Cdn-Firearms Digest Saturday, July 12 2008 Volume 11 : Number 693 In this issue: "Any government that seeks to disarm the population..." Re: It'd be a Glorious day if the RFC pulled together "Mother Loses Kids After Sending...Daughter to School Swastika..." Re: A New Face on gov't? Added to Dave. excerpt: Firearms and Freedom ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:55:39 -0600 From: Joe Gingrich Subject: "Any government that seeks to disarm the population..." Subject: "Any government that seeks to disarm the population is acting on totalitarian premises." The John Birch Society http://www.jbs.org/index.php/issues/right-to-bear-arms/18-right-to-bear-arms/1895-understanding-the-right Understanding the Right As delightful as sport shooting, gun collection, and hunting may be as recreational pursuits, the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" has nothing to do with such worthwhile hobbies, nor with the history of the Second Amendment. There is more at stake. Put in simple, unadorned terms, the right to bear arms in self-defense separates citizens from subjects. Any government that seeks to disarm the population is acting on totalitarian premises. Vladimir Lenin, founder of Russia's Soviet Communist regime, defined his totalitarian philosophy of government in these words: "The scientific concept of dictatorship is nothing other than this - power without limit, resting directly on force." Most modern political science texts, in describing government's role in society, offer some variation on the assertion that government has a "monopoly on the legitimate use of force." This is fundamentally the same as Lenin's prescription, differing only in the extent to which the state would exercise its monopoly. While most governments will not resort to the methods used by Lenin's regime - summary execution of entire sub-populations, confinement of millions to prison camps, engineered famine, creation of a huge secret police apparatus - every government that claims a monopoly on force is kindred to and only steps away from Lenin's totalitarian order. The U.S. Constitution, by way of contrast, explicitly recognizes that the people, as an endowment from their Creator, have a right to use force in their own protection, and to protect their families, homes, and communities. That right is self-existing, where the coercive powers of government are derivative, delegated, and - most importantly - subject to revocation by the people when abused. The Second Amendment's reference to a "well-regulated militia" lists one function of protecting that right, while acknowledging that the right existed anterior to government, and is not to be "infringed" or restricted in any way by the central government. The constitutional republic created by the Constitution is likely the first and only government in history whose founding charter explicitly repudiates a monopoly on the use of force. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:07:51 +0900 From: Ian Jefferson Subject: Re: It'd be a Glorious day if the RFC pulled together See below. The Green party has a mixed bag policy. Decriminalize the firearm paper crimes sounds positive. 106 makes me think wistful thoughts of my mis-spent youth. Willy's got a solid idea however I think not just the green party. We all need to join the party closest to the rest of our politics and have our voices heard. Among other things. We don't need to hijack any party. Calm demeanour consistent debate and put forward revised policies. Try to keep in mind that the anti-RFC crowd are mostly just ignorant, cheered on by a few malevolent voices bearing hate-the-RFC literature. Ian On 12-Jul-08, at 5:54 AM, Roger wrote: >> FROM WHAT I READ THE GREENS ARE DEFINITELY ANTI-GUN SO WHY WOULD WE >> VOTE >> FOR THEM? >> THE LIBERTARIANS AT LEAST PROMOTE THE RIGHT OF GUN-OWNERSHIP AND CCW. > > I clearly remember reading about the Green Party and their ANTI- > position on > Firearms Ownership. Even if they flip-flopped to gain support of > Canadian > Firearms Owners, I'd never trust them if they did a 180 just to get > votes. http://www.greenparty.ca/en/policy/visiongreen/partfour c) Gun control and ownership rights Police associations across Canada assert that the gun registry helps them keep law and order. Many rural Canadians and First Nations people find the restrictions onerous and discriminatory. We need to better balance these interests without allowing guns to be prevalent in society. Our Vision The Green Party will keep the gun registry, but reduce the paperwork and bureaucratic burden for rural use and for hunters and marksmen, with no criminal history. In the wake of the Dawson College shootings, we learned two important things. The guns were registered and they were powerful semi- automatic weapons only desirable if one wants to kill lots of people. The fact the guns were registered does not prove the gun registry is a failure, as some would have us believe. It does demonstrate that some guns need to be made entirely illegal. Semi-automatic guns and handguns are in this category. They should be banned. However from the 2006 platform: http://www.greenparty.ca/files/GPC_Platform_2006.pdf 104. Decriminalize non-compliance and eliminate registration fees with the national firearms registry for firearms designed specifically for hunting, while strength ening measures to combat gun smuggling and the possession of banned weapons. Also I have to add: 106. Regulate marijuana under federal legislation as a product similar to alcohol and tobacco. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:46:45 -0600 From: Joe Gingrich Subject: "Mother Loses Kids After Sending...Daughter to School Swastika..." Subject: "Mother Loses Kids After Sending Daughter to School With Swastika Drawn on Arm" http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,380741,00.html Mother Loses Kids After Sending Daughter to School With Swastika Drawn on Arm A Canadian woman who describes herself as a white nationalist lost custody of her children after sending her daughter to school twice with a swastika drawn on her arm, the CBC reported. The Winnipeg mother told the CBC she regrets redrawing the Nazi symbol after a teacher scrubbed it off. She is fighting the child welfare system to regain custody of her daughter, 7, and son, 2, who were removed from her home four months ago. "It was one of the stupidest things I've done in my life but it's no reason to take my kids," the unidentified woman told CBC News. She is currently allowed to see her kids for two hours a week. Child and Family Services workers were alerted after the second swastika incident at school, the CBC reported. When they arrived at the family home they found neo-Nazi symbols and flags, and proceeded to seize the kids. The case has sparked a debate over whether the police and child welfare authorities can take children away because of their parents' beliefs. "I'm willing to jump through their hoops," the woman told the CBC. "If they want me to deny my beliefs, I'll tell them that, but at the same time, I'm not a traitor to my politics, my beliefs. I just want my kids back." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:08:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Sciuk Subject: Re: A New Face on gov't? Added to Dave. Bruce Mills wrote: > I was thinking about something like this earlier this evening - we should > be asking people questions like "Don't you care about your rights?" and > "Don't you care about freedom?" - stuff like that. The operative word in > questions like this is "care" - I'm sure that most people *do* care, they > just don't have all the information at hand, and just don't know what to > do about it. They just need to be shown what to do. > > Yours in LIBERTY! Bruce, Apparently, rights and freedoms are not on Canadian's minds these days. High oil prices, fear of an economic recession and loss of jobs will drive the next election. Our very thin "wedge" issue is not the polarizing club which will resonate with most Canadians, and rhetorical questions about rights and freedoms will fall on deaf ears when livelihood and quality of life are threatened. I believe that the Morning Glory approach (voting green) will not send the message which was hoped, and might well serve in alienating the Tories from ever again (?) supporting the RFC in any meaningful way. It is risky. Well intended, but very risky. We need to do a better job of PR for the RFC across the board, and bring us into mainstream. Allowing politicians to make cheap sound-bytes over our tools (Miller) and letting them get away with shutting down our clubs is only possible because *WE* have not differentiated ourselves from the bad guys, and the public doesn't know any better. Our only hope for salvation lies in the hands of an electorate, who currently will not stand up for us, because they don't know who we are, and what we're all about. All they see is "guns are bad", and we own guns, so we must be bad too ... This is strange, because strong evidence suggests that the RFC in one form or another makes up almost 23% of the electorate (just not in Miller's world) -- we truly do have an URBAN/RURAL divide to overcome. Political beligerance will blow up in our faces. Activism will paint us as (*dangerous*) angry extremists -- we have guns, rememember? Public education remains our best hope (I mean even the Hell's Angels recognize the value of public relations when they do their teddy bear rides for sick kids). We need to become an identifiable minority, rather than an unrecogizable herd of cats We must somehow paint ourselves a different colour. Change our spots. Become gay. Something ... but whatever we do, we must do it as ONE. Rob Sciuk ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 08:10:29 -0600 From: Joe Gingrich Subject: excerpt: Firearms and Freedom An excerpt: http://www.jbs.org/index.php/issues/right-to-bear-arms/18-right-to-bear-arms/1894-firearms-and-freedom Firearms and Freedom Lessons of History History is replete with examples of would-be tyrants who have sought to disarm the people they intended to enslave. Julius Caesar, in his account of the Gallic wars, recognized the difficulty of conquering an armed people, as indicated by such observations as "all arms were collected from the town" and "there could be no terms of surrender save on delivery of arms," and his claim that he had "cut off the hands of all who had borne arms" and had slain "a great number of them and stripped all of their arms." During the 20th century, totalitarian and authoritarian regimes have used gun registration records and other means to confiscate firearms from those who might otherwise jeopardize their rule. Stringent gun laws established by the anti-Communist Cuban government of Fulgencio Batista, for instance, enabled Communist despot Fidel Castro to solidify his control after toppling Batista. Under Batista, gun owners had to register their firearms with the police, which made it a simple matter for Castro's agents to locate and collect the guns. In Nazi Germany, as documented in "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny by Jay Simkin and Aaron Zelman (1992), a pre-Nazi law of 1928 required the registration of anyone having anything to do with firearms or ammunition. When the Nazis assumed power, they simply declined to renew the relevant permits, thereby justifying the confiscation of firearms and ammunition and clearly demonstrating how registration paves the way for confiscation. In 1938, the Nazis' own draconian gun control legislation further deterred effective opposition to their increasingly oppressive rule. It included a provision under which Jews were "prohibited from acquiring, possessing, and carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as truncheons or stabbing weapons." And in his early years as Italy's Fascist ruler, Prime Minister Benito Mussolini, in a speech delivered at the Italian Senate on June 8, 1923, asserted: "The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all the elimination of the so-called subversive elements.... They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results." Government oppression thrives when a people are disarmed. But when the people are armed, exactly the opposite is the case. Which is why the Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V11 #693 *********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@scorpion.bogend.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@scorpion.bogend.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:drg.jordan@sasktel.net List owner: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@scorpion.bogend.ca FAQ list: http://www.canfirearms/Skeeter/Faq/cfd-faq1.html Web Site: http://www.canfirearms.ca CFDigest Archives: http://www.canfirearms.ca/archives To unsubscribe from _all_ the lists, put the next four lines in a message and mailto:majordomo@scorpion.bogend.ca unsubscribe cdn-firearms-digest unsubscribe cdn-firearms-chat unsubscribe cdn-firearms end (To subscribe, use "subscribe" instead of "unsubscribe".)