Over the weekend I’ve caught more comments online from Lefties who are upset that gun owners are not rushing in to defend shoot the cops on their behalf.
Including a similar sentiment from a sitting US Senator (he’s first):
Libertarians should be freaking out about Portland.
— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) July 18, 2020
I used to be a Libertarian. I’m not anymore but I believe I still understand their principles.
Nothing about LIbertariansm says that the federal government cannot arrest people who have engaged in the arson and destruction of federal property.
Federal LEOs are picking these people off the streets when they are relatively alone or in only small groups as opposed to in the middle of riots when the LEOs are outnumbered. They are not being “disappeared” or “kidnapped.” They are being taken to a federal judge for arraignment the next morning.
But Schatz for brains couldn’t come right out and say what others on the Left wanted to.
No, in fact. We law-abiding gun owners own guns to protect ourselves from government that attacks us first. Government that in general are run by people who share an ideology with the current crop that is causing all the problems in Portland.
We did not sign up to shoot cops lawfully executing arrest warrants on people who try and set fire to a federal courthouse.
Especially, because the same people who are calling for us to come and defend them were wishing the government to kneel on our necks until about 15 minutes ago, and will send the government to kneel on our necks as soon as they win and take over.
There are many responses I’ve seen online to these people, but my favorite has been these two memes:
Very, very true.
I’m having the same argument not with the left but with Instagram-libertarians, which are not libertarians but more like anarchists with ARs instead of AKs and less actual action.
One of the reasons I left Libertarianism was the takeover by anarchists.
People literally arguing that selling heroin to addicts in CVS and letting teens make porn was fine because freedom or something like that (I’m not making those examples up).
“But what if the child consents?” is another one I see a lot.
Once again, the idiots that are tearing down statutes, burning buildings, and trying to abolish the police ARE the ones we are armed against.
Personally, I’m easy to mistake for a “small-l” libertarian; I believe small government, great individual liberty (and attendant great individual responsibility), and adherence to the Constitution are the best path.
Once upon a time I considered myself a “Large-L” Libertarian, back when small government and great liberty/responsibility were the main drivers. But then someone suggested ending the “War on Drugs” by legalizing marijuana and other substances — because “your body, your rights” — and the Libertarian Party became “like the GOP, but with legal drugs”.
That, in my opinion, is where the Libertarian Party went off the rails and started incorporating a ton of contrary principles and false “rights” from all over the political spectrum. Great responsibility is no longer talked about; I’m guessing too many want to have their cake and eat it, too.
Small-l libertarians are still out there, but have a hard time organizing because “small government, great liberty” isn’t specific enough to build or promote a functional political platform, and the idea of promoting great responsibility is seen as a liability.
In any case, no matter how small a government gets, it still has the right and authority to defend its property and assets against violent rioters and looters — even those who call themselves “peaceful protesters”.
Oddly enough, “great liberty” means you have the right to define yourself using whatever words you want, but I have the equal right to respond to your actions and call it like I see it. Individual rights square nicely like that. 🙂