LF: 1775 . . . Again?

Title: 1775 . . . Again?
Source: Eric Peters Autos
URL Source: https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2019/12/23/1775-again/
Published: Dec 23, 2019
Author: Eric
Post Date: 2019-12-24 07:56:34 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 11297
Comments: 55

When people desperately trying to avoid a fight are left no choice but to fight, they are often the fiercest fighters imaginable.

The reason being an explosion of righteous anger – of berserker fury – directed at the bullies who will not leave them be.

Governor “Coonman” Northam of Virginia is such a bully.

He intends to rescind the current, ancient and long-acknowledged legal right of Virginians who aren’t criminals to possess more than single shot rifles and pistols – by criminalizing anyone who does possess them.

These newly minted “criminals” will then be required to turn in their formerly legal firearms to the government or be subject to Hut! Hut! Hutting! by armed government workers sent by the Coonman to enforce his criminal acts.

These acts include the criminalization of any “training” – even without firearms – which the Coonman and his supporters consider potentially “anti-government.”

This is a recipe for 1775.

Another bully – Thomas Gage, the British military governor of Massachusetts – attempted a “Coonman” in that year, which lit the fuse of what became the Revolutionary War. He sent armed government workers – Redcoats – to confiscate the weapons of the colonists – who had finally had their fill of being bullied. These long-ago AGWs eventually gunned down several colonists on the village green at Lexington.

Word of the massacre spread and the people rose in response, fighting back with whatever means available, harrying the column of armed government workers as it made its way back toward Boston, some 18 miles away.

The fury incited by that long-ago “Coonman” was subsequently described by himself:

“These people show a spirit and conduct against us they never showed against the French . . . They are now spirited up by a rage and enthusiasm as great as ever people were possessed of and you must proceed in earnest or give the business up. A small body acting in one spot will not avail, you must have large armies making diversions on different sides, to divide their force. The loss we have sustained is greater than we can bear. Small armies cannot afford such losses, especially when the advantage gained tends to do little more than the gaining of a post.”

Eight years later, those furious colonists finally succeeded in getting the bullies off their backs – permanently.

They probably never imagined that homegrown bullies even worse than “Coonman” Gage would eventually arise to torment them.

The current “Coonman” may not realize just how very tired the people are of being bullied – and how willing they are to fight, if a fight is forced upon them.

The “Coonman” feels confident. He has the full weight and force of the government and all its means at his disposal. He has legions of armed government workers available to enforce his writ.

But he hasn’t got the fury – and that is something he ought to reckon with, before it it is too late.

I speak from a rural SW Va county, in which most of the people living here know one another. Know they are not criminals, no matter what laws the Coonman may hurl characterizing them as such.

It is a very different to “red flag” and sic police department Hut! Hut! Hutters! on someone in a suburban home whose neighbors have no idea who he is than it is to order local sheriffs – who know their neighbor – to Hut! Hut! Hut! him on orders from Richmond. There is no “gun violence” problem in my county and everyone knows it. They therefore understand that what Coonman is proposing is not some kind of needed curative but the criminalization of almost an entire populace by distant tyrants who are loathed by almost the entire populace.

People such as Coonman are viewed as illegitimate foreigners; creatures who speak a foreign language, even though it is English. People here have had enough. The differences are irreconcilable. And the resentment is boiling.

Look at a map of the last election. The state remains overwhelmingly red – but the blues control the entire state government. It is because the blues – like a cancerous mole – control the densely populated counties adjacent to the federal capital. The reds no longer have a say in state government – and people who have no say tend to get angry. Right now, they are extremely angry.

It could get out of control very quickly.

It will be hard for the Coonman and his followers to portray 90 percent of the people living in the counties outside of Northern Virginia and Richmond as “criminals” by passing laws transforming them into criminals.

If this thing starts, it will not end until one or the other side is no longer capable of fighting. It will be no-quarter-given. It will be awful.

But it will be righteous.

And it may be the only way.

Don't be eager for a civil war, Virginia. the result will be the same for you as the last time.

You have to win this fight at the ballot box. you cannot win it on the battlefield. The correlation of forces has not improved for rebels since 1861, and unlike 1776, there's no French Army or French Navy out there to secure the win for the rebels.

I would add that, at this time, they cannot win this in court either. Note that all this pandering is about laws that do not exist. It is about proposed legislation, to be taken up, or not, in the 2020 legislative session.

If the majority of voters in Virginia support this legislation, and the majority of legislators pass it and the governor signs it, it's the law. The minority has recourse to the courts. If the courts do not side with them, they have some choices to make.

The best choice is to put forth the political effort to PERSUADE the majority to change its mind. There are ways to do that: keep track of the statistics, of crime and victims. Show the people that the gun legislation didn't work as designed, but DID have bad side effects. Convince the people to change the law. That may or may not work, but that's democracy.

The other choices are various forms of rebellion and resistance, which don't convince the majority, just anger them, and which only result in various levels of worsening losses to the rebels (depending on whether they are peaceful "passive resisters" or wage open warfare a la 1861.)

The voters have spoken and there's nothing to stop them. At one time the second amendment would have protected these weapons but, you know, Heller.

To be technical, McDonald. Heller only applied to the District of Columbia. McDonald followed Heller and expanded application to the States.

In Heller, only a D.C. law was at issue. The Court did not incorporate the 2nd Amendment against the States, as no State issue was involved. In McDonald, the Court fully incorporated the 2nd Amendment against the States.

I referred to Heller because Heller defined the weapons protected by the second amendment. And they didn't include dangerous and unusual weapons not in common use.

I mean, the Heller court was eager to point out the types of weapons NOT protected by the second amendment -- those not typically possessed by law- abiding citizens for lawful purposes or dangerous and unusual weapons -- even though the statute never mentions them.

Yes. How about a definition of "arms" by Heller as the Miller court provided?