Saturday, December 01, 2007

More of the Same, This Time from Harvard

Via The High Road, we have this, from the Harvard Crimson...

Written in an age in which minutemen rose to dress and fight at a moment’s notice, the Second Amendment was no doubt motivated by a young nation’s concern for its own safety and stability. But now, when the United States is protected by the most powerful security forces on the globe, the Second Amendment is neither relevant nor useful. Rather, it has become an impediment to vital public policy, and it should be repealed and replaced with nuanced federal legislation....In the context of today’s society, the Second Amendment is outdated. Constitutional debates over its interpretation stand in the way of the implementation of pressing public policy.
Nuanced federal legislation that would eventually mandate bans and confiscations, no doubt about it. It's quite the coincidence the Harvard student newspaper is called the Crimson, as that would arguably be the color of the streets of this great country if it ever came down to the bans and confiscations. And am I the only one who finds it quite appalling that these people are so willing to throw away their rights -- and our rights -- just because they think it'd make for good public policy? It's good to see them coming out and saying this sort of thing, as we know it's been their goal all along...but as they ignore natural rights and constant appeals to reason, does it not push us that much closer to taking up arms in defense of our rights? Something else comes to mind from the great Mike Vanderboegh, as he discusses the civil war that would result from the banning and confiscation of arms from the American people, in response to Dan Simpson's police-state wet dream (emphasis mine -- ed.:)
"Unlike the American Revolution, the civil war will reflect the coarsening of the rules of war and will look more like Iraq or Bosnia. The war would certainly extend to those whose direct and support it-- civilian or not-- as they are primary targets, far more so than the foot soldiers of Ambassador Dan's Einsatzgruppen. Bill Clinton extended our own rules of war in the Kosovo intervention to include the news media and other propagandists as legitimate targets. Under these rules, Ambassador Dan and his anti-gun ilk would all be dead men."
And in this case, of course, that "anti-gun ilk" would include the staff of the Harvard Crimson. I hope it never comes to that, but it would seem to me the only thing to be said is, once again, "Molon Labe."