“When Government Goes After Your Guns And Your Arguments,” TODAY at 3 p.m. ET (12 p.m. PT)

In the wake of Orlando, Democrats are predictably calling for gun control. And in other news, the Massachusetts Attorney General is trying to prevent ExxonMobil from defending itself by means of argument. These stories and more in today’s show. See Program Notes, below, for all the stories, etc., I plan to discuss.

Join in live, either by phone or in the chat room at BlogTalk Radio!

The show can be accessed here.

To access the show’s page at BlogTalk Radio, which will allow you to check out a past episode or to subscribe via iTunes and other services, use this link.

To access the iTunes store page for “Don’t Let It Go…Unheard,” where you can find past episodes, subscribe, and leave ratings and reviews (pretty please!), use this link.

Finally, if you would like to support the show financially, please donate using your Pay Pal account or Credit Card here.

Program Notes

Omar Mateen Posted to Facebook Amid Orlando Attack, Lawmaker Says

Daniel Greenfield: Muslim Privilege Killed 49 People in Orlando HT Bosch Fawstin

HT Glenn Jameson

West Hollywood Inundated With AMAZING Pro-Gun, Pro-Gay Posters

Gun sales surge among gays, lesbians after Orlando shooting

Gun homicides steady after decline in ’90s; suicide rate edges up HT Rob Abiera

First the Government Went After ExxonMobil. Now They’re Going After Me.

Soda Tax Passes in Philadelphia. Advocates Ask: Who’s Next?

California lawmakers unplug the state’s electric car program HT Rob Abiera

‘F*** You, Islam’: Homophobic Canadian Commentator Kisses Milo In Orlando HT Bosch Fawstin

Prince, Earth Day, and Reconsidering Hope


Filed under Don't Let It Go...Unheard

2 responses to ““When Government Goes After Your Guns And Your Arguments,” TODAY at 3 p.m. ET (12 p.m. PT)

  1. A few points on this topic:

    1. Innocent until proven guilty is synonymous with non-criminal until you commit a crime. I don’t care how good the cops are, victims (should they be the targets) are always first ones on the scene, and when seconds count the cops are only minutes away. The possibility of non-criminals turning criminal will never be zero so long as man possesses free-will. For these reasons to construct legal barriers preventing access to a means of self-defense would be, well, criminal.

    2. Delegation means someone/group will be acting on your behalf based on your sanction. Delegation of rights is a very important concept in understanding how a government’s actions can be moral. Delegation of rights does not mean, however, complete loss of rights of Individuals via a transfer (not even partial loss). In fact no loss of rights has occurred via delegation. Assuming we correctly understand the concept of unalienable rights to mean we cannot lose, give, surrender, transfer or forget away the right to self-defense, so we cannot lose, give, surrender, transfer or forget away the right to the means of self-defense. The right and the means of exercising that right go hand-in-hand. For these reasons to construct legal barriers preventing access to a means of self-defense would be, well, a violation of our rights.

    3. Our structure of government as it is currently misunderstood by our Justices leaves no remedy to resist statism via secession, making it more likely that secession would lead to a war (otherwise known as a revolutionary war if secessionists should win, or a civil war should the unionists win). A proper government would explicitly allow any sub-component to secede peacefully as a built in mechanism to protect our right to freely associate — and it would not be up for change via convention (as rights are not determined by votes). These sub-components of a larger government that can secede would have access to the larger weapons Dr. Brooks saw as a requirement to defeat conventional forces, but would be odd for individuals to possess.

    As an aside, I think Texas should declare its independence and effectively secede. It would be messy, but I believe that’s the change needed to see a free society within my life time. They have a fairly robust national guard BTW.

    PS if these concepts are not in Dr. Smith’s book on the moral case for rights (next on reading list after Equal is unfair), then I ought to continue my project on rights.

  2. I finally have a chance to listen to this week’s show. Your comment about the left saying “it’s just about the gun” or “it’s just homophobia” and trying to equate the not baking a cake for a gay wedding to a jihadist killing gays was largely what I wrote about this week, There was a tweet by Sally Kohn just hours after the massacre which almost explicitly equated the two. To borrow a word, I found the idea she expressed revulsifying.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.