Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Inexorable, creeping statism (WARNING: Not really gun related)

I've pretty much gotten out of the habit of weekend blogging (when readership is way down anyway), but there's something I want to talk about. Since it isn't really directly connected to the main point of this blog (gun rights), I figured the weekend would be a good time to bring it up.

I am, as far as I know, the only member of my immediate family (a fairly large family--I have four siblings, all married, with children) who is not a Democrat. If we spread the net a bit beyond immediate family, I have an uncle (my father's brother) whom I believe to be a pretty staunch Republican, but for the most part, even my extended family is almost exclusively Democrat, and range from fairly enthusiastic about Obama to quite enthusiastic.

This doesn't lead to a great deal of tension between me and the rest of the family, perhaps in part because I am, although not a Democrat, also not a Republican, and do not support McCain.

After the last presidential debate, my mother disdainfully pointed out something McCain said (which was indeed pretty wacky--something about turning returned combat soldiers into schoolteachers, without the cumbersome process of first certifying them as educators). My response (referring to the entire debate not very politely, as a "Clash of the As . . . [a term that could be interpreted as 'donkey orifices']") displeased her, and she asked what, specifically, I objected to about Obama.

While the issue of gun rights would be enough all by itself to earn Obama (and McCain, for that matter) my contempt, there's a whole lot more to it than that (and she doesn't care about gun rights, anyway). I soon discovered that actually articulating my general opposition to both candidates was an exercise I probably needed.

I decided that my main objection to both of them, as it is to the vast majority of politicians, is that they keep trying to offer governmental "solutions," and refuse to acknowledge that government is, in fact, generally the problem. It occurred to me then that legislators see it as their primary job to, well . . . legislate--that is, write and pass laws. Laws, though, are almost by definition limitations on personal freedom (you must do x; or you mustn't do y). Some such limitations are clearly necessary--the "freedom" to rape or murder, for example, is one that quite obviously needs limiting (right out of existence).

The problem is that our Constitutional government is two-hundred twenty years old--there simply aren't very many freedoms in need of limiting anymore. Society evolves; technology expands--I get that, and realize there will always be a need for some new laws, to deal with changing realities. Still, Congress sees thousands of bills every year, many of which become laws. The result of this can only be a reduction of freedom.

I wish I had a solution. I'd love to see H.R. 1359/S. 3159, the "Enumerated Powers Act," pass, along with some version of the "Read the Bills Act," but am not so gullible as to either believe I'll ever see that happen, or that even with both bills signed into law, a determined Congress won't find a way to ignore them.

Still, that would be some "Change We Can Believe In."

7 comments:

the pistolero said...

I think ultimately one could tie all politics & liberty blogging back into guns, though; after all, as the great L. Neil Smith pointed out, gun rights makes for a better litmus test for politicians and political philosophies than anything else out there.
For the record, I am not a big McCain fan either, for the very reason you mentioned, but I sure do like his VP pick, and not just because she's easy on the eyes. I'd heard it said before that she was the closest thing to a libertarian candidate ever to make it to a slot on one of the Big Two party tickets. From what I've read about her I tend to agree with that. If only we could be assured that McCain's selection of her as his running mate was not a one-time nod to the small-government base...

The_Chef said...

Palin is anything but libertarian.

And I do agree there is a creeping statism at work. Dr. Robert Higgs refers to it as the "ratchet effect of Government".

After all "There is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program."

Gun Rights are a good litmus test. But at the same time I know many libertarians who don't care to own guns themselves but are very solid on economic and social issues.

bwaites said...

Great thoughts, and a great post, glad you posted on a weekend!!

I'm certainly not a McCain booster, but I see little choice if we are to keep an avowed gun grabber from the White House.

the pistolero said...

Palin is anything but libertarian.
Indeed...but I really never said she was. From what I've heard, though if she doesn't lean that way in her personal beliefs, she at least tends to govern that way.

45superman said...

I (of course) like Palin's position on gun rights.

I haven't been able to get much of an idea on where she stands on much else (aside from abortion).

Frankly, however much I like a vice presidential candidate is not going to have much of an effect on my opinion of the person running for the top job, and McCain, with or without Palin, has simply not earned my vote (which, living as I do in Illinois, wouldn't help him anyway).

"Not as bad as Obama" just doesn't cut it for me. I won't criticize those who see it differently, but I'm not playing that game anymore.

The_Chef said...

"Not as bad as Obama" just doesn't cut it for me. I won't criticize those who see it differently, but I'm not playing that game anymore.

A choice of a lesser evil is still a fundamentally evil choice.

Hell I'm not voting, not after both those pricks voted for the bailout package.

hairy hobbit said...

You could always close your eyes and vote for her while hoping his health isn't quite up to snuff.

Being in Ohio where my vote's already been pretty much stolen I've thought about auctioning it off to the highest bidder, just like both of the major party candidates have done their whole life. My faith in people doing the correct, and intelligent thing (like voting 3rd party) is all but gone.

At least that way I have the glimmer of hope of stopping outright socialism...or helping jump start the revolution that will probably happen.

Of course, it's illegal for us little people to do it, but that's all modern campaigns DO...they promise payment for the vote, and never really seem to deliver.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6d9YXYAa9Y

Oh well. maybe I'll just flip a coin or roll some dice...or let the voting machine pick for me.