Kahr leaving NY

[Texasrpbrock]

I would be awesome if Texas ended up with 70 percent or more of the firearm manufactures when the dust settles. Hopefully Mr. Rick will keep persuading them to come on down as the price is right!

[The Annoyed Man]

I'm glad they're leaving and hope others follow along, but I do wonder about unintended consequences.

Once all of the businesses are gone, it's not like the remaining citizens are going to wake up and say, "Wait. We want those businesses back. Let's support guns after all."

No, instead, the remaining demographics will be ever increasingly skewed against gun rights. Maybe they're already too far to redeem, but without even a remnant of opposition, the antis will be given a rubber stamp to pass any laws they want.

Sad.

They are already going to pass their laws with rubber stamp, whether or not these companies leave. The leftists care more about the collectivist ideological purity of the state than they do the rights of man. That's just a fact. New York is not going to change until it crashes in on itself. Ditto California and Massachusetts, and on a only slightly smaller scale, Chicago. All these cities/states are in the process of building the unsustainable.

If I may make an illustration by borrowing something from Christianity.........Christians who really believe pray for the gospel to reach all the unreached people groups (10/40 window, and all that) of the world, because scripture prophesies that when all the people groups of the world have been reached, Christ will return. We seek to hasten His return, if we can, by therefore committing to reaching unreached peoples for the gospel. But, and this is the relevant part to this topic, the way is forward. We do not seek to go backward in this quest, even if backward is more comfortable and convenient, and forward is more difficult and challenging....because backward leads to the delaying of prophesy, and forward leads to the fulfillment of it.

Similarly, there is only one way to the constitutional redemption of these states: forward. They have to implode in order to come out the other side redeemed. I understand your concern for the citizens of NY as the state increasingly skews against gun rights, but they have to go through that, and they have to suffer the calamity of being unable to protect themselves because of what their "new King Georges" imposed upon them, in order to regain an appreciation for the full expression of the 2nd Amendment. They have to have crime run rampant in their streets, to the point where police can't even put a dent in it and people become afraid to go outside. They have to suffer through a massive wave of home invasions and murders as ever increasing numbers of criminals no longer fear a home-owner's ability to defend his home. They have to suffer through the imposition of an ever more powerful police state in reaction to burgeoning crime.

They simply have to go through all that and more before they finally look at states where crime is lower and people breathe easier and begin to ask why those states are different from New York. They have to taste the bitter pill of recognition that it is their own folly that got them there, nobody else's, before they will change.

And here is the big stumbling block: Property.......and this is why the Founders placed such a premium on the rights of property. To the collectivists of NY, literally everything you possess is something that you are allowed to keep. You don't really own it, you are simply allowed to keep it. You don't really own the salary you worked for, you are simply allowed to keep that part of it that the state does not keep for itself. All money belongs to the state; you are simply allowed to keep some of it. It extends to the ridiculous. You cannot buy/sell/own/possess anything that is not first allowed.......like a Big Gulp in NYC, for instance.

This is bigger than the 2nd Amendment. For states like California, this is an economic issue as well, and not just an issue of individual liberty. For someone to accept the reality of the 2nd Amendment, one has to first accept that property rights exist and are sovereign. One cannot "keep and bear arms" if the fundamental human right to own and use a thing is actually a permission granted by government, not a right. So the statist view of the Bill of Rights looks more like this:

1. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The People shall not practice any religion, speak freely, report the news; assemble for any reason, or petition the Government for a redress of grievances unless they receive permission to do so.
2. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The state's National Guard, being necessary to the security of the State's rulers, the people have no permission to keep and bear Arms.
3. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   Any Soldier or Police Officer may, at any time, commandeer the use of any house, without the consent of the Owner, whether in time of peace or war, so long as it is necessary for the enforcement of the state's security.
4. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The people can have no expectation to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against searches and seizures. Warrants shall issue upon any suspicion by any empowered official, with no requirement to describe the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The state shall have the power of universal surveillance, by all means, including electronic and aerial, and by means of any new technology which develops in the future to make surveillance more complete.
5. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The state may compel a person to be a witness against himself. Enhanced interrogation techniques are permissible so long as established procedures are followed. The state has all authority to establish procedures. The state has the authority to continue prosecution of the accused until the necessary and desired results are achieved. Private property does not exist. All material objects, intellectual product, and land are property of the state. The state may grant permission to The People for use of such property on a limited basis for personal use.
6. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The state may detain an accused person as long as necessary before trial, without requirement of justification. The state has the authority to conduct a trial quickly and in secrecy. The presiding judge, as the state's representative, has authority to disallow any evidence or witnesses which may be a barrier to a successful prosecution. (....just ask George Zimmerman.....)
7. In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   Since the state owns all property and merely lets The People use a portion of it, there is no right, implied or otherwise, for recovery in civil court except as determined by whim of duly appointed authorities.
8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   There is no limit to a bail requirement or imposition of fines; punishment may be arbitrarily decided at conclusion of a trial......if there is one......
9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The People have no other permissions than those granted by government.
10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    
    The statist interpretation:
    All power resides with the President of the United States.

The statist way leads to implosion. The extreme example in modern history is the collapse of the Soviet Union. But other examples include the Roman Empire, and we're seeing it actually beginning to happen in heavily socialized western Europe. Statism attempts to sustain the unsustainable, and invariably it leads to further and further restrictions on individual rights in the quest for social stability, in an increasingly unstable society. Indeed, it could be argued that the crackdown on liberty actually augments the instability, hastening the eventual collapse of the state. The human tendency to want to control the world around them, particularly among people who do not believe that there exists a Deity who is actually in control of all things, is what leads to statism, and it is absolutely why the Founders, even those who were not particularly dogmatic in their own theological outlook, absolutely believed that their experiment depended upon a religious and moral people. Please note, I did not say a Christian people; but I do mean a people who believe that their is some kind of Author of all Things, greater than themselves, who created and controls the universe and everything in it. Whether that looks like Christianity or Judaism, or Islam, or Buddhism, or Zoroastrianism, or Bahai, is not constitutionally important. What is important is the belief in something greater than self—that is NOT government—to which the individual is personally spiritually accountable.

Statists have replaced a belief in that "higher power" with a belief in the state. It is absolutely necessary for their "god" the state to collapse and be demonstrated as impotent to better their lives before they will put their faith in something better.......much like the priests of Baal whose (small "g") god was demonstrated to be impotent before Isaiah's God at Mount Carmel.

I therefore actually pray for the hastening of those state collapses, even in the face of the resulting calamities for individuals, because that is what it will take for them to have their Mount Carmel moment.

And with that, I am off to get ready for church.....

[K.Mooneyham]

I'm glad they're leaving and hope others follow along, but I do wonder about unintended consequences.

Once all of the businesses are gone, it's not like the remaining citizens are going to wake up and say, "Wait. We want those businesses back. Let's support guns after all."

No, instead, the remaining demographics will be ever increasingly skewed against gun rights. Maybe they're already too far to redeem, but without even a remnant of opposition, the antis will be given a rubber stamp to pass any laws they want.

Sad.

They are already going to pass their laws with rubber stamp, whether or not these companies leave. The leftists care more about the collectivist ideological purity of the state than they do the rights of man. That's just a fact. New York is not going to change until it crashes in on itself. Ditto California and Massachusetts, and on a only slightly smaller scale, Chicago. All these cities/states are in the process of building the unsustainable.

If I may make an illustration by borrowing something from Christianity.........Christians who really believe pray for the gospel to reach all the unreached people groups (10/40 window, and all that) of the world, because scripture prophesies that when all the people groups of the world have been reached, Christ will return. We seek to hasten His return, if we can, by therefore committing to reaching unreached peoples for the gospel. But, and this is the relevant part to this topic, the way is forward. We do not seek to go backward in this quest, even if backward is more comfortable and convenient, and forward is more difficult and challenging....because backward leads to the delaying of prophesy, and forward leads to the fulfillment of it.

Similarly, there is only one way to the constitutional redemption of these states: forward. They have to implode in order to come out the other side redeemed. I understand your concern for the citizens of NY as the state increasingly skews against gun rights, but they have to go through that, and they have to suffer the calamity of being unable to protect themselves because of what their "new King Georges" imposed upon them, in order to regain an appreciation for the full expression of the 2nd Amendment. They have to have crime run rampant in their streets, to the point where police can't even put a dent in it and people become afraid to go outside. They have to suffer through a massive wave of home invasions and murders as ever increasing numbers of criminals no longer fear a home-owner's ability to defend his home. They have to suffer through the imposition of an ever more powerful police state in reaction to burgeoning crime.

They simply have to go through all that and more before they finally look at states where crime is lower and people breathe easier and begin to ask why those states are different from New York. They have to taste the bitter pill of recognition that it is their own folly that got them there, nobody else's, before they will change.

And here is the big stumbling block: Property.......and this is why the Founders placed such a premium on the rights of property. To the collectivists of NY, literally everything you possess is something that you are allowed to keep. You don't really own it, you are simply allowed to keep it. You don't really own the salary you worked for, you are simply allowed to keep that part of it that the state does not keep for itself. All money belongs to the state; you are simply allowed to keep some of it. It extends to the ridiculous. You cannot buy/sell/own/possess anything that is not first allowed.......like a Big Gulp in NYC, for instance.

This is bigger than the 2nd Amendment. For states like California, this is an economic issue as well, and not just an issue of individual liberty. For someone to accept the reality of the 2nd Amendment, one has to first accept that property rights exist and are sovereign. One cannot "keep and bear arms" if the fundamental human right to own and use a thing is actually a permission granted by government, not a right. So the statist view of the Bill of Rights looks more like this:

1. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The People shall not practice any religion, speak freely, report the news; assemble for any reason, or petition the Government for a redress of grievances unless they receive permission to do so.
2. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The state's National Guard, being necessary to the security of the State's rulers, the people have no permission to keep and bear Arms.
3. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   Any Soldier or Police Officer may, at any time, commandeer the use of any house, without the consent of the Owner, whether in time of peace or war, so long as it is necessary for the enforcement of the state's security.
4. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The people can have no expectation to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against searches and seizures. Warrants shall issue upon any suspicion by any empowered official, with no requirement to describe the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The state shall have the power of universal surveillance, by all means, including electronic and aerial, and by means of any new technology which develops in the future to make surveillance more complete.
5. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The state may compel a person to be a witness against himself. Enhanced interrogation techniques are permissible so long as established procedures are followed. The state has all authority to establish procedures. The state has the authority to continue prosecution of the accused until the necessary and desired results are achieved. Private property does not exist. All material objects, intellectual product, and land are property of the state. The state may grant permission to The People for use of such property on a limited basis for personal use.
6. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The state may detain an accused person as long as necessary before trial, without requirement of justification. The state has the authority to conduct a trial quickly and in secrecy. The presiding judge, as the state's representative, has authority to disallow any evidence or witnesses which may be a barrier to a successful prosecution. (....just ask George Zimmerman.....)
7. In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   Since the state owns all property and merely lets The People use a portion of it, there is no right, implied or otherwise, for recovery in civil court except as determined by whim of duly appointed authorities.
8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   There is no limit to a bail requirement or imposition of fines; punishment may be arbitrarily decided at conclusion of a trial......if there is one......
9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
   
   The statist interpretation:
   The People have no other permissions than those granted by government.
10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    
    The statist interpretation:
    All power resides with the President of the United States.

The statist way leads to implosion. The extreme example in modern history is the collapse of the Soviet Union. But other examples include the Roman Empire, and we're seeing it actually beginning to happen in heavily socialized western Europe. Statism attempts to sustain the unsustainable, and invariably it leads to further and further restrictions on individual rights in the quest for social stability, in an increasingly unstable society. Indeed, it could be argued that the crackdown on liberty actually augments the instability, hastening the eventual collapse of the state. The human tendency to want to control the world around them, particularly among people who do not believe that there exists a Deity who is actually in control of all things, is what leads to statism, and it is absolutely why the Founders, even those who were not particularly dogmatic in their own theological outlook, absolutely believed that their experiment depended upon a religious and moral people. Please note, I did not say a Christian people; but I do mean a people who believe that their is some kind of Author of all Things, greater than themselves, who created and controls the universe and everything in it. Whether that looks like Christianity or Judaism, or Islam, or Buddhism, or Zoroastrianism, or Bahai, is not constitutionally important. What is important is the belief in something greater than self—that is NOT government—to which the individual is personally spiritually accountable.

Statists have replaced a belief in that "higher power" with a belief in the state. It is absolutely necessary for their "god" the state to collapse and be demonstrated as impotent to better their lives before they will put their faith in something better.......much like the priests of Baal whose (small "g") god was demonstrated to be impotent before Isaiah's God at Mount Carmel.

I therefore actually pray for the hastening of those state collapses, even in the face of the resulting calamities for individuals, because that is what it will take for them to have their Mount Carmel moment.

And with that, I am off to get ready for church.....

And that is why I absolutely LOVE this quote from JFK (whatever his faults may have been): "The rights of man come NOT from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God".

[Jumping Frog]

And that is why I absolutely LOVE this quote from JFK (whatever his faults may have been): "The rights of man come NOT from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God".

So why quote three and a half pages of TAM's post to state your one sentence comment?

[TexasCajun]

The eventual fall of the "progressive" states will unfortunately be delayed by the federal government who has already demonstrated their unwillingness to allow the natural progression to occur with companies that are too big to fail. Under the current arrangement, the progressives can delay their inevitable fall for generations.

An interesting point was brought up at my wife's church today: the first step toward liberation & freedom is to first realize that you are a slave. So, there is some hope for the people who reside in the leftist enclaves.

The following occurred to me yesterday & has stuck with me today. I think it is a pretty good summation of TAM's post. In looking at two entities that both start with the letter g, it's interesting to note how all things are possible with reliance on the once that uses fewer letters (God) vs the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of relying on the one that uses many more letters (government).

[jtran987]

Good for Kahr!

[The Annoyed Man]

And that is why I absolutely LOVE this quote from JFK (whatever his faults may have been): "The rights of man come NOT from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God".

So why quote three and a half pages of TAM's post to state your one sentence comment?

Because it was worth repeating?

Sorry.... I kid, I kid.

[rbwhatever1]

Good move for Kahr!