2008: Gun Control Candidates Need Not Apply

12:05am Thursday, March 08, 2007

By John Longenecker

For the American electorate, candidates who commit to the concealed carry bills and who see them signed into law will show a deeper respect for citizens and the law of the land than gun control obsessives.

How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of. — Representative Suzanna Gratia Hupp (TX)

In national news, Sunday, February 11, 2007, Rudy Giuliani announced in a tour through Kalifornia that his gun control helped reduce crime in New York. (Gun control puts the K in Kalifornia.)

This is why several other Mayors are pulling out of NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s gun control scheme. Not only is it anti-liberty, but it just never works.

At this time, the DOJ’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is investigating Mayor Bloomberg’s sting operations and New Orleans Mayor Nagin is under a court order to return weapons stolen by officers following Hurricane Katrina. Guns are taken illegally. Gun control is illegal in the United States.

His Honor Mayor Giuliani believes that he has learned all there is to learn and doesn’t need to hear from the people about how wrong he is in bringing his ideas elsewhere. It’s a free country, but some ideas are just un-American and reflect a poor understanding of what we are all about. Self-rule.

Gun control contributes nothing to crime control anymore than delaying police contributes to crime control. It hurts innocent constituents by disarming the very people on whose authority police operate.

Think, Your Honor: Police operate on the authority of the people, so that when they arrive, they arrive with your appointed authority. Their badge is a sign of Official Appointment. You derive your authority from the people, and by law, the people’s authority is on scene when police arrive.

But when an armed citizen is on scene, the law is already on scene there, too. This is where gun control is breaking the law: you are disarming the authority of the people illegally. And therefore, you are not contributing to crime control, you are contributing to crime by disarming that lawful authority. [Officials obviously believe in non-police civil authority when they employ private armed guards or personal concealed carry for themselves.]

Individuals may legally stop a crime in progress, including in defense of another and certainly in de-escalating their own robbery, rape, or murder. With authority. And under our values system. Gun control does not legally frustrate citizen authority – it illegally bluffs people out of it and backs the bluff with legal force. This is abuse of process.

Any interference – yes, interference with this authority (such as gun control) — shows a poor understanding of our values, our societal dynamics and of course, crime. It shows an inflated opinion of oneself.

Admit it, Your Honor: New York City is no model for crime control any more than Washington, D.C. is, and even they are re-examining the idea of gun bans.

Anyone for gun control shows an ignorance of or refusal to respect the Bill of Rights and other backbones of our law of the land in that, in such an issue, no official can have an opinion or personal view of the subject against his oath of office, which is to defend and protect the big C.

Any of the 2008 candidates for office in favor of any so-called sensible gun laws exhibit a poor understanding of our system and believe that they have some wiggle room for creativity in governance. They do not. This is the objection of free peoples everywhere, not just here: assumption of powers not granted. It goes against self-rule.

In this country, individuals are already possessed of the legal authority to armed self-defense, without waiting for police. How does a rational person believe that someone already in authority must get permission from a public servant to act in what is already the law of the land – and without that permission, they must be at the mercy of the violent?

There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. – Daniel Webster.

Mr. Mayor: did you know that police have no duty to protect your constituents? The Mayors pulling out of the Bloomberg stings know this. Police have no duty to protect individuals. Many have dropped out of Bloomberg’s attempt to confiscate weapons from the sovereign authority in this country.

Praise to those Mayors who understand the wisdom of armed self-defense and authority at the moment it’s needed most. Thank you for your service.

The Second Amendment isn’t about guns or hunting anymore than the First Amendment is about typewriters, Mr. Mayor. It’s about concepts of liberty residing in the authority of the people since the inception of the nation and written to remain that way. The First Amendment is watchdog of government in various ways and is not absolute, and the Second Amendment backs our sovereignty by force and is absolute, which authority cannot legally be taken away.

Taking weapons is breaking the law because it challenges our sovereignty with abuse of process, itself backed by force. This is not leadership or governance: this is an illegal challenge to sovereign authority.

Candidates who oppose personal carrying of handguns lack the understanding to serve and have only the lust to rule. The first step is, of course, to outlaw the honest. It keeps the issue of violent crime alive while people die at the hands of it. Gun control never reduces crime, but endures as an immortal, evergreen issue.

Listening, 2008 Candidates?

They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters – with force, if necessary. It’s how 22,000 gun laws profoundly affect the non-gun owners in America: it challenges their sovereign authority, too.

Repeal gun laws and stop challenging the sovereign authority of the people: protect it and serve it.

John Longenecker’s book, Transfer of Wealth: The Case For Nationwide Concealed Carry is in its Second Edition and it would make a great gift for the non-gun owner. You can purchase his book at Transfer of Wealth. You can also read other articles by John Longenecker here.

Guns are back on the table

Hannity ask Giuliani the right questions on guns

Dave Kopel's Presidential candidates on the Second Amendment

Early 2008 Presidential Contenders: Pick your gun control poison

Misguided mayors need to look to Castle Doctrine laws to curb crime