![]() |
| From Bryan Hyde |
First, a little ad to pay the bills-- I really need an infusion of money for some unexpected expenses (on top of the expected ones). PayPal and Venmo are faster, so that would be preferable.
Thank you, and onward to the content.
Those who want you to doubt that anarchy (self-ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking you to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are better.
![]() |
| From Bryan Hyde |
Every single gun "law" is unconstitutional. Every one of them, from 1934's National Firearms Act, to the Gun Control Act of 1968, to whatever new rule gets imposed next year. Or 100 years from now. They are all unconstitutional in every detail.
Examples? Rules against machine guns, rules imposing background check requirements and Form 4473, forcing gun sellers to get government Federal Firearms Licenses and keep records of sales, saying who can (and can't) manufacture weapons or what kind, any rule that allows a cop to take your gun when others wouldn't have the right to do so. No one has the right to disarm anyone who isn't posing a credible threat at this moment. There is no such thing as a constitutional "law" concerning restricting weapons for individuals. Not even one example.
Either the courts agree or the courts are wrong. That's just the way it is.
Maybe the "justices" are cowards or maybe they are crooks who want to ensure government power, but either way, they are wrong. The same goes for the quisling surrender-monkeys of the NRA who repeatedly sell out gun owners in exchange for a place at the table and a pat on the head by the political criminals (including police) they fawn over.
The right to own and to carry weapons doesn't come from the Constitution-- the Constitution simply recognizes a right that has always existed everywhere and made it a crime to violate that right.
The Second Amendment doesn't "apply" to guns; it restricts what government is allowed to do. And restricting guns or other weapons in any way is completely off the table. Long guns, short guns, sawed-off guns, braced pistols, semi-automatic, fully-automatic, metal projectile or plasma blast, suppressed, with any attachment, in any configuration. Bullet types, feeding device capacity or function, caliber, construction method or material. detectability or invisibility, "silencers", or any alteration to any of the same. Government is prohibited from expressing an opinion, in legislation or by rule, on weapons owned and/or carried by the population. Including inside government facilities. Point to where the Second Amendment makes an exception when some government employee somewhere is scared or thinks it is a "common sense" policy.
If the courts allow any such anti-gun rule to stand, the courts are wrong.
There is no wiggle room. There are no exceptions. There is no justification that survives scrutiny. None.
And, as always, natural human rights are superior to any document. Such as the natural human right to own and to carry weapons of any kind, everywhere, without asking government permission, or even letting government know.
If the Constitution actually permitted any government anti-gun rule (which it doesn't) the Constitution would be wrong. Just as it is wrong when it "authorizes" taxation. Government can't be "authorized" to violate rights. No one, and no collective, can be.
The anti-gun bigots (in government, in government's corporate media, or freelance) will lie, argue, and try to shame us, They will make up historical "facts" to prove their case. They are forced to lie to prop up their side because the truth isn't with them. They will cherry-pick statistics, or point to what other governments have done and gotten away with. They will cry and get melodramatic over the innocent deaths their anti-gun/anti-defense policies guarantee, and try to blame the people who didn't do it. Their crocodile tears don't sway me. They are the villains. No matter if they have good intentions and really believe they are right. It is never right to violate the rights of individuals. I don't care about a villain's opinion on what I should be "allowed" to do. I am not government property. The lowest individual is superior to any government employee or agent. Governments have no rights; only individuals do. And the "right" to violate the rights of individuals doesn't exist... it can't exist. Government thugs can believe otherwise, but it won't change the truth.
The power to commit evil and get away with it doesn't prove the evildoer is in the right. It just proves that sometimes evil has power.
If you run across any anti-gun bigot doing what they tend to do, feel free to copy and paste any part of this to tell her to jump in a lake. It won't change her mind, but maybe some onlookers will see it and be empowered to resist her lies and calls for enslavement.
--
What particular facet of liberty is most under attack right now?--
I DO NOT support anti-gun bigot politician Donald Trump. Do you want to tempt me to support him? Keep trying to get him.
As much as I hate Hilary Clinton personally I would see anyone indicting her over and over as a crooked idiot. (But she's an Untouchable, so this will never happen in the real world.) I would be tired of the nonsense and I would want it to stop. This kind of vendetta would just make me hate the prosecutors as much as I hate her (which is an immeasurably high amount).
If Charles Manson had been found "not guilty", and a determined prosecutor kept finding new charges to bring against him because he "had to" be found guilty so he could be locked up forever, I would feel the same way. Being crooked for a "good reason" is still wrong.
The Department of Justice is the villain; a bigger threat than any individual bad guy.
I realize the motivation in this specific case is to stop Trump from becoming president again, and they don't think they can prevent it without doing this sort of thing (cheating) to tip the scales in their favor. When you don't have a candidate you think can win without tilting the playing field, you tilt the playing field. However you can.
I don't think they realize-- but maybe they do-- that they are making Trump's fans rally behind him with this constant legalistic harassment. They make him look like a victim of a corrupt system. Which he is, but so is everyone else and this just shows how corrupt the system has become. Long term, it's going to hurt the supposed credibility of their corrupt system. Maybe more than it can recover from.
So on second thought, maybe this is just what is needed to collapse the whole house of cards and get everyone to see how illegitimate it really is. In that case, make Trump a martyr and keep on trying to get him. It would be worth it.
Never do I get a press release from one of these groups defending liberty. Not from "the Left" nor "the Right". Nope. It's all about how their group is plotting to violate someone's rights in some way. And they are looking for co-conspirators to stand with them.
At this time, or maybe it's because the majority of these press releases come from New Mexico groups, it's mostly Left-statists doing the plotting. Although, the vast majority of the press releases I get from Texas are also from Left-statists plotting to violate someone somehow. I'm a little surprised by that.
I also get press releases from "official" state offices. I just got one such press release from the official prohibitionist ("Regulation and Licensing Department") in New Mexico announcing that they have, under threat of violence, shut down a Cannabis store for selling products imported from another tax farm and manufacturing extracts without the "proper license".
Against my better judgment, this time I sent a reply simply telling them they are evil.
I have removed myself from some of the lists, but not all of them. It's good to know what the enemies of liberty are plotting, but too many such emails gets overwhelming. And depressing.
They HATE your liberty. They are plotting to take it from you, whatever it takes.
I just don't get hatred against people based on their circumstances of birth.
If you're going to hate someone, hate those who deserve it: people who make a choice to violate others. Hate what someone does, not who they were born.
It's ridiculous to hate Jews, blacks, or Russians since they aren't doing anything to you by existing. They were merely born, and that tells you nothing about what each of them, as an individual, is doing. They couldn't change who they are if they wanted to, and why would they?
Rapists, police, and muggers, on the other hand, are in the group they are in by choice-- a group categorized by the things they do. Things they continue to do. They could make the choice to stop and make amends for their past violations, but they rarely do.
If you need to direct hate at someone, they are begging for it by choosing to violate others. Still, hate their actions, not who they otherwise are.
Of course, the argument could be made that we live in a failed society populated with grossly irresponsible people. I wouldn't disagree too hard. The acceptance of cops among us makes the point.
Cops encourage this lack of thinking-- it secures their theft-funded "jobs". It's why they are enthusiastic to molest people who've dealt with bad guys themselves. "Job" security for a "job" that has no business existing.
Even if there were no police, only private security, I probably wouldn't hire them anyway. I have never seen a use for them. They only make bad situations worse by their presence. Investigators are a completely different situation. Give me a Sherlock Holmes, not a Lestrade-- and let me hire one for myself if I need one.
You can hire as many as you want and can afford-- just don't expect your neighbors to foot the bill for something they have no desire for and decide they can't afford.
However, there would be one huge improvement if society made the switch to private security-- I doubt that private "cops" would lurk around looking to cause trouble like real, government-employed cops do today.
If your job has to be funded coercively-- through taxation-- it's not an ethical job. Ethical people (who've realized the situation) don't accept such jobs.
I do my best to avoid places where cops are loitering, watching everyone and looking to start something. I found myself in such a place over the weekend, and I didn't stay long. I have no desire to be around loitering gangs of Blue Line Mafia thugs.
Almost worse than the cops are the people who fawn over them. What are they lacking that they feel the need to lick the boots? Sick, sick people.
I always have and I always will.
If you don't understand the difference you may be confused by that statement.
Can you imagine being so weak and useless that you'd run to tattle on someone for something you read online?
I'll bet you can't. Neither can I.
I have never reported anyone for something they wrote. Not once. I've never been tempted to-- not even as a joke over some politician's online threats to use government violence against innocent people. I can't even imagine being that pathetic.
But there must be a lot of those useless people out there.
Moving on.
I have joined Gab and Truth Social. No promises on how active I will be, or if they'll fall by the wayside like so many other social media groups I'm an inactive member of.
That will depend on how easy they are to use, how much engagement I get and give, and whether they can grab my interest.
Supposedly I violated the Twitter/X rules again, but this time they didn't tell me which tweet offended their sensibilities. Or, the way it was stated it may just be the totality of everything I do there.
I think it's possible it was a glitch stemming from their branding switch, since I can't think of anything I've done recently-- and it happened overnight so it couldn't have been today's blog post.
It's also possible one of the anti-gun bigots, pro-slavery/tax people, or one of the communists I've been interacting with got offended and reported me. But I never said anything threatening to them. We may never know.
I appealed and asked which rule I violated. They may or may not answer. Maybe I should have included "...so I'll know whether to go ahead and move to Threads". They'd probably know I'm not serious about that, though.
I get a lot of blogging inspiration from Twitter. Otherwise, I'd just let it go.
The volatile nature of the platform means I can't make friends there, since the people I like get banned, suspended, and vanish too frequently to form attachments. There are several people who disappeared like this just as I was getting to know them, and right in the middle of conversations. That limits how useful I find the platform, and how much I like it, in a major way. That may be hurting Twitter's business model more than they realize.
Here’s the message I got:
But if you have nothing to lose, who gives a wooden Biden?
If I were an FFL (a holder of a Federal Firearms License) and I was terminally ill or wanted to purposely end my earthly existence, I would burn every 4473 (as well as all other ATF/FBI forms) in my possession-- physical or digital.
I would do the same if I knew the bATFe was about to commit a raid on me and I was probably going to be arrested anyway. If I were going to be completely ruined, I might as well be doubly ruined.
This is the problem with making up draconian punishments for non-crimes-- you lower the mental bar for going ahead and doing actual useful non-crimes that they also criminalize. And destroying incriminating records the state can use against people is useful. And good and right.
Just like if the punishments for having a semi-auto firearm are the same as for having a full-auto, some people are going to go ahead and get a full-auto. And why not? There's really no downside. I pointed out this reality decades ago, and now we see this exact thing happening in Chicago, etc. with "Glock switches" and such.
We all know the fedgov illegally keeps a registry, but there's no reason to leave those records lying around if there's nothing left to lose. Force them to show they've got the illegal registry. Let them incriminate themselves for a change. It probably won't make a difference, but it's good ammunition to have in reserve.
Your liberty is illegal, unpopular, and seen as a threat to those who seek to appease the enemies who occupy your territory. Same with your life and property if you decide to defend them from those who'd take or destroy them. Some of the people around you are happy to work with your enemies to help them destroy you.
If you are really lucky, you have family and friends who'll be on your side. To help you keep the enemies at bay. If not, enemy territory is going to feel more claustrophobic and lonely than you'd like.
What are you going to do about it? You probably shouldn't tell me over the internet.
It's a problem.
I don't have a solution.
You can pretend this isn't true; that I am being hyperbolic. I suspect this is how most people cope with the situation.
You can try to go along to get along. Maybe they'll eat you last.
You can join the enemy as a mole or monkeywrencher, either buying time from the inside or working to foil their plans. But at risk of losing yourself in the process.
You can speak the truth and make them mad-- taking your chances.
You can be silent and as invisible as possible while carving out your own little hovel of liberty in the midst of those who want to destroy you. Until you are discovered.
Any approach is going to have upsides and downsides-- and you don't have to stick to only one method.
If you don't at least recognize that you live in enemy territory... I don't know what to say to you.
I can't believe the people who try to justify taxation.
One guy told me that taxation to pay for insulin is OK because people will die! without it. I asked if he would voluntarily pay for other people's insulin, without being taxed. He deflected. I asked again. He responded "I do pay voluntarily, but I am only one person, and pharmaceutical companies rip people off. When there are matters of life and death, I want my government to fix it."
Ouch! "my government"! The statist's most ignorant phrase! Anyway...I told him, "Government empowers the pharmaceutical monopoly. By supporting government you are killing people who need life-saving medicines." Not to mention government is the worst mass murderer in the entire history of the planet, and he imagines it will save lives because it is so compassionate.
I should have asked how many strangers' insulin he's currently buying for them directly. I bet I know the precise number without him telling me.
I and another person tried to explain to him that (imagining you are) buying something with taxes is inefficient (at best). Most of the tax money only goes to support the bureaucracy and infrastructure of the state (and pay the interest on Congress' debt). Only a vanishingly tiny portion ever goes toward anything useful, like insulin. He doesn't care and isn't going to listen, because he loves "his" government and he loves stealing YOUR money for things he wants.
People who support taxation and government are quick to ridicule freedom (and ignore liberty)-- he characterized it as loving "muh freedumbs". They are horrible people. But, by advocating in favor of taxation-- theft, extortion, slavery: archation-- they are telling you exactly who and what they are.
When people who believe they are well-educated, and who mistake that for intelligence, call for medicines to be free. They dig in when you point out they are advocating slavery-- then they get busy building straw man after straw man, imagining they've won the debate. Ignorant clowns.
When these same people (it's nearly always the same people) believe that banning guns would actually make society safer. And that government would never use this imbalance of power against them or their family and friends.
When others believe they can be fans of the Constitution while demanding the government unconstitutionally "secure the borders". Or keep fighting a War on Politically Incorrect Drugs. Or keep up a standing military and militarized police.
And when, no matter what legislative crimes these political buffoons commit-- such as making up anti-gun rules-- they aren't held accountable. Their crimes are allowed to stand as "law", until, or unless, someone strikes them down. In which case, they'll just change the wording and do it again and not even get a slap on the wrist. Liberty delayed is liberty denied. Those who deny liberty are evil.
You might think I'm joking when I say "Politics makes people stupid". I'm not. I'm dead serious. And it's going to have terrible consequences.
Are you preparing to survive and thrive under those consequences? If not, why not?