Law abiding citizens under bad faith laws

Earlier I covered one of Congressman Eric Swalwell’s idiotic Tweets about gun confiscation.

There was a reply in that thread that I saw that I really wanted to take apart.

It is from German Lopez, who is a correspondent at Vox who writes about guns.

With respect to Mr. Lopez, no, it is not odd.

We are law abiding citizens because we believe in just and reasonable, good faith laws.

This does not apply just to gun laws, but to all laws.

Good people are not morally obligated to obey evil laws.

Followers of this blog might remember from a few weeks ago a Georgia State Representative that proposed a Testicular Bill of Rights law as a protest to Georgia’s heart beat bill.

If passes – unlikely, but say it happened – it would be a crime for a married man to have consensual sex with his wife without a condom.

I would not obey that law.

A radical feminist a few years ago proposed replacing Fathers’ Day with Castration Day, making castration of men mandatory.

You can say this is extreme and would never happen, but barely two generations ago, when my Grandfather was a young man, Germany was castrating Jews, Gypsies, and the mentally defective against their will.

In the United State, the Supreme Court decided in 1927 in Buck v. Bell that compulsory sterilization of the mentally defective was Constitutional.  Buck v. Bell has never been overturned.

I have covered three news stories, one in England, one in Canada, and one in Texas in which the goverment has engaged in the compulsory chemical castration of children under the guise of gender affirmation.

With the modern Left, every old bad fascist idea is new an great again as long as it’s woke, so the idea of the compulsory sterilization of undesirables being mainstreamed is not that far fetched, as long as the justification is woke.

I will not obey that law.  I will not submit myself or allow my son to subject to that.

The Supreme Court has never overturned Korematsu v. United States, justifying Japanese Internment.

Anybody who follows social media knows that the Left calls NRA members and white males in general terrorists after any shooting.  Sitting Congresswoman Ilhan Omar said in her official Twitter that the NRA “are the true enemy!”

If a Progressive were to use Korematsu to justify the internment of NRA members or gun owning white men or any other category of woke undesirables.

I will not obey that law.

Twitter is now enforcing Sharia blasphemy laws on its American users.  This backs up the EU’s court’s support for Sharia blasphemy law enforcement in Europe.

New Zealand is trying for restrict the free speech of Americans, and is jailing its own citizens for having a PDF.

The Left in America hates free speech, loves to deplatform speakers, and believes hate speech should be banned.

If a Progressive judge from the Yale Law School class that protested Kavanaugh overturns the 1st Amendment and prohibits hate speech and defines writing a Conservative blog as a hate speech violation, and orders me to stop blogging.

I will not obey that law.

I will not obey bad and restrictive laws that deprive me of my live, liberty, property, or Constitutional protections.

I obey the law as is today because I want to participate in a free society.

When the law says I have to give up my guns, my right to speak, or my bodily autonomy, I will not obey the law because it is not a law written in good faith.

Understand that the purpose of Swalwell’s idea is to turn tens of millions of people who up until the moment the law goes into effect are both law abiding and have never harmed anyone into felons.

The purpose of Swalwell’s law is the subjection of tens of millions of good people to a loss of liberty and property.

Saying “yesterday you were law abiding, but today, without doing anything different, you are not law abiding and you must give up your rights and your property to be law abiding” is not an argument or a law passed in good faith.

To put it bluntly, I will not agree to walk into a concentration camp just because the law says I must.

That’s not odd.

To think that I, or millions of other Americans, will subjugate ourselves to some petty tyrant because he scribbled his name on a piece of paper.

That’s odd.

 

13 Replies to “Law abiding citizens under bad faith laws”

  1. Apart from all the good points above, there’s the simple principle of Marbury v. Madison: a piece of paper with scribbles on it, issued by the government, if not authorized by the Constitution, is not law. Which means two things: (1) citizens have no obligation to pay attention to it, (2) government officials are required to disregard it because of their obligations under their oath of office.

  2. “I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.” —Robert A. Heinlein

      1. Although an awful lot of them are about how unbelievably sexy intelligent red-headed women with long legs are…

        …which I don’t disagree with, mind you.

        1. It’s hard to know which Sci-Fi writer had more moral philosophy in his books, Heinlein or Herbert. Either way, I could spend hours in the Senate filibustering just quoting those two on the principles of freedom and good governance.

  3. Could I add that Eric Swalwell (I will not use his undeserved title) implied that he could use nuclear weapons on U.S. citizens if we did not go along. Right there he is both unqualified to hold any public office and does deserve to be reminded of his own mortality. He started out with a mass murder death threat.

  4. 244 years ago, the government of Massachusetts sent troops to enforce the law and collect privately held arms from farmers and villagers in the area surrounding Boston. It didn’t wok out all that well for the enforcers.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick. Also, You can use html code to decorate your comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.