Category: Rights

Conundrum

Deep Thoughts, Rights

The old saying goes, “Those who choose security over freedom deserve neither.”

And yet… you have a situation like this one:

The man who transformed El Salvador from one of the most dangerous countries in the world to one of the safest, President Nayib Bukele, is despised by liberals.

When he won reelection in a landslide, liberal media outlets ran headlines stating that democracy had ended in El Salvador and that the country had become a one-party state. However, El Salvador is not Cuba.

Bukele did not eradicate opposition parties, nor did he imprison them or seize control of the press. Instead, he delivered on his promises. He made the country safe by locking up criminals.

And how did he do this?

In 2022, after a gang war resulted in the deaths of 87 people over a period of just three days, Bukele took action against crime. He constructed the country’s largest prison, the Terrorism Confinement Center (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo or CECOT), with a capacity for 40,000 gang members. And he began filling it.

Human rights groups, who live in safe, wealthy Western nations, have criticized Bukele for violations of the rights of suspects.

But the logic is flawless. Only gang members have gang tattoos. If anyone else gets a gang tattoo, they will be killed by the gang. The same is true for tattoo artists.

They would be killed for giving gang tattoos to non-gang members. Additionally, part of the initiation to joining a gang is to commit a serious crime, often murder. Once they become a member, their full-time job is to commit crimes. So, logically, anyone with a gang tattoo is a gang member and has committed crimes.

If this makes one think, “That sounds like the foul MS-13 gang”, then one would be correct.

I have often thought about doing this right here in the U.S. of A., as whole areas of the country have become terrorized by gangs like MS-13.  And as the gang members proudly wear their clan tattoo, why not just arrest them as self-confessed criminals?

Because that’s wrong — basically, it’s un-Constitutional, and on more than one level.  And here’s how it was done in El Salvador:

Bukele decided to let logic prevail, arrest the gang members, and put them in prison. He was more concerned about the rights of street vendors, business owners, school children, working people, and ordinary citizens than he was about the rights of violent criminals.

The state of emergency he declared in 2022, and has renewed several times since, suspends the constitutional rights of the gang members and bypasses the corrupt courts and justice system, which had allowed the criminals to reign for decades. Since then, 75,000 gang members have been arrested, and 7,000 have been released.

Believe me, there’s a lot to be said in support about measures like those of Nayib Bukele.  After all:

Bukele claimed that his country went 365 days without a murder. And while the exact number has been called into question, it is an indisputable fact that the country now has the lowest murder rate it has seen in 30 years, plummeting by 70%, and now stands at only 2.4 per 100,000 in 2023, making it the second lowest in the Americas, just behind Canada.

Okay, maybe that worked in El Salvador, which started off being a shithole country, and just dug itself a deeper one over decades of corruption and your standard Third-World degeneracy.  Desperate measures were called for.

But the U.S. has never been a shithole country, in no small part because of the protections that our Constitution affords everybody — and not just non-gang members, either.

I am profoundly disturbed by the tone of articles such as the one I’ve linked to and quoted from in this post.  Of course I can see the benefits of actions like that of Bukele.

But I can also see how that kind of thing can be turned around and used against, oh, people like MAGA supporters or, for that matter, gun owners.

And to quote a wise man (not a politician, but a playwright), who saw where this could lead:

“William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”

— Robert Bolt, A Man For All Seasons

Private Property

Government Thugs, Rights

Here we go:

A proposed rule from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will soon take effect, forcing many private gun sellers to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to sell their guns.

The targets of this rule are not licensed federal gun dealers, as they are already required to use the NICS on every gun sale and/or transfer.

Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders are required to conduct background checks on all gun sales and transfers because of the Brady Act (1993). That act created the NICS, and, since then, all retail sales of both new and used guns have been conducted via the NICS. Democrats have pushed to include private sales in the NICS requirement. However, Congress — even when controlled by Democrats — has refused.

But the recently proposed rule does what Congress has refrained from doing by allowing the ATF to set its sights on private, non-licensed Americans who may sell guns at some time throughout any given year…

…and when people refuse to comply with this fucking monstrosity, the rule will create criminals where heretofore none existed (as so many of these “regulations” do).

Oh, and don’t think you can get around this assholishness by swapping or bartering for guns, either.

I know, I know:

But a reminder:

This should be interesting.  My advice (and remember, I am no lawyer, nor any kind of criminal — yet):  if you are going to ignore this un-Constitutional infringement on your rights, make sure to do so only with trusted friends and family members — no strangers, ever, because you never know when the ATF is blackmailing or otherwise pressuring someone into breaking the law on their behalf.

Like they did with Randy Weaver.

Going Medieval

Mocking Furriners, Rights, The Gun Thing

Britishland:

Brits:  “If guns are banned, can we use swords?”
Britcops:  “No.”
Brits:  “How about crossbows, then?”
Britcops:  “We’ll get back to you on that*.”

*The Home Office has launched an eight-week consultation to see if there should be a licensing system to control the use, ownership and supply of crossbows.

Frogland:

The Principality of Monaco plans to follow in the footsteps of its surrounding French neighbours by organising a national day dedicated to the collection of weapons and ammunition that have been found or inherited by individuals.

At the end of 2022, France managed to collect more than 150,000 weapons without inflicting legal or administrative proceedings on the weapons’ former owners.

The head of the Administrative Police Division, Rémy Le Juste, addressed the topic at the Monaco Police’s well wishes for the New Year, saying “this is a major subject which deserves everyone’s attention, given the somewhat troubled international context that we are going through.”

Le Juste admitted that “It still happens that our services intervene with individuals who find themselves owners through inheritance of undeclared weapons dating from the Second World War,” and added: “We encourage, from now on, all people who find themselves, despite themselves, possessing weapons to call on our services: either to have them destroyed or to make them unfit for their use, and this, without these people being subject to criminal charges, subject of course to the agreement of the judicial authorities.”

Only knights, the King’s men and the king’s favorites may own weapons of war.  Peasants:  non.

U.S.:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

More Bastardy From California

Gummint, Rights, Surveillance Society, The Gun Thing

I thought this nonsense had been declared illegal:

Several major credit card companies have decided to move forward with a plan to track purchases made at gun retailers in California, CBS News reported Monday.

American Express, Visa, and Mastercard will implement a new merchant code for firearm and ammunition retailers, allowing banks to track “suspicious” purchases to comply with a new California law.

As I’ve said before, whenever government needs a BJ, corporations have absolutely no problem falling to their knees.

Fuckers.

Cash.  Gun shows/estate sales.  Individual purchases.  (I don’t know how any of this would help CA residents, as they appear to be doomed, gun-wise.)

Update:  Seems like Idaho has the right idea, though.

More Gummint Bastardy

Government Thugs, Rights

Oh, this is just priceless:

The Treasury Department, on behalf of federal law enforcement after January 6, 2021, asked banks to snoop through customers’ transactions for signs of “extremism,” such as purchases of “small arms” or from gun retailers Dick’s Sporting Goods, Bass Pro Shop, or Cabela’s.

Dunno why they’d include Dick’s, which doesn’t sell any guns anymore (or shouldn’t, given their track record), but whatever.  It’s Gummint, so their lists are probably way out of date.  But it gets worse, by Rep Jim Jordan’s (R-OH) estimate:

According to the analysis, FinCEN warned financial institutions of “extremism” indicators that include “Transportation charges, such as bus tickets, rental cars, or plane tickets. for travel to areas with no apparent purpose,” or the purchase of books — including religious texts — and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views.

“In other words, FinCEN urged large financial institutions to comb through the private transactions of their customers for suspicious charges on the basis of protected political and religious expression,” Jordan wrote.

Jordan said FinCEN also distributed slides prepared by one bank explaining how other banks could use MCCs to detect customers whose transactions may reflect “potential active shooters, [and] who may include dangerous International Terrorists / Domestic Terrorists / Homegrown Violent Extremists (‘Lone Wolves’).”

This, by the way, is why you should never give the government any information, if you can — they’ll just use it, and not always (or ever) to your advantage.

I shouldn’t have to remind anyone of this, but:  cash purchases, individual sales, gun shows, and you know the rest,  Anything to prevent the fucking Gummint from seeing what’s under your fingernails.

As for the travel part:  drive, buy gas with cash, disable any tracking bullshit on your phone (Google Maps, for instance) and leave as little trace as possible.

Range time, Kim?  Yes, indeed.

Keeping It Anonymous

Big Brother, Deep Thoughts, Rights

POTUS-wannabe Nikki Haley and some others have come right out and said that Internet anonymity should be banned.

I think that’s bullshit, despite the fact that I myself have eschewed Internet anonymity (for the most personal of reasons).  I think that while anonymity can breed mischief, it can also protect someone from retaliation when, for example, shining light on the inner workings of an institution.

Whistle-blowers in large institutions (especially government and large corporations) would almost certainly be silenced because of (justified) fears that they’d lose their job by so doing — even if they were exposing extreme malfeasance or negligence.  That cannot be a good thing.

Of course, anonymity affords trolls and other such excrescences the ability to say awful things — such as defamation or character assassination — not to mention unacceptable utterances such as… racism?

Oh yeah, and that’s the problem.  Because the minute you say “You can say this and not that”, there’s a little question of who decides the parameters of accepted speech.

We have a First Amendment that addresses that issue, I believe, and it was thoroughly covered in the Anti-Federalist by — ho! — the anonymous “Brutus”.

There is a vulnerability in that freedom, of course, just as there’s vulnerability in all our social and political freedoms.  But confining ourselves to speech for a moment, we know the old adage that a lie travels round the world before the truth can get out of bed, and anonymity is the prime facilitator thereof.

Online commenter “Fred_The_Wise” can post on Xwitter that he has proof that Bill Clinton is a serial molester of underage girls, and even Clinton’s feral lawyers would have a problem stopping that “untruth” from spreading and “contaminating” Clinton’s good name.  “Kim du Toit” can do no such thing, of course, unless he has the actual proof that Bill Clinton is such a pervert.

The problem, as we all know, is that “Fred_The_Wise”, even if he has actual proof of said molestation, is not going to be the next “suicide” at the hands of the Clinton “Hit Squad” because nobody knows who he is;  whereas “Kim du Toit” would have to be extremely careful of slippery soap in the shower and random nooses hanging from trees, if you get my drift.

That “Fred_The_Wise” might just be indulging in a little gratuitous character assassination is just a malevolent by-product of the freedom of speech.

Which is terrible, but unfortunately for goons like Nikki Haley, they’re just going to have to live with it, as we all have to do.