The NRA Just Gave Me A Call

Well, the NRA just gave me a call about the UN Gun Grab (!). They thought they were going to solicit me, but instead that got a rant  instead. My final words to them were simply they cannot be trusted to do what is right and that my money is better served going to the GOA and the JPFO. I give you this from Alvie D. Zane of The Cliffs Of Insanity titled UN Gun GRAB!!!! which pretty much sums up most of my other comments to them:

Friday, September 2, 2011
UN Gun Grab!!!!!!
From now on, I’ll refer to the UN Gun Grab!!! as the NRA Money Grab!!!

Tough guy Wayne LaPierre had his telemarketers pay me a phone call today.  Right as I got in the house, I was greeted by the NRA.

I received the customary welcome message, then Wayne’s 2 minutes of hate for the UN Gun Grab (with extra exclamation points!!!!), then a “poll question” of whether I supported the UN going after gun rights on American soil.

I gave no answer, but I did get another human on the line.

He gave me the pitch for a 5 year membership-all of the benefits, the perks, the free decal, and the commemorative NRA knife.

Forgive me but why not something that’s at least related to firearms.  A bayonet?  Yes.  A cute rosewood handled commemorative knife?  Eh….not so much.  Don’t want to get in trouble with the tree popo.

Finally, my chance to talk.

Excellent…open bomb bay doors

Well sir, I actually dropped my NRA membership.  And I’ll tell you why I’m proud of that.

A couple of years ago, about 50 of us got together.  We manned up and rifled up and carried openly on the banks of the Potomac-in sight of the Washington Monument and the Capitol Dome.  Larry Pratt from Gun Owners of America came.  But no NRA.  Press from all over the world came, but the NRA wouldn’t touch us.

As far as the UN Gun Grab goes, I’ve been hearing this talk from the NRA for years.  Honestly, I don’t care what the UN does, what Obama does, what Washington does.

My rights are God-given, they are unalienable and no piece of paper can take them away.  My freedom doesn’t depend on what a judge says, on what Washington says, or even what the majority says.  If they want to come grab our guns, then let them try.  And then we’ll see what “fighting for our gun rights” looks like.

Understand that this sentiment isn’t directed at you, but your bosses.  Feel free to pass this uphill to them.  Good day.

My only regret is that I didn’t talk longer and thereby consume valuable working time in a non-productive effort. Starve the monkey.

After I hung up, I thought of so much more that I could have said.

How the NRA won’t stand up for the Montana Firearms Freedom Act.  How they didn’t want to push Heller.  How they gave Harry Reid a “B”, yet couldn’t see their way fit to endorse his opponent when he was clearly vulnerable.  How they are so late to the party where Gunwalker is concerned.  How they aren’t a “cold dead hands” organization anymore, but instead insist we need to be tough like Chuck and trigger the vote.

I suppose I also could have tried to get the caller to look through the Hoffman lenses.

Well, I’ll have something to talk about next time they call.


Is There An Inalienable Right To Self-Defense?

Gunwalker and the Foundation of Liberty: The lives of the individuals harmed by Gunwalker mean nothing to statists.
August 21, 2011 – 12:00 am – by Mike McDaniel

It all comes down to this: Is there an inalienable right to self-defense? If there is, each man has indisputable, inestimable value, value that he may rightly preserve even if the life of another man is forfeit. A man may kill another in lawful self-defense even if the policy preferences of the state would prefer his death. If a right to self-defense actually exists, it is in a very real sense the highest law of the land and all lesser laws must pay it deference. It fundamentally defines the social contract, the nature of the relationship between man and the state.

But if there is no such inalienable right, the entire nature of the social contract is changed. Each man’s worth is measured solely by his utility to the state, and as such the value of his life rides a roller coaster not unlike the stock market: dependent not only upon the preferences of the party in power but upon the whims of its political leaders and the permanent bureaucratic class. The proof of this analysis surrounds us.

Irony abounds in that England, the cradle of the common law and of our doctrine of self-defense, has utterly done away with even a government-condescended privilege to self-preservation. Not only have the English allowed themselves to be virtually stripped of firearms, British politicians have made attempts with varying degrees of success to ban knives. Attempting to protect the self or others from brutal criminal attack can and will lead to lengthy jail sentences in jolly old England — for the victims. Attacking criminals often go free, and often successfully sue their victims for daring to harm them in the process of depriving them of property or their very lives.

In the recent riots in Britain, we see America not far into the future if the progressive worldview is much further advanced. Contemporary England is a nation that spends a great deal of time and energy ostensibly caring for “the people,” yet cares not a whit for the life of any individual, particularly when that life is threatened or taken by a member of a favored political class or victim group, criminals included. This attitude and practice is a foundation of socialism.

Continued at – Gunwalker and the Foundation of Liberty: The lives of the individuals harmed by Gunwalker mean nothing to statists.
August 21, 2011 – 12:00 am – by Mike McDaniel