Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumGuns, Democracy, And The Insurrectionist Idea
McVeigh was, to most, a dangerous criminal. But to some, he was a patriot, committing an act of insurrection against a tyrannical American government. What is most astonishing about the McVeigh case is not that he believed the governments actions justified his violence against it, but that the theory he was invoking insurrectionism has met with increasing approval and legitimacy in otherwise serious circles. That this claim is no exaggeration is the basis for Joshua Horwitz and Casey Andersons disturbing and important book on this subject. As the authors note, insurrectionist theory has won legitimacy not only in public debate and in the pages of law reviews, but from the highest court in the land. In the 2008 Supreme Court case of D.C. v. HELLER, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote with apparent approval (and certainly not with disapproval) that the Second Amendments right to bear arms is an important right in part because men with guns and training are better able to resist tyranny (at 2801) and as a safeguard against tyranny (at 2802). More about that later.
Horwitz and Anderson note that the insurrectionist perspective argues not only that the government is to be viewed with the greatest suspicion, but that citizens should be prepared to resist it with force (p.4). As groups like the National Rifle Association insist, guns mean freedom; more guns mean more freedom; any government-enacted restriction of guns is, ipso facto, an infringement on freedom; and the threat of armed force by citizens against their government is beneficial, not corrosive; healthy, not harmful to freedom. The book begins by defining insurrectionism, noting that the insurrectionist sloganeering is largely detached from societal reality. They note one of many ironies of insurrectionism: it asserts that [*391] the government is too weak to protect its citizens yet too strong to be trusted (p.26). More than any other individual or group, the NRA bears primary responsibility for promoting and legitimizing the idea that the threat of political violence (and what is the point of the threat if it is not backed by the prospect of action?) is not only a good thing, but protected under the Second Amendment. The tipping point came in 1977 when hard-liners within the NRA took control of the organization at its annual convention. Since then, the organizations direction has been ever more political, strident, and radical.
http://www.gvpt.umd.edu/lpbr/subpages/reviews/horwitz-anderson0609.htm
SkatmanRoth
(843 posts)Vessel operators transiting St. Marys River, between Lake Superior and the lower Great Lakes, have a new nautical chart to help lessen the dangers inherent in this narrow and complicated waterway. The first edition of Chart 14887 (St. Marys River Vicinity of Neebish Island) is available this week as a paper print-on-demand chart, PDF, and raster navigational chart. The electronic navigational chart will be available by March, in time for the beginning of the shipping season.
Coast Survey has built the chart from original sources, providing the highest standard of accuracy for hydrographical and topographical features and aids to navigation. The chart provides large-scale (1:15,000) coverage of the up bound and down bound channels of the St. Marys River one of the busiest waterways in the nation. Over 4,100 transits of commercial and government vessels move about 75 million tons of cargo through the 300-day shipping season.
Chart 14887 uses updated shoreline data, collected with NOAAs high tech remote sensing planes. (See National Geodetic Surveys shoreline data viewer.) At the 1:15,000 scale, the positions of many of the features were corrected an average of ten meters from positions in prior charts, a vital correction for precision navigation by vessels that can exceed a thousand feet long.
Coast Survey also plans to issue new editions of the current four largest scale charts of the St. Marys River in late January. Charts 14882, 14883, 14884 and 14962 will have all new shoreline, updating the locations of features and aids to navigation. These updates for the St. Marys River follow 21 new editions for Great Lakes charts from Buffalo to Thunder Bay Island, around the Lower Peninsula to Milwaukee Harbor and Ludington. More updates are slated for 2014 and 2015.
http://noaacoastsurvey.wordpress.com/2014/01/07/new-noaa-nautical-chart-for-st-marys-river/
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)SkatmanRoth
(843 posts)The drive by poster comes back to read one of his hit and run threads.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)By AK Luis
Format aperback
This book will be loved by the anti-gun crowd and hated by the pro-gun crowd. That is the general nature of books of this type. To be fair, I have a stong opinion on this subject, and am less that unbiased. However, It is not a proper scholarly work, and cites multiple sources that have been discredited in academia. I would hope someone would attempt to challenge my believes using this book, as it would be easy to deflect the criticisms with facts. Truth be told, you can make any argument sound good by picking facts. This book didn't even bother with picking solid facts.
I am not supposed to link in this review, so for a source I will give you the following citation: JIAFM, 2007 - 29(4); ISSN: 0971-0973
Women who employ:
-Non-forceful verbal resistance strategies (i.e. pleading) were associated with completion of the raped in 96% of instances.
-Forceful verbal resistance (i.e. screaming) was associated with completion of rape in 45-55% of instances.
-Attempted flight was associated with completion of the rape in 15% of instances. (Only a fraction of women were even in a postion to consider flight, i.e. not thrown to the ground).
-Forceful physical resistance was associated with completed rape in 14% of instances.
-Weapons use in forceful physical resistance(knives/guns)were associated with completed rape in <1% of instances.
http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Democracy-Insurrectionist-Joshua-Horwitz/dp/0472033700
Go to a gun shop and ask them to look up FFL number 1-54-000-01-8C-00725
ileus
(15,396 posts)sarisataka
(18,220 posts)At the meeting May 21-22 in Cincinnati a hard line group of activists successfully stage a coup taking control of the NRA from the "old guard" of sportsmen oriented leaders.
Later that year the NRA-ILA is founded as a new lobbying group on the concept 'No Compromise. No gun legislation'
By the end of 1980 NRA membership has tripled.
How did this happen? There are a myriad of reasons. Polarization within NRA ranks. A motivated group who knew how to use the voting system to its advantage. Moderates abstaining as they felt represented by neither faction and some outside factors-
1968 Gun Control Act
1972 ATF founded
Feb. 5, 1977 The Firearms Control Act of 1975
So is the modern, extremist NRA a bastard child of an aggressive gun control movement? I suppose it depends on ones perspective. Yet literally overnight an organization that for over a century had been relatively quiet and content to promote the sporting aspect of gun use transformed into arguably the strongest, most feared lobbying group in DC.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Gun Prohibitionists started advocating the Prohibition of Handguns, then Semi-Automatics, and for some Gun Prohibitionists, all guns. Gun Prohibitionists sowed the wind, and reaped the whirlwind. Gun Prohibition Advocates have no one to blame but themselves. You do not attempt to take people rights and freedoms away, and then claim it's their fault when they react.
Another factor contributing to the change in the NRA was the realization that the "Fudds" (those who believe the only purpose of owning guns was to hunt) would be perfectly willing to sell out other guns owners as long as they were allowed to keep their hunting guns. And since fewer gun owners hunt these days, the non-hunters were not about to let themselves be sold out.
The rise of organizations seeking to strictly limit or ban handguns.
Mark Borinsky founded the National Council to Control Handguns in 1974
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Campaign
"We'll take one step at a time, and the first is necessarily - given the political realities - very modest. We'll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and then again to strengthen the next law and again and again. Our ultimate goal, total control of handguns, is going to take time. The first problem is to slow down production and sales. Next is to get registration. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and ammunition (with a few exceptions) totally illegal.
National Coalition to Ban Handguns, later the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_to_Stop_Gun_Violence
The Cincinnati Revolt was an outgrowth of organizations like the two mentioned above.