In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
An Open Letter to John Burtt, Chairman,
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
An Open Letter to John Burtt, Chairman,
Fifty Caliber Shooters Policy Institute
By David Codrea
Codrea4@adelphia.net
April 21, 2002
Dear Mr. Burtt,
I am disgusted and angry with Democrats in the California Assembly for their continued attempts to gut the Second Amendment by outlawing ownership of .50 caliber rifles. I am disgusted and angry with socialist commentator George Skelton and his masters at The Los Angeles Times for their unceasing propaganda war against the right of the people to keep and bear arms. And I am shocked and upset with the remarks attributed to you in Skelton's latest hit piece.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt -- after all, Skelton is a seasoned master at lying, suppressing information and distorting comments by repeating them out of context. Even so, your statements seem inexplicable and even disparaging of hard core gun rights activists. Since you are a leader representing a gun owner constituency group with access to lawmakers, this rightly concerns me.
"It's an extreme sport," you say, referring to .50 caliber shooting.
Why? Since when is shooting a rifle "extreme"? Besides, shooting a high powered rifle accurately over long distances is not just a "sport" to many Americans. It is a skill they take seriously -- one that may be needed to defend their families, their country and to fulfill their duties as members of the unorganized militia. No?
"It's a toy that we use and we've invested a lot of money in it"
Mr. Burtt, I doubt this will persuade Times readers -- but it certainly seems a trivial justification for exercising a right, especially when tyrants are dictating to us nothing less than the terms and conditions of our surrender. If we don't obey them, they will send out thugs to smash down our doors, degrade us as human beings, steal our property and destroy our lives. If they perceive us as resisting their rape in any way, the goons will kill us and high-five each other after the deed.
Besides, the DoJ jackboots don't care how much money you've invested. And while the shooting sports can be undeniably fun, I think publicly characterizing a firearm as a "toy" is something you need to reconsider, because it trivializes their ownership and use, and undermines one of the fundamental tenets of NRA's Eddie Eagle program, that is, "Guns are not toys."
You call on activist gun owners to get a fire in their bellies over what you refer to as "your fine hobby"? Do you really expect gun owners to mobilize under the banner of "sporting use," a term our oppressors exploit in order to identify and ban additional firearms? And do you know the origin of this tactic?
Per attorney Richard Stevens:
"The Nazi Weapons Law (18 March 1938) forbade importation of weapons under substantially the same test. Section 25(1) of that Law proclaimed: 'It is forbidden to manufacture ... and to import: Firearms which fold-down, break-down, are collapsible, or are speedily dismantled -- beyond the common limits of hunting and sporting activities -- ...' Section 21 of the Nazi Law (and its enforcing regulations) employed the 'sporting use' exception also where they permitted licensed persons to carry "firearms, designed for -- and usually used for -- the hunting of fair game."
What troubles me the most about your comments was your disavowal of Brian Puckett's letter to the Public Safety Committee. "I don't endorse it," you say. "I would not consider those people mainstream Americans."
"Those people?" Which ones do you mean, the ones who don't think that tools for resisting tyranny are toys? The ones who don't treat liberty as a "hobby?" Is that truly too far out of the "mainstream" for you?
Did you even read Puckett's article, Mr. Burtt? If you didn't, why would you comment on it in such a negative manner? Were you aware that nowhere did he call for violence, that he was merely reporting how persecuted people backed into a corner might ultimately lash back when their freedom is attacked -- and they have no means left for peaceable redress? You didn't think this is "perfectly understandable" and "absolutely logical"? And did you know he cited examples like Rosa Parks in an attempt to outline peaceable alternatives for obtaining recognition of civil rights?
"This is the forum where these things should be handled," you proclaim, referring to the California Assembly. That forum, in its arrogance and its criminal disregard for basic human rights, is the initiator of oppression and force, and so far has been shown almost superhuman tolerance by those they continually harass. What exactly are you prepared to do should your august forum not see things your way and ban .50's in spite of your best efforts?
I hope you don't think you will resolve it in California's courts; the California Supreme Court has already ruled that the state Constitution is silent on the right to keep and bear arms, and the highest federal court of jurisdiction, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, has flatly stated that individuals have no recognized right to gun ownership under the Second Amendment. Which means when (not if) the Assembly and Lockyer get around to criminalizing ownership of .50's, you're going to have a choice to make.
If the bill doesn't make it out of committee this time, don't assume this validates the tactic of lobbying as the only means of effecting change. Davis is scared to death that Simon might actually pull it off, and sheer politics make him loath to encourage passage of this edict. He is probably doing what he can behind the scenes to call the dogs off until after his position is secured.
And don't discount the effect letters from "those people" have in making the oppressors think twice. You certainly understand that the Founders codified a right to rebellion as a last resort check and balance against tyranny. You understand that for this to work, good people must be willing to die--and, yes, to kill. Because if people are willing to surrender their guns just because they've been ordered to, what is the use of having a Second Amendment?
I heard you speak at ATF Night last month, and Brian Puckett asked you a direct question: If you are ordered to register or surrender your .50's, will you comply, or will you defy "authority" and refuse to cooperate -- and so inform your members? I couldn't help but notice you didn't answer him, and redirected the topic to lobbying. I hear you are going to speak again next month. I'd like to hear your answer then. Because how boldly you're willing to fight for your rights will have a direct effect on inspiring the rest of us to acknowledge you as a leader and give you our support.
In the meantime, please feel free to reply. As this is an open letter, your open response is invited.
Sincerely,
David Codrea
One of "Those People"
This letter was written on April 19, 2002. On this day in history, rebellious American citizens who had been denied all peaceful means of redress engaged in a pitched gun battle with government agents attempting to disarm them. Some carried high powered Kentucky (sniper) rifles, outgunning the authorities equipped with standard-issue Brown Bess muskets.
These men were willing to defy authority, break the law, and if need be, kill to claim their liberty and bequeath it to posterity. Thank God.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3362
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Fifty Caliber Shooters Policy Institute
By David Codrea
Codrea4@adelphia.net
April 21, 2002
Dear Mr. Burtt,
I am disgusted and angry with Democrats in the California Assembly for their continued attempts to gut the Second Amendment by outlawing ownership of .50 caliber rifles. I am disgusted and angry with socialist commentator George Skelton and his masters at The Los Angeles Times for their unceasing propaganda war against the right of the people to keep and bear arms. And I am shocked and upset with the remarks attributed to you in Skelton's latest hit piece.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt -- after all, Skelton is a seasoned master at lying, suppressing information and distorting comments by repeating them out of context. Even so, your statements seem inexplicable and even disparaging of hard core gun rights activists. Since you are a leader representing a gun owner constituency group with access to lawmakers, this rightly concerns me.
"It's an extreme sport," you say, referring to .50 caliber shooting.
Why? Since when is shooting a rifle "extreme"? Besides, shooting a high powered rifle accurately over long distances is not just a "sport" to many Americans. It is a skill they take seriously -- one that may be needed to defend their families, their country and to fulfill their duties as members of the unorganized militia. No?
"It's a toy that we use and we've invested a lot of money in it"
Mr. Burtt, I doubt this will persuade Times readers -- but it certainly seems a trivial justification for exercising a right, especially when tyrants are dictating to us nothing less than the terms and conditions of our surrender. If we don't obey them, they will send out thugs to smash down our doors, degrade us as human beings, steal our property and destroy our lives. If they perceive us as resisting their rape in any way, the goons will kill us and high-five each other after the deed.
Besides, the DoJ jackboots don't care how much money you've invested. And while the shooting sports can be undeniably fun, I think publicly characterizing a firearm as a "toy" is something you need to reconsider, because it trivializes their ownership and use, and undermines one of the fundamental tenets of NRA's Eddie Eagle program, that is, "Guns are not toys."
You call on activist gun owners to get a fire in their bellies over what you refer to as "your fine hobby"? Do you really expect gun owners to mobilize under the banner of "sporting use," a term our oppressors exploit in order to identify and ban additional firearms? And do you know the origin of this tactic?
Per attorney Richard Stevens:
"The Nazi Weapons Law (18 March 1938) forbade importation of weapons under substantially the same test. Section 25(1) of that Law proclaimed: 'It is forbidden to manufacture ... and to import: Firearms which fold-down, break-down, are collapsible, or are speedily dismantled -- beyond the common limits of hunting and sporting activities -- ...' Section 21 of the Nazi Law (and its enforcing regulations) employed the 'sporting use' exception also where they permitted licensed persons to carry "firearms, designed for -- and usually used for -- the hunting of fair game."
What troubles me the most about your comments was your disavowal of Brian Puckett's letter to the Public Safety Committee. "I don't endorse it," you say. "I would not consider those people mainstream Americans."
"Those people?" Which ones do you mean, the ones who don't think that tools for resisting tyranny are toys? The ones who don't treat liberty as a "hobby?" Is that truly too far out of the "mainstream" for you?
Did you even read Puckett's article, Mr. Burtt? If you didn't, why would you comment on it in such a negative manner? Were you aware that nowhere did he call for violence, that he was merely reporting how persecuted people backed into a corner might ultimately lash back when their freedom is attacked -- and they have no means left for peaceable redress? You didn't think this is "perfectly understandable" and "absolutely logical"? And did you know he cited examples like Rosa Parks in an attempt to outline peaceable alternatives for obtaining recognition of civil rights?
"This is the forum where these things should be handled," you proclaim, referring to the California Assembly. That forum, in its arrogance and its criminal disregard for basic human rights, is the initiator of oppression and force, and so far has been shown almost superhuman tolerance by those they continually harass. What exactly are you prepared to do should your august forum not see things your way and ban .50's in spite of your best efforts?
I hope you don't think you will resolve it in California's courts; the California Supreme Court has already ruled that the state Constitution is silent on the right to keep and bear arms, and the highest federal court of jurisdiction, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, has flatly stated that individuals have no recognized right to gun ownership under the Second Amendment. Which means when (not if) the Assembly and Lockyer get around to criminalizing ownership of .50's, you're going to have a choice to make.
If the bill doesn't make it out of committee this time, don't assume this validates the tactic of lobbying as the only means of effecting change. Davis is scared to death that Simon might actually pull it off, and sheer politics make him loath to encourage passage of this edict. He is probably doing what he can behind the scenes to call the dogs off until after his position is secured.
And don't discount the effect letters from "those people" have in making the oppressors think twice. You certainly understand that the Founders codified a right to rebellion as a last resort check and balance against tyranny. You understand that for this to work, good people must be willing to die--and, yes, to kill. Because if people are willing to surrender their guns just because they've been ordered to, what is the use of having a Second Amendment?
I heard you speak at ATF Night last month, and Brian Puckett asked you a direct question: If you are ordered to register or surrender your .50's, will you comply, or will you defy "authority" and refuse to cooperate -- and so inform your members? I couldn't help but notice you didn't answer him, and redirected the topic to lobbying. I hear you are going to speak again next month. I'd like to hear your answer then. Because how boldly you're willing to fight for your rights will have a direct effect on inspiring the rest of us to acknowledge you as a leader and give you our support.
In the meantime, please feel free to reply. As this is an open letter, your open response is invited.
Sincerely,
David Codrea
One of "Those People"
This letter was written on April 19, 2002. On this day in history, rebellious American citizens who had been denied all peaceful means of redress engaged in a pitched gun battle with government agents attempting to disarm them. Some carried high powered Kentucky (sniper) rifles, outgunning the authorities equipped with standard-issue Brown Bess muskets.
These men were willing to defy authority, break the law, and if need be, kill to claim their liberty and bequeath it to posterity. Thank God.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3362
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878