Monday, April 14, 2014


APRIL 16, 2014
The natives are not only restless, they are fighting back. When in the course of human events a government becomes oppressive, it is not only the right but the obligation of the people to resist the oppression. This is the prime message of our Bill of Rights and our Constitution and we are seeing up close and personal how the government is running amuck with huge infringements on our rights and freedom.
For decades this column has repeatedly said that the government has now become all about power and money. The politicians and bureaucrats keep inventing more ways and passing more laws to increase taxes (yes, Nelson Rockefeller, a fee is the same as a tax) and to place more restrictions on our freedoms we have enjoyed for decades. and even centuries.
Every time the government raises taxes or increases fees, it lowers the standard of living for taxpayers. More money is taken from wage earners and households when the tax bite provides for more programs that do not benefit the taxpayer. Granted that some taxes are raised to increase the income of government employees, but it still means that those who are not government employees or getting government benefits are doing with less so that the government beneficiaries can have a higher standard of living. The math is undisputable. That is the way government works.
Freedom is another issue. Some laws are beneficial and should be enforced. Speed limits in school zones or where there is high pedestrian activity is a good thing. It saves lives and it is reasonable. People who speed in those areas should be arrested and punished. However all laws are not created equal. In many states the speed limits on interstate highways is 75 miles per hour. In New York the limit is 65 miles per hour. 
Either the New York lawmakers believe that their constituents are not as skillful in driving as those in other states or they find the fines given for speeding tickets are an excellent means of increasing revenue. Opinions on this subject may vary depending on whether the person is paying or receiving the fine. However, nobody blames the car if an accident occurs if a speeding car hits a person or causes property damage.
We all agree (maybe a few don’t) that drunken driving is an offense that should be enforced to the maximum, yet, we see some people who have been arrested four or more times for the offense. Some get proper penalties to discourage the practice, but obviously the repeat offenders should be treated with more severe punishment to discourage subsequent offenses. If a drunk kills a person, nobody says cars should be banned or have governors on the car to prevent high speeds. Nobody says that alcoholic beverages should be sold in smaller containers or require a permit to buy it.
However when a miscreant, criminal or insane person kills people with a firearm, the media and politicians call for a restriction or ban on guns to “do something about the murders.” They offer draconian laws regarding “mental illness” that can include not allowing a person who may take an antidepressant to help them get past a personal tragedy to be unable to own a firearm. Yet, it is said that a significant number of police officers do use antidepressants on occasion. Enforcement of such laws, it seems, depends on perception and perspective.
The SAFE act in New York is experiencing problems in New York already. April 15 was the deadline for registering semi-automatic rifles with certain cosmetic features that have no effect on the functionality of the gun. It would seem that compliance of this law is problematic for the state. State Police won’t release any numbers when asked how many have registered any guns. The people are not only speaking, they are shouting.
Gun owners in Connecticut have a similar law and the police are finding an overwhelming non-compliance of registration in that state. Their State Police are in a quandary on how to react to that disobedience. Where will they find room in the prisons to put taxpaying citizens who refuse to obey a stupid, unnecessary and unjust law?
Even in Nevada the people are objecting to what they consider to be an unjust action against a rancher and grazing cattle. When the federal government stole his cattle (oops! With government it isn’t stealing. It is confiscation) they found a huge crowd to protest the action. The citizens, some being armed, “persuaded” the government police, to reconsider, return the cattle, and leave.
Perhaps people are beginning to wake up and realize that freedom isn’t free and they have to assert themselves to make the politicians and bureaucrats realize that in a republic the people are more powerful than the politicians. This may be the twenty-first century version of the tea party.

No comments: