The Economist's Cookbook

Let's face it gun control is not popular right now. Especially when it comes to national level legislation. Several Supreme Court cases have helped to bolster our case for the ability to "cling" to our guns. So instead of playing by the rules, the gun control nuts are trying an end-run to ban all ammunition that has lead in it. So ... basically all of it.

...the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Lisa Jackson, who was responsible for banning bear hunting in New Jersey, is now considering a petition by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) – a leading anti-hunting organization – to ban all traditional ammunition under the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976, a law in which Congress expressly exempted ammunition. If the EPA approves the petition, the result will be a total ban on all ammunition containing lead-core components, including hunting and target-shooting rounds.

This should scare you if you're a shooter. It is legislating by proxy with little or no recourse for the "little guy" you can't vote bureaucrats out of office.

For those of you that are not aware of the existence of what some people call the "Three Percent" movement. They are, for lack of a better description, quasi-revolutionary. I wouldn't say fully, because while they may preach "keep your rifle ready and your powder dry", they aren't out looking to start assassinating public officials or waging open war against the government. Yet.

And I think that they serve a very good purpose. They are a fountain of information regarding gun laws, the abuse of police powers, and trying to gauge where politicians lie on certain issues. And , God forbid, a shooting war did start in this country between government agents and armed citizens, I'd probably be supporting them however I could. Politically speaking, they are either libertarians or "conservative republicans" (I still don't really understand what this means).

But there is another side to the 3% guys and gals that ... concerns me. In fact it is a concern that largely mirrors my concern with "libertarian" groups in general. While most of the "Threepers" I've come into contact with have been passionate, intelligent people. There are a few ... "moonbats" that exist.

Now those of you that are reading this that consider yourselves part of the 3% crowd, please hear me out.

I very much enjoy some of the financial and economic discussions. The work on gun rights and political activism for the Second Amendment is priceless. But get the raving loons out of your group! I don't mind people talking about how much the government sucks, I don't mind the discussion about rights. What I mind is people who:

• Go flying off the hilt about the New World Order and all this other random conspiracy crap, that is a COMPLETE violation of Occam's Razor.

• While I don't object to people holding their religious values. I'm frankly sick and tired hearing that "The END TIMES are nigh!" No one cares, people have been screaming that for ... millennia. I do mean millennia, since the early 100s AD certain Christian groups have been calling for the end times, you haven't gotten it right yet. Please stop treating the most confusing book in the Bible like you understand prophecy, no one's gotten it right yet.
  

I have seen several examples of BOTH of these points of view on blogs that are backing or sympathetic to the movement. (Hell, I'M sympathetic to the movement).

But this presents us with a problem. It's a problem that libertarians have struggled with: how do you get these people out of the party when one of your founding tenants is "free association"? The libertarians have their share of UFO chasing, NWO fighting, tinfoil hat wearing, conspiracy nut cases. And frankly it hurts the movement. It hurts the movement a lot because morons like that end up on TV and the American people go "What the hell? I don't want to be part of this group!"

So I pose the question to the Three Percenters: What are you all going to do? Please keep in mind that I'll back most of you. In fact, I do my best to try and provide a bit more economic education to some of the other blogs that support the 3% movement. But you all still have some kinks to work out. Please consider this constructive criticism.

What happens when we are pushed far enough to start pushing back?

Rick Santelli on CNBC recently tore the stimulus and the Obama administration a new one.

What will we do? I ask this to everyone, no matter their political persuasion. What will YOU do when the government starts kicking doors in because people suggest that secession is better then tyranny? What will YOU do when SWAT teams throw your loved ones to the floor, toss a black bag over your head and you disappear into some sort of institutional camp where you'll be trained to NEVER oppose the benevolent State?

I found this over at WRSA. Watch it and ask yourself what you will do?


What will you do when they decide that you are not "American Enough"?

From the hate for personal/sexual/substance liberty on the right, to the hate for guns and economic liberty on the left. How unfortunate that our oppressors have been allowed this much power.

I hope there is a peaceful solution to this slavery. However I fear that there won't be and before long we'll be fighting in the streets.

Kurt Hoffman over at Armed and Safe has his own Saint Louis gun rights column thanks to The Examiner.

I want to quote a short bit from his article:

In short, restrictive gun laws have exactly zero likelihood of disarming criminal gangs, and instead serve only to impede those who scrupulously obey laws from obtaining the best means of defending themselves from the huge--and growing--threat of these gangs. Whose side are the gun prohibitionists on, anyway?

Go read the rest of it here.
If the FBI is right and 80% of the crimes in this country are perpetrated by gangs/gang members (most of whom are already outside the law) then ... how is "legally" disarming you and I going to "stem the tide of violence"?

On another vein, this is part of the reason why drugs should be legalized. People are in gangs to make money, feel accepted, and be "part of a group". The fact that they fund their operations not with protection rackets, but with drug sales means that by legalizing the use and sale of drugs, one can essentially dry up the VAST majority of gang cash flows.

I say this because Merck and Pfizer can produce medicinally cut cocaine for a LOT cheaper then the street price. Let's use economies of scale to put the Cartels out of business. Legalize their good, and let them supply to legitimate drug companies. Hey look, suddenly there is little to no money in being involved with a gang.

For those of you not familiar with the term, here's wiki to the rescue.

This goes out to all of the gun grabbers in the US. All of you Brady Campaign supporters, AHSA cronies, Handgun Control Inc. members, and the slews of other organizations clamoring for the populace to be disarmed for "the safety of everyone else around you" listen up.

There are lots of gun owners in this country. Many of those gun owners have seen what has happened in Australia, Britain, and other countries where people fell asleep and were not vigilant enough to guard their rights. Many of us, if a ban is passed, will not comply. We will not cooperate. We will stockpile our resources. We will wait. We will train as circumstances permit. We will study. And finally, when pushed far enough, we will defend the right of a people to defend themselves against those who would torment society for "it's own good".

The groups above think they will prevent violence with bans on firearms, de facto bans on ammunition, bans on certain firearms with cosmetic modifications which make it "dangerous", bans on reloading, and bans on lead. What they might start is a war. So as Leonidas allegedly said to Xerxes: "Come and take them."

Here is a bit from NPR of all places about the use of private hitmen being used to combat the notorious gangs of Guatemala.

Now in general, I like market solutions to problems. But the libertarian in me does question the ability of businesses to guarantee their work. Or even the use of that kind of coercion to prevent the death of family members to gangs that are willing to chop a child up and send the bits back to dad so he'll pay his "Protection Money"

In all fairness though, this system of privatizing hitmen in order to keep the gangs in check has been successful. From the Article:

Lots of us have left the gangs. We don't want to return to that life. We're trying to do better.

I don't care if these people get weepy over the death of their counterparts. I honestly don't care. You willfully and brutally violate the property rights of other individuals and then suddenly you get upset when that populace you've been molesting refuses to look to the corrupt government for protection (protection incidentally that they won't find).

Now granted, much of the gang crime we see in the world is drug related, so ending the war on drugs and legalizing the distribution of substances will be a giant step forward in terms of eliminating the economic incentive for gangs to operate. Still I'm glad to see a free market solution to the problem. It would be interesting to see a contrast study done of losses paid out in protection money and the cost of using mercenaries to kill your extortionists.

[Hat tip to WoG]

What the hell?

After attempting to sneak the Xbox 360 classic Halo 3 into his house, Daniel Petric, aged 17, was caught by his parents who consequentially confiscated the game. The game was locked away in his parent's closet, where a 9mm handgun was reportedly kept.

Daniel Petric took the game and handgun from the closet and took them to his parents, asking them to close their eyes to await a surprise.

Mark Petric, Daniel's father, told the court that he had expected a pleasant surprise, but found his head had gone numb. He had been shot in the head, as had his wife Susa Petric, 43, who died instantaneously.

So wait... your kid is a self-centered brat who values an inanimate object, namely the Xbox over the life of his family members.

Just bury the damn thing, change the constitution and ban guns. Stop blaming violent video games and Marilyn Manson. Enough is enough. These tragic murders need to stop.

So ... let me get this straight. The Xbox is not at fault. The gun is. But wait... the author contradicts himself:

What's the biggest factor? Guns. Guns don't kill people, people kill people, but especially if they have a gun.

So this gamer is willing to acknowledge that the gun is merely a tool, but it's a tool that enables violence, therefore it's at fault. So a tool that is not a violence enabler is not at fault when used for a violent purpose? That doesn't seem consistent. Who gets to decide what things are enablers and what aren't?

Really, why do you need guns except to shoot a pigeon, or a deer? You're not a policeman. You can't ensure that you're children won't get hold of your gun. You can't hold yourself to be a responsible adult when you return home angry, drunk and volatile.

Actually My brother who is 14 knows how to use my Sig which is kept loaded at all times, he knows the four rules of using a firearm. And what the hell is that last sentence? I mean DAMNIT people, you ARE responsible when you drink for your actions.

Today, I'm ashamed to be a gamer.

I'm worried, very worried. It seems like no one cares about liberty, freedom, trade, and wealth anymore. Not that your average person really gives a damn about the finer points of argument over freedom vs. slavery. Hell we've replaced rational discourse with emotional appeal, demagoguery, lies, and politics.

I'm just an "extremist". One of a precious few that seem to see the primrose path we're being led down. A path that will ultimately self-destruct in what I think will be a very Atlas Shrugged fashion.

What do we do? Do we run? If so, where? Fighting will leave us branded as domestic terrorists, and while I would love to see the established political power in this country torn to bits, I don't relish trying and only succeeding in spending the rest of my life in some prison where the government and people can forget about you.

Education is failing as every new crisis is used as evidence against free markets and free minds. I think it was Stalin that said education is a weapon. It's a weapon that is, I fear, no longer ours to wield in any effectual manner.

What are freemen to do? I don't have an answer and that troubles me greatly. I get to sit and watch our society grind itself up.