Our neighbors to the north have been looking sharp lately, and don’t think America hasn’t noticed.
As always, the issue is not about guns, it’s about governance, as a conservative movement makes its way.
Praise to Canada for it’s perseverence and courage in resisting the anti-freedom movement there.
In order for any system to operate well and to prosper, it must be free. Socialist states do well in a one-sided sort of way, but deteriorate and become stagnant. Many states around the globe say they are a Democracy, but, of course, they are oppressive, pretending that their oppression is the desire of the people, a democracy.
Free means that the people decide and government responds, and true freedom means letting the people direct the values, actions and interactions with government, come what may. If you’re going to live with the actions of government, it’s best you direct those actions, n’cest pa? Canada is moving more in that direction, and it’s good for Canada on this important subject.
For instance, Canada’s gun registration which is being dumped. In Gun Lobby Trading Favors With The Feds, appearing at thespec.com, June 12, 2006, Dianne Reinhart of The Hamilton Spectator writes that the amnesty for gun registration means “They won’t know where they [the guns] are.”
Well, Ms. Reinhart, that’s the idea. Governments have no business knowing where the guns are. Read the entire article here. Why governments don’t need to know where the guns are is this: people and government are not adversaries.
A very shrewd marketer once said, “Registration is the first step to confiscation of guns.” That shrewd man was Lenin. He was right, because, there, the people and the government were adversaries.
Thus, the conservatives in Canada are right to forget all about registration; they are not opposed to the people, they serve the people.
Ms. Reinhart has said earlier in the article, “You have to hand it to the federal Conservative government spin doctors. They would have us believe that Stephen Harper’s government is big on fighting crime.”
Begging your pardon, Ms. Reinhart, but that’s the best way to begin to fight crime: untie the hands of the people to resist it. Where’s yer head?
As I’ve said, you don’t fight crime by adhering more and more to go-nowhere anti-crime policies, and registration compelling the law-abiding will, by definition, never reach the criminal, hence it doesn’t fight crime. In fact, very few after-the-fact and compel-only-the-law-abiding plans can honestly be said to fight crime. Registration is not one of those few.
Crime is fought instance by instance, by the resolve not to be a victim and by the decision to act with superior force. Force, not characterized as violence, but moral force. The main idea of armed citizens is this: violent acts can be stopped from escalating, and by the people who know the immediate situation best, the target. You know, the asset of the country.
It means trusting the citizen, individually. It means preferring the interests of the citizen over those of the aggressor.
The conservative movement in Canada seems to sense this and steps up with authority.
The article goes on to analyze various non-sequiturs such as gun crime in general, costs and ease of transfer of weapons and various theories, but ignores specific realities, such as non-gun crimes (knifings, robberies, strong-arms, weaponless murders, multiple assailants, rapes, abductions and other non-gun crime both reported and not reported). Such analyses tend to focus on figures and sterile after-the-fact perspectives rather than realities the people have to live with when they cannot fight back in facing real-time grave danger.
Mixed in with these assessments are other reports of stupid official advice on the subject, such as urging crime targets to scream or otherwise do anything but resist. In an armchair analysis, typical of anti-resistance, anti-dignity, anti-safety groups, this after-the-fact report shows the chase and discourages the power and spirit of stopping the act in progress. ÂÂÂ
To wit: Aside from remaining aware of surroundings, Lafreniere’s best advice to anyone who is attacked by the man is: “Scream your head off.”
But this line appeared in that article before: Earlier, on March 18, a woman walking home from work was grabbed from behind, but managed to scratch and hit the suspect and escape.
Resistance works.
 and these are becoming more marginalized, I see, as more encouraging reports appear, such as the notice of dumping registration. The entire thrust of the article was how much money and assets are focused on chasing a suspect with a little tiny bit on the most obvious and simplest of solutions: resist, with force, if necessary.
Reinhart closes with this: Here’s some other news you won’t hear from government and anti-gun control spin doctors: 90 per cent of gun owners are licensed and 90 per cent of guns are registered — and the registry is highly supported. In fact, the decision to remove long guns from the registry is opposed by police, public health officials, more than 40 women’s groups — and the Attorney’s General of Ontario and Quebec, who have announced they will fight the proposals.
And the registry works.
Well, I hate to tell you this, Ms. Reinhart, but these people are officials, and as public servants, they don’t get an opinion; they get instructions. What about the objections of the people they serve?
The registry works?? Works for whom? It works for officials and not for the people in terms of safety. And it works for criminals in terms of advantage.
You don’t need to know where the guns are.
This assertion to drop registration is encouraging, and I’m interested to see just how Canada will answer the United Nations’ intrusive dictates about world disarmament, the so-called illegal trafficking in small arms. [Most worldwide weapons dealings are legal, according to U.S. Ambassador to the U. N. John Bolton, and the genuine illegal trafficking is insignificant. Furthermore, many nations need arms to survive, since, as many historians point out, millions die at the hands of their governments, not each other. How will another free nation meet this question?]
I have appreciation for Canada. When the belligerent nations are asking you to hand over your weapons, it’s one thing: when some of your own people are asking the same, and advocating that you give them what they want, it’s joining the belligerents.
And when the people resist it all, then the people speak. As a free nation does in order to remain free.
This movement to discourage resistance on various fronts comes with the flimsiest of reasons, and I’m glad to see Canadians seeing through them by taking this important first step.
It’s good for Canada. It’s good for the hemisphere. It’s good for the world.
________________________________________
John Longenecker is author of Transfer Of Wealth. John can now be heard on MP3, and his website is www.TransferOfWealth.net
ÂÂÂ
ÂÂÂ
ÂÂÂ

