Author Joel Rosenberg Arrested

[Calbeck]

Hopefully he'll get some jail time just for being a passive aggressive git.

Yeah, because we should be locking up people just for irritating you personally. Rather even LESS cause than we lock people up in Gitmo for.

Guns aren't jokes. Using them in such a confrontational manner is childish at best.

Aaaaaand if Rosenberg had been playing a joke OR using a gun confrontationally, you'd have a point.

 

[happyelf]

I do, however, believe that their work on behalf of upholding one of the fundamental rights granted to American citizens by the framers of the US Constitution is worth supporting.

The founding fathers believed this issue was so important that it came second in their minds only to our rights as free humans to speak ours.

This might come as a shock to you, but people in other countries don't actually tend to place much value in the supernatural power that Americans ascribe to the founding fathers and their magic documents To be frank, your argument is an archaic and regressive appeal to a kind of literalism that is as invalid when considering a constitution or a bill of rights as it is when considering the bible. Or indeed, any other text.

These documents are endlessly reinterpreted, most of all by the people who claim a fundamental, literalistic, or originalist view of them. Conservatives in particular are notorious for banging on about their preferred rights (and the popular interpretation of the second amendment is a classic example of this), while they commit appalling breaches of even the most basic rights when it suits them. The notion that these documents of historical figures are somehow relevant or valid beyond the value ascribed to them by modern context is absurd.

Do us all a favour, take responsibility for your own beliefs, appealing to the credibility of a bunch of historical figures might pass muster in the increasingly comical faux-democracy you live in, but you only have to look at America's actual record on the treatment of it's citizens and other people around to world to see what little real merit or power these documents have. If anything, such bizarre myth and melodrama clearly serves to obscure the actual dysfunction of your extremely overrated form of government.

Yes, Americans get to own guns. They can even wave them around in public. Do they have functional health care, education, or regulation in any sector? Of course not, they're a democracy, and democracy is about tax cuts for the super rich, cheap gas, stupidly large military budgets, and strutting around public buildings with a nickel-plated surrogate cock on your hip. Good lord, of all the terrible things police officers do, forcing this jackass to disarm was certainly not one of them.

That, to me, means something, and I'm happy to contribute my money and time to help those who agree. I understand that a lot of people don't like guns and would prefer to never see them or hear about them. I understand that. I believe it is their right to decide for themselves whether or not they will exercise their own rights, but it is not their right infringe upon mine.

And it's not your right to infringe upon theirs by contributing to and offering political protection to such a dangerous industry. Are you aware of how many Texan guns find their way south across the border every year? And how many people die as a result? American states sharing the border aren't just involved in drugs coming north, and money going south- guns go south as well, and a great deal of them aren't stolen or covertly purchased, they're simply bought. These weapons arm the gangs and enforcers that are inflicting such a terrible death toll, and they're certainly far better armed due to their proximity to the good old US of A.

If you or those like you cared about other people's rights and indeed their lives, then your first, last, and only agenda for the foreseeable future would be far tighter regulation of guns sales in your state to prevent those tragedies from occurring. Instead, your agenda is backing up some crank in Minnesota who has taken as his cause a similarly self-serving 'right' which is in truth nothing but a bizarre cultural affectation.

PS- The NRA was pivotal in turning video games into scapegoats for school shootings.

PPS- I'm sure you'll use your pre-packaged legalism from above to infringe upon my free speech as presented in this post, but for the record, if you have a principle, and believe that people have a right, you work uphold that right even when you aren't required to do so by law. That's the difference between an american establishment-style constitutional right, and an actual, functional, meaningful right.

PPPS- Sorry about the rant everyone but between this and moviebob bleating on like Penn Gilette about GM foods and an outright sociopath about starving people being less important then a mars colony, I'd reached my limit of idiotic Americans for the month. I get enough of that shit elsewhere on the net without putting up with it here, and if that's what's going to pass for content then people should be stating their opinion about it.

 

[wearesoneutralthatithurts]

are your cityhalls so unsafe?
Why the heck should i carry a gun into a city hall? are there rapists, murderer etc?
i dont know. i´m from germany, we´ve repressive laws and i am happy with it. our capital crima rates are low, and i think that may be a side effect of this law.
Ot:

Spoiler

sure criminals can purchase illegal weapons, but i dont fear criminals, i fear the normal peaple, who get stressed and angry. the people of our society become more depressive and sad. some become paranoid about this terrorism thing (ist unsafer to drive cars..)
if such people get guns, they might amok. or shoot someone accidentally beccause they think that were burglars.
that men, who get drunk and start arguing might user their weapons and later they are aresstet for killing someone. without a gun this might have ended with a broken nose or so.
The police worries about the fact,l that most of the joung and joung criminals carry knifes.
The rate of heavly injured people (after an argument about "nothing", like:"dont look " or "dont talk to my girlfriend,asshole") increases. A weapon at the hand of a agressive, sad r fearsome person, who didnt lerned to control his feelings and emotion is a danger to the society.
and i dont trust the normal people. everyday i can see people, who arent "qualified" to get a gun. who beat their partner, who fight at a bar, which are drunk at 10.am, which are bullying other pupils. People who want to take the law in own hands, when the police is to slow or to "nice"..

we have here many weapons too, becaus the shooting sport is a part of this society. but the rate of deaths by shooting is very low. the amoking guy at winnenden got his weapon, becaus his dad didnt secured i properly. if he had did that, this amok might never have token place*
i trust the police, our is not so overreactive. I think they can guard us. and life i risky, so might have bad luck sometimes and suffer. but i think i´d suffer more if every moron in this land could get a gun and carry them outside.

if you have a gun at your home ist ok. if a buglar comes, i´d call the police first and then get a gun. normally housebreakers dont carry heavy guns. killing someone is punisht harder then housebreaking plus, if the buglar has a weapon, the court might think that he wanted to kill with intent. that would be attempted murder. long long long time jail. i dont think that the most burglars want that. they will carry a knife. but a weapon there is more an diasdvantage.
*gramatically correct? this sounded the best^^

 

[darkknight9]

I do, however, believe that their work on behalf of upholding one of the fundamental rights granted to American citizens by the framers of the US Constitution is worth supporting.

The founding fathers believed this issue was so important that it came second in their minds only to our rights as free humans to speak ours.

This might come as a shock to you, but people in other countries don't actually tend to place much value in the supernatural power that Americans ascribe to the founding fathers and their magic documents To be frank, your argument is an archaic and regressive appeal to a kind of literalism that is as invalid when considering a constitution or a bill of rights as it is when considering the bible. Or indeed, any other text.

And its meant to be. A group of individuals framed the argument many years ago in terms of "god given" and "inalienable" rights so that no one then or in the future could attempt to ply changes to our rights whether through carefully worded law or force of arms.

These documents are endlessly reinterpreted, most of all by the people who claim a fundamental, literalistic, or originalist view of them. Conservatives in particular are notorious for banging on about their preferred rights (and the popular interpretation of the second amendment is a classic example of this), while they commit appalling breaches of even the most basic rights when it suits them. The notion that these documents of historical figures are somehow relevant or valid beyond the value ascribed to them by modern context is absurd.

No argument here. If the US could actually break the two party system with a choice that ascribed to all of the tenets of the Constitution and its amendments, I believe great change might actually happen. But I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

Do us all a favour, take responsibility for your own beliefs, appealing to the credibility of a bunch of historical figures might pass muster in the increasingly comical faux-democracy you live in, but you only have to look at America's actual record on the treatment of it's citizens and other people around to world to see what little real merit or power these documents have. If anything, such bizarre myth and melodrama clearly serves to obscure the actual dysfunction of your extremely overrated form of government.

Painting with a pretty broad brush aren't we? First off, the freedom that you will find many Americans enjoying does not come from the "extremely overrated form of government". If anything if you're hearing something outside of the US talking about how great its government is, you need to find some new news sources brother. The line of folks that are displeased/dissatisfied/disgusted with our government is long and loud. We are, in a word, unhappy. But when you let Mary Shelly's monster loose with less than half its original brainpower and double the greed of Scrooge McDuck, changes will be exceedingly slow.

It started as a republic and quickly became a democracy. No faux about it, every political topic is perverted into a popularity contest... winner take all. And while its very popular to bash its treatment of its citizens, understand that there is a super majority of residents who want to be left the hell alone when it comes to Uncle Sam. Taking responsibility for themselves, their beliefs and a (yes I'll say it) bull headed stubbornness to do things without help... All because of the merit and power of those documents.

Yes, Americans get to own guns.

As long as they are citizens, they aren't felons, they aren't judged mentally deficient, or they aren't currently on the run form the law. That's the ownership responsibility on the Federal level. All 50 states then have some additional regulations from the lowest regulations (following the federal rules) to positively draconian (Kalifornia, Massachusetts)

They can even wave them around in public.

No they cannot. That's called brandishing and its no different if you began to wave a sword, knife, baseball bat or wrecking ball around. Its dangerous. Like most things, if you can't act responsibly, you might not get to keep it.

Do they have functional health care, education, or regulation in any sector? Of course not, they're a democracy, and democracy is about tax cuts for the super rich, cheap gas, stupidly large military budgets, and strutting around public buildings with a nickel-plated surrogate cock on your hip.

All penis projection jokes aside, I have had functional government provided health care for the past five years, I'm almost done with my Bachelor of Science degree (which is taking me nearly 17 years to complete through every fault of mine and mine alone) and nearly every part of my life is regulated from gasoline tax to how I'm allowed to walk across the road. The federal code alone is ten thousand pages and you better hope you don't break that! State laws and rules, county zoning and statute, city ordinances... regulation is the cornerstone of how government (in this country) rides the coattails of the economy. Personally, I don't mind tax cuts whether they are actual tax cuts or if, like the latest ones, they aren't a "cut" at all... just a mandate to continue status quo instead of going back to pre break levels. It usually means a game or two under the tree next year for yours truly. I'm below fed poverty level, but it means financial breaks for the poorest of the poor too. Gas here, by the way, is not only not cheap, it sucks. The stuff you can get in say... the UK? Oooh that's good burnin stuff. Ours is overfilled with "alternatives" meant only to propel a now defunct system of subsidies and corn fields. I miss real gas. Good lord, of all the terrible things police officers do, forcing this jackass to disarm was certainly not one of them.

And it's not your right to infringe upon theirs by contributing to and offering political protection to such a dangerous industry. Are you aware of how many Texan guns find their way south across the border every year?

I believe the correct question is are *you* aware? The ATF and both the US and Mexican governments have stopped publishing numbers related to seized weapons and traceable guns due to faulty facts. Simply claiming they are coming from the US then showing a fully auto M60 on top of a pile of confiscated money, drugs, and guns looks great, sounds great for the press and the public... however, insofar as class II, III, and NFA regulated (yes I said regulated) firearms, there are *NONE* that come legally from US sources. Before you dig into past articles examine very closely what I've written there. There may be a number of straw purchases for semi auto weapons, shotguns, and handguns. But those cartel boys are using full auto MP-5's. They don't just give anybody one of those, let alone enough to outfit entire groups of men. Guns come from many more places than Texas.

If you or those like you cared about other people's rights and indeed their lives, then your first, last, and only agenda for the foreseeable future would be far tighter regulation of guns sales in your state to prevent those tragedies from occurring. Instead, your agenda is backing up some crank in Minnesota who has taken as his cause a similarly self-serving 'right' which is in truth nothing but a bizarre cultural affectation.

Sorry you see it that way Elf. But the horrible thing about having a monster for a government is if you give it an inch, it will eat you alive.

PS- The NRA was pivotal in turning video games into scapegoats for school shootings.

And they threw gun owners under the bus in 1993 also, they don't have any of my money.

PPS- I'm sure you'll use your pre-packaged legalism from above to infringe upon my free speech as presented in this post, but for the record, if you have a principle, and believe that people have a right, you work uphold that right even when you aren't required to do so by law. That's the difference between an american establishment-style constitutional right, and an actual, functional, meaningful right.

And (bolding emphasis mine) that's exactly what the author in question is doing in this situation. Functional, meaningful, actual, working to protect it. I have no problem with your right to speak, why do you have something against his right to work to uphold the law? Unless we're going to drift into another "nickel plated" penis fantasy I think you're making his point for him.

PPPS- Sorry about the rant everyone but between this and moviebob bleating on like Penn Gilette about GM foods and an outright sociopath about starving people being less important then a mars colony, I'd reached my limit of idiotic Americans for the month. I get enough of that shit elsewhere on the net without putting up with it here, and if that's what's going to pass for content then people should be stating their opinion about it.

No problems here, I can't stand moviebob either.

(Apologies in advance if the formatting is wonky)

 

[The Wooster]

While I'm fond of guns, and love firing one. I don't think there's a real need for the average citizen to carry one (I'm an Englishman living in Canada which explains that a little). That being said I'm kind of torn about this news. On the one hand our writer protagonist is obeying the law and the police are, assuming the article is correct, in the wrong. On the other hand he entered this situation knowing what would happen in order to make a point and antagonize the police. Now he wants Joe public to help pay for his stunt. That doesn't seem right to me.

On a lighter note. The fact I now know Russ Pitts is armed to the teeth makes that strip I was writing about how bad his 'Top games of the year' choices were seem like kind of a bad idea.

 

[happyelf]

I'm trying not to escalate thiss or drag us into nested quote hell so i'm only going to tackle a few points.

And it's not your right to infringe upon theirs by contributing to and offering political protection to such a dangerous industry. Are you aware of how many Texan guns find their way south across the border every year?

I believe the correct question is are *you* aware? The ATF and both the US and Mexican governments have stopped publishing numbers related to seized weapons and traceable guns due to faulty facts. Simply claiming they are coming from the US then showing a fully auto M60 on top of a pile of confiscated money, drugs, and guns looks great, sounds great for the press and the public... however, insofar as class II, III, and NFA regulated (yes I said regulated) firearms, there are *NONE* that come legally from US sources. Before you dig into past articles examine very closely what I've written there. There may be a number of straw purchases for semi auto weapons, shotguns, and handguns. But those cartel boys are using full auto MP-5's. They don't just give anybody one of those, let alone enough to outfit entire groups of men. Guns come from many more places than Texas.

I'm not suggesting that there aren't other sources of weapons, but despite your dismissal of 'that one news story with the m60' the reality is that this continues to be a serious problem. Yes, i'm sure that under the Obama administration, the US government, the ATF, the Mexican government, and indeed the pope and Jesus christ themself are all shying away from such a right wing wedge issue with gusto. That's pretty much all they do; run scared and apologise for being voted for by liberals.

And no doubt errors were made- just like the occasional error is made in everything from climate change science to biology. But that doesn't mean we should accept the counterarguments made when they are so clearly shaped by the powerful interests behind them.

No offence, but anyone looking at the US in depth, as I have, should recognise that the powers at play are corperatist, conservative, and yes, selectivly authoritarian. If you haven't figured that out yet, I don't know what to say to you. We can talk again in 20 years about how your health care has worked out for you and your friends and family. Or how employment or hoising or much of anything is going in the 'self reliant' nation you live in. What state are you in anyway? Because apart from Texas, there aren't many conservative states that don't take more than their fair share of federal taxes, despite their claims about self reliance.

You talk about regulations riding the coat-tails, but it's the poorly and deliberatly de-regulated* financial market that tied your economy to the back of their armani suits, jumped into a hole, and then got back out again with no strings attached thaks to their buddies in the GOP, who didn't shout nearly as hard against bailout and stimulus as they did against tighter regulation and stronger terms for the huge loan the american taxpayers gave to the ultra-rich who have just been given yet another tax cut to the massive detriment of the deficit. And then they go back to raging against what few social services you have left.

*And yes, i'm aware who did that, albeit with the help of Newt's Republican revolution. I'm not fan of the democrats, either.

That's the state of play in the US, and it's certainly the state of play when it comes issues relating to firearms.

If you honestly think that there isn't a serious problem with the guns trade in southern states, then you need to read up more on the way in which industries, ALL SORTS of industries, contribute brazenly to illegal actitivy through direct, legal sales. One example, you know meth? Big problem in the US, and elsewhere? Meth is created through the purchase of drugs available over the counter, and has become such a big buyer of these drugs that recent studies suggest as many as half the sales of such drugs in the US go to people providing raw materials for meth labs.

That's one example. There is a wealth of quasilegal activity taking place in pretty much any major industry, from bribing regulators, to obstructing scrutiny, to outright hazardhous sales of legal material. And corrupt, disfunctional regulators on both state and federal levels are hard pressed to even give a shit that it takes place.

The same goes for guns. As a gun advocate, you probably think that regulations governing guns are at worst suitable, at best, draconian. But the actual tracking and sale of guns is not nearly as clear cut as you are suggesting, and preventng solid tracking methods is one of the key agendas of the gun lobby.

There is an enormous quasi-legal trade of guns in the US, in no small part due to their popularity, volume, and protected legal status. Certainly this trade in southern states on the border is a serious issue, and it's unwise for you to brush it off in line with information you find pleasing, information which has been no doubt prepared specifically to appease people like you and put your concerns to rest.

Remember, I don't have a stake in this- I live in Australia, and we've got a lot of problems, but after a particularly nasty shooting spree in tasmania we heavily tightened gun laws and we've been safer as a result. Does US gun lobby propaganda paint us as safer? No actually, they present the act as causing a crime spree. Is the information you've read from similarly compromised sources any more valid in it's rebuttal of the trade of guns and drugs in southern border states? No, not really. They might state facts, but they state facts about australian crime too(violent crime was up in a slice of that timeframe, but that was taken out of context, and overall crime remains extremly low, and the rise corelates with the rise in organised and regional crime), it doesn't make their argument any more valid, and their assesment any less deliberatly misleading. But that's fine for me, I can sit here and laugh at the plight of the world if I want to. I have friends, even american friends, who do it as a hobby. We can all sit and watch things slide slowly into a hole, particularly those of us in a country without a health care cartel.

But you do have a stake in this, and you owe it to yourself to cast aside the propaganda that obscures to many issues everywhere in the world, but particularly in the US. And don't imagine for a moment that the propaganda or persecution involved in this issue is two way, or left wing- whatever half-assed efforts the other side has been making, it pales in signifigance compared to the Gun lobby. As you mentioned yourself, the NRA has grown powerful and influential enough that it doesn't even really need to keep it's base-gun owners- happy anymore. And to be frank, this is about a lot more than guns, and to be even more frank, guns are just a thing that powerful people use to distract guys like you and russel from real issues, and from the problems within you own areas of the political spectrum.

If you or those like you cared about other people's rights and indeed their lives, then your first, last, and only agenda for the foreseeable future would be far tighter regulation of guns sales in your state to prevent those tragedies from occurring. Instead, your agenda is backing up some crank in Minnesota who has taken as his cause a similarly self-serving 'right' which is in truth nothing but a bizarre cultural affectation.

Sorry you see it that way Elf. But the horrible thing about having a monster for a government is if you give it an inch, it will eat you alive.

And using that kind of logic, that anti-government screed, conservatives wooshed into power under George Bush, and embarked on one of the most monsterous periods of brutality, waste, and warmongering that your nation has ever seen. And they'll probably do it again in 2 years, and then again in 12 years or so. And in between, the democrats will hold the left hostage for fear of what the gop will do. And then they'll all go out to the same dinner parties and laugh about what suckers you all are.

You're just playing your part in the big game. The 'I hate the government' myth is created to disengage you from political action, and encourage you to oppose desperatly needed regulation, taxation, and social services. You talk about self reliance, but you're really practicing self-disenfranchisement.

The only way that people can remain free in the face of opression by the powerful, is to band together and form functional, but also powerful democratic institutions. It's not enough to have a government, you have to have a strong government, because if you don't, you even up with a corrupt, disfunctional, incompetent government that spends it's time bailing out the super rich and invading the middle east. A ddemocracy must be strong, or it's not a democracy. And please, don't talk about how american is a republic or a democracy or blah blah blah. From where i'm standing, only half your country votes, and you don't even have a preferntial ballot. Your idealised reverence for the bill of rights and constitution has if anything, aided in the calcification of your system, and suporting it is just another myth to keep you under control.

And it's not as if liberals don't have their big myths, too. The democrats are built on such myths, and retain power with them- power over the party, and power over the left. The virtue of centrism, the positive power of the free market, the meritocracy of wealth, the triumph of incremental reform. The spoiler effect, which can be real in some races, but certainly was not a reason to blame Ralh Nader for losing to george Bush. And on, and on, it's clear
you're all been suckered. You all have your own myths, wether you get them from fox news, or the new york times, the daily show, or the economist.

And yeah, we get plenty of BS over here- horrible, racist policies, suicidally wasteful neglect of major issues like climate change, all sorts of stuff. But in most democracites, lobbying and propaganda are a million dollar industry. In the US, it's worth billions. And in one of thoee billion dollar firms, there's a team of brigh young go-getters working very hard to make sure you keep believing in your self reliance, and the monsterous nature of government, and the importance ofyoue gun rights. They've probably got a whole building dedicated to it somewhere along k-street.

It's not the government that is monserous, it's the people running it, and the people controlling them.

PS- The NRA was pivotal in turning video games into scapegoats for school shootings.

And they threw gun owners under the bus in 1993 also, they don't have any of my money.

I'm not suggesting that the NRA is actually serving the interests of gun owners, they have clearly risen to that lofty height where their Purpose is no longer really relevant. But then again, you aren't really serving your best interests by putting time and money into this issue. There are real problems in your comunity- in all our comunities, and false issues, wether they be gun rights in the US, or Boat People in Australia, serve to distract us, and come at too high a human cost for us to tolerate.

PPS- I'm sure you'll use your pre-packaged legalism from above to infringe upon my free speech as presented in this post, but for the record, if you have a principle, and believe that people have a right, you work uphold that right even when you aren't required to do so by law. That's the difference between an american establishment-style constitutional right, and an actual, functional, meaningful right.

And (bolding emphasis mine) that's exactly what the author in question is doing in this situation. Functional, meaningful, actual, working to protect it. I have no problem with your right to speak, why do you have something against his right to work to uphold the law? Unless we're going to drift into another "nickel plated" penis fantasy I think you're making his point for him.

Because as i've said, wether you accept it or not, your rights come not only at a human cost, but at a political cost. The more you put into the myths like gun rights and states rights and property rights, the less you'll be able to protect your Actual Rights.

PPPS- Sorry about the rant everyone but between this and moviebob bleating on like Penn Gilette about GM foods and an outright sociopath about starving people being less important then a mars colony, I'd reached my limit of idiotic Americans for the month. I get enough of that shit elsewhere on the net without putting up with it here, and if that's what's going to pass for content then people should be stating their opinion about it.

No problems here, I can't stand moviebob either.
(Apologies in advance if the formatting is wonky)[/quote]And I apologise for any typos i left in this since i typed it in a rush.

As for moviebob, I don't mind his movie stuff, but a dude can't just outright say 'my fantasies about mars missions are more important than world hunger' and expect people to pat him on the back for being such a jackass. Not that it stopped a bunch of people from doing just that.

 

[4RT1LL3RY]

I fail to see a valid reason for the arrest. Rosenburg fully complied with the officers request as required by laws in that jurisdiction. Personal vendettas aren't reason to arrest someone and neither is his posted video that shows improper handling of the departments actions.

I find many of the comments that people are making about police officers to be in poor taste though. I come from a family full of police officers and know the trauma that they go through on a regular basis.

The things that are made apparent in the world are not the good, but the bad. You hear on the news about murder and war, but rarely about the good that people do in a community. The reasons behind them make at least some sense though, if your cities police department were to bust a major drug smuggling ring or weapon traffickers that isn't shown.

What I am trying to say is don't lump all police in with the bad ones. For every corrupt power hungry cop there are 10 trying to make their community a safer place for their families and those they care about. The systems themselves may be corrupt and sometimes royally screw things up, but the individuals go through more then most people can bare.

 

[Postal47]

Russ Pitts is the Editor-in-Chief of The Escapist, a long-time fan of Joel Rosengberg's work and a member of the NRA.

I seriously would never have guessed that.

Really? I'm not suprised, although I actually had him pegged as a Libertarian.

 

[darkknight9]

I'm trying not to escalate thiss or drag us into nested quote hell so i'm only going to tackle a few points.

Agreed. I got damn near lost in my own earlier, so I'll do away with most of it in this one.

As for 'that one news story' its really about *every news story where the most ferocious looking are the ones paraded around. And an important distinction must be made. Fully auto or true assault (select fire) weapons are prohibitively expensive and heavily regulated in the US. Zero crimes have been committed in the US with legally owned NFA (National Firearms Act) weapons. The closest one could draw to a crime being committed with one is after being fired by his local police department, a former LEO stole a sub machine gun from his former employer and murdered a few folks. The typical initial background check for a first timer buying a machine gun, silencer, etc is six to eight months. You agree to be at the ATF and FBI's beck and call 24/7 and allow them unfettered access to your weapons. No warrants. No Lawyers. Heck they don't even have to knock on your door if they don't want to. (You will find they are courteous enough to at least call the day before in most cases). Do this, and they will allow you to keep them until your next inspection. Do it not and your 10, 20, 30 or even 100 thousand dollar plus toys become property of the government. To date, none confiscated have been returned.

Now, I grant you, people try to buy guns and are denied through the check system. They are then reported and if the local sheriff has time, he'll look into it. And they have family buy for them through straw buyers. That carries a hefty fine and federal prison time but rarely gets prosecuted because like most laws in my country its meant as an add on to other crimes to increase the likely hood that you'll settle or plea bargain your way out of the charges. The myth that the law is actually pursued and that people are brought to justice before the guns are gone is just that. A myth. As for the thought of the individual dealers breaking the law and selling them illegally, I can tell you that the BATFe agents make their names and get promotions based on how many of these guys they catch... and its the only glory or newsworthy leverage they have in the political thunderdome of appropriations. Nothing says "more tax money please" to the senators in Washington than 'that one news story'. As such, crooked dealers are few and far between.

Remember that while some weapons are making it through, the murders are being perpetrated by gents with fully auto AR15's, MP5's and AK's. Ones that arrive by the crate and are either stolen/acquired from Mexico's army... or smuggled in just like any other country might get a crate of brand new MP5's. In all honesty I hope folks reporting these crimes and singing songs of gangsters in Mexico start paying attention to where these things come from. It would be interesting to find out which weapon dealer is shipping them German and Chinese made arms...

And no doubt errors were made- just like the occasional error is made in everything from climate change science to biology. But that doesn't mean we should accept the counterarguments made when they are so clearly shaped by the powerful interests behind them.

Ok, I lied. I wanted this quote in here because its hits home for me. I'm less than 12 months away from graduating (knocking on wood) with a degree in Applied Science with focuses in Nanoscience and Materials Science after having lived life a little first (yeah I'm in my thirties). The principle of reexamination or of errors is.... not unknown to me. I rarely accept arguments from either side unless I cant easily dismiss them, or if I can see why someone *wants* me to believe them vs showing me why I should.

There is no doubt that this nation, the US, is run by, guided by, whipped by, led by and relegated by the almighty dollar. Some folks won't even get out of bed in the morning if they don't think they can get a buck from someone. And the subject of guns being a problem along the southern border is as tenuous as the issue of immigration. There are just as many folks screaming about needing to stop immigrants coming into the US as there would be yelling about the cost of fruit going up if we were able to stop them. I'm quite aware of the quasi illegal business going on in the US... Billions of dollars that would break industries large and small if they were enforced, prosecuted and punished. There are, in the money is king society, other things more important to both government and society. Unfortunately.


I live in Wisconsin by the way, where it gets entirely too cold for those freeloading Canadians to attempt a multiple mile hike in the Wilderness to come here...

I'M KIDDING, about the Canadian part, not about the cold part.

The sad truth of the American situation is the pendulum of the two party system. It is under full swing now, as we'll no doubt only get a brief respite from the election cycle before the ads for the next presidential race start running in less than a year. We need to be able to tell all comers that we are free. We know of those items in the past we have sacrificed to have it and cosmic forces willing more and more of the unwashed masses will finally realize that things like the Patriot Act are horrible and illegal. If any of our rights were granted a one wish and its cured scenario, I would cure that, and hopefully all of its sub laws (Intelligence Authorization Act of 2004) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.2417.ENR:
etc.
Can't be free unless you can speak, write, create, perform, and play video games without worrying about upsetting delicate sensibilities. Heck, every new idea is wild and crazy until its accepted. Or until its unsuccessful.

I don't 'hate' the government. I wouldn't have health care if I didn't have my government. But, I *do* hate people who swing the arm of the government for personal gain, glory, power, or ego. I honestly haven't shaken any politicians hadn since the 80's and with one or two exceptions, its more than likely going to stay that way for the rest of my life. I'd stand up for Joel's right to carry because I follow the law to the letter personally and I don't believe that anyone should restrict that right if its not spelled out by law. On that note, I support lawful carry, lawful driving, lawful flying (no I will not go up in another homebuilt ultralight again thankyouverymuch) lawful assembly and lawful speech. However, if you're not ready to tow the line or die for the things you believe in, you don't deserve to participate. You're right, very few of us vote compared to the rest of the world for a myriad of reasons. And alot of the folks that do turn out say their vote doesn't count. Enough people don't vote because you honestly have the choice in most national and state races (no so much local races) of a Douchbag or a tuRdsandwich. (Or, as Lewis Black puts it, two bowls of sheeet.)

The monster is indeed the flesh and blood of the elected that warm seats, kiss babies, and steal lollipops. And we put them there. Mostly because there is/are very few people left who want to try and tame the colossus it has become.

I would like to find out what exactly you think "Actual Rights" are if they are not linked to local sovereignty, property rights, use rights, self defense, or unregulated speech.

And after watching two different reviews of movies by moviebob, and listening to him whine on and on and on and... you get the idea. I won't risk trying anything else he's done.

 

[happyelf]

Thanks for your thoughts, darkknight. I don't want to keep going back and fourth here, because i think we've both said our piece. As for rights, I live in a country without a bill of rights, that probably should have one (and it's not as if reform i hurtling along here, either, and there are some appaling exceptions to the rule, mostly relating to visitors from overseas) but i'm quite confident in saying that Australians have more and better freedom of speech than Americans do.

And frankly I think there are rights your nation neglects, like the right not only to work, but to posess a funtional welfare state- after all, it's the people who pay tax, tax should serve them. America is bad at the kind of rights taken for granted in every other genuine democracy in the world, and it adds rights that the rest of us kind of scratch our heads at- with good reason, since they clearly havne't made you any more free, or even been enforced in a genuine way.

I'm a student of american politics, and I know, know that when people use terms like 'states rights', or 'property rights', they're very often using a code word for a desire to infringe on other people's rights.

Property rights should not trump, and to be frank, are trivial, compared to the rights that all workers and consumers should have. The wealthy should not have the right to exploit people as much as they do, and nine times out of ten when somebody says 'property rights', well you know they're not talking about your right not to get police knocking down the door- they're talking about the right of the wealthy to infringe the rights of the people they have power over. Hence 'money is speech', a so-called principle bandied about a lot in campaign finance discussions, to give one example. Property rights are used to opposed taxing the ultrarich, even as they boosted with corperate welfare and bailouts. When it comes to forming policy, Property rights are a code word for rule by the rich.

States rights, and i'm going to trust you enough to be completly frank here, have a long history as a cover for racist and other bigoted agendas. The notion of states rights can be traced to the civil rights era, and in particular to key strategists in the era of nixon's republicans who, and on record I might add, stated that their strategy was to avoid the kind of overt racism that cost them votes, while channeling those sentiments into a republican base in the south. There is a notorious quote by one of nixon's strategests in which he says almost word for word, "if you sit there saying, N*, N*, N*, people are going to drift away, you can't form a solid base like that. But if you talk about cutting welfare and so fourth, we all know who's going to be most effected by that, and that's something people can get behind". That's not propaganda, that's an actual quote from these guys. And that is still a solid plank of the states rights concept- the prevention of social justice and similar reforms.

Certainly, there are other cses where states rights might serve other goals, even leftist goals- but precious few advocates of states rights are complaining about the amount of federal money that flows from large, urban, left leaning states, to small conservative states. Likewise, you would be hard pressed to find an advocate of states rights that genuinly oppose say, health care companies suing states for trying to set up public options, or the amount of money conservatives in utah channeled into advertising when california voted on gay marriage.

People who endorse states rights from a right wing background can say they'd be happy with a nation where for instance, the northwest liberal states got to keep their federal money, and set their own immigration policy, but people like that also claim to want to balance the budget- and they never, ever do.

Self defence is a complex issues. To be frank, I don't think america's gun culture makes it safer. And I emphasise the culture in general. For every person who might use guns lawfully, there's a chance that some jackass will take an assault rifle to a protest, or shoot up a school, or just get their guns stolen. I'm not a fan of police, at all, but the key to public safety is police reform, even if that means police play a more overt, protective role. But to be frank? There just isn't that much violence crime, in either of our countries. And likewise, there aren't that many incidents of the misuse of guns.

But I literally frequent a forum, a reasonably popular and wel traficked one, where the protected subforum dedicated to us style gun ownership has at one time given advice on amunition to a metally disturbed man who then commited a spree killing. Sure, some people in the thread kinda realised how crazy it was for a guy who had wandered into the forum from an asbergers support group site to be talking about getting shotgun shells to punish a group of gangbangers for damaging his haloween pumpkins, but there were still plenty of guys who found it very important to tell him that he'd need something a lot heavier than bird shot. Then he shot some people, including his neighbors and himself.

The same forum had a regular who was an obnoxious supporter of gun rights, who photographed his guns on his dining room table, casually mentioned that he kept them in plain view most commonly, mocked (along with half the forum) the (mostly liberal non gun owning) people who argued that his firearms should be in a safe, and then had them all stolen. Did he learn from this? Of course not. He just bitched about the 'kind of people' who rob people's houses, and complained about the expense of replacing everything.

Every culture and subculture acts to perpetuate it's norms. Basically any such soncial construct can lead to people acting irrationally, and perpetuating mistakes and poor behaviour. Every culture and subculture has a few jackasses in the mix. But your jackasses, your cubculture, have guns.

So that's it for rights and that should probably be it for this conversation. Feel free to reply and I will read it, but I don't want to keep going with this, i think we've stated our point of views, and if we kept backing and fourthing, sooner or later I fear we would get to fussing and feuding.

 

[rddj623]

Poor guy. Freedoms are being challenged all the time. Here is a prime example. Even when laws are followed (presumably) people are still being charged fraudulently.

 

[Starke]

Russ Pitts is the Editor-in-Chief of The Escapist, a long-time fan of Joel Rosengberg's work and a member of the NRA.

I seriously would never have guessed that.

Really? I'm not suprised, although I actually had him pegged as a Libertarian.

There's nothing that says that Libertarians can't love guns. Hell, I did before (and after) I defected to the Democratic party.

But, yes, in all honesty this did surprise me a bit.

 

[RelexCryo]

There's something fishy going on here. Those Cops sound like they're after him.

^This. Thanks a ton Russ. I really apprecaite you informing us of this.

 

[Postal47]

Russ Pitts is the Editor-in-Chief of The Escapist, a long-time fan of Joel Rosengberg's work and a member of the NRA.

I seriously would never have guessed that.

Really? I'm not suprised, although I actually had him pegged as a Libertarian.

There's nothing that says that Libertarians can't love guns. Hell, I did before (and after) I defected to the Democratic party.

But, yes, in all honesty this did surprise me a bit.

Of course not, as a Libertarian gun owner I should know.
However, many libertarians, especially individualist anarchist
libertarians such as myself, do not support the NRA because
their main priority seems to not be protecting gun rights but rather
getting Republicans elected to office. Contrary to the way we
are often portrayed by the media, libertarians are NOT simply
a radical branch of the Republican party, rather, we often have as
much (or as little) in common with the Democrats.

 

[Calbeck]

This might come as a shock to you, but people in other countries don't actually tend to place much value in the supernatural power that Americans ascribe to the founding fathers and their magic documents

Also known as law.

Not surprising, however, that non-Americans would have little or no interest in American law, but then similarly one would expect they would have little or no interest in a discussion about alleged infractions of American law.

Of course, were I to leap into a discussion about a British case where a person had been accused of breaking British law, and I blew off a load of gunk about how Americans don't care about, say, the workings of Parliament, I would be equally off-topic, ignorant, and a boor.

(loads of gunk about how the law should be widely open to reinterpretation based on the desires of the individual doing the interpreting, particularly insofar as such interpretation might be used to further a political and social ideology wholly at odds with the law itself)

(another load of gunk entirely ignorant about American firearms usage and rights, to include the usual Freudian comparisons to anatomy, accompanied by extensive and irrelevant complaints about unrelated American social programs and taxation policies, and followed by the usual train of hyperbole about how horrible it is to have an independently-armed populace in general)

Your medication is ready, dear troll.

 

[darkknight9]

Thanks for your thoughts, darkknight. I don't want to keep going back and fourth here, because i think we've both said our piece. As for rights, I live in a country without a bill of rights, that probably should have one (and it's not as if reform i hurtling along here, either, and there are some appaling exceptions to the rule, mostly relating to visitors from overseas) but i'm quite confident in saying that Australians have more and better freedom of speech than Americans do.

And pre-patriot act I'd say you were all kinds of wrong, but for now I'll I'll ask how much longer you have to wait until Atkinson actually does retire (and the list of banned video games or unrated games grows), how many more people have been arrested under the re instituted sedition act(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_sedition_law) and are you still as confident that you have more freedom of speech given the following statement: "not all political speech appears to be protected in Australia and several laws criminalize forms of speech that would be protected in other democratic countries such as the United States."?

And frankly I think there are rights your nation neglects, like the right not only to work, but to posess a funtional welfare state- after all, it's the people who pay tax, tax should serve them. America is bad at the kind of rights taken for granted in every other genuine democracy in the world, and it adds rights that the rest of us kind of scratch our heads at- with good reason, since they clearly havne't made you any more free, or even been enforced in a genuine way.

And herein lies one of our (you and I) biggest misconceptions. Not differences, for I sense that in the political realm we are probably pretty close in belief, but like it or not, this country *does* possess a functioning welfare program or two. It functions. It is inefficient, subject to the changing whims of whomsoever happens to be in office and it honestly can look daunting to someone who needs help but there are folks (myself included) who have successfully been supported by this system and are now nearly ready to rejoin the workforce and not only start paying tax back into the system again, but I honestly look forward to being able to donate to both the local concerns (housing authority) and the larger entities (moolah back into the fed system). You can make an argument that to an outsider, it seems that things are broken, but I can tell you from first hand experience... if you are willing to fill out the paperwork and jump through the necessary hoops, the help is there. The sad fact of us here in the US is that there are quite a few folks that are either too proud (stubborn) to ask, and there is a certain segment that does not want to put forth the effort to renew... they just want it handed to them.

I'm a student of american politics, and I know, know that when people use terms like 'states rights', or 'property rights', they're very often using a code word for a desire to infringe on other people's rights.

I view it as more of an issue of commerce, trade, taxation, and the fourth amendment, but I certainly will go on record as saying that political types and folks with money have and will continue to use these phrases to suit their own agendas. For me, local solutions to local problems are always better than "one federal law to rule them all..." (sorry, just watched all three movies yesterday with my son, I had to work a Lord of the Rings thing in here somewhere) In having more localized solutions, the arguments are going to arise: Who's going to get what cut of possible tax monies? Who is responsible for civic duties? Who will serve to mediate troubles if more than one set of laws come into play? I wanted to say all of this to show that these (and more) thoughts surround my discussions of states rights instead of just saying a "the federal government is to big and intrusive" having a sort of (if you watch south park) 'They took our jobs! Der der der!!!!" moment.

Eminent domain is the biggest property rights issue I have at the moment. I dearly hope its not an issue in your country. Bad juju. Its most assuredly something used to infringe on the rights of others and its not honestly as despicable as some of the other deplorable things in our history but it is a tender issue.

No, in all honesty my rights discussions and feelings on governments boil down to the following words of a great man in US history:

"The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred against the government, the right to be let alone?the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)

Self defence is a complex issues.

No argument there!

If your bored one night and you're willing to continue to look with an objective eye (but like me you enjoy when someone references their statistics) give the following page a once over: http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/noframedex.html It *does* have a little bit of political bleating on it, mostly when answering rhetoric that all sides are using, but its an interesting examination of multiple sources regarding how often firearms save lives in America.

So that's it for rights and that should probably be it for this conversation. Feel free to reply and I will read it, but I don't want to keep going with this, i think we've stated our point of views, and if we kept backing and fourthing, sooner or later I fear we would get to fussing and feuding.

Perhaps... nevertheless I've enjoyed this thoroughly, many thanks. Wicked better than finals last week.
Stay safe happyelf!

 

[dashiz94]

Yeah I smell bullshit. I'm not going to make any quick assumptions here but this definitely seems like a way for the police to cover themselves, or get in the papers.

 

[TrollOgerElf]

smells like they have it in for him
willing to make a big show out of it too even tho they are in the wrong

 

[Ghengis John]

Here I thought for sure he'd have been caught with at least a Dagger or Plus 1 Scimitar.

 

[likalaruku]

What, was he caught in an airport with a Sword of Might +2?