Attribute to L. Neil Smith’s The Libertarian Enterprise

A federal judge has just ruled that a recent Massachusetts ban on “assault weapons” (undefined, as always) and on large-capacity magazines doesn’t violate the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution Once again, we are left to wonder, whether U.S. District Judge William Young, who issued the ruling, is simply dim-witted, or deliberately ignorant of the history and utility of the uniquely American right of the individual to own and carry weapons. Stupid or incompetent, judgie-wudgie, make a choice; you are clearly one or both of them.

Partly this smelly can of worms was opened by the late sainted Justice Antonin Scalia, a darling of conservatives, who ruled, insanely, that the Second Amendment is not absolute but may be “regulated”. My question for the judge’s moldering corpse, is, if a right can be regulated, then what the hell good is it? Must we place our rightful power to resist authority in the blood-soaked hands of authority?

“The AR-15 and its analogs [left as conveniently undefined as ”assault weapon“], along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,” Young, the villainous idiot—and a Reagan appointee, I’ll point out —lied, directly side-stepping the principal reason for which the amendment was written. This nation’s Founding Fathers, who had fought and defeated the most powerful government on Earth and knew what they were talking about, intended that individual citizens should retain the physical means to resist government incursions in their lives, and to overthrow that government, if necessary. When you’re facing fully automatic weapons, lever actions, as much as we may love them, simply won’t do.

Creatures like this judge are the reason we need the Second Amendment. What he needs is a white powdered wig to show the world what he really is: a power-hungry slavering autocrat, dedicated to disarming the Productive Class, whom he would help to enslave.

At one time in our history, the best and most appropriate instrument to control government was the muzzle-loading flintlock rifle, better, at the time, than the smooth bore muskets governments issued. However, as time passed and technology progressed, government troops were equipped with better weapons like the single-shot breech loading Hall Carbine, the percussion rifles and pistols of the War Between The States, the Remington Rolling-block, or the Trapdoor Springfield, which meant that it was prudent and appropriate for civilians to arm themselves the same way. Later, bolt-action rifles were developed and used in the Spanish American War and World War I. And then, during World War II—77 years ago—the military were issued the semiautomatic rifles and carbines that willfully uninformed and evil “progressives” like this judge have so enthusiastically upset themselves about today.

(An aside: people like this cross-dressing dolt, and the Million Moron March of several years ago, frequently denounce the quick-firing guns we like as “weapons of war”. But what else do you call the dirty and dangerous process of putting down a tyranny but war, perhaps the only kind that should ever be fought?)

The embarrassing thing—for them—is that the right weapons for civilians to “keep and bear” today are the fully automatic M-14 and the M-16, currently forbidden (in any meaningful sense) under unconstitutional laws rammed through by the vile and disgusting Roosevelt Administration in the 1930s, which was dedicated to the same “transformative” politics as Comrade Barack Obama, and actually more worried about a “Businessmen’s Coup” or the Bonus Army (look them up) than anything else. It’s interesting to note that machine guns weren’t outlawed altogether—that would be illegal, after all—but are only obtainable through a difficult, complicated, and expensive process. Banning “bump stocks“ is also illegal, Donald, being completely contrary to the reason the Second Amendment was written.

In an odd, ironic way, this situation is the government’s fault. If they didn’t want civilians armed with fully automatic weapons, they should never have issued them to their troops in Vietnam. When American soldiers are carrying laser guns and particle blasters (or whatever else advanced technology brings them), civilians will be entitled (and wise) to own and carry the same weapons, too, to restore the balance. If this crooked, cretinous judge doesn’t like it, I’ll remind the good people of Boston (where he holds forth) that a city lamppost is a multi-use device.

Maybe, as he kicks and swings and purples, they can give him a 21-AR-15 salute.