Buck Twin
04-22-2002, 10:59 PM
California is getting hit really hard. so I thought I'd spread this article by Brian , I hope you like it as much as I did. you will also see just what california thinks of gun owners.
Brian Puckett responds to Article on .50 BMG Rifles
April 22, 2002
TO: L.A. Times
In an April 18 column, George Skelton quotes from an article I wrote for
KeepAndBearArms.com. In it, I reported what is commonly known among the
informed - that millions of good Americans, after enduring years of oppression,
vilification, and terrorism directed against them as gun owners, have reached
the sad but logical conclusion that only violence will restore the full, free
exercise of their right to own and use firearms. For reporting this fact, Mr.
Skelton says I should be denied a proposed California rifle "permit".
I'm not surprised that Mr. Skelton's automatic, un-American response to hearing
unpleasant facts is to recommend punishing the messenger. That's the socialist
way - total control over people and information.
Nor am I surprised that Mr. Skelton used absurd terms like "superguns", "small
cannons", and "monsters" to describe common .50 caliber rifles - even though
many models can be shoulder-fired - nor that he lied and used Clintonian
distortions of truth in saying the guns were "capable of taking out" concrete
bunkers, armored personnel carriers, hovering helicopters, or destroying tanker
trucks at 2,000 yards. Such propaganda is normal for liberal elitists, who
think the masses will swallow anything.
And I'm not surprised that Mr. Skelton didn't tell readers that my article was
about avoiding future violence. I'm a gun owner, so Mr. Skelton must demonize
me.
In any case, Mr. Skelton need not worry about my getting a gun "permit". I
would never apply for a permit to own any gun, any more than I would apply for
a permit to own a Bible, or Torah, or printing press, or to obtain legal
counsel, or to assemble with other citizens. Of course, those will all require
permits if people like Mr. Skelton ever run things. Their contempt for the
Constitution isn't limited to the Second Amendment.
-- Brian Puckett, Los Angeles
FURTHER NOTES ON THIS MATTER
The article I wrote titled "Terrorism Against Gun Owners, Civil Disobedience,
and Killing"
(http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3271) has
stirred up a hornet's nest. Maybe the following items will put things in
perspective.
1. John Ross wrote an entire novel ("Unintended Consequences") on the very same
subject of my article, and seems not to have gotten half the flack for it. By
the way, I'm happy for John about that, and urge you to read his fascinating
book.
2. Many people have written to me wanting further information on my views.
Here's a pretty direct email and my response:
Brian:
Do you want to violently overthrow any government or harm any official? I do
not think you do want this. Please let me know. Some say you do desire this
from reading your writings. As for me I want non violence, but if someone is
attacking me with violence I will respond with force if need be, and only if
need be.
Thanks,
XXX
Puckett responds:
Dear XXX:
Instead of listening to what "some say", perhaps it would be best to read what
I wrote:
"Every new illegal gun control edict issued, and every day that existing
illegal gun control edicts continue to be enforced, brings inexorably closer
the time when firearms owners will train their guns on the politicians, judges,
and other officials who have misled the rest of the public into
giving up their sacred and ancient rights. A desire to avoid this terrible
tragedy motivates my own actions regarding the Second Amendment and the rights
it protects." --- from "Why I Will Not Obey California's Gun Registration
Edict" - B Puckett
(See http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=126.)
"Furthermore, if we don't stand up and say NO right now, it is likely that
those who refuse to become de facto slaves or victims of the police state will
begin in earnest the calculated killing of anti-gun, anti-Constitution
politicians and activists. While this may indeed ultimately lead to a repeal of
gun laws and of other unconstitutional laws, it will likely force the American
people to endure even more oppression and severe civil turmoil - even civil war
- in the meantime.
"Some will say that is exactly what this country needs, and perhaps they are
correct. But we should try the peaceful alternative first. This requires that
we overcome this pervasive fear of our own government, that we stand up
together, and that we speak out publicly. We must continue disobeying
unconstitutional edicts - even if we do so privately - and continue informing
our "representatives" that we are doing so - even if we do so via an anonymous
letter - for as long as it takes." -- from "Terrorism Against Gun Owners, Civil
Disobedience, and Killing" - B Puckett
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3271
I don't think I can be any clearer on this subject.
Best regards,
Brian:)
Brian Puckett responds to Article on .50 BMG Rifles
April 22, 2002
TO: L.A. Times
In an April 18 column, George Skelton quotes from an article I wrote for
KeepAndBearArms.com. In it, I reported what is commonly known among the
informed - that millions of good Americans, after enduring years of oppression,
vilification, and terrorism directed against them as gun owners, have reached
the sad but logical conclusion that only violence will restore the full, free
exercise of their right to own and use firearms. For reporting this fact, Mr.
Skelton says I should be denied a proposed California rifle "permit".
I'm not surprised that Mr. Skelton's automatic, un-American response to hearing
unpleasant facts is to recommend punishing the messenger. That's the socialist
way - total control over people and information.
Nor am I surprised that Mr. Skelton used absurd terms like "superguns", "small
cannons", and "monsters" to describe common .50 caliber rifles - even though
many models can be shoulder-fired - nor that he lied and used Clintonian
distortions of truth in saying the guns were "capable of taking out" concrete
bunkers, armored personnel carriers, hovering helicopters, or destroying tanker
trucks at 2,000 yards. Such propaganda is normal for liberal elitists, who
think the masses will swallow anything.
And I'm not surprised that Mr. Skelton didn't tell readers that my article was
about avoiding future violence. I'm a gun owner, so Mr. Skelton must demonize
me.
In any case, Mr. Skelton need not worry about my getting a gun "permit". I
would never apply for a permit to own any gun, any more than I would apply for
a permit to own a Bible, or Torah, or printing press, or to obtain legal
counsel, or to assemble with other citizens. Of course, those will all require
permits if people like Mr. Skelton ever run things. Their contempt for the
Constitution isn't limited to the Second Amendment.
-- Brian Puckett, Los Angeles
FURTHER NOTES ON THIS MATTER
The article I wrote titled "Terrorism Against Gun Owners, Civil Disobedience,
and Killing"
(http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3271) has
stirred up a hornet's nest. Maybe the following items will put things in
perspective.
1. John Ross wrote an entire novel ("Unintended Consequences") on the very same
subject of my article, and seems not to have gotten half the flack for it. By
the way, I'm happy for John about that, and urge you to read his fascinating
book.
2. Many people have written to me wanting further information on my views.
Here's a pretty direct email and my response:
Brian:
Do you want to violently overthrow any government or harm any official? I do
not think you do want this. Please let me know. Some say you do desire this
from reading your writings. As for me I want non violence, but if someone is
attacking me with violence I will respond with force if need be, and only if
need be.
Thanks,
XXX
Puckett responds:
Dear XXX:
Instead of listening to what "some say", perhaps it would be best to read what
I wrote:
"Every new illegal gun control edict issued, and every day that existing
illegal gun control edicts continue to be enforced, brings inexorably closer
the time when firearms owners will train their guns on the politicians, judges,
and other officials who have misled the rest of the public into
giving up their sacred and ancient rights. A desire to avoid this terrible
tragedy motivates my own actions regarding the Second Amendment and the rights
it protects." --- from "Why I Will Not Obey California's Gun Registration
Edict" - B Puckett
(See http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=126.)
"Furthermore, if we don't stand up and say NO right now, it is likely that
those who refuse to become de facto slaves or victims of the police state will
begin in earnest the calculated killing of anti-gun, anti-Constitution
politicians and activists. While this may indeed ultimately lead to a repeal of
gun laws and of other unconstitutional laws, it will likely force the American
people to endure even more oppression and severe civil turmoil - even civil war
- in the meantime.
"Some will say that is exactly what this country needs, and perhaps they are
correct. But we should try the peaceful alternative first. This requires that
we overcome this pervasive fear of our own government, that we stand up
together, and that we speak out publicly. We must continue disobeying
unconstitutional edicts - even if we do so privately - and continue informing
our "representatives" that we are doing so - even if we do so via an anonymous
letter - for as long as it takes." -- from "Terrorism Against Gun Owners, Civil
Disobedience, and Killing" - B Puckett
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3271
I don't think I can be any clearer on this subject.
Best regards,
Brian:)