The Church of Kharma Futures

The Rev's views on politics, events,faith, and the world. All content copyright Church of Kharma Future 2007-2015 All rights Reserved

Permits and Tyranny: Assault on Liberty

Posted by revkharma on February 11, 2009

Suppose that every time someone wanted to publish a book, or a newspaper, or give a speech, there was a requirement that anyone wishing to do so obtain a permit. Federal law required a background check, and a test to determine if the person wishing to speak, or write had ever committed a crime or been treated for certain psychological conditions.

Each member of a church, wishing to practice a religion should obtain clearance from the federal government.

 

You go to a trial, and are put under oath and questioned. You tell the interrogators that you wish not to answer, as the information may be incriminating. In order to refuse to answer, you will be required to provide a legal permit. Such permits vary from state to state, and even from city to city. Only those who have been cleared, according to state or federal regulations will be permitted to exercise such rights.

These seem pretty far fetched, don’t they? It’s flat out a violation of constitutional rights to require a legal permit to act on those rights which are plainly guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, a document we Americans revere as a foundation of the liberty we so justly prize.

 

Of course, it’s all ridiculous. No way would such restrictions be permitted by the courts.

But, why then, are such restrictions not just tolerated, but encouraged by federal, state, and local governments, and by self styled ‘civil rights groups’ like the ACLU? The Second Amendment is pretty clear and very short. It grants the rights of all Americans to own and use weapons without restrictions.  The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed.

There is a quote, often attributed to George Washington, which refers to firearms as “Liberty’s Teeth”. Without the ability to defend ourselves from government, there is no way to prevent government to continue to restrict and reduce liberty, the very liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Without the Second amendment, the other rights are naked and unprotected. The Founders and the writers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights fought to liberate themselves from a tyrannical King who imposed taxes, extracted tariffs, and gave little in return. AS they themselves had to fight for that liberty, they saw that future generations of Americans might one day need to do the same. So, they ensured that an armed citizenry would always be guaranteed the right to protect themselves against the force of government. There are numerous references to the need for citizens to be stronger than their government.

Later generations of Americans became comfortable with the idea of an all protective government. Subsequent generations have become seduced by the soft addictions of a government which guaranteed not liberty, but comfort. Rather than merely provide a protected zone within which law abiding citizens could engage in their private lives, government now began to assume the role of provider of comfort, and guarantor of basic needs for living. Governments seeing that to continue to do this would entrench a regime of dependency and growing government power hastened to expand such structures and expanded the scope and reach of government to all facets of American life. 

The idea of a self sufficient, self protected individual clashes with this vision of expansive all protective, all controlling government. Thus the demonization of those who insist on taking care of themselves. “Gun nuts”, extremists, ‘survivalists’ all are cast as a threat to order, and marginalized by ‘right thinking people’.

Lawless behavior is not categorized as the problem, rather it is the tool used that is wrong. Thus, we do not stigmatize the criminal as much as the object used to commit the crime. “Gun Crimes” becomes a rallying cry of those wishing to remove all traces of the Second Amendment. Guns are evil, a talisman, an effigy to be destroyed. In order to remove guns from American society, the Second Amendment must be twisted, and distorted. For many years this was accomplished by the myth of the ‘Militia Clause’ insisting that the second amendment exclusively was meant to apply to regular military, and not to individual rights. The fact that this would make the Second the ONLY of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights which would be a collective rather than an individual right was an inconvenient fact which was swept under the rug for many years.

Only recently, in the Heller case did the court plainly and clearly state that there is a clear and individual right to possess guns firmly placed within the bedrock principles of the founding of America. Even after a clear and decisive victory for the forces of liberty, many layers of government have refused to acknowledge the primacy of this right. We who stand for liberty are on the verge of a titanic struggle. The new regime which has taken power in Washington has made clear that they wish to expand and empower government to a level never before seen.

Watch closely and be prepared. There may not be a direct attack, but rather a disguised subversion of rights and liberty. Once they see a clear path and find excuses to begin to infringe in the Second Amendment, we will see the final stage of their assault on liberty.

We are in a dangerous time. We must watch, and prepare. We must not let the legacy bequeathed to us by the Founders fall to those who seek to reinstate tyranny here in America.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Permits and Tyranny: Assault on Liberty”

  1. Excellent reading!

  2. Andy Wendt said

    Great Post !

    And to keep this going:

    A background check for all public speakers would seam prudent, as hate speech only comes from those who speak, and clearly speaking in public is fraught with criminal potential.

    A permit to go to church might make sense too, because religious intolerance is is a growing problem and studies have shown that people with a religion are the most likely to be intolerant. So we better know who and where these religious people are at all times in order to protect those who believe in nothing from having to listen to anything from anyone who believes in something.

    And for those who have actually read the constitution: I think there should be created a national database for the purpose of having each of the before mentioned overlay nosey citizens, who may have already committed a cyber crime by even reading the thing, sign a waiver stating that despite what they have just read they fully understand the 10th amendment no loner means jack.

    Etc, Etc, Etc.

  3. MassRon said

    Reminds me of the Stamp Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamp_Act_1765

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: