Regardless of any other explanation, any of the politics, money kickbacks or anything else, this was a raid by armed federal agents. That means if anyone at Gibson had even given the impression of resisting, they would have been slaughtered like an animal, and the officers would face the same justice as the vast majority of other raiders: none.
As Robb says:
But what bothered me the most was that... They had enough people willing to kill other human beings over pieces of wood that a raid was possible. Not one of them went “You want me to put people’s lives in jeopardy because they purchased wood in a manner that even India doesn’t really enforce?”And that says it all. Jeff Cooper once said "Not long ago it was easy to tell who the bad guys were. They carried Kalashnikovs. Now it is much more complicated, but one thing is sure - any man who covers his face and packs a gun is a legitimate target for any decent citizen."
Ten points for that one. That's the real issue, isn't it? It's the one nearly every one sidesteps in the discussions and comments.ReplyDelete
Land of the free an home of the brave? That's long gone. There are plenty of unprincipled enforcers ready to step up and pull the trigger at the least sign of resistance. As long as there's some legal umbrella to excuse the violence.
Which is why I find the vast majority of so-called liberals so damn disgustingly hypocritical about guns and violence.
Oh, they have no problem with guns and violence, as long as their agents (the sacred and revered state) are doing the dirty work. After all, the victims broke the law, didn't they?
Addendum: This is why real conservatives must oppose the law-and-order criminalize-everything-I-disapprove-of mentality, where we must pass new malum prohibitum laws and constantly expand the definition of crime: those law-enforcement tools aimed at the "bad guys" inevitably end up being aimed back at you when some other gang takes charge.ReplyDelete
War on drugs? There's where your militarization of the civilian police force came from. Was it worth it?
War on terror? BOHICA, baby. Here we go again. Ratchet down our liberties, ratchet up the "us vs. them" mentality now being seen in civilian law enforcement.
As you sow so shall you reap. I just hope that everyone is enjoying the bumper crop.
I get more libertarian every day. As Jefferson put it, "if it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket" why should I care? The proliferating code of federal regulations is choking our society to death, bit by bit.ReplyDelete
It's the biggest problem we face that gets no discussion by any of the crop running for president.
Don't forget that Randy Weaver's wife and son were murdered over a piece of wood, too. It all stemmed from the ATF informant having Randy modify a shotgun that in turn violated the obscure law on overall gun length, while the shotgun barrel was always of the correct length to be legal, in and of itself. The length of the wooden stock was what caused the overall shotgun length to be held to be an illegal weapon. Randy wasn't aware that modifying the stock length made the gun illegal. Pieces of wood for shotgun stocks or pieces of wood for Gibson guitars -- the outcome is the same: an infringement of personal freedoms. Regulating behavior should be the Government's goal, not the prohibition of arbitrary lengths of pieces of wood or the prohibition of specific species of wood, or the prohibition of alcohol such as in prohibition.ReplyDelete
Why won't the media excoriate the government for sending armed Federal officers on such a warrant service? Why should the staff at the Gibson facilities be subject to the possibility of being shot and killed over the confiscation of some wood and some records?ReplyDelete
Were the Feds actually concerned there would be physical resistance to their raid? Were their officers afraid the shipping clerks would garrote them with guitar strings? Why isn't anyone in a position of authority saying "WTF, Over?"