Diana DeGette Wants You Dead

by L. Neil Smith
[email protected]

         It may come as a surprise to many to learn that I didn't kill John F. Kennedy in November of 1963. I have an alibi and witnesses -- well, one witness, anyway. At the time, I was hundreds of miles away from Dallas' Dealy Plaza, in my last-period junior biology class at Choctawhatchee High School near Fort Walton Beach in Okaloosa County, Florida. My witness is my high school girlfriend, with whom I am still more or less in touch via the internet.
         Likewise, I did not kill Robert F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King, although I was convicted by the media and punished by the Democratic Party for both murders. So were you, despite the fact that there are questions still to be answered about the deaths of King and Bobby, and nobody has a clue who killed Jack. The '68 Gun Control Act got hung around our necks like a rotting albatross where it remains today with other dead fowl like the "cop-killer bullet ban", the "ugly gun and magazines that look like penises ban", and the Brady Bill, brought to us by the great guys and gals at the RNC, "Brady Bill-Bob" Dole, Prop.
         Every one of America's 70 million gun owners has been treated, over the past 35 years, as if he or she personally peered through the cross-haired glass of that Mannlicher-Carcano (or the Mauser that apparently really did the job) and squeezed the trigger. Over the past 35 years, every one of us has been made to feel more and more like a criminal, skulking along inside the dusty darkness of society's wainscotting, for nothing more than the act of exercising and defending our natural right -- the right of every man, woman, and child -- to obtain, own, and carry weapons.
         We all know the facts. Several million times a year, people successfully defend their lives, their property, and their rights using guns. Most of the time, it isn't even necessary to fire them. I've displayed a weapon in this way three times in my life and didn't pull the trigger, although I wouldn't hesitate to do so.
         At the same time -- stripping away morally and legally justified shootings, as well as suicides (the exercise of another basic human right no matter what a prosecutor-stacked jury says) -- a few thousand times a year people are killed by other people using guns.
         The majority of my readers will see the point immediately, but so-called liberals have trouble thinking clearly, so I'll explain it as best I can. Look at the numbers (documentation on request): several million lives saved; a few thousand lives lost. Until now, maybe you were ignorant, maybe that's even an excuse. But from this moment, we'll all know exactly what you are. If you're willing to pass a law that sacrifices several million lives to a few thousand, you're either insane or a fascist monster.
         If you support any form of gun control -- let's call it what it really is, victim disarmament -- you're insane or you're a monster.
         Maybe both.
         I've had it to here with so-called liberals sticking their fingers in their ears and chanting, "I'm not listening to Gary Kleck! I'm not listening to John Lott!" The Littleton murders could easily have been prevented -- by adhering to the letter of the highest law of the land -- and it's the fault of these thumbsucking, bedwetting, infantile evaders of objective reality that they weren't.
         But there's another point that most of us in the freedom movement don't seem to have considered. Leaders of the other side -- the slavery movement -- know the facts, too. Parasitic vermin like Sarah Brady, Bill Clinton, Charles Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Frank Lautenberg, Carolyn McCarthy, and Diana DeGette command legions of flunkies -- you pay their salaries -- to catalog those facts so they can be twisted to serve the slavers' agenda.
         Allow me to repeat: victim disarmers know the truth, too. They can't not know the truth. But why would they pass laws sacrificing millions of lives on the shopworn and thoroughly discredited claim that it might save a few thousand?
         Brady, Clinton, Schumer, Feinstein, Dodd, Frank, Lautenberg, McCarthy, and DeGette all know the truth. But they promote a murderous lie. Are they stupid? As much fun as it would be to believe it, they wouldn't be where they are -- their drinking straws deep in the carotid arteries of the productive class -- if they were stupid.
         No, it's we who've been stupid.
         Ever look at what else these creatures vote for?
         Would even one of them vote against raising taxes to 100 percent and putting every American on welfare? Would any one object to America's streets being policed by blue bereted UN thugs? Would any one resist a campaign to outlaw private, freestanding homes and force everyone into Utopian "arcologies"? Would any one oppose making owning an automobile -- except for their own limousines, -- or refusing to use mass transit a crime? Would any one speak out against forcible implantation of transponders under our skin so we can all be traced and tracked constantly? Would any one of them resign over the passage of a law declaring our children to be government property?
         Why do I have to ask these questions? Do you have an instant's doubt? I know what they are. You know what they are. They know what they are. They're the aspiring slave-holders of the 21st century.
         At this moment, more Americans own guns than at any other time in history; crime has begun falling at an unprecedented rate. Brady, Clinton, Schumer, Feinstein, Dodd, Frank, Lautenberg, McCarthy, and DeGette would like you to believe it's their gun laws and other wholesale violations of the Bill of Rights that caused this drop in crime, but we know better -- and so do they. Everything they brag about has been tried before -- there were 20,000 gun laws already in place when Clinton took office -- and it's all failed utterly.
         What's different this time? For liberals who didn't get it, check the previous paragraph: more Americans own guns than at any other time in history and as John Lott tells us, "More Guns, Less Crime".
         Brady, Clinton, Schumer, Feinstein, Dodd, Frank, Lautenberg, McCarthy, and DeGette don't want less crime. Less crime means less need for government, fewer excuses to violate our rights and steal the fruits of our labor. Worse, people capable of defending themselves against criminals are capable of defending themselves against government. Very hard on the slavers' agenda.
         What do Brady, Clinton, Schumer, Feinstein, Dodd, Frank, Lautenberg, McCarthy, and DeGette want? Gun owners are the largest, most easily identifiable group of self-sufficient individuals. Self-sufficient individuals threaten their slavers' aspirations. Self-sufficient individuals must be eliminated and the best way to is to sacrifice millions of them, claiming it will save thousands.
         What do would-be slave-holders want? Clinton, Schumer, Feinstein, Dodd, Frank, Lautenberg, McCarthy, and DeGette want you dead.
         They want you dead.
         They want you dead.

L. Neil Smith is the award-winning author of The Probability Broach, Pallas, Henry Martyn, Bretta Martyn, The Mitzvah (forthcoming, with Aaron Zelman), and 15 other novels. Order them from Amazon.com via http://www.lneilsmith.org//index.html or from Laissez Faire Books at http://www.laissezfaire.org or just call Laissez Faire toll free, 1-800-326-0996

P.S. from Neil: Diana DeGette is the vile and repulsive Denver congresswoman who replaced the vile and repulsive Patricia Schroeder, and whose sublime ambition is to level the playing-field for gang-bangers by depriving all members of the productive class of any pistol magazine of a competent capacity for self-defense against her beloved clients.

Forwarded from a friend whose intelligence is cleverly concealed behind a blue collar facade and a career in government service:

"School is a place for learning and today's lesson, boys and girls, will be 'Cover and Concealment -- How to Tell the Difference.'"

Next to advance to the next article, or
Table of Contents to return to The Libertarian Enterprise, Number 45, May 11, 1999.