I see now way this could end badly.
It would seem Chavez has bought it.
Unions prove, once again, to be anti-freedom,anti-safety, and anti-intelligent.
And lastly, authoritarians will always move for more laws when they disagree with anything.They also hate the concept of self-determination.
I was in various private Christian schools from kindergarten up through the end of my senior year in high school. I’ve been part of a few congregations. The closest thing I ever got to apologetics was a copy of Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ. It’s, basically, the Christian version of the ‘New Atheist’ books and therefore doesn’t count. Point is, if any Christian should have been intellectually prepared for an atheistic onslaught against my faith, it should have been me…
Read the rest at Path to Patriarchy
Last post I looked at violence from both sides of the equation. Today we look at an entirely new formula. Government banning guns. It will be both shorter but, I think, make an even better case against the idiocy of disarming the law abiding.
Gun Established: Massacre Happens: Casualties(roughly):
Soviet Union 1929 1929-1953 20 mil
China 1935 1948-1952 20 mil
Germany 1938 1935-1945 13 mil
Cambodia 1956 1975-1977 1 mil
I could name more, but this will suffice. Note, each of the four examples above is a case of democide. Governments annihilating their own populace. I can’t say it any simpler than this. The ability to defend yourself from a random thug barely qualifies as a fringe benefit compared to defense against your own government’s tendencies towards the mass extermination of the people.
It is vitally important to understand who signed the the Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law and why. It was first signed and ratified by The United Kingdom, Austria-Hungary, France, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire. What is the first thing we can note about these places. Most of them were fairly powerful. What they were doing was creating a system that gave them the benefits while attempting to remove the advantage of smaller weaker countries from using the outrageously successful privateers.
Thomas Jefferson noted in 1812 that:
…every possible encouragement should be given to privateering in time of war with a commercial nation…our national ships are too few in number…to retaliate the acts of the enemy…by licensing private armed vessels, the whole naval force of the nation is truly brought to bear on the foe.”
According to wikipedia (I know…) American privateers took about 600 British vessels during the war. At the time America had no real navy to speak of. They did however have lots of people interested in becoming free and making a profit at the same time. Now similar events occured during the war of 1812. Does anyone really think the politicians had forgotten this when signing a document outlawing privateers?
Remember, a government does not like competition. It tends to show off how much better someone else is at doing their jobs.
Testing my will power. Nothing but meat, veggies and limited fruit to eat. If i can’t find these foods I fast. Only water or plain unsweetened tea to drink. On tues. the 13th I will allow myself a beer. Until then: no beer, no caffeine no vices. In addition, minimum of one new post a day. Failure will reset the clock and lose me my Tuesday beer.
Note: This doesn’t count as today’s post.