by Nathan Barton

Today’s theme seems to be hypocrisy, especially as dealing with guns and self-defense. Hollywood, Congress, the presidential candidates: all great examples of hypocrites. And we can’t forget organized religion either.

It is all about them. Egotism? Apparently it runs in the Schumer family: not just Senator Charles, but Actress Amy as well. She is taking the shootings in a Louisiana theatre as personal, as if the drifter personally decided HER movie (supposedly somewhat autobiographical and all about her disfunctional lifestyle) was the place to go and kill people. And she proclaims loudly that it is all about the money – the gun culture and the mass killings, that is, NOT her movie, as reported in the Guardian. Her cousin the big-shot, of course, wants to see everyone BUT the cops, military, and his own bodyguards, disarmed.

As apparently do the GOP candidates, who despite their claims to support rights of self-defense, open and concealed carry, and cooking bacon on the barrel of an AR-15, apparently are fine with disarming audiences at their debates. I don’t want to go into the inanities of these staged (literally) events, but hypocrisy seems to reign among the 16 (or is it 20, or 24?) “big names” clamoring to be the GOP nominee, still 15 months from election day. Salon is quick to point out the hypocrisy, but it is easy to agree with the leftist rag on this – none of the candidates, not even Rand Paul, is willing to make an issue of it. But you can be sure that the bodyguards there were packing heat. Yes, indeed.

Hypocrites! That was a frequent accusation by Jesus during His earthly ministry, speaking of the priests, scribes, Sadducees and Pharisees who were the dominant classes of rulers (secular and spiritual) in Judea and Galilee. The same can be said of many religious leaders today, as Bethany Blankley points out in her Townhall column on religious leaders who are “advisors” to Planned Parenthood and claim it is doing “God’s work.” The list is provided, and includes mainstream denominations as well as various Jewish groups and a Muslim. The Tanakh and New Testament both make it clear that Jews and Christians respectively have an obligation to protect the unborn. I don’t know what the Koran says about it, but it seems what we have here are hypocrites and heretics.

I agree with George Smith: “Why We Should Abandon the State,” in his blog, Barbarous Relic, he summarizes many good points. There is nothing to be gained by prolonging the misery – let us end it NOW. He reviewed a book by Lew Rockwell, but adds many comments of his own that point out WHY the state is not worth trying to reform, and instead should be abolished. The major question, in my mind, is when, and exactly HOW. A slow, gradual death (which we are seeing now, I think) would be the least painless as far as cataclysms go, and least likely to result in chaos and an opportunity for warlords and gang rule. But in the meantime, millions are hurt: there is something to be said for a rapid, overnight transition. But it too will create harm for millions. The least likely scenario is a peaceful process of dismantling the current system.

Idaho is not a “blue state” by any means, but it seems that the VA thought that it was, and sent out a letter stating that a veteran could not continue to own or have guns, because he was incompetent as proved by giving authorization to someone else to manage his VA benefits, according to the AP,  and this resulted in a large protest in a small community way up in the Panhandle, including – get this – the local sheriff. The protesters were telling everyone no one was coming to get the Vet’s guns. Now, if we had this kind of community support in places like DC and Connecticut and San Francisco… Or right next door in Washington State.

Local tyranny in Washington State. Given its strong military culture and renown as a bastion of the defense industry in 21st Century America, Washington is strangely progressive, not just liberal, but Tranzi. This is an example from Hot Air, not to be confused with the liberal NPR/PMI show “Fresh Air.” Seattle plans a massive anti-defense tax on guns and ammo, to put us all in our place. Called a “gun-violence tax” and seemingly in violation of various state laws (as well as constitutional provisions, even on the Left Coast), it might be more appropriately called the “Suburban Economic Development Act” or the “Gun-Trafficking Enhancement Act” since it would encourage gun shops to move outside the city, and those who need or want guns to go outside the city to buy them, and then bring them back home. It will neither raise the revenue (half-million dollars is claimed) nor cut down on violence; rather it will make it harder for the poor (already the major victims of violent crime) to be able to defend themselves. But never mind, that is the Tranzi mindset: all that is needed would be ANOTHER law to make transporting a gun purchased elsewhere into Seattle, without registration and payment of the tax, illegal. THAT will stop the criminals, ya betcha!