Posted on 03/14/2003 6:03:09 PM PST by tpaine
Introduction
It is high time for the federal government to outlaw gun possession by anyone except the police and the military, and to round up all firearms currently in private hands. Millions of Americans think so, but even the most aggressive of America's gun control groups have not been willing to advocate such a policy. Into the breach has stepped the Communitarian Network, arguably the most influential think tank in Washington. In a lengthy position paper, The Case for Domestic Disarmament (Domestic Disarmament), the Communitarian Network presents a forceful law-and-policy case for a gun-free America.
Domestic Disarmament is noteworthy because it is almost the only scholarly document arguing at length for confiscating all guns, rather than merely outlawing the future production of certain "bad" guns (such as handguns and so-called "assault weapons"). Domestic Disarmament is particularly important because it is a product of the Communitarian Network, the think tank that, far more than any other, has the ear of President Clinton and many other leading Democrats (and *440 some Republicans).
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.
This Article evaluates and responds to Domestic Disarmament and the Communitarian Network's gun prohibition agenda. In addition to discussing Domestic Disarmament, this Article considers David C. Williams's Civic Republicanism and the Citizen Militia: The Terrifying Second Amendment, which calls for a somewhat different communitarian approach to gun policy. Williams argues that the Second Amendment poses no impediment to any form of gun control on individuals, and in the long term, the government should revive the "well regulated Militia" and encourage citizen proficiency with arms and participation in communal defense organizations.
Part I of this Article provides an overview of communitarianism and the Communitarian Network and summarizes the argument of Domestic Disarmament. Part II inquires into whether domestic disarmament is enforceable and what communitarian problems may be raised by enforceability issues. Part III sketches a variety of possible solutions to the American gun dilemma, including the communitarian militia proposals of Williams.
Part IV briefly reviews the contribution that firearms ownership may make to public safety, and Part V closely scrutinizes Domestic Disarmament's conclusion that the Second Amendment presents no barrier to firearms confiscation.
For too long, the American gun control debate has avoided the most fundamental issues. The progun and antigun lobbies both agree that there are "good" gun owners and "bad" gun owners; the main issues concern drawing a line between the two and determining what kinds of measures should be used to keep the two groups separate. In addition, the antigun lobbies argue that there are good guns (many types of rifles and shotguns) and bad guns (handguns and assault weapons) and that no gun control policy should deprive good Americans of their good guns.
Nevertheless, none of the major policy groups participating in the American gun debate argues, as does the Communitarian Network, that America's gun policy should be modeled on Japan's, in which communitarian values prevail, guns are almost entirely prohibited, and gun violence is rare.
By forcefully raising the issue of whether any Americans should have guns at all, the Communitarian Network performs a great service by inviting inquiry into the most fundamental premises of the American gun control debate. In this Article, the authors hope to advance the inquiry begun by Domestic Disarmament.
(Excerpt) Read more at i2i.org ...
Moreover, Domestic Disarmament offers an entirely new vantage point from which to view the firearms issue--from the communitarian context, in which the individual's responsibilities to society are seen as more important than the unlimited exercise of rights.
The authors quickly gloss over this major detail. The first responsibility for each citizen is to not initiate harm/force, threat of harm/force or fraud against another person or their property. That must be the first and paramount priority. Since every politician, bureaucrat and government employee is first a citizen, they have the same paramount priority.
A person that is in possession of a gun or any object does not equate to the person having initiated harm/force against another person. On the other hand, threatening to throw a person in jail because they are in possession of a gun is a threat of force against a person that is minding their own business.
It's not about rights nearly as much as it is about who is initiating force, threat of force and fraud against people that are minding their own business.
It's been said often that a sign of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. I'd say that doing the same thing and expecting a different result is a sure sign of incompetence and irrationality.
Politicians and bureaucrats aren't insane. They know exactly what they are doing. And a main stream news media is glad to facilitate the politicians and bureaucrats, lies and deceptions. That is also true for the authors that wrote the above article for the Maryland Law Review
Why do you think congress is so often called lawmakers? If there aren't enough problems for politicians and bureaucrats to proclaim they're trying to solve they create "boogie man" problems -- problems that don't exist -- and then proclaim to be working on solving those problems.
Now, as far as job security goes that isn't irrational or necessarily incompetent. Least wise not on a purely self-serving basis. But their job security does not take precedence over what they are paid to do.
What is the primary job/duty of government? To protect people and their property from the initiation of force, fraud and threat of force -- to protect people and their property from being harmed by others.
Creating "boogie man" problems and then proclaiming to work on solving those problem for the purpose of job security is fraud. On the scale that politicians in Washington do it it is massive fraud. A third to half of federal government expenditures are spent on frauds created by politicians and bureaucrats in Washington.
That's to be expected when the method politicians and bureaucrats use to fund government is threat of force in the first place. So right off the bat politicians and bureaucrats are in bed with creating injustice.
Income taxes are collected by strong arm tactics: "if you don't pay your taxes you'll be fined and go to jail". Conversely, a consumption tax such as the National Retail Sales Tax (NRST) is a voluntary tax. Wherein if you don't want to pay the tax don't buy the item.
Compared to the massive fraud implemented by politicians and bureaucrats, fraud in the business community barley registers on the "Richter" scale.
Simply put, for the past 150 years government objective is to expand government jobs, cash-flow and control. In that sense it is not unlike any business. But government is not a business and the people never intended for the government to have the growth and control dynamics of a business. The only, I repeat, the only way the government could expand its cash flow, size and control to a hundred times the power and size of the largest fortune 50 companies was by initiating force. The initiation of force is enacted as laws by politicians and bureaucrats. Their minions do the dirty work of initiating the physical force.
Who are the wealth providers and who are the parasites? Who offers competitive products and services in a free market? Who provides jobs, necessities and luxuries to sustain and enhance human life? Who forces people to buy their services or else go to jail? Who initiates force, threat of force and fraud?
Politicians and bureaucrats are far more destructive and harmful to innocent people than all petty criminals combined. And for sure, business and science have done more to benefit people than politicians and bureaucrats. Those two -- government and business-science -- for the most part at this point in time are opposing forces.
The masses are increasingly understanding the frauds impinged on them by politicians and bureaucrats. And that "wake-up" awareness is only going to escalate. As is their awareness and understanding that business and science provides them with massive benefits. Those two effects are caused by people waking up the power of their own rational conscious faculties as the only real and valid authority -- sounding the death knell of the status quo.
Politicians and bureaucrats as well as main stream media reporters and journalists and academics are becoming increasingly aware of that. For sure, it will be interesting to see which ones hang on fighting tooth and nail to the very end despite the unavoidable demise of the status quo -- a lesson in futility. ...And who will flip to rational competence and redeem themselves honorably with integrity as they hold themselves accountable for their past harms inflicted on what was in the past an unsuspecting people.
That is/will occur faster than most people can imagine. To understand why is to understand how the illusions foisted on people of whom holds real power and honor has been hidden from the masses by manipulating mysticism in the minds of the masses. And how thin the veil has been stretched. It has been stretched tissue thin and will fall apart/collapse like a water-logged tissue. Think of how quickly Nicolae Ceausescu was brought down when "X" number of people saw though the illusion of power.
It sounds like the author is attempting to overthrow the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution. As such he should be arrested and tried for sedition.
But since that is unlikely to happen, the treasonous bastards may as well start confiscation. It's inevitable, and I'd rather deal with it sooner rather than later.
This is SIX YEARS OLD!!!
If they were to become a significant force with the USA so that their priciples were being enacted it would be time to take out as many of their supporters as possible before one was harvested for one's organs.
Equating guns to drugs again, tpaine?
You never tire of that sourceless falsehood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.