A World Without Guns

The United Nations has convened its Small Arms Review Conference. As has been reported by Cam Edwards on Townhall.com, each day has been full of testimony from nations who have sought to restrict the ownership of guns by its citizenry. The ultimate goal of the United Nations is to ban all ownership of guns by the citizenry of the member nations. The only nation who seems to take a stand against this in this conference is the United States. Ironically, though, not all of the citizenry of the U.S., whose freedom from the tyrannical rule of Imperial England was won by common people with guns, stand with the United States in her assertion of the rights of the citizenry to own guns.

A state in which the only people who have guns are the police is a police state. The 2nd amendment has been perverted by the Brady cult to deny that the founders had anyone in mind but the military to have guns in their possession. The citizenry is already at a disadvantage with bans on assault weapons. The government by using the ATF has assaulted and killed citizens that it deemed a threat preemptively at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

Assaults on the 2nd amendment are the most dangerous to our civil liberties. Without the ability to defend ourselves from the government, none of our rights are safe.

The words of Patrick Henry, if I can get this quote right, ring true. "The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of patriots." Our founders knew that, left unchecked and without the threat of retaliation and a fight from the citizenry, that the government would soon be full of power-hungry tyrants. Slowly over the years, men of this nation have slept, have forgotten the lessons of the past, and have allowed our rights to be eroded and stepped on by our government. We have now came to the point in time that our nation is headed for socialism and hell. A revolution of the people will be the only recourse to bring us back to our foundation.

And if the state is the only one with guns, the only thing that the citizenry will be able to bring will be their knives. Knives at a gunfight lose.

And so it is in nations who have restricted gun ownership. In our own country, we need look no further than Washington D.C. to see just how successful restricting guns are in curbing crime.

Can anyone say "Bilderberg."

On the Subject of Slavery

Aside from Vox's latest firestorm, slavery has been the topic of discussion in many forums. In the U.S., the slavery of black people, who were sold from Africa by tribal leaders, who were held as slaves prior to the Reconstruction period prior to 1865, has been a topic of discussion for several years. Most recently, black people living today who claim to be descended from those held as slaves and what society owes them monetarily has been the subject of discussion among left-leaning so-called civil rights circles.

As is the case in most left-leaning equality parties, the goal is not equality but retribution and punishment for the sins of history, or at least the alleged sins of history. Slavery was definitely a scourge on the honorable history of this nation and its founding. Economic interests held off the abolition of slavery for several years after the founding of this nation. The monetary payments to the descendents of slaves or the supposed descendents of slaves would require the enslavement of others. This would be retribution by definition.

This is because the payments for retribution would have to come from our current tax system. Our current tax system is a form of slavery.

slav·er·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (slv-r, slvr)n. pl. slav·er·ies
The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household.

My logic in this conclusion:

1) The state of being bound implies that one is held against their will.
2) The labor of an individual belongs to that individual unless he willingly enters into a contract by which he promises a portion of his labor to another in exchange for goods or services.
3) The labor of an individual requires the time of that individual.
4) Time is a significant resource to an individual, as each individual has a limited amount that is unknown to him.
5) If a person is not living, he cannot spend his time to labor. Without the person, the labor resource does not exist. Therefore, a person's time is a part of their being.
6) If time is a part of a person's being, the monetary value of his labor agreed upon by contract belongs to him.
7) The Federal government, by force, taxes the monetary value of labor for the benefit of others without the laborers consent. If the laborer does not pay the tax levied upon him, then the government takes it by force. Therefore, a portion of labor is required to be given to the Federal government without contractual agreement but rather by force.
8) Therefore a person is bound in servitude to the state as a slavemaster for a portion of his labor. Therefore our current system of taxation is institutional slavery.

The Fair Tax is the best method I have seen so to replace the current tax structure and get the average citizen out of bondage of the government. I say this for the following reasons.

1) All other alternative tax structures are based on income taxation, including the flat tax. Still in servitude.
2) The Fair Tax eliminates not only the income tax, but Social Security and Medicare taxes as well.
3) The Fair Tax leaves in the hands of individual income earner how much tax he will pay be virtue of a percentage of consumption dollars. The more a person spends, the more he pays.
4) The Fair Tax is also conducive to economic growth, since an individual's gross income and bring-home pay will be the same.

The Fair Tax even has a provision that would give a "pre-bate" to each American household based on what is considered by the Labor Department to be poverty level. In other words, if a family of four is considered in poverty at $20,000, a family of four making $20,000 or less will get a refund of all sales taxes paid to the Federal government under the Fair Tax. Each family of four in the U.S., regardless of income, would be refunded sales taxes paid on the basic necessities of life up to poverty level.

Neal Boortz and John Linder have co-written a book on the Fair Tax, and John Linder is sponsoring a bill in the House of Representatives to pass the Fair Tax. I have read the book, and I recommend it. This is our best chance of getting out from under the imperial Federal government's thumb.

Back From My Blogging Sabatical

I looked at my last post and was surprised to see that April 21 was the last time that I blogged. I have no good excuse, though I have been busy. I apologize to the 2 or 3 readers that I have, if you will even read my blog anymore.

I have, since last blog, came to some important conclusions.

1) My new heroes in the culture war are Vox Day and Neal Boortz.
2) The Republican Party is definitely as much if not more of a big government party that the democrats, and are therefore unworthy of my vote. As a matter of fact, they are one in the same party.
3) Party affiliation in general stifles individual thought, as each party has a platform that each member is expected to abide by.

Why are Vox Day and Neal Boortz my new heroes in the culture war? First of all, neither is a lockstep party affiliate that only regurgitates the platform of their party. Secondly, both are independent and creative thinkers who are not afraid of the political and social realities of stating the truth, no matter how painful it may be, even to themselves. Thirdly, both handle their critics with well-thought responses, using facts to support their conclusions while dispelling the opponents assertions. And finally, both the right and left political factions have them in their sites for some reason or other.

I have been particularly interested of late in the discussion that Vox has had on his blog, which is linked on this blog site, concerning the increase in sex slavery in western Europe. In a nutshell, here is Vox's assertions:

1) Sex slavery is on the upswing in post Christian western Europe.
2) The rejection of Judeo-Christian values is to blame in the devaluation of the worth of women, and people in general, in post-Christian societies.
3) Humanism, and more particularly, feminism has been at the forefront of this rejection of Judeo-Christian principles.
4) For most of recorded history, slavery has been the norm. All forms of societies have had slavery at one point or other in their history.
5) Only two instances of the outlawing of slavery without outside political influence exists in history: One in 15th-16th century Japan, because of the personal convictions of one man; and in 19th century Christian Great Britain.
6) Great Britain's force within itself for this change was a group of Quakers, who proclaimed that slavery was a scourge upon mankind.
7) Christianity uplifted more women from property status than any other religion, and the social system based upon Christianity has perpetuated the same.
8) Christianity has served as a moral compass for those societies who adopt the principles.
9) Those who reject Christianity either have adopted another set of religious principles from which they base their morality, or are humanist and are moral relativists.
10) The rejection of Christianity in western Europe has led to the adoption of Islam, many of whose new converts are women living in post-Christian Europe.
11) The irony of feminism is that by rejecting Judeo-Christian principles, and more particularly Christianity as a religion, women are suffering much more oppression and have returned to their historical status as property in post-Christian societies.

The feminists in the blogosphere and their pantywaist defenders were really upset over Vox's statement that he found "humor" in western culture having a rise in sex slavery. Reasonable people know that he was referring to irony as humor, but some people aren't reasonable. Especially on the left.

Vox also was labeled a "Nazi" by the whole political spectrum recently when he entered the deportation debate on illegal immigrants. His assertion here was that Nazi Germany transported large numbers of Jewish citizens to concentration camps, and that the inability of the United States to transport illegal migrants to the south side of the border is bunk. But, by citing a successful transportation strategy, albeit from Nazi Germany, he suddenly was a nazi who was suggesting that we massacre illegal migrants. Michael Medved, a proclaimed righty, even dedicated air time to denouncing Vox's column as nazi propaganda.

Neal Boortz is somewhat less patient with his critics, as I assume the medium is radio rather than print or internet blogging. But he correctly took to task the anti-flag burning amendment crowd as political panderers who are looking for easy ways to keep office. Such an amendment also flies in the face of private property rights, of which Boortz is a staunch defender. He also is bold enough to take on K Street and try to muster enough grass roots support to overthrow the current slavemaster, the IRS, and the tax system it employs here in the U.S.

I do not believe that I must go into detail about the Republicrat party. What I find funny is that the left hates George Bush, but, aside from foreign policy and defense, he is a democrat dream-come-true. And so it is with Republican congressmen. Spending is higher than ever on domestic programs. No social security reform. The President then spends more money on a prescription drug benefit for Medicare, who is in worse dire straits than Social Security from a liquidity standpoint. He co-writes an education bill with the Hero of Chappaquidick, Ted Kennedy, who then promptly stabs him in the back by stating that President Bush concocted the war in Iraq from Texas. He then pushes immigration reform that would give amnesty to illegal migrants. In other words, the U.S. would sell citizenship for $2,000, much like Clinton sold the Lincoln Bedroom to his donors. It is almost as if the left were staring in a mirror at themselves and hating the image of themselves. Self-loathing, I've found, is a trademark of left-leaning people.

So, come November, I most likely will go to the booth and cast a blank ballot, unless some independent-minded candidate is on the ballot. Of political parties, the platform of the Constitution Party best matches my views. However, this party nor any of their candidates have made it to the ballot in Georgia.

Sorry about my prolonged vacation from blogging on my own blog. I hope to be back in full force.