Down With Power Audiobook!

L. Neil Smith's
Number 823, May 24, 2015

They want our guns so they can do things to us
they can't do as long as we have our guns. The
whole issue is really no more complicated than that.

Previous Previous Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Idiot ''Academic'' Advocates Victim Disarmament
by L.Neil Smith

Bookmark and Share

Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise

A friend of mine sent me an article this week that came from Patriot Update. a freedom movement publication. It, in turn, referred the reader to the same article in The Blaze by Dave Urbanski. The long, awkward headline in both cases read "Professor Says America Has Proven Its Inability to Handle Widespread Gun Ownership".

Like many another gun-grabbing hoplophobe, the guy's skull is so full of festering, malicious garbage, it's hard to know where to start. To begin with, the "professor"in question is one John Traphagan; his specialty is religious studies. At the risk of offending my friends who happen to be religious, I'll point out that the guy makes a living blathering in a field which has no subject matter, no hard facts, and no repeatable experiments. To me, the mental processes of anybody over four years old who admits to having an Imaginary Playmate, or sees fairies at the bottom of his garden are suspect.

At least.

If this be argumentum ad hominem, let us make the most of it. To this writer, me, it's simply a matter of prudently considering the source.

As a propaganda springboard, this so-called "professor" hops off the spectacular and photogenic multi-motorcycle-gang battle that occurred days ago in a Waco beer-joint parking lot. AS the sign said in Wanted Dead Or Alive, "Drink all night, Pistol Dawn". Of course, it could have been anything, a bank robbery, an especially lethal PTA meeting, or a deadly baby shower. His kind don't care: they sit around like vultures on a cactus, waiting for somebody to die. He's likely ecstatic to have been given this hook to hang his bee-filled bonnet on.

Like all such grand ideas Traphgan's is just the same old frog-boiling crap: gradually outlaw and then confiscate "certain" guns in incremental stages so we can all keep loving and trusting each other until we are betrayed. You can probably guess what kind of guns; the more effective they are at defending you and your family from freelance criminals or a feral government, the sooner they'll be taken away. But I have some news for Traphagan and all such schemers and social engineers: Americans have obeyed their last gun law, and personally, I will never trust anyone who covets even the least of my collection. You see, I know what they won't admit. They want my guns so they can do things to me that they can't do as long as I have my guns.

If you remember nothing else from this essay, remember that: they want our guns so they can do things to us they can't do as long as we have our guns. The whole issue is really no more complicated than that.

But they will not be permitted to Pelosify this country any further.

Mr. Traphagan, it occurs to me to wonder how you've never noticed that the most criminally violent spots in this country are those that have followed your prescription, and outlawed guns. Are you blind? Are you deaf? Then why haven't you noticed that, conversely, in places which have legalized open or concealed carry of weapons, and people still hang rifles and shotguns in the back windows of their pickup trucks, violent crime has fallen in double digits. Are you a fool? Do you only notice phenomena or events tht fit your outmoded, discredited theories?

Or do you know these facts as well as I do and choose to ignore them because you actually hunger to watch people die by the thousands for some obscure, perverted reason of your own? I once knew a guy whom everybody described as a "blood-in-the-streets revolutionary"—that is, anybody's blood in the streets except his own. Does that describe you accurately? Then you have a problem: I will never comply. Exactly how many individuals like me are you willing to see killed to enforce your airy armchair aspirations? Are you a knowing accomplice to brutal fascism, an enabler of mass murder, or just another moron with a mortarboard?

Like the man said, come and get them, John. Yourself. I'm extremely conversant in this field, and have been writing about it for over half a century, since 1964. I'm well known in certain circles for having said that opponents of any form of personal liberty—but especially the individual right to own and carry weapons—are either evil, stupid, or insane. My question to you now is, which are you?

Another point, John. The governments of various nations in which you claim that people have "realized" there is no reason to possess personal weapons: they have all participated, at one time or another, to one degree or another, in the last century, in the mass slaughter of about a quarter of a billion people. At the same time, crimeless Switzerland, which has avoided all that, requires its male citizens to own and keep what amounts to a machine-gun in their homes. And lots of ammunition.

They have not had to fight a war for 400 years.

As a polemicist, I personally strive each and every day to see a loaded AR-15 (or AK-47) in every home, and a Glock (or 1911) on every night table. It's already happening, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. I have been ably assisted in this effort by Barack Hussein Obama, who has frightened millions of people into buying their first gun.

I'm a novelist by trade, highly interested in the phenomenon of character, so you'll forgive me if I am extremely curious how you came to believe that the criminal mischief of a tiny minority means that 330,000,000 people have been proven unable "to handle widespread gun ownership." Those numbers would seem to me rather to have proven exactly the reverse. Moreover, to punish that 330,000,000 for the criminal actions of a few hundred or even a few million is patently unjust.

It's also illegal: the Second Amendment, just in case your own professors neglected to tell you, is part of the Bill of Rights, the highest law of the land. Repeal it, and you will renege on an ancient agreement; with the Constitution null and void, government will no longer have the authority to do anything. We will be ruled by brute force.

Or would you enjoy living through a civil war?

Of course you're completely wrong about England, Australia, Japan, etc., too. Most have had victim disarmament for decades. They disguise the resulting crime rates as something else. England, for instance, blamed the IRA for decades. Countries like Australia (which was never exactly laissez faire about guns to begin with), that have adopted victim disarmement more recently, presently suffer the highest violent crime rates in the world. So, John-boy, are you a liar or just misinformed?

And here's the kicker, John. You recall that Waco gunfight that gave you an excuse to write the tripe somebody sent me? I've just learned it was as phony as everything else that underpins the political stances you take. According to my friend, columnist Will Grigg, writing for, it was a trap, a setup, an ambush. The nine people killed were killed by the authorities, as part of a scheme related to "Fast and Furious", in which gun shops were forced by the BATFE to sell guns to bikers that had been converted by the feds into machine guns. So in terms of support for your argument, it is meaningless.

But then, meaninglessness is your bailiwick, isn't it? I suggest you save your authoritarian political wet-dreams for someone who cares and go back to teaching gullible kids about virgin birth and the transubstantiation of the host. You'll be much happier in the long run.

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:

payment type

Just click the red box (it's a button!) to pay the author

This site may receive compensation if a product is purchased
through one of our partner or affiliate referral links. You
already know that, of course, but this is part of the FTC Disclosure
Policy found here. (Warning: this is a 2,359,896-byte 53-page PDF file!)

Big Head Press