Compromise
If I understand what I read of the "Petzal Papers" of 1994, his assertion was that a) legislation is inevitable, b) the current plans are horrific, c) we can mitigate this if we "allow" Feinstein to specify expressly that OUR hunting guns are safe and itemize the exclusions along with the bad stuff.
A review of his postings in the current matter does little to encourage.
I'm something of a reactionary myself.
When DOS came out, I stayed with CP/M as long as I could. When Windows came out, I stayed with DOS as long as I could. When Windows 95 came out, I stayed with Windows 3.1 as long as I could. And so on and so on.
I drive a stick shift. Always have. Insist on it, actually.
I tend, with any "improvement" in technology, to lag behind the curve, to stick with what's tried and true. Stuff I can rely on. Never buy version 1.0 of anything.
I resist change. (
Irony: I'm a software/firmware engineer.)
On the other side of this coin, I've found myself having to drag customers kicking and screaming from the ancient systems they use into the merely obsolete systems I use.
I think it's fair to say I understand both sides of the "resistance to change" issue.
Hunting equipment has come a long way since I was a cave man:
- Large heavy rocks
- Stone axes & knives
- Spears
- Bow & arrow
- Muskets
- Black powder rifles
- Smokeless cartridge rifles
- Repeating rifles
- Self loading repeaters
- High capacity repeaters
- Rifles with long range optics
- . . . and so on
In parallel with the improvements in the weapons themselves there have been improvements in ergonomics and materials.
(Interestingly, this progression closely resembles another: the evolution of weapons of war and of defense.)
One may choose to plant a flag at any point on that scale and declare "nothing later than this is righteous for hunting." And that's fine, if you have your own private game preserve.
And if this was the entire scope of the discussion, that would be fine.
It's not.
Man has used these same tools not only to feed himself, but to wage war and to defend himself from predation.
[There's a lengthy discussion that goes here about tyrants and slavery and disarmament, but let us take that as read.]
America is unique among nations in that its founders recognized that government must have checks against it and, moreover, that these checks necessarily be manifested as an armed population.
Let us not speculate here why the government of this nation would want its population completely disarmed in a world where predation among men and nations continues to flourish. Suffice it to say that such is egregious folly.
Let us interest ourselves, then, with the methods of this madness.
What drives the reluctance to change? It can be argued that it is a form of fear. This idea, however, is only as useful as it predicts behavior.
If fear is involved, can it be used as a tool? Can it be amplified and directed? Yes, it can. Fear tends to cloud judgement, making misdirection easier.
In order to gain substantial support for disarmament -- or at least neutralize resistance to it -- let us then threaten calamity (removal of all self loading repeaters) and offer to mitigate this to seem to protect a subset embraced by a large population who resist change. Point out that the weapons to be restricted are the very ones this resistant population already tend to resist. Regret that such restriction must cause discomfort to the resistant group, and assure them that, with their support for the compromise, their preferred selections will go unmolested.
Once the first precedent for sweeping restrictions has been established, then greater restrictions will be more easily imposed.
Eventually, total disarmament can be achieved.
Well, it seems that was working for them in 1994.
Unhappily, the perception among the hunters seems to be that this compromise worked for them once; they should stick with the proven game plan. What emerges is the belief that hunting has been "legitimized" as the "standard" for gun ownership.
They were lied to then, they're being lied to now.
Petzal was evidently swayed by his combined fears and the lies he was given. His perception has apparently not extended far enough to realize the danger of pursuing this false compromise, and he believes that what "worked" before will work again, with hunting as the annointed standard bearer for righteousness in firearms.
Truth is our only weapon.
Truth spoken shrilly and stridently will largely go unheard.
Truth spoken with passion can be heard.
Truth spoken without rancor can be heard.
Those who seek to disarm have used fear to their advantage. So be it.
There is much to fear. Eventually, having removed the most militarily useful weapons, those who disarm will seek to eradicate the rest, and hunting will finally be the purview only of the rich and privileged.
Not only will the population no longer be able to defend itself in person and community, the shooting sports and traditions will be gone.
Speak the truth to these, our brothers in this cause.
Speak to them with passion, but without rancor.
Illuminate for them the larger danger.
Promise to stand by them.
No compromise.
The reason that we should hold off is because a Petzal apologist is going to show us a written passage where the AWB-endorsing, Feinstein-coddling Petzal recants his support of same. Show us where he CHANGED his position of endangering our freedom and the future of our country. Please, show us. With 1022 looming over our necks should we be “trusting” and wait to see if this self-incriminated traitor to our cause decides to zumbo us or not? Do you have that kind of trust? You WANT this hack to speak on your behalf in regards to the 2nd? Why? Because there is not a more willing , able correspondent to step up to the plate and support our cause 100%? Please... Because the entire gun industry will collapse if the cornerstones of Mssrs. Zumbo & Petzal are tossed out on their Brady Bunch butts? Great! Embrace them. Carry on. Show us a recant to his traitorous words or in the stead, I’ll fight with those who would stand beside me while retching on the overwhelming, vile stench of apologists… With or against. Black or white. It has come to that. Grey dooms us all... Forever.
You
are pissing me off!
