• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

On Liberty

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun. “
--Patrick Henry




t
 
Well, yes, I am in a better mood today, but nowhere near the way I think I should be feeling. I know it's an intuition, but right now I seriously doubt anyone reading this topic is feeling right with our world.

You know how I feel about the law; like it or not, it is to be obeyed.

But of late, especially here in NY, we gun owners have seen a blatant gauntlet thrown at our feet, and a large percentage of the gunowners I've been speaking with are personally debating their views about gun laws and their obedience thereof. Damned near every one of them is telling me they won't and that I'd be a pussy if I did. The law his clearly been ordained with the express purpose of forcing gunowners to choose between the bend of the knee or the willing assumption of the cloak of the lawbreaker. A lot are seriously considering the latter, and for once, I think they're not far off about the breaking of this one. It's over the line, way over. I still don't know how I'm going to go on this, and that's a new first for me.

At least the representative owners' organization have stood up at least far enough to mount a legal challenge in the State's Supreme Court. It would appear that all the preliminary positioning and posturing has been accomplished, and right now the record stands with both sides petitioning the Court for summary judgment. $160,000+ into the fray and another infusion of $80,000 from the NRA, and at least the checkbooks are where the mouths are.

I have no idea how this one will shake out, but I suspect that if the Court caves to the Grabbists, we are about to witness something entirely new within the borders of NY State. I put no faith in Courts and Princes and can only say I dine daily on a diet of dread; for myself of course, but more importantly, for my fellow neighbors, nearly all of whom have stakes in this outcome. Pretty soon, I may have to get off the pot and take a few dangerous steps in a more positive direction.

Personally, I hate this prospect and sorely resent my government's clearly deliberate efforts to put me in this position. I do not relish being in a position where emotion fuels my actions, but there's little option to handle this sort of thing without it. What especially troubles me is that several tens of thousands of my fellow citizens and neighbors share this stepping stone with me. The potential for a poor outcome far outweighs that for the good.

Mainly, though, I have this image in my mind that the authors of this measure probably never intended to see the law enforced, and are callously forcing the State Police, each and every, into the positions of universally mistrusted, universally endangered pawns. Their masters could care less whether the challenge succeeds or fails, and intended this entire controversy as a name recognition exercise with a side helping of doing nothing useful while simultaneously earning the repute of political tough guys, standing tall in the face of the most law abiding group within their jurisdiction. They already have their mileage, and the rest is not really germane to their original and ultimate intent. The stench of hypocrisy is overpowering, but everyone just seems to nod and accept this as business as usual.

So if my image here is hard for my peers to sort out, it's no easier for me.

Running out of nails to bite...

Greg
 
Last edited:
Greg,

That was one of the more thought provoking posts i've read in a long time, thank you for your patriotism. I have to count myself as one of many who do not feel right with our world. One of the more depressing thoughts one can have is that of those who either turn a blind eye or completely ignore the state of or country. You're spot on in stating "our founders are dead & their likeness is nowhere to be found." The posturing & pillaging for nothing more than self-gratification/satisfaction/gain going on in the .gov (& most elsewhere) is appalling to those who dare to see their surrounding for what they truly are. How so many people in our world sleep at night knowing full well their intentions to do their fellow man harm is beyond this simple rednecks comprehension abilities. There is a clearly defined course we find ourselves on, as far as I can tell, it looks to be a collision course.

With that said, I would like to share this quote.... reminds me very much of your recent post:

“It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen."
--Aristotle



t
 
I thank you and I think your quote sums up my own thoughts perfectly.

I think we are facing issues nearly identical to the German populace immediately prior to the Reichstag fire. After the fire, there was no question about the issues, and the opportunity to reverse course was irretrievably past.

We nod and smile at our very own peril. Trying to be both the good individual and the good citizen is being incrementally legislated/ordered into an insurmountable quandary. Tempers and consciences are now being deliberately stretched to the breaking point by those who should be providing statesmanlike guidance. When that's the case, someone should be in the penalty box, but when the refs have been bent, the penalty box is just there to gather dust.

I refuse to light the match, but once the fire catches, I am, even in my aged decrepitude, still quite able to lay another stick upon it.

No-one needs to own an 'assault weapon' in this confrontation to be throughly involved.

When Liberty (like Justice) is denied to one, Liberty is denied to all.

When I was in Vietnam, it was, at best, somewhat of a stretch to explain myself, even to myself, as defending my fellow citizens' liberties. But when it came down to doing one's duty in obedience to duly constituted authority, there was never any question for me. I had sworn to, and I was keeping my word, even to the death. Some of us really do take these things seriously.

This is not like that, subversion never is...

Greg
 
Last edited:
....
We nod and smile at our very own peril. Trying to be both the good individual and the good citizen is being incrementally legislated/ordered into an insurmountable quandary. Tempers and consciences are now being deliberately stretched to the breaking point by those who should be providing statesmanlike guidance. When that's the case, someone should be in the penalty box, but when the refs have been bent, the penalty box is just there to gather dust.

Greg

I believe that in and of itself is worthy of quotation.

To paraphrase and old Metallica song "...you know it's sad but true..." :)



t
 
Greg,

I understand your fight and hope in some way to support what it true by posting this below.


Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained — we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

What resonable man would not agree with the patriotic scope of this speech.
 
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"


Some of the most powerful words ever spoken. By a fellow Virginian, I might add, as were Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe.
 
Last edited:
I am no Patrick Henry, and would not be if nominated to the role. He extolled independence by way of insurrection.

I think more along the lines of M.L. King and Gandhi. If that course fails, I leave the consequences to those younger than I, with the hotter blood. I understand that this may seem a more bland and innocuous route, but remember what they accomplished for all their restraint.

The other route fulfills the fears the Grabbists insist on painting such as us with. Don't assist them by turning their allegations and insinuations into truth.

Greg
 
Last edited:
Fear is the only thing that will work on tyrants, just as it did for MLK. Though they hated him, the FBI feared arresting King would result in bloodshed because the Deacons for Defense surrounded him with armed men. He wasn't killed or arrested sooner because of the FBI's respect for passive resistance, but rather the guarantee of ARMED resistance, armed resistence that would have spread. As for Gandhi, his restraint was based on necessity because he didn't feel it was possible to oppose the British without arms or training. If he had the means he would have. Here is a Gandhi quote urging his followers to enlist in WWI in order to learn how to aid their quest for independence:
"To bring about such a state of things we should have the ability to defend ourselves, that is, the ability to bear arms and to use them...If we want to learn the use of arms with the greatest possible despatch, it is our duty to enlist ourselves in the army." -Gandhi, (1965) Collected Works, Vol 17. Chapter "67. Appeal for enlistment", Nadiad, 22 June 1918

“Be not intimidated … nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.” –John Adams (1765)

Not to say passive resistance isn't useful if it is fatal as it often is. Sam Adams well understood the visceral response the colony would have to the Boston Massacre, which he needed and used to help good decent people throw off their "decency" and get to work.
 
Ky, That quote is bad ass. I have to ask, was "wheedled" a typo? I want to save that quote but cannot find a definition of the quote.



t

wheedle |ˈ(h)wēdl| verbemploy endearments or flattery to persuade someone to do something or give one something:


 
The law is not to obeyed. It is to be questioned, validated and observed by those it applies to.

Dogs obey.
 
His Own Words - Gandhi Quotes


The following are all direct quotes from Mohandas Gandhi, with the occasional commentary added only in order to inform the reader of the context. These are the stated and verified opinions of Gandhi.

On Non-Violence

During a prayer speech on June 16, 1947: “If we had the atom bomb, we would have used it against the British.” ~ Gandhi’s “The Last Phase,” Vol. II, p. 326

Regarding Polish resistance to Hitler’s invasion: “Almost nonviolent.” ~ Richard Grenier’s “The Gandhi Nobody Knows,” March 1983

“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.” ~ Gandhi’s “Autobiography,” Part V, Chapter XXVII

To the British during WWII: “This manslaughter must be stopped. You are losing; if you persist, it will only result in greater bloodshed. Hitler is not a bad man.” ~ G.D. Birla’s “In the Shadow of the Mahatma,” p. 276

“However, at about 12 o’clock we finished the day’s journey, with no Kaffirs to fight.” ~ The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Government of India (CWMG), Vol. V, p. 262

“I do believe that where there is a choice between cowardice and non-violence I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence.” ~ CWMG, Vol. XXI, p. 132.

“In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?” ~ The Indian Opinion, March 25, 1905

“It is indeed necessary to be physically strong. If the Indians want to learn the use of fire-arms and swords, by all means let them do so. ?” ~ The Indian Opinion, June 18, 1908

I support the views of Gandhi, but he was not a simple person, all black and white. To emulate him, one must emulate him in his entirety. In essence, he is stepping forward; offering himself up in the manner of the Miner's Canary, to draw the oppressors out far enough to show their hole cards.

So who is the coward; the canary, or the ones who remain in line? Standing behind is not the desirable act, stepping forward and joining shoulders is the act of courage.

He demonstrated to the world precisely the fate of the placid in the hands of those without restraint or conscience.

When we ask ourselves what we have to lose, the question is not about just our individual selves, but about all those aligned with us.

One cannot overturn oppression without sacrifice. Force of arms cannot demonstrate the rightness of anything, but the force of arms against the demonstrator can bring out the oppressor's true visage.

Confrontations like ours do not get settled on the plains of battle, but rather in the minds of those who have lent the power of their inertia to their own oppressors.

My Wife's Grandmother always understood this; once burnt, forever wary.

She lost two of her Sons in Russia (MIA forever), and the youngest, the last (14), in the Volksturm.

Like the Jews, she also demanded "Never again!".

Your views of M.L. King parallel my own. I don't know whether the Deacons employed the implied force in defense of King; does anybody?

Theodore Roosevelt embodies my view regarding soft speech and big sticks. Without the stick, it really doesn't matter how softly or loudly one speaks.

Why do you think our firearms are in the crosshairs? It is to silence and disenfranchise all those like us; and we are not alone in this jeopardy. We are only the ones who could do something about it on behalf of ourselves and all those others.

When someone treats one like an enemy, how does one respond? What are the remaining options, really?

When no cloak remains but that of the Wolf, don the cloak, and do it full measure

Greg
 
Last edited:
Fear is the only thing that will work on tyrants, just as it did for MLK. Though they hated him, the FBI feared arresting King would result in bloodshed because the Deacons for Defense surrounded him with armed men. He wasn't killed or arrested sooner because of the FBI's respect for passive resistance, but rather the guarantee of ARMED resistance, armed resistence that would have spread. As for Gandhi, his restraint was based on necessity because he didn't feel it was possible to oppose the British without arms or training. If he had the means he would have. Here is a Gandhi quote urging his followers to enlist in WWI in order to learn how to aid their quest for independence:
"To bring about such a state of things we should have the ability to defend ourselves, that is, the ability to bear arms and to use them...If we want to learn the use of arms with the greatest possible despatch, it is our duty to enlist ourselves in the army." -Gandhi, (1965) Collected Works, Vol 17. Chapter "67. Appeal for enlistment", Nadiad, 22 June 1918

“Be not intimidated … nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.” –John Adams (1765)

Not to say passive resistance isn't useful if it is fatal as it often is. Sam Adams well understood the visceral response the colony would have to the Boston Massacre, which he needed and used to help good decent people throw off their "decency" and get to work.

In support of your train of thought...

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"
- The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
 
PMC; reading through the link you supplied, I can only admire Whittemore's dedication and courage; and the concept gives me genuine pause. Much as I see good purpose to his actions, I also recognize that he was unique in his or any other time.

For the record, I have serious doubts that I could be more of a help than a hindrance, which is the basis of my comment about younger individuals. But while I breathe, my family and friends will not go on the line without my presence alongside in body as well as spirit. I am not talking about picket lines here. I don't start the fires; I add the wood to allow them to thrive. Stokers play a valuable role as well.

I have few illusions about my capabilities.

Alas, the works of Solzhenitsyn are but cautionary; conjecture rather than documentary of any triumph. Time had already tipped the balance to the point where words, soft or strident, lacked the emphasis of said big stick.

Rather than to promote disputation and rancor within a worthy topic, I deem it wisest for me to end my commentary here.

Greg
 
Last edited:
PMC; reading through the link you supplied, I can only admire Whittemore's dedication and courage; and the concept gives me genuine pause. Much as I see good purpose to his actions, I also recognize that he was unique in his or any other time.

A total Warrior of the type that is rare but found in small number at every significant point in history where there is struggle.


Alas, the works of Solzhenitsyn are but cautionary; conjecture rather than documentary of any triumph. Time had already tipped the balance to the point where words, soft or strident, lacked the emphasis of said big stick.
Greg

He, like any survivor of totalitarianism, hoped to impart to the present that burying your head in the sand and hoping for the danger to recede is folly. Though they lacked the tools of resistance he understood that the will mattered more. At least in doing so they would have had hope. Once sent into the forest wilderness all hope was lost.

I dont think Solzhenitsyn ever understood our Jeffersonian/Locke based concepts of the individual and freedom but I will give him credit for being a Patriot committed to Mother Russia.
 
I understand and agree Greg.

As for the Deacons, in Jonesboro after desegregation the police showed up with firetrucks to hose down black students who would attempt to enter the school. The deacons showed up with shotguns, loaded them in full view in front of the firemen, and said they were for anyone who attempted to stop the kids. The authorities retreated. Likewise, they stopped several Klan activities, and shot into a mob attempting to prevent them from extracting a beaten girl.

Interestingly, except for the Klan, the Deacon's implied force was directed at the authorities acting under the color of law. Just goes to show that officers tend to think a lot more about their orders, and whether they are moral and Constitutional, when they understand violence will be going both ways.

I can see you understand what is at risk beyond the words, as do I. Hopefully if there is any justice nothing beyond words will be required anymore of any of us. In our own way we all consider ourselves essential, almost all have relationships and roles to play for loved ones, shoes only we can properly fill. It is precisely that which makes our inheritance of liberty so poignant and gut wrenchingly costly. From those men who died in front of their wives and children literally on their own doorsteps in Lexington, down to your comrades in arms and then mine, all of them had so much to lose, and did their duty despite it all.

The timing of things allowed me to I attend a squadron-mate's funeral. He was lost on a night CAS mission in the North of Iraq. We were thankful to the Seals who recovered what little remained of him, and standing in the rain at his funeral, with his small children and young wife, I well and fully understood that the physical pain of death, the loss or damage of your physical body, is the very least of what is risked by those who fight. All the days left, meals at the kitchen table with an empty chair, every birthday, anniversary, Christmas, the marriage of your children, the joyous days of birth and the trying days of sadness, the passing on of accumulated wisdom, memories created in laughter now cherished in anguish, down to even the simplest enjoyment of a sunset from the front porch; all of these are to be endured now without one they love, and felt everyday.

So much at risk, but then Was it ever any different for Men who fight? Did any from Lexington til now risk less?

I have seen men die, men that were supposed to be under my protection. A close air support pilot truly has a God's eye view of the field, seeing not just one man's struggle but so many, all the while feeling anything but God-like when one of your own falls. When the voice over the radio confirms about that man what you already know from your own eyes, I couldn't help even in the chaos but to spare a fleeting thought for someone known to him thousands of miles away, someone anxiously going about the business of living while someone they love fights and dies. Someone whose day and everyday thereafter though so normal to them so far, was already changed forever. In that moment it feels guilty, even obscene, to know it before they do.

After those times, to me there are few principles worth such unending sacrifice. But to me, those few are indeed worth it all. If all of that striving and pain and sacrifice from Lexington common til now is to have any meaning at all then my children and their children will live in as much liberty as I can devise by any means I am able, so help me God.
 
I smile at the MLK/FBI association. The FBI knew if they killed MLK, they would make him a martyr and move his work even further than it was at the time. The reasoning of his armed guards is not as high as the reasoning of what they were thinking at the time. His movement was in fact losing steam, it was becoming stale, and not moving forward. The FBI knew this. They knew it would not be long until the entire movement came to a slow, faltering standstill. Then James Earle Ray, in all his southern wisdom, shot the guy, made him a martyr, and look where it went.(This was a major part of US History II discussion as facilitated by APSU(retired) Prof. Cicero Hughes, US Army vet, APSU professor, and as he said, straight, no BS, American Negro)

As to Gandhi being totally peaceful, the above stated is more than enough to show that to be a myth of liberal thought. If one looks even further back into world history to peaceful men, they will find within him a violent man who would kill for honor, family, and nation or peoples. This is inherent within all of us, this willingness to fight a just fight when it needs to be fought. Sure, many are castrated of this within modern society, but many still hold these behaviors within as well.

Liberty was ours to allow to be taken. We secured it once, then secured it yet again from the British Crown. We have historically fought for it for others throughout the world, yet have allowed it to slip piecemeal for the veil of imaginary security in modern times. I find the innate behaviors of the American Frontiersman to be of great importance within our kind. It is that which will guide our movement forward and allow us to take the steps we may well need to take again one day.
 
I agree BGE, thanks to you I JUST found this thread and it contains some of the best commentary by our peers I believe I have ever read. The ideals exchanged here and Greg L.'s gut-wrenchingly honest observations moved me beyond words.

To "resurrect" the thread, here's one that I found meaningful when I was in harm's way every day. As much as I'm not really a fan of Steinbeck, I appreciated this one:

“Fear the time when the bombs stop falling while the bombers live - for every bomb is proof that the spirit has not died...And this you can know - fear the time when Manself will not suffer and die for a concept, for this one quality is the foundation of Manself, and this one quality is man, distinctive in the universe.”

― John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath
 
I agree BGE, thanks to you I JUST found this thread and it contains some of the best commentary by our peers I believe I have ever read. The ideals exchanged here and Greg L.'s gut-wrenchingly honest observations moved me beyond words.

To "resurrect" the thread, here's one that I found meaningful when I was in harm's way every day. As much as I'm not really a fan of Steinbeck, I appreciated this one:

“Fear the time when the bombs stop falling while the bombers live - for every bomb is proof that the spirit has not died...And this you can know - fear the time when Manself will not suffer and die for a concept, for this one quality is the foundation of Manself, and this one quality is man, distinctive in the universe.”

― John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath

Bogey, I read that a couple of years ago. Don't remember the quote, but what a novel. Really disturbing, especially the ending, but one of the most memorable things I have read.
 
Bogey, I read that a couple of years ago. Don't remember the quote, but what a novel. Really disturbing, especially the ending, but one of the most memorable things I have read.

Yeah, I found a copy of it abandoned in the mud hut we were living in at the time and figured it was something I should have read long ago so I waded through it. I'll admit that I didn't really enjoy it. I'm funny that way though in that I never could "get into" Faulkner or Conrad either, despite their literary renown.
That quote is really the only thing I got from the book that meant anything to me, other than the pervading theme of abject misery and despair.
 
To paraphrase Steinbeck, every attack on personal freedom is proof that it has not died.

Going further; it's also evidence that freedom's opponents still fear its champions.

Would that this be ever so.

For every champion brought down, another two need rise in their place. This is that time.

Let freedoms' attackers be the architects of its triumph.

Greg
 
Last edited:
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. (Back then!)

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.

The god who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.

And the day will come, when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva, in the brain of Jupiter.

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.

What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.

The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.

When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality.

Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.

It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately.

Liberty is the great parent of science and of virtue; and a nation will be great in both in proportion as it is free.

He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

I have never been able to conceive how any rational being could propose happiness to himself from the exercise of power over others.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

In a government bottomed on the will of all, the...liberty of every individual citizen becomes interesting to all.

I’m a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it.

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to God and myself alone. Its evidence before the world is to be sought in my life: if it has been honest and dutiful to society the religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one.

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.

I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.

Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?

A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

The right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others.

An elective despotism was not the government we fought for.

History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.

If there is one principle more deeply rooted in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest.

It is better to tolerate that rare instance of a parent’s refusing to let his child be educated, than to shock the common feelings by a forcible transportation and education of the infant against the will of his father.

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just.

The man who reads nothing at all is better than educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.

I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.

In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile

- Thomas Jefferson.

I am the punishment of God...If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.
- Genghis Khan

When a person has no fear of being different, they are free. When a person can choose to be who they want to be, they are free. When a person can say what they believe and do what they believe, they are free. When a dream can become a reality, freedom is at work in their lives.

All these things, and more, define freedom for me. People in the United States of America think they are free, and they are right, but freedom comes at a price. It isn’t free. Many people have sacrificed themselves and their own freedom to make sure that we Americans are safe in our homes and free to choose to live out our dreams. One cost is that we pay taxes to support our military so that they can fight to defend freedom in the world. Another cost is that people die to ensure freedom for us, and others. This is the ultimate price to pay and we should honor those people and the cause they fight for.

Also, freedom comes with the responsibility to defend it and keep it alive for everyone, forever. If nobody was there to defend freedom, others could take our freedom away. Because I believe that freedom is the most important thing to us as Americans, we should do whatever it takes to keep strong and make it last forever.

The cost of freedom can take people’s lives and destroy families. And at that cost, thank goodness there are heroes who are willing to protect it for everybody. It’s hard to grasp that some countries today fight and fight for even a small taste of freedom. The United States of America tries to bring freedom to those countries and that is also one of the costs we must pay. It is not enough to keep freedom for us alone. We must pay the price for free people everywhere.
-Evan Coleman age 12
 
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
 
Can think of no better comments other than a more modern contributor, Jeff Cooper. I keep this on my computer, read it frequently and quote often:

"We emphasize again that freedom and liberty are not interchangeable ideas. Freedom basically denotes the elimination of restraint--the breaking of shackles. It was used as a conspicuously successful morale builder for galley slaves, among others. It was promised to the slaves on the Christian side at the critical battle of Lepanto in 1574. They were told they would be freed if their side won. Since the existence of a galley slave is about the closest approximation of hell that humanity can devise, freedom from it was an unequaled objective. Liberty, on the other hand, is a political idea denoting the right of an individual to do whatever does not interfere with the activities of his neighbor. Men also fight very well for liberty, but that objective is less well understood and may not even be prized by persons lacking the spirit for it. Most of today's governments are socialist in which liberty is mostly lacking, and the people in those states do not seem to mind. Thus it is somewhat annoying to hear exhortations that do not differentiate between those two words."
 
Excellent quote of Cooper. Heres another

"A handgun is at its best when its used to fight your way back to a rifle "