DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
WebWar
HTML https://webwar.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Ιστορία κ&#...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 4238--------------------------------------------------
Ενάντια στο
μονοπώλιο
των όπλων!
DIR By: FringeElements
Date: December 18, 2012, 12:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ο Stephen Halbrook εξηγεί
γιατί το
μονοπώλιο
των όπλων
αποτρέπει
τους
ανθρώπους
από το να
ζήσουν
ελεύθερα
και είναι
απαραίτητο
για την
σοσιαλιστική
και
πολιτική
τυραννία
του κράτους
και καλεί σε
κοινωνική
απειθαρχία
και
αντίσταση
απέναντι
στο
τρομοκράτος
και τους
μηχανισμούς
του.
[center]Tyranny and the Monopoly of Arms
HTML http://images.mises.org/DailyArticleBigImages/6321.jpg[/center]
The indifference which seems to pervade many libertarian circles
regarding recent gun control laws—laws which are likely to forge
the final links on the chains shackled to the average American
citizen—is dangerously surprising. Apparently no one perceives
the importance of what has occurred.
Few realize the extreme shackles placed on actual or potential
gun owners by the acts snowballing into the Gun Control Act of
1968 (Public Law 90-618). To purchase a gun one must make a
sworn statement of identity, which is sent to the local police
chief—who decides whether the applicant may own a gun on the
basis of whether he is a “law-abiding” citizen (i.e., if he
obeys every order of the power elite). Firearm ownership is
denied to convicted felons, dishonorably discharged veterans,
aliens illegally in the U. S., and former citizens who have
renounced their citizenship, viz., all potential opposers of the
Establishment. Users of “dangerous drugs” like pot, anyone under
21, as well as many others are also denied the right of
ownership. Ownership of fully automatic, large caliber, or other
firearms is absolutely prohibited to everyone but the State.
Even those qualified to own an arm are hampered by total
registration, a fact unknown to the general public. Besides
direct registration of newly purchased guns, “backdoor
registration” of all other guns occurs due to the requirement
that merchants record the name, address, etc., of all buyers of
ammunition. These records are subject to police and Federal
snooping. All producers and retailers are also fettered by high
license fees and other outrages.
Some state and local governments have gone even more berserk.
In many areas, anyone possessing a firearm is under constant
harassment by the police. Complete registration, as well as the
charging of atrociously high license fees, have left many with
the necessity of surrendering their guns. The states of New
York, New Jersey, and Illinois are particularly oppressive in
this regard.
On the local level, the situation in Miami reads like a chapter
from 1984. To apply for gun ownership, one must submit to the
police extensive personal information. While at this point they
have not gone quite as far as Rhodesia, where 32 blacks were
recently sentenced to death for the “crime” of possessing
firearms, anyone who is caught carrying a “dangerous weapon”
without police approval gets a minimum of 6 months or $1,000 in
fines. To help enforce these repressions, a $100 bounty is paid
to anyone who is willing to squeal on his neighbor for firearms
violations. Other cities are on the same road.
The ultimate goal of the power structure is the total abolition
of private (non-ruling class) gun ownership. In mid-January 1969
the Illinois Academy of Criminology spoke favorably of this
goal, and hundreds of other groups and individuals openly admit
similar ambitions. The minimum they will settle for is complete
police control of all firearms as is the case in Soviet Russia.
The masses are taught to believe the lie that such laws will
reduce crime. Nothing could be further from the truth, because
gun ownership by the general population simply does not cause
crime. In 1966, twice as many guns per home were owned in Canada
as compared with the U. S., yet the gun homicide rate of the
former was only one-fifth that of the latter (American Rifleman,
Aug., 1968, p. 46). And surely, if one wants to kill another,
the absence of a gun will act as no safeguard; in Japan, where
civilian guns are outlawed, the murder rate without guns is
almost twice as high as the U. S. rate without guns (American
Rifleman, Nov., 1968, p. 17).
On the contrary, gun ownership by the immense majority serves to
prevent crime. Criminals have second thoughts regarding killing
and plundering peaceful individuals who may be armed. But they
have no hesitations when they are confident that their victims
are helpless. Since criminals will always have guns (no
criminals would register their guns, and besides, zip guns are
easy to make), it is necessary that potential victims be able to
arm themselves to prevent crime. Each month the American
Rifleman, under the column “The Armed Citizen”, cites numerous
instances in which private guns have prevented crimes.
Thus the avowed goal of State gun control is false. What, then,
is the real reason why the power elite wants to leave the people
defenseless?
It has already been observed that guns are necessary for
peaceful individuals to protect themselves from criminals. But
who has been the most ferocious criminal in history? It is
obvious: the State!
The U. S. Government, though they trust themselves with the
largest arsenal the world has ever known, including everything
from napalm and M-16’s to tanks and H-bombs, will not trust its
thralls with .22-cal. revolvers. Why does this trust not exist?
The people want to be free, a great number of blacks as well as
many non-ruling class whites desire self-determination, and the
Establishment must frustrate these movements. Laissez-faire gun
ownership is feared for the same reason that Hitler would have
been afraid of a gun-owning Jewish population or Stalin a bunch
of pistol-packing Ukrainians. Well does the State know Mao’s
dictum: political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” The
rulers realize that the only way to retain their control over
the people is to monopolize the firearms. The powers-that-be
perceive that the people can never exercise their right to be
free if they have no might to be free. Thus it is in part by gun
control that Big Brother perpetuates his hegemony.
Besides those already mentioned, one of the most important
steps taken by the U. S. Leviathan has been to forbid the
importation into the U. S. of surplus military rifles. American
gun manufacturers, including Winchester-Western, Remington, and
Savage gave tremendous support to the passage of this act to
prevent competition from old and low-priced but reliable foreign
arms. The State’s motive is evident too: these inexpensive guns
were within the buying power of everyone, and outlawing further
importation prevents the many who cannot afford expensive
American guns from acquiring a means of self-defense.
Understanding the political (or rather, the anti-political)
utility of guns for the people, it is deplorable that the police
can know who owns which firearms. But unless present trends are
reversed, these quasi-private guns will not be around to worry
about—they will be confiscated, leaving the people with no
protection whatever.
There are few methods available to prevent this. The National
Rifle Association has been a somewhat effective lobbyist in
Congress to preserve the Second Amendment freedom to keep and
bear arms, but it is likely that such efforts will only delay
confiscation. The best mode available seems to be that employed
by the people of Chicago last fall: only one-third of the city’s
1,200,000 firearms were registered in accordance with the
ordinance requiring total registration, and of the two million
gun owners in Illinois, less than one-fourth obtained the
required license (American Rifleman, Dec, 1968, p. 6). Only mass
civil disobedience can prevent Big Brother from totally
disarming his serfs.
Dr. Stephen P. Halbrook is a Research Fellow at the Independent
Institute, and has taught legal and political philosophy at
George Mason University, Howard University, and Tuskegee
Institute. He received his J.D. from the Georgetown University
Law Center and Ph.D. in social philosophy from Florida State
University.
The winner of three cases before the U.S. Supreme Court (Printz
v. United States, United States v. Thompson/Center Arms Company,
and Castillo v. United States), he has testified before the
Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Subcommittee
on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee, Senate Governmental
Affairs Committee, and House Committee on the District of
Columbia.
A contributor to numerous scholarly volumes, he is the author
of the books, That Every Man Be Armed: Evolution of a
Constitutional Right; A Right to Bear Arms; Firearms Law
Deskbook: Federal and State Criminal Practice; Freedmen, the
Fourteenth Amendment, and the Right to Bear Arms, 1866-1876 ;
State and Federal Bills of Rights and Constitutional Guarantees;
and Target Switzerland: Swiss Armed Neutrality in World War II.
Dr. Halbrook’s scholarly articles have appeared in such journals
as the Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law,
Drug Law Report , George Mason University Law Review, Journal of
Air Law and Commerce, Journal of Law and Policy, Law &
Contemporary Problems, National Law Journal, Northern Kentucky
Law Review, St. John’s Journal of Legal Commentary; Seton Hall
Constitutional Law Journal, Tennessee Law Review,University of
Dayton Law Review, Valparaiso University Law Review, Vermont Law
Review, and William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal. His popular
articles have appeared in such publications as the Wall Street
Journal, San Antonio Express-News, Environmental Forum, USA
Today, and Washington Times, and he has appeared on numerous
national TV/radio programs such as “The Phil Donahue Show” and
programs on Court TV, Voice of America, CNN, C-SPAN.
See Stephen P. Halbrook's article archives
HTML http://mises.org/daily/author/409/Stephen-P-Halbrook.
#Post#: 4264--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ενάντια
στο
μονοπώλιο
των όπλων!
DIR By: mistermax
Date: December 18, 2012, 10:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
ΟΧΙ ΣΤΟ
ΜΟΝΟΠΩΛΕΙΟ
ΤΗΣ ΒΙΑΣ
ΕΝΟΠΛΗ ΒΙΑ
ΣΤΗΝ ΒΙΑ ΤΗΣ
ΕΞΟΥΣΙΑΣ.
#Post#: 4270--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ενάντια
στο
μονοπώλιο
των όπλων!
DIR By: Ισοπε&#94...
Date: December 18, 2012, 11:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Κόψτε αυτή
τη μαλακία
με τα copy-paste
κείμενα στα
αγγλικά. Και
κανένας δεν
τα διαβάζει
και
προσβολή
είναι για
όποιον
γράφει
μόνος του!
#Post#: 4312--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ενάντια
στο
μονοπώλιο
των όπλων!
DIR By: FringeElements
Date: December 19, 2012, 2:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from:
Ισοπεδωτικός
link ---
>
> Κόψτε αυτή
τη μαλακία
με τα copy-paste
κείμενα στα
αγγλικά. Και
κανένας δεν
τα διαβάζει
και
προσβολή
είναι για
όποιον
γράφει
μόνος του!
>
--- End Quote ---
Τα διαβάζω
εγώ και, ως
ατομικιστής,
δεν έχω
ανάγκη
κανέναν
άλλον!
#Post#: 4324--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ενάντια
στο
μονοπώλιο
των όπλων!
DIR By: mistermax
Date: December 19, 2012, 1:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from:
Ισοπεδωτικός
link ---
>
> Κόψτε αυτή
τη μαλακία
με τα copy-paste
κείμενα στα
αγγλικά. Και
κανένας δεν
τα διαβάζει
και
προσβολή
είναι για
όποιον
γράφει
μόνος του!
>
--- End Quote ---
κανε αυτο
που πρεπει
να γινεται
και με τα
ελληνικα
κειμενα.
Διαβαζε
μονο τον
επιλογο,
εκει ο καθε
συγγραφεας
βαζει τον
καλυτερο
του εαυτο να
τα ξαναπει
ολα- αυτο
ειναι το
αγχος του
καθε
επιδοξου
προπαγανδιστη.
Στην
περιπτωση
του
ελεμεντς,
μπορεις να
διαβαζεις
μονο αυτο
που γραφει
στις
εικονες, το
ιδιο ειναι.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1