"We allowed ourselves to be shoved back, grumbling, EVEN AS WE HELD THE INSTRUMENTS OF OUR LIBERTY IN OUR OWN HANDS."

My thanks to Amish Tom (a low bow and broad flourish of the boonie hat) for bringing this post at FactsNotFantasy ("Gun Grabbers are On The Move Again") to my attention. In commenting upon it, I restated the principle of the Three Percent more succinctly than I have in the past, I think. (David Codrea keeps telling me how I do drone on.)

Mike
III

My comment:


There was a bumper sticker back in the 70s, "When guns are outlawed, I'll be an outlaw."

The law exists to provide a framework for ordered liberty. Rights are God-given and inalienable (see Declaration of Independence). The rule of law, as expressed by the Founders in the Constitution while sometimes ill-expressed and inefficient, is far preferable to the rule of man.

The Obamanoids (like Dubya and the Clintonistas before them) are far more interested in the rule of man than the rule of law, hence their tearing up of contract law in the auto "bailout" as well as their thirst for gun control.

Amish Tom's post above about the law is harshly stated but unfortunately correct, for as Hobbes observed "a contract without swords" is meaningless. Which is why the Founders inserted that pesky Second Amendment.

Now, the danger here, as it always has been in every trans-tyrannical period in human history, is waiting too long because you're used to doing things "legally" when the tyrant has seized control of the legal system and perverted it to his own ends.

Hitler was "legally" installed in power and quickly began using the Weimar Republic's legal system against it. Gun registration lists, for example, and police files on specific enemies. (Can you say "PATRIOT Act"?)

The anti-Nazi Germans, mesmerized by "the law" and waiting for orders that never came, were scooped up one by one without ANY resistance. Everyone was waiting for the next election, which never came, except on the Nazis' own terms.

(Class, repeat after me: "ACORN." "Amnesty for illegals." "Moving the Census authority into the White House." I think you get the picture.)

Thus we must not wait for the mis-named "Republican" party to get its act together. It never will. If they sold us out in good times, welshing on their promises after 1994, growing the power and scope of government, not only refusing to reign in the ATF and the FBI BUT GROWING THEIR POWER AND LENGTHENING THEIR LEASHES, what may we expect for them in bad times but ineffectual excuses?

The Tea Parties did not come from the GOP, as much as the Dems might wish to imagine it. People are flooding into the streets and the public meetings precisely because they have concluded that the "system," as they have understood it, no longer protects them. Thus, they will make their own arrangements.

Yet the other side cannot see beyond their own world view and assumes that everything is as before and thus, they can order us about and make it stick. This is because they believe in democracy (majority rule, which is three wolves and a sheep sitting down to vote on what to have for dinner) and not the ordered liberty of the Founders' Republic.

The health care debate, then, is like every other debate we have with them. It is not about access to health care, but about government control. But they think now, because of the election, they have the right to abrogate the Constitution (which is not even a concern for them, because as Amish Tom points out above, the only thing they respect is force) and tell the rest of us what to do.

In this situation, there is only one thing to do, one message to get across to the other side. It is not polite. It does not rest upon "legality." It is this, and we must tell this to our opponents as often and as loudly as we can:

"If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

That IS what we are talking about, isn't it? That is certainly what the Founders said at Lexington and Concord, and later, with the Second Amendment.

We Three Percenters have tried to make that point, but not quite so brutally, with the Doctrine of the Three Percent:

"We will not disarm.

You cannot convince us.

You cannot intimidate us.

You can try to kill us, if you think you can.

But remember, we'll shoot back.

And we are not going away.

Your move."

We must get across to them that ONE TINY BIT MORE OF INFRINGEMENT, and we will NOT obey, hence, when they seek to enforce it and attack those of us who refuse, the bullets begin to fly.

If we can get them to understand that civil war is possible, that their own miserable hides are on the line if they start it, then perhaps they will back off. It is our only hope, the rule of law being knocked flat by travesties such as the Olofson case.

The Second Amendment, in and of itself, is no longer credible as a deterrent because we have not insisted upon its enforcement. The failure has been ours, not the Founders. Not even really the other side's, for the Founders foresaw their arrival as inevitable. They counted on us, the armed citizenry, and we have heretofore let them down. We allowed ourselves to be shoved back, grumbling, EVEN AS WE HELD THE INSTRUMENTS OF OUR LIBERTY IN OUR OWN HANDS. But, as our enemies understood, they meant nothing without the will to use them.

The time has come, my fellow armed citizens, to "stick our guns in the tyrant's face" and back him off a step or three. Nothing less will save us, or our children's and grandchildren's liberty, from the tyrant's boot and the long dark night of collectivism.

We MUST do this.

Here.

Now.

Join us.

Mike Vanderboegh
The alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters
sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com