support gun control. Have
you lost your minds?