By Nathan Barton
The Politburo (excuse me, Board of Supervisors) of the City and County of San Francisco, an integral part of the California [People’s Democratic] Republic, has voted unanimously to declare the National Rifle Association to be “a domestic terrorist organization” according to Breitbart.
Supposedly (according to the local People’s Radio Voice, KQED), the resolution is toothless. Even so, the claims made by the Politburo are incredible, and in a moral world, would open them to claims of libel and slander, and the NRA (or its members) no doubt is considering a civil suit for defamation. And no doubt, the AntiFa and other bizarre elements of San Francisco will take this to heart, and (as has been done in California in the past) find opportunities to attack members and supporters of the NRA. I hope that those people who subscribe to any NRA publications – let alone are members – are receiving their mailings in plain brown envelopes. And what is someone just receives one of the NRA’s ubiquitous solicitation mailings?
Because, after all, if you BELONG to a terrorist organization, you ARE a terrorist. Right?
(And as someone pointed out, does this resolution make the USPS an accessory to a terrorist organization for distributing their publications and invitations?)
But more to the point, who is next? While the NRA’s wealth and organizational strength are cited in the resolution, there are many other organizations which can be slandered and libeled in a similar way:
- Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership
- The Zelman Partisans
- Second Amendment Sisters (the various surviving chapters of that organization)
- Gun Owners of California
- California Rifle & Pistol Association
- Gun Owners of America
- US Concealed Carry Association
And many, many more. Which have thousands of members in California, and surely at least a few dozen in the City and County of San Francisco.
Not every member of every organization is going to take this sort of thing calmly or with a shrug. Might it not be that the SF Politburo is making a self-fulfilling prophesy, and sparking the formation of just that? A sort of “Provisional National Rifle Association,” perhaps?
What they HAVE created is a climate that promotes and encourages violence against those who are condemned, directly or indirectly – the owners of guns, those who dare to purchase ammunition, and those who speak up in favor of them? (Remember, California now requires background checks for buying ammo. Is it too much to expect that those records will NOT be made available, legal or not, to hoploclasts and hoplophobes?)
After all, California – and San Francisco – have a long and dishonorable history of vigilante activity and organizations. Even if they eschew using firearms, they have so much else to choose from to initiate violence against the hated terrorist gun owners and their ilk.
Enough brave AntiFa types (protecting their identify in the black masks) could surely overwhelm a deranged and armed NRA member, right? Even with a “multi-bullet magazine” in their self-defense pistol. And imagine how these martyrs would be honored for the sacrifice of their lives in yet another mass shooting triggered by their mob attack on an evil terrorist.
But would not San Francisco, and California, courts take a dim view of attacks on lawful and peaceful gun owners? Please! This resolution sends a message to the prosecutors and judges, already strongly sympathetic to abolishing “gun rights” of self defense. “Sorry, we just don’t have enough enough evidence to prosecute.” Or “We have higher priority cases to do that: we have all these flower shops to prosecute for refusing to make arrangements for sex=change honor ceremonies.”
Seriously, in a regime as we have in San Francisco today, and given the decayed and corrupted state of that city’s society and culture, there are many ways to add teeth to this resolution. Law or not. After all, this is a sanctuary city and much more.
And it is also avidly watched: we should not be surprised to see many other Tranzi cities and even states imitating this, and against more than just the NRA.
(FYI: I am not and have never been a member of, or friendly towards, the NRA. I do not believe that the NRA is as strong a supporter of the God-given, human right of self-defense as it is usually seen to be. I believe that it has compromised time and time again with the gun-control regime: the hoplophobes and hoploclasts. But it IS a prominent and very much demonized organization.)
(Afterword: It has been pointed out that I am being unfair, perhaps, to San Francisco, as my antipathy towards “Sodom-by-the-Bay” influences me. It is noted that the Supervisors of San Francisco DO have a reason for greater fear of firearms held by citizens of, and visitors to, their once-lovely city. First, the incidence of madness, insanity, and mental illness is very high in their area. Second, the extremism of San Francisco, from its board down to the most “humble” denizen pooping in the streets, is so much that they fear that those who so revile that behavior will finally lose their tempers and try to exterminate the contagion. Third, they themselves clearly have no compunctions about using violence and other kinds of force to get their way politically.
I will agree with my reviewer: the rulers of San Francisco DO have reason to fear an armed citizenry, and their own inhabitants. But that only demonstrates that they should not be allowed to have the power to even pass such resolutions as this. I do not dispute or seek to steal away THEIR right of free speech, but let them do it like everyone else: as private persons and NOT as supposed governors of their society.)