–Finally, a voice of reason about guns

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor, which ultimately leads to civil disorder.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The penalty for ignorance is slavery.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the gap.
======================================================================================================================================================================================

Just when you think gun nuts could not possibly become more stupid, they outdo themselves. These ardent defenders of the Constitution (when it suits their purposes) have taken one more step into total insanity:

Gun enthusiasts’ stalk and threaten CEO after she develops weapon only owner can fire

Armatix, a German company, has developed so-called “smart guns” that can only be fired by the owner. The company uses a watch that ties the owner to the weapon, called the iP1. Armatix is already selling the personalized weapons in Europe and Asia.

Belinda Padilla, president and CEO of the U.S. division of firearm manufacturer Armatix, says she was stalked and threatened by “gun enthusiasts” after she tried to bring a safer handgun to market.

She said it began with a “few fuming-mad voice mail messages and heavy breathers” that got her to stop answering her phone.

And then photos of her home were posted online.

You see, to a brave heavy breather, even a slightly safer gun is a threat.

The Oak Tree Gun Club near Los Angeles had agreed to sell the Armatix smart pistol until Calguns.net, a forum of second-amendment rights advocates, found out about the news.

“I have no qualms with the idea of personally and professionally leveling the life of someone who has attempted to profit from disarming me and my fellow Americans,” one comment said.

Actually, the level of cowardice and paranoia among gun nuts is go great, they fear virtually everything. Here is what NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told his cheering members:

“We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home invaders and drug cartels and carjackers and knockout gamers and rapers, haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping mall killers and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease that could collapse the society that sustains us all.”

Gun nuts need their guns to ward off all those terrorists and the drug cartels. (How many terrorists and drug cartels have you stopped lately?)

And, of course you stand in front of the electric company’s power stations to prevent killers from “storms of violence against our power grids“? (Or do you fire your gun up at lightening to prevent those “storms of violence” that knock out your electricity?)

And finally, yes, your gun will be great to have against “vicious waves of chemicals or disease.” (Shooting poisonous chemicals and bacteria takes real marksmanship.)

Have you ever seen movies of Germans joyously cheering Adolf Hitler’s insane rantings against mythical enemies? That is the picture of the NRA crowd cheering LaPierre’s mouth frothing insanity.

And then there’s gun nut Sarah Palin’s speech, also to the NRA:

“Actions to stop terrorists who’d utterly annihilate America and delight in massacring our innocent children? Darn right I’d do whatever it takes to foil their murderous jihadist plots – including waterboarding.

“If I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists.”

To this gun nut, torture is akin to the religious rite of baptism.

But, as the saying goes, “What goes around, comes around.” After Sarah Palin wrung her hands about a terrorist “massacring our innocent children” we get this:

Georgia cops defend man with gun who scared parents at children’s baseball game

(An) unidentified Georgia man with a gun in his holster brought a baseball game to a screeching halt at a Forsyth County park this Tuesday, after he refused to leave a parking lot overlooking the field.

“He’s just walking around [saying]’See my gun? Look, I got a gun and there’s nothing you can do about it.’

He knew he was frightening people. He knew exactly what he was doing,” mom Karen Rabb told WSB-TV. “He scared people to the point where we stopped the game, took the kids out of the dugout and behind the dugout, and kind of hunkered down.”

If it weren’t so sad, the irony would be delicious:

One day after the incident, Gov. Nathan Deal signed Georgia’s House Bill 60, which allows licensed gun owners to carry their weapons in bars without restriction and in some churches, schools and government buildings under certain circumstances.

“Bars” is good. What could possibly go wrong when a drunk has a gun? After all, that drunk is going to protect us against bacteria and power outages.

And kids playgrounds is even better. If an angry father disagrees with an umpire’s call, he can just blow that umpire away. Haven’t we all felt like doing that.

And what if the kid pitcher hits your kid with a pitch. Good thing you have your trusty .45 handy. Blammmo!

But there’s more:

Yes, it’s a community where we cling to our religion and our guns,” said Georgia House Speaker David Ralston.

I must have missed the part of the bible where it talks about everyone carrying a killing machine, everywhere. Must be the New, New Testament.

But finally, a little common sense?

“When I was reading my son’s story last night, he turned to me and said ‘Mommy, did that man want to kill me?'” said Rabb. “I own a gun. I have no problems with the Second Amendment. But they do not belong in a parking lot where we have children everywhere. If you want to make a statement, go to the Capitol.”

Right, don’t endanger our kids (Even though the Constitution clearly states that everyone should be able to carry any gun, anywhere. Right?)

Instead, do as Mrs. Rabb says. Go to the Capitol and shoot some politicians.

Finally, a voice of reason.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

====================================================================================================================================================
Nine Steps to Prosperity:
1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually
8. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here)

—–

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia.
Two key equations in economics:
1. Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
2. Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

THE RECESSION CLOCK

Vertical gray bars mark recessions.

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the lines rise. Federal deficit growth is absolutely, positively necessary for economic growth. Period.

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–How acceptance of the Gap makes slaves of us all

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

The single most important problem in economics is the Gap — the income/power gap between the very rich (the .1%) and the poor.

Re-read the post, “The Gap, the whole Gap and nothing but the Gap” and you will be reminded that:

Money is power. Privilege is power. The Law is power. Control, Possessions, Strength, Influence, Glory, Weaponry, Knowledge, Talent – all are power. And despite their vast diversity, they all have one measure: The one measure of power is the Gap between the most and the rest.

Power is not an absolute; it is a comparative. If each person on earth owned one million dollars, no one would be rich. But if one person had just a hundred dollars and everyone else had but one dollar, that one person with the hundred dollars would be rich.

It’s not the absolute amount of money that makes him rich; it’s the Gap.

For every level of power, those below wish to narrow the Gap above them, and those above wish to widen the Gap below them.

Thus, those below can be persuaded that Gap-widening strategies are beneficial, so long as the perception is that these strategies will be applied below them.

The Southern middle-class votes for conservative austerity, because austerity widens the gaps between all classes, especially the gap between the poor black and middle-class white.

But, there are unanticipated consequences:

Recovery Has Created Far More Low-Wage Jobs Than Better-Paid Ones
By Annie Lowrey, APRIL 27, 2014

WASHINGTON — The deep recession wiped out primarily high-wage and middle-wage jobs. Yet the strongest employment growth during the sluggish recovery has been in low-wage work, at places like strip malls and fast-food restaurants.

In essence, the poor economy has replaced good jobs with bad ones. That is the conclusion of a new report from the National Employment Law Project, a research and advocacy group, analyzing employment trends four years into the recovery.

Higher-wage industries — like accounting and legal work — shed 3.6 million positions during the recession and have added only 2.6 million positions during the recovery. But lower-wage industries lost two million jobs, then added 3.8 million.

With 10.5 million Americans still looking for work — the unemployment rate is 6.7 percent — employers feel no pressure to raise wages for those who are working. As a result, the average household’s take-home pay has declined through the recession and the recovery to $51,017 in 2012 from $55,627 in 2007, after adjusting for inflation.

Nothing could please the very rich more. Consider how they feel about being able to access an entire nation of low-paid-wage-slaves.

Debt ceilings, deficit reductions, shrinking “big government,” unemployment compensation limits, reductions in food stamps and other poverty aids — these all are austerity designed to widen the gap.

They are popular, not only among the upper .1%, but among all income/power levels, because as “The Gap, the whole Gap . . . “ told you:

The fear of narrowing the Gap below is stronger than the desire to narrow the Gap above. The fear of losing relative power is stronger than the desire to gain relative power.

In evolutionary terms, losing power can result in death, while gaining power may have only marginal benefits, if at all.

Being forced financially to move down to a “worse” neighborhood is far more traumatic than is the pleasure of moving to a “better” neighborhood. Being demoted carries deeper, longer-lasting emotions than does being promoted.

That is why the middle-class easily is persuaded by the rich, that social payments (food stamps, unemployment insurance, etc.) cause sloth, and so should be eliminated.

Being easily persuaded to vote to widen the gap below them, the middle-class pays a price. The gap widens above them:

America’s Middle Class Falls Behind
Denver Nicks, April 22, 2014
For the first time in decades, middle-income Americans are no longer the richest middle class in the world

The New York Times, citing an analysis of survey data going back 35, reports that the middle class in the United States has fallen behind Canada’s middle class. While economic growth in the U.S. is equal to or stronger than growth in other countries, those gains have gone almost exclusively to the wealthiest Americans.

America’s middle class is still wealthier than corresponding demographics in Europe, but the gap has narrowed significantly in the last 10 years. Meanwhile, the poor in the U.S. are significantly worse off than their counterparts in Europe and Canada—a total reversal from 35 years ago.

The people who should care the most, vote the least, and the people who vote the most, vote the worst.

Why the Democrats’ Turnout Problem Is Worst in North Carolina
Nate Cohn

North Carolina might be the state where Democrats suffer the most from low midterm turnout. The state is divided between older, culturally Southern and conservative voters, and younger, more diverse and more liberal voters.

In midterm elections, when older voters turn out at much higher rates than younger ones, the Republicans have a big advantage.

It was not always thus. The South, being poorer than the North, once voted for liberals who provided the most federal benefits. But the Nixon “Southern Strategy,” which appealed to Southern bigotry, turned the tide.

Today, older Southerners, who rely most on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other aids to the elderly, are most likely to vote conservative, i.e. to reduce . . . that’s right . . . Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other aids to the elderly.

They are the ones most easily sold on the false idea that the poor (black and brown) are “takers,” while the rich (white) are “makers.”

Why? Because in despising the poor, the white middle class is quite willing to believe the rich, especially when the bought-and-paid-for media, politicians and economists tell them government aid to everyone should be reduced. It is classic, “Cut your nose to spite your face” thinking.

By linking austerity to rewarding “takers,” the rich have narrowed options for improving the lives of the middle-class and the poor. For example:

Would You Pay a Quarter for Someone Else’s Insurance?
414 APR 28, 2014 9:58 AM EDT
By Christopher Flavelle

The case against the Affordable Care Act rests on the premise that the free market can better provide health insurance to the nation’s 54 million uninsured than a government program can.

That is a quote from Bloomberg View. So indoctrinated are we by the rich-owned media, politicians and economists, that even a normally liberal publication follows the conservative line.

The real case against ACA rests on the conservative premise that the federal government cannot afford to provide fully funded, comprehensive Medicare to man, woman and child in America.

So, because the government is presumed unable to pay for health care, the burden falls on taxpayers, and this has led to the convoluted, complex, Rube Goldberg plan called Obamacare.

A telephone survey by Bankrate.com asked 3,496 people how they would react if a business tacked on an extra 25 cents to every bill to help cover the cost of health insurance for its employees. Among Democrats, 70 percent said they would approve; 11 percent said they’d disapprove but would keep doing business with it anyway. Just 12 percent said they’d stop patronizing that business:

When Republicans were presented with the 25 cents idea, however, a plurality — 35 percent — said they would respond by taking their business elsewhere. An additional 17 percent said they would disapprove but would keep using the business, while 34 percent said they approved of the extra charge.

The vast majority of Republican respondents — 78 percent — also told questioners that Obamacare should be repealed. So a significant portion of Republicans don’t think the government should pay for people’s health insurance, but they are not willing to pay even a small amount more so that those people can get covered through their employer.

Which leads to a puzzling question: How, exactly, are these people supposed to get insurance?

It leads to an even more puzzling question: Why does virtually everyone — Democrat, Republican and Bloomberg — oppose the federal government’s paying for America’s health care?

The Affordable Care Act, that paean to austerity thinking, was created by Republicans and adopted by Democrats, all of whom support the Gap. Today’s conservative objection is that ACA isn’t “gappy” enough, because some of the poor benefit.

And the voters accept the rich propaganda that the government is running short of dollars, or that federal spending is causing hyper-inflation — and the Gap makes slaves of us all.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

—–

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Surprise! Latest right wing hero turns out to be a lying bigot. So what else is new?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

You would think that after so many right wing heroes have turned out to be idiots, bigots or worse — Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, the list goes on and on — the Republicans would have learned something. Sadly, no.

You’ve read about Cliven Bundy, the latest in a long line of Republican heroes. He became a conservative celebrity for valiantly fighting against the big, bad old government that wants to kick his cows off his land — land that his ancestors settled in 1877 before the federal government illegally laid claim to it.

He recruited patriotic citizens — armed men and women — to protect him from the U.S. government, and its illegal laws. Those brave souls scared off the weak, government lawmen.

Except:

1. Bundy admits he doesn’t actually own the land. Instead, he now claims the State of Nevada owns the land, so presumably he owes rent (which he never has paid) to Nevada, instead of owing rent (which he also never has paid) to the U.S. government.

2. According to Gene Lyons in the Arkansas Times:

One thing about that mangy posse of anti-government crackpots camped out at Cliven Bundy’s place in the Nevada desert: Most don’t know a thing about cattle ranching.

See, it’s calving season across most of the country. No rancher worthy of the name is going to run off leaving his cows to fend for themselves while he fights somebody else’s battles. Particularly not some deadbeat who refuses to pay his grazing fees, and who claims that the same laws that apply to every other rancher in the United States don’t apply to him.

A guy who wraps himself in the stars and stripes while proclaiming “I don’t recognize the United States government as even existing.”

Nationally, some 18,000 ranchers lawfully graze 157 million acres of federally-owned property supervised by the Bureau of Land Management, at subsidized rates. No wonder the Nevada Cattleman’s Association–not exactly a left-wing organization—has stated that while its membership has perennial issues with the BLM, it encourages obeying the law and “does not feel it is our place to interfere in the process of adjudication in this matter.”

See, this isn’t land the U.S. seized by eminent domain. Surrendered to the Feds by Mexico in 1848, it never belonged to the state of Nevada, which didn’t yet exist. The U.S. District judge who ordered Bundy’s cattle removed ruled that he “has produced no valid law or specific facts raising a genuine issue of fact regarding federal ownership or management of public lands in Nevada, or that his cattle have not trespassed.”

See, it’s a form of welfare the BLM oversees, but it helps sustain a way of life Americans are nostalgic about. The various “Sovereign Citizen” groups and armed militia types playing soldier in the desert, however, are something else. While the BLM was wise not to confront the mob, the current triumphalism among far-right zealots can’t be seen as anything but ominous.

One wonders, however, how the armies of April will react to a Las Vegas TV station’s revelation that much of Bundy’s personal saga is make-believe. Grazing Golden Butte since 1877? Not quite. His father bought the Bunkerville ranch in 1948; they began renting BLM land in 1954.

3. Bundy is a racist of the worst kind. According to TPM Livewire:

Cliven Bundy Wonders If Blacks Are ‘Better Off As Slaves’ Than On Gov’t Assistance

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” the rancher began as he described a “government house” in Las Vegas where he recalled that all the people who sat outside seemed to “have nothing to do.”

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

And there we have it — yet another right-wing nut-case bigot–a deadbeat who won’t pay his bills, but complains about others receiving a government subsidy, and who simply cannot help lying, insulting and otherwise demonstrating abject stupidity.

I wonder how those goofballs with guns, who put their lives on the line for Bundy, feel now. Well, we know how the right wing politicians feel:

The NY Times reached out to spokespeople for Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Dean Heller (R-NV), who have spoken in support of Bundy, and for Texas Attorney Gen. Greg Abbott (R). Those who responded distanced themselves from Bundy and his remarks.

A spokesman for Heller, who had called Bundy and his supporters “patriots,” told the Times that the senator “completely disagrees with Mr. Bundy’s appalling and racist statements, and condemns them in the most strenuous way.”

A spokeswoman for Abbott, (said his) letter to the agency “was regarding a dispute in Texas and is in no way related to the dispute in Nevada.”

A spokesman for Paul told the Times that the senator wasn’t immediately available for comment.

As Louisiana Republican Governor Bobby Jindal famously said, “We’ve got to stop being the ‘Stupid Party,'”

Keep trying, right wing folks. So far, it hasn’t worked. Must be in the genes.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

—–

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–The latest gun laws: Ignorance, stupidity, insanity — or something more devious?

Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Here is the path the right wing has taken us down. Is it ignorance, stupidity, insanity — or something more devious:

Ga. governor signs ‘guns everywhere’ into law
Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal signed a controversial gun bill into law on Wednesday
Larry Copeland and Doug Richards, USA TODAY 4:17 p.m. EDT April 23, 2014

ELLIJAY, Ga. — It’s legal for licensed gun owners in Georgia to pack heat in bars, schools, churches and some government buildings.

Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal, a Republican, on Wednesday signed the state’s “Safe Carry Protection Act,” which critics dubbed the “guns everywhere bill,” in north Georgia, on the edge of the Chattahoochee National Forest and Cohutta Wilderness area.

The new law, which goes into effect July 1, allows licensed gun owners in Georgia and visitors from 28 other states to bring a gun into a bar without restrictions and carry a firearm into some government buildings that don’t have security measures. It also allows school districts to decide whether they want some employees to carry a firearm and religious leaders to decide whether to allow licensed gun owners to tote to their church, synagogue or mosque.

Guns in bars? What could possibly go wrong with that? Doesn’t everyone trust a drunk with a loaded gun?

But really, why stop with semi-automatic guns with big magazines? Why not fully automatic, belt-feeding machine guns in bars? C’mon Governor, don’t be such a wimp. Machine guns for everyone, everywhere.

But no problem Gov., because you have rejected the ACA Medicaid expansion (and the free federal $2.9 billion your taxpayers forfeited), your people will die younger anyway. So gun killings won’t make all that much difference in Georgia’s average life expectancy.

Kansas will nullify local regulation of guns
By JOHN HANNA-Associated Press

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) – Kansas will strip cities and counties of their power to regulate guns and nullify local gun regulations in July, ensuring it will be legal across the state to openly carry firearms and adding to a string of victories in recent years by gun-rights advocates.

Gov. Sam Brownback announced Wednesday that he signed a bill late the previous day preventing local officials from restricting the sale of firearms and ammunition or regulating how guns are transported and stored. The National Rifle Association has described the legislation as a model for states seeking to strip local officials of gun-regulating powers.

Brownback has consistently supported gun rights, and the GOP-dominated Legislature had solid gun-rights majorities even before the Republican governor took office in January 2011.

Hey, aren’t you the same geniuses who want to teach creationism in science classes? And aren’t you also the same geniuses who cost your taxpayers $5.9 billion in federal funds by not not expanding Medicaid coverage under “Obamacare”? Sure you are.

But is this ignorance, stupidity or insanity — or something more devious? Ask yourself this: Who are most likely to be killed by guns? The rich or the rest? Who live in the most dangerous neighborhoods? The rich or the rest. Think about it, and think about why the right wing, which is most closely aligned with the rich, opposes gun control.

The more miserable the rich can make the lives of the rest, the greater the Gap — and that really is all the rich care about.

Anyway, here is a copy of a letter I am sending to politicians around America, but not to Georgia or Kansas. Under the circumstances, it would have been a waste of postage.

SAMPLE LETTER TO MAYORS AND GOVERNORS

The Supreme Court has blocked many efforts at gun control. Let’s be clear; there are no foolproof ways to eliminate gun violence. The best we can hope for is partial solutions.

Here are two partial solutions that have not been tried, and would pass Constitutional muster:

Partial Solution I: Identify the “Bad Guys”

As Wayne LaPierre famously said, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” But how can we identify the “bad guys”?

To date, gun control advocates have focused on background checks, which the NRA sees as a secret plot to take guns away, or to give the government a list of gun owners, for some devious purpose.

So how do we “stop” bad guys with guns, if we don’t know who they are?

There really is only one way to identify bad guys and to prevent these bad guys from obtaining guns and from shooting people: Convince the bad guys to self-select. We have to convince them that shooting someone or even carrying a gun, would be a bad idea.

Here, in common English, is the bare bones of a suggested law. (I’m sure the politicians could translate it into appropriate legalese):

Any person who commits a felony while carrying a gun, shall be sentenced to a prison term of 20 years to life, in addition to the term for the felony itself.

Example: You rob a store, while you are carrying a gun. The judge sentences you to two years in jail. Ordinarily, you’d be out of jail in about 18 months.

But with the above law in force, you’d serve at least 22 years (“20-years-to-life” means a minimum of 20 years).

Too harsh? Not at all. Wayne LaPierre wants to shoot those bad guys. This law mercifully only jails them.

The only ones punished are the bad guys — the felons. And although the law doesn’t require shooting them, it will keep them off the streets and even make them think twice before carrying guns.

In the mean streets of many cities, it’s become a badge of honor, not at all a deterrent, for a gangbanger to spend a couple years in jail, get his tattoos, then come out and start shooting again.

But 20+ years? That’s a whole different ball game.

LaPierre might object that the proposed law doesn’t ask good guys to shoot bad guys — just jail them. But I think he’ll like the rest of the law

1. It identifies the bad guys, without good guys having to undergo background checks.
2. Good guys can keep their guns.
3. Bad guys are “stopped,” without the need for good guys to start a dangerous shootout, in which innocent good guys could be killed.
4. The long jail sentence could dissuade bad guys from carrying guns.

It’s a solution that accomplishes everything Wayne LaPierre and the NRA wants, and nothing they don’t want. It evolved directly from LaPierre’s own words.

Good guys should welcome this law. It says nothing about taking away your guns. It allows you to stockpile all the guns you want — pistols, rifles, shotguns, AK47s — whatever feels good to you.

Partial Solution II: Make the Gun Providers Liable

Pass a local ordinance saying, in essence:

Any provider of a gun that is used in a felony shall have the same criminal and civil liability as the actual perpetrator of the felony.

If you make or sell or give someone a gun that is used in a crime, you are responsible for that crime. Harsh? Unfair?

Some municipalities have “dram shop” laws, making a tavern responsible for damages, where intoxication was at least one cause of the damages. Sell liquor to a drunk; the drunk commits a crime; you are fined and/or go to jail.

If you feed someone liquor in your home, and that drunk gets into an accident, you could be found guilty of aiding and abetting.

These laws are weak (they generally don’t apply to the manufacturers, importers, wholesalers or package liquor dealers), are different in every municipality, and are difficult to apply across state lines, but the point is, they do make sellers liable for a product they sell, even though they themselves didn’t misuse it.

So even these woefully weak laws make bartenders a bit more cautious about selling drinks to doubtful people.

The precedent of making a seller liable for the misuse of product he sells, could be extended to guns. Gun manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, even private citizens, would be liable for crimes committed with guns. So you, the gun provider, better set up a system to prevent your customer, or your customer’s customer, from misusing the gun.

Rather than trying to outlaw gun ownership, which the Supreme Court says won’t work, merely make gun ownership more costly. Sellers probably would have to buy expensive insurance, the cost of which would be added to the cost of the gun.

–Would these two ideas eliminate guns? No.
–Could honest people still obtain guns? Of course.
–Could criminals still obtain guns? Sure.

But the increased cost, and increased liability, represent Constitutional steps from the current, insufficient control for the single most dangerous, easily available product the world ever has known.

Dear readers. You might wish to cut and paste this letter and send it to your politicians.

Future Americans will look back on our century, and shake their heads in wonderment at the abject stupidity they see. The fact that people believe adding guns will reduce gun killing and gain “freedom,” is so ludicrous as to be beyond belief. It will be the way we feel about the people who claimed the world was flat and the sun was the center of the universe.

But really, why not machine guns, Mr. LaPierre?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

—–

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: