By W. AUGUST MAYER
August 5, 2019 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - What follows is a reprint of a piece that we posted on January 17, 2013 voicing our thoughts about a proposal made by then President Obama regarding administrative changes that he stated would address gun violence. As these things usually go, his initiative was rolled out during a surreal dog-and-pony show using school children as human shields. This, in a cowardly attempt to hide his true agenda - registration then confiscation of all firearms.
Administratively, in what we believe is clearly an unconstitutional end-run around the Second Amendment, Team Obama has issued a set of new "guidelines" and/or Executive Orders which direct various federal agencies to carry out specific steps to address the alleged problem - easy access to defensive weaponry by American citizens.
First observation - It's impossible to ignore the President and Vice President BiteMe's shameless use of innocent kids as pawns in a high-stakes game of chess, a tactic which is identical to that employed by the Third Reich.
Since the November election the neo-Marxist/neo-Fascists, led by Mr. Obama, have moved with great haste to implement key elements in what might be called the left's implicit agenda.
All political ideologies/philosophies are at their core an attempt to define the world in terms [he who controls the language, controls the narrative/agenda] which lend themselves to the solutions provided by said ideologies.
So on the left their defining of capitalism as an unfair method of distributing goods and services results in a desire to pass legislation which will result in more stringent regulation/control of business and consequently, higher taxes on successful capitalists and their various enterprises.
The above is widely understood - lefties do not like business.
Also ranking high on their hate list is firearms - "guns" in their rather limited lexicon on the topic.
These folks either don't understand the Second Amendment or as is overwhelmingly the case, fully understand the implications of "the right to keep and bear arms," ignore it, perhaps alleging that it's no longer acceptable in "modern, civilized" America, and proceed down the path towards jack-booted confiscation.
These anti-gunners will never rest until the right to bear is denied to all but the wealthy, the well connected and the powerful.
Now do not be overly concerned, armed guards will still protect your money at the bank and at the Federal Reserve, heavily armed Secret Service personnel [with .45 caliber or 9mm full-auto HK MP5 sub-machineguns] will guard the president and his family [as they should] and Hollywood showbiz kids [who make movies about themselves and don't give a fuck about anyone else] will continue to be granted concealed carry permits and be surrounded by armed security guards with nearly enough firepower to take over a small Banana Republic.
In plain terms, for the left it's much like capitalism, it's fine for them, just not for you.
It's the Soup Nazi writ large..."No prosperity or security for YOU!"
And so their philosophy goes, armed guards with military weapons for them, a rusty butcher knife or can opener for you - possibly a courtesy toe tag, perhaps on a still warm body if the coroner is quick enough.
Just the facts ma'am...
Now without going into the text of the lengthy, at times very heated debates which took place during the Constitutional Congress on this matter [please refer to "The Federalist," authored semi-anonymously by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison - all towering intellects whose wit and wisdom was so formidable that any of them would wipe the floor in a debate with any current member of the Democrat leadership - including the alleged "smartest man in the world," Barack Hussein Obama whom we believe is fluent neither in ancient Greek nor Latin], let is suffice to say that the purpose of the Second Amendment was clearly understood by all of the Founding Fathers to mean one thing - to insure that American citizens would always have access to the weapons necessary to resist a government turned tyrannical.
You mean it's not about having the ability to go out in the fall and chase Bambi's dad all over the lower 40?
Nope, it has nothing to do with hunting - btw did John Kerry ever get his "huntin' license?"
If hunting must be defended, then let's just say it was and remains ordained by a higher authority and is locked into the DNA of homo sapiens. Perhaps more succinctly we are prisoners [thank you Norman Mailer] of the urge to hunt.
The "right" to hunt, is therefore by definition, inalienable and yes, sometimes you do need more than "7 cartridges," to kill your quarry. Consider dealing with an enraged Cape Buffalo which has already absorbed 4 shots from your .470 Nitro Express double. THAT Duggaboy is hiding while bleeding in the pampas. He is completely pissed-off and almost impervious to pain. This fella is going to wait so he can ambush, then stomp your ass into red colored jam. If the game being hunted is elephant, then after being adequately trampled you will be picked up by the animal's powerful trunk and beaten for good measure against the closest big rock or tree.
We analogize this using large, dangerous game animals because they symbolize the sheer power of a modern rogue government. Now if our unlucky hunter [and his Bwana] had the good sense to use a .577 Tyrannosaurus or a .600 Nitro Express, perhaps one good shot behind the shoulder would have sufficed.
Maybe not...these animals seldom die easy. You don't survive in Africa unless you are, to use the colloqialism, "tough as nails."
Make sense so far?
Fact: At the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment [of course as part of the Bill of Rights] the "assault rifle" of the day was a large bore - usually over .50 caliber - rifle or musket. The difference being that muskets have smooth bores and hence are a less efficient weapon accuracy and range wise than the rifle, whose bullet is spun like a football by the engraved rifling for stability.
Many upon many Redcoats fell to well placed slugs fired by the Colonists out of Kentucky [or Pennsylvania] Long Rifles - you could have asked their widows...or better...their field surgeons.
It should seem manifestly clear to anyone that at the time the Second was agreed upon, the weapons which were referred to generically as "arms," were what are now being re-classified by the gun-grabbers as assault rifles and/or military semi-auto pistols.
Bottom line: It was these state of the art milspec weapons that the Founders intended that American citizens never be denied access to. They wanted to forever provide access to the type of weapon which was capable of fending off government, assuming it were to come to that...an unthinkable proposition to be sure.
Hunting has nothing, repeat n-o-t-h-i-n-g to do with it...would someone please pass this information along to Mr. Cuomo...we believe he is outside on a ledge somewhere.
Hell, at the time, everyone hunted, the "right" to do that was never even considered. It would have been a bizarre consideration under any circumstance, how was one to put meat on the table unless the breadwinner could go out into the wilderness and kill a deer a beaver or a bunch of grouse?
None of this of course dissuades the left from attempting to disarm the public, hence the soon-to-come "assault weapons" legislation - which actually was authored some time ago, kept on the shelf and then conveniently dusted off when some firearm related tragedy took place.
Shades of the Reichstag fire in 1933.
Don't try to tell me that the left was not overjoyed at the news of the Connecticut shooting. To them it was manna from heaven, a sheer gift. That's the way this bunch works. It's also the way that most totalitarian states begin, building upon created crises which "require" ever more stringent actions.
"Hey Homie, we are part of Barack's UN Peacekeeping Force and we are here to help. Come out with your hands up and kneel with your wrists behind your back..."
[Yes even the UN uses AK-47s and they certainly know how to insert high capacity magazines - you call them clips one more time and I will scream...before doing something unpleasant to you]
One thing that always strikes me in these "historic" debates [which aren't debates at all since the left's position is non-negotiable] is that those proposing all of these new, sweeping firearms laws know little or nothing about that which they seek to legislate.
These clowns don't know an AK from an AR, a Heckler & Koch or an FN from their asses and moreover, don't give a shit. Ignorance might not be bliss, but it is reassuring...
Of course the same thing happened regarding Obamacare...it's a pattern. Harvard and Yale edumacated lawyers [the majority of which have no idea on what side of the abdomen the appendix is located] telling medical doctors how to practice their honorable and ancient trade.
Let's call it the Hypocritical Oath of Office and be done with it, ok? That is the type of oath which would suitably be sanctified while placing one's right hand on Thomas Jefferson's Qur'an.
Allah knows best - thank the late [assassinated] Theo Van Gough for popularizing that phrase.
Once again for emphasis: Dianne Feinstein, President Obama, Vice President Biden, Nancy Pelosi and NY Mayor Bloomberg know nothing about firearms, we would be surprised if any of them could handle [let alone field strip] a Glock pistol or an AR 15 type rifle without shooting themselves or someone else. We do remember Mrs. Feinstein back in 1994 during a press conference try insert a backwards facing magazine into an AK. The stupid broad had no idea what was wrong, until someone from off camera inserted it for her.
Perhaps she is more at home with a different manner of "insertion?"
Sorry, very bad mental image...
So what is the prognosis Dr. Mayer?
Hell if I know for sure, but I absolutely guarantee you that the Right is ITCHING for a fight. For example in numerous interviews with the average citizens who attended last weekend's Crossroads of the West gun show in Daly City, CA [consider it SF without the aroma of urine and where legislators haven't take leave of their minds] I was told, sometimes rather forcefully, that their allegiance is to the U.S. Constitution and to the rule of a just law, justly administered not to Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, John Boner, John McCain or his bud, Lindsay "Light-In-The-Loafers" Graham.
In the scheme of things they can all go to Hell, in due time and naturally of course, don't want to rush Mother Nature, She is one jealous Lady...
Don't believe it? Just cross Her and see if she pushes back...or instead, knocks you on your ass...my bet is with the latter.
Americans will never give up their defensive weapons, not to Mr. Obama not to anyone.
Ok...here is the pull-quote - patriotic, hard working, God fearing Americans who understand their heritage and the great experiment - Western Civilization - would rather die as freemen rather than live as slaves. I think they might have a point.
©1999-2019 PipeLineNews.org LLC., W. August Mayer. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.