Imagine a Moratorium on Gun Control in 2012

Imagine a five year moratorium on all enforcement of gun laws. What would happen?

Would the fears and apprehensions of gun control activists come true? Or, would we see a re-awakening of the electorate’s supervision of our public servants and a much greater excitement about self-rule?

I think the re-awakening would transpire. Heritage of sovereignty would come alive and the government/governed rapport would improve immensely. You see, Americans do not hate their government; we prefer our roads to be safe, our meat inspection to be reliable, and our votes to be righteous (and counted). What we also prefer is respect for the Sovereign.

What would happen if the United States enjoyed a moratorium on restrictions on equipment for rifles, a moratorium on the enforcement of types of guns, acoustic suppressors, length of a rifle, magazine capacity or where and when one can concealed carry? What would change?

And what would happen to our image around the world? Would the UN back down on its insistences on arms control? Would national and international commerce improve? Would lending improve if neighborhoods were safer? And would jobs return?

The greatest fear of gun control is personal independence of the citizen, where the silliness of large bureaucracies is self-evident. Since America’s first gun control measures, public servants have been able to plumb the depths of the electorate’s tolerance for political nonsense and find a rather broad tolerance for the earliest appearance of impropriety and corruption. Once servants learned that the electorate will delegate to them the illusion of protecting our personal safety, they believed and acted upon the practice of getting the people to delegate them anything. Officials haven’t stopped since.

What would happen if Americans could stop violent acts on their authority instead of being restrained from acting in emergency? What would happen if more Americans – by the millions – became increasingly aware of their legal authority to act in refusing to be a victim?

Seriously, what would happen? What would happen if more citizens refused to be a victim of crime and system both?

I’ve always said that the repeal of gun control will impeach the need for immense bureaucracy in terms of billions upon billions of dollars — and in a coerced adherence to ludicrous and unreasonable laws.  A moratorium on gun control would be just as good as repeal, making repeal in demand soon after test driving it for five years.

But all of this is not even about guns, it is all about independence. For, as long as we have gun laws for the Sovereign never really touching crime, boondoggles of all sorts will continue in the name of fighting violence, hate, bigotry and greed, not to mention shortages of food, energy and materials.

The repeal of gun laws or even a moratorium for sixty months will not lead to blood in the streets any more than the right to carry in forty-eight states has. The majority of states in America supports the concept of the armed citizen with more than enough laws to protect the public (murder is already illegal, for instance) and registration of guns is unheard of in many states. All inall,  they have not been given reason to regret open and concealed carry for millions. Those states have found that the armed citizen reduces crime by a ubiquitous presence while gun control has proven to be absent when it was needed most.

My belief is that those Americans who want to see smaller government will not see it without first seeing the repeal of all gun control.

But you’re going to have to act fast. November is around the corner, and it won’t happen with gun owners alone. Smaller government won’t happen with the Tea Party alone, either. There has to be a national will for smaller government by the tens upon tens of millions in connection to a repeal of gun control, and articulated well so that every voter is on the same page in understanding their own sovereign authority and how to keep it for all generations.

As one for instance, the second amendment keeps government small non-violently and through due process. The second amendment does not keep tyranny at bay by forever keeping a gun to the head of Congress – the armed citizen keeps abuses of due process at bay by impeaching them as unneeded redundancies of the armed citizen, and poor substitutes at that. This is why gun control exists: not for safer streets, but for safer seats.

You can unseat somebody, but nothing will really change without first unseating gun control as the cornerstone of costly bureaucracies, self-appointed mandates and shortages.

Great work if you can get it, and for now they have it.

Not all officials are in favor of gun control; too many patriots in the United States Government and lower governments. But all officials have to comply with colleagues when the entirety of government powers is mustered, funded and carried out against the will of the people.

Repeal all gun control for smaller government and get a handle on violence in order to get a handle on buraucracies. Revoking the tolerance for gun control will push the reset button on what else we tolerate or don’t.


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.