The Radical Left’s First Order Of Business: Disarm The Public, Part Four

Opinion
Read Leftists Urge Americans to Betray Their God-Given Right to Bear Arms – Part Three

AmmoLand Come and Take It Tee
AmmoLand's Come and Take It Tee

New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Purveyors Of Collective Guilt: Andrew Cuomo And Eric Swalwell.

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty. . . . and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?”

Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree.” ~ From the essay, “Of Crimes and Punishments,” by Cesare Bonesana di Beccaria, Marquis of Gualdrasco and Villareggio (born March 15, 1738 – died November 28, 1794); Italian criminologist, jurist, philosopher, and politician; widely considered as the most talented jurist and one of the greatest thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment.

What the jurist, Cesare Bonesana di Beccaria, pointed out most eloquently in the Eighteenth Century, concerning the disarming of the civilian population, is no less true today.

Yet, radical Left politicians, in the Twenty-first Century are spouting the same inane remarks about firearms’ ownership that antigun politicians evidently spouted in the Eighteenth Century, which, then, would account for Beccaria’s essay, and, tacitly, for Beccaria’s scathing rebuke of them. And, what are those absurd remarks that anti-gun politicians, and anti-gun advocates, and zealots crow endlessly, mindlessly about? It all boils down to this:

In order to enhance public safety, it is necessary to confiscate firearms. This is done for your [the public’s] own good. Gun violence will be curtailed, once confiscation of guns has been accomplished. Fewer guns mean less crime. And, if you do not surrender your firearms, we will make an example of you—all for the public good, of course!

Antigun politicians recited words to that effect in Eighteenth-Century Europe, just as they do today—thus, Beccaria’s strong rebuke. But, whether any of the anti-gun politicians and anti-gun zealots of the Eighteenth Century, as with their counterparts today, truly believed in their imbecilic remarks, that is debatable. But, what isn’t debatable, today at least, is that anti-gun politicians intend to harass law-abiding gun owners to the point that most of us—as these antigun politicians and zealots undoubtedly hope—will relent, and surrender, albeit reluctantly, our firearms to Government authorities.

Of course, the criminal element will continue merrily along to obtain their firearms, as they obtain most of the firearms they use to commit acts of violence now: on the black market, or through theft, or deceit. And there will, of course, be no concomitant decrease in gun violence in the U.S. But, then, gun confiscation to reduce crime isn’t the radical Left’s reason to confiscate firearms from the civilian population of this Country, anyway. It never was. That is a mere pretext. It plays well in the Press. The goal of the radical Left here is, and always has been, population control, not gun control.

Population Control, Not Gun Control

A perfect case study of this point, and ongoing at this very moment, is the situation presently playing out in Venezuela, under the Madura Socialist Dictatorship. A reporter for the Washington Examiner, Claude Thompson, poignantly pointed out, on April 30, 2019:

“Videos emerging from Venezuela Tuesday show anti-Nicolás Maduro protesters being reportedly shot at and run over by military members while civilians are unable to use conventional weapons to defend themselves following a private gun ownership ban in 2012.

Videos circulating on social media show an unidentified helicopter reportedly shooting at protesters and armored military vehicles running over groups of citizens protesting the continuing reign of Maduro, who refuses to yield control of the country to Juan Guaidó, who multiple countries, including the United States, recognize as the legitimate president of the country.”

Are the scenes coming out of Venezuela, in recent days, a foreshadowing of what we can expect with the installation of a Socialist Dictatorship in our Country? We can very well expect such a sad state of affairs if the Collectivists in our Nation come to power. They will begin the dismantling of our Free Republic by instituting a massive gun confiscation program. We know that Collectivists disdain the very idea of fundamental rights, as natural rights, preexistent in the individual—rights bestowed on each American citizen by Divine Grace rather than by the grace of Government.

After all, the very existence of an armed citizenry galls the radical Left—the Collectivists—who are intent on creating an omnipotent, omnipresent central Government, a Government that isn’t answerable to its citizenry. The founders of our Nation would be appalled. But, then, the Collectivists don’t give a damn about what the founders thought or would think, about the Collectivist agenda.

The Collectivists envision a new world order, where sovereign, independent Western Nation States, including the United States, will cease to exist. The Collectivists envision the erection of a new political, social, cultural, economic, financial, and legal system of governance; one where edicts emanate from the European Union’s Executive arm, the European Commission, whose headquarters is in Brussels, the Capital region of Belgium.

Recall the Globalist President Barack Obama’s address to the European Union, delivered in Hannover Germany, on April 25, 2018. In pertinent part Obama said,

“And this is what I want to talk to you about today—the future that we are building together—not separately, but together. And that starts right here in Europe.”

Was Obama’s remark mere pleasantry, or was it something more; a portentous foreshadowing of something sinister; something ominous in store for Americans: heralding the dismantling of our institutions, the destruction of our Free Republic, the loss of our National sovereignty; the abject subordination of the United States to a foreign power; the subjugation of a free people; the abrogation of our Constitution; the rescission of our Nation’s fundamental, unalienable, sacred and inviolate rights and liberties?

But whether these Collectivists know it or not, their vision will lead to Armageddon. Our citizenry will not bow easily to subjugation. They did not do so in the 1700s, as the British Empire learned well. And they will not do so now. If the Collectivists seek to thrust their vision on Americans by force of arms, they will be met with force of arms. If the Collectivists seek to thrust their vision of America on the citizenry through subterfuge, they should know that Americans are not easily duped and the Collectivists' efforts will be severely repulsed.

It is galling to hear people like Governor Andrew Cuomo and Representative Eric Swalwell, sanctimoniously bellowing, by turns both belligerent and flippant, for ever more restrictions on the sacred right of the people to keep and bear arms. Indeed, Cuomo and Swalwell, like other radical Leftists in our midst, are no longer maintaining the pretense that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is worth securing at all.

While some remarks still invoke the notion that fewer guns means less crime—regardless of the fact that it is not the number of guns in circulation but whom it is that has access to them that is the salient factor —antigun politicians, such as Cuomo and Swalwell, no longer really pretend that gun confiscation will translate into less crime. It is, rather, the tacit implication of their message—namely that guns signify something bad in and of themselves and, so, no one, aside from the police and military should have access to them—that is the real message blared out, behind the banter of gun violence, that they seek to convey to the public.

So it is that Cuomo and Swalwell, and other radical Leftists—using the pretext of gun violence, perpetrated by the occasional maniac, lunatic, criminal, and gang-banger—denigrate tens of millions of average, rational, law-abiding American gun owners who do continue to cherish their sacred right to keep and bear arms and who do not take lightly nor kindly to the attack on both them and on their responsibly owned and possessed firearms.

It has become patently clear that Cuomo and Swalwell place the law-abiding gun owner in the same camp as psychopathic criminals and the maniacs who happen to use firearms to commit violence. Cuomo and Swalwell dare impose collective guilt on all gun owners despite the fact that it is only a few—the lowest common denominator in society—that is responsible for gun violence. That becomes evident through both the words they utter and through the policies they endorse, which they seek to translate into law.

Cuomo and Swalwell remain unperturbed at the outlandishness of their remarks and their policy goals. They continue to castigate, taunt, and deride gun owners mercilessly—people like you and me who seek merely to exercise our God-given right—YES, GOD-GIVEN RIGHT—to keep and bear arms.


Arbalest Quarrel

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel' website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit www.arbalestquarrel.com.

  • 16
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    10 Comment threads
    6 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    15 Comment authors
    CoelacanthTheHolyCrowRotaryConnectedKUETSARobert Pollard Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    Coelacanth
    Guest
    Coelacanth

    The problem with socialism is, you can vote your way into it, but you have to shoot your way out of it.

    KUETSA
    Guest
    KUETSA

    Andrew Cuomo’s NY SAFE Act – Compliance Rate – 4%

    American Gun Owners are NOT surrendering the Second Amendment OR their firearms to these treasonous progressive communist SonOfABitches!

    TheHolyCrow
    Guest
    TheHolyCrow

    4% ? Are you sure it was that high ? I thought it was more like 1%, as symbolized by that straight up middle finger most everyone shoved in their ugly faces. Can you imagine how embarrassed, stupid, and hated they must feel ? Wait until the night of their 3 am Military Tribunal rolls around.

    Robert Pollard
    Guest
    Robert Pollard

    Those 2 and others like them are criminals by breaking the law of the Constitution. They should be tried for treason as examples to the other criminals like Hillary, that they cannot get away with breaking the law forever like they have and are still doing.
    Back in the mid 90s, I just learned that the Clintons allowed 4 prisons to pump out blood to Canada that was tainted with Hepatitis, and HIV. Thereby killing millions that included mostly children. They were paid 10 million for that deal. This is mainstream news!

    Jim Hovater
    Guest
    Jim Hovater

    The Liberal Left is pushing a civil war they won’t win.

    Bill
    Guest
    Bill

    There is a difference between a real democracy, where people vote according to their conscience, and a coerced democracy, where people vote because of a government-induced social pressure to conform to a certain ideology, or to a desire not to have government benefits removed because you have expressed dissent. Consider the role of these things (discriminatory use of oil profits) in keeping Hugo Chavez in power and securing Maduro’s succession into the office. Oh, by the way, notice those same dynamics and how they corrupt American politics as well. People here no longer vote for ethics, advancement of the society,… Read more »

    rich z
    Guest
    rich z

    I will bet, that BOTH have carry permits and body guards.

    Stripeseven
    Guest
    Stripeseven

    Hold them accountable for their actions.

    Deplorable Bill
    Guest
    Deplorable Bill

    They travel by motorcade. They have high end security teams to “protect and serve” — them. Grace for them and law for anyone else. This is how slaves are made. It is all too obvious that when the demoncrapic / socialist / communist party has enough votes they will do a King George/Diane Feinstein: ” Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in”. You can bet that, just as one of her fellow demoncrats said, nukes, (really, that is the quote) mass confiscation and jail time will be involved for everyone who is not working security for the demoncratic elite.… Read more »

    hippybiker
    Guest
    hippybiker

    Deplorable Bill. You lost me when you misquoted the Declaration. Please remember that the Constitution wasn’t ratified until some 14 years later.
    Otherwise, a good rant.

    Nanashi
    Guest
    Nanashi

    When Democrats first got gun control, it took less than 10 years for them to follow it up with concentration camps.

    m.
    Guest
    m.

    cu-homo & swallows-well: go out & see how well hands-on confiscation works for “ewe”

    Tim Hoskin
    Guest
    Tim Hoskin

    You lost me when you called Venezuela a dictatorship. Maduro was democratically elected by a wide margin as verified by internation monitors and still enjoys tremendous support among his people. The suffering in Venezuela is a direct result of US sanctions. If Venezuela wasn’t sitting on large oil reserves no one in America would have heard of Maduro. Please don’t repeat these evil men’s talking points.

    Heed the Call-up
    Guest
    Heed the Call-up

    Tim, Hitler was also elected, the USA was blameless then, too. Neither can one blame the citizens of those countries for the ills of of those in charge. And no, Venezuela’s issues weren’t created by the USA, either, they were created by its government and who is running it.

    RotaryConnected
    Guest
    RotaryConnected

    Venezuela was doing just fine until the price of oil dropped over 50%. As long as they had oil money rolling in, they could buy everything else they needed. They became dependent on imports, which was fine for awhile, until they ran out of oil revenues. The moral of the story is to always be able to produce your own living necessities. Grow your own food and make your own toilet paper. Keep the people busy and employed, producing the necessities of life. NEVER DEPEND ON GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS, and never put all your eggs in one basket.

    AggregatVier
    Guest
    AggregatVier

    Hitler rose to power in a democracy. It devolved into a dictatorship. The writer lost you before you even read the article as you apparently cannot appreciate such a real life transition.