Keep and Bear Arms

Time For Traitors To Step Aside
By Michael Z. Williamson
October 21, 2003

KeepAndBearArms.com -- Folks, let’s start with some facts:

FACT: The Silveira vs. Lockyer case is at the Supreme Court now. Done deal.

FACT: The Silveira case is either going to be ignored or heard by the justices.

FACT: A lot of work has been done by a very competent attorney named Roy Lucas, who has an excellent track record at SCOTUS.

To that end, I’m puzzled what the current legions of detractors are trying to accomplish. No amount of complaining about it being “The wrong case at the wrong court” is going to stop the ball—it’s rolling downhill as we speak.

No amount of backstabbing and undermining is going to improve the case.

There’s a small, but vocal, group of critics getting in a peeing contest as to who can make the worst claims about the backers and attorneys involved. These people have been around politics long enough to understand the concept of caucus—once a platform exists, one puts disagreement aside and supports the party. Our party -- those who support the 2^nd Amendment -- is going to have a day in court. Done deal.

In which case, I can only use a harsh term about those pecking at the corpse before it’s even dead.

That term is “TRAITOR.”

Yes, it’s a harsh term. It’s also accurate.

What in the hell are you trying to accomplish, folks? There are three possibilities here:

1: SCOTUS refuses to hear the case. It goes away, someone tries again. No actions on your part can improve this scenario.

2: SCOTUS rules against us. That seems to be the big fear here. “But what if we loooooooooose?” I hear people whine. Fact is, most District and lower courts are of the opinion that we don’t have a 2^nd Amendment. Several of those judicial opinions are why this case exists, right? If you step into the arena, there’s a risk of losing. But if you refuse to fight, you have lost preemptively. And even among those courts that recognize it, the 2^nd Amendment is not considered a civil right for purposes of civil law—one cannot sue anyone for “violating my Second Amendment rights.”

This case hopes to address that. We have good briefs, good clients, good attorneys and a plan. Give us more competent amicus briefs if you want to help.

3: SCOTUS rules in our favor. Do please assure me this is what you’d like to see! It would define keeping and bearing arms as a right, permanently. From there, we have a basis to HAMMER our opponents politically and socially as “bigoted extremists attempting to undermine our civil rights.” And make no mistake, we will.

Now, complaints, aspersions, second-guesses, death threats against our attorneys and ad hominem attacks and pejoratives will not accomplish possibility #3. THAT is what we’re here about, folks.

I’ve got friends supporting this case who are Trotskyites, neo-Conservatives, Libertarians, gays, Christians, Muslims, etc. If we define the 2^nd Amendment as only applying to “right-thinking people of the right political and racial makeup,” we’ll not only be bigots, we’ll lose by our own divisiveness. Recall your Franklin. “We must all hang together, or we most assuredly will all hang separately.”

Frankly, I’m puzzled. It seems as if a certain cross-section of our community wants to say, “We Told You So! Neener, Neener, Neener! Your suit failed!”

Childish.

Not only childish, but it would mean they’d be gloating along with Sarah Brady, Chucky Schumer, Dianne Feinstein and other enemies of freedom.

Just whose side are these people on? They aren’t on ours, and they aren’t staying quiet and working in parallel on their own cases. Their only goal seems to be sabotage of the case we do have. That is traitorous. That makes the Brady Bunch cackle with glee.

The case is at SCOTUS. Support it, or step aside. But do everyone a favor, and keep your misgivings to yourself.

	Print This Page

Written By:	Michael Z. Williamson
	Time For Traitors To Step Aside By Michael Z. Williamson October 21, 2003 KeepAndBearArms.com -- Folks, let’s start with some facts: FACT: The Silveira vs. Lockyer case is at the Supreme Court now. Done deal. FACT: The Silveira case is either going to be ignored or heard by the justices. FACT: A lot of work has been done by a very competent attorney named Roy Lucas, who has an excellent track record at SCOTUS. To that end, I’m puzzled what the current legions of detractors are trying to accomplish. No amount of complaining about it being “The wrong case at the wrong court” is going to stop the ball—it’s rolling downhill as we speak. No amount of backstabbing and undermining is going to improve the case. There’s a small, but vocal, group of critics getting in a peeing contest as to who can make the worst claims about the backers and attorneys involved. These people have been around politics long enough to understand the concept of caucus—once a platform exists, one puts disagreement aside and supports the party. Our party -- those who support the 2^nd Amendment -- is going to have a day in court. Done deal. In which case, I can only use a harsh term about those pecking at the corpse before it’s even dead. That term is “TRAITOR.” Yes, it’s a harsh term. It’s also accurate. What in the hell are you trying to accomplish, folks? There are three possibilities here: 1: SCOTUS refuses to hear the case. It goes away, someone tries again. No actions on your part can improve this scenario. 2: SCOTUS rules against us. That seems to be the big fear here. “But what if we loooooooooose?” I hear people whine. Fact is, most District and lower courts are of the opinion that we don’t have a 2^nd Amendment. Several of those judicial opinions are why this case exists, right? If you step into the arena, there’s a risk of losing. But if you refuse to fight, you have lost preemptively. And even among those courts that recognize it, the 2^nd Amendment is not considered a civil right for purposes of civil law—one cannot sue anyone for “violating my Second Amendment rights.” This case hopes to address that. We have good briefs, good clients, good attorneys and a plan. Give us more competent amicus briefs if you want to help. 3: SCOTUS rules in our favor. Do please assure me this is what you’d like to see! It would define keeping and bearing arms as a right, permanently. From there, we have a basis to HAMMER our opponents politically and socially as “bigoted extremists attempting to undermine our civil rights.” And make no mistake, we will. Now, complaints, aspersions, second-guesses, death threats against our attorneys and ad hominem attacks and pejoratives will not accomplish possibility #3. THAT is what we’re here about, folks. I’ve got friends supporting this case who are Trotskyites, neo-Conservatives, Libertarians, gays, Christians, Muslims, etc. If we define the 2^nd Amendment as only applying to “right-thinking people of the right political and racial makeup,” we’ll not only be bigots, we’ll lose by our own divisiveness. Recall your Franklin. “We must all hang together, or we most assuredly will all hang separately.” Frankly, I’m puzzled. It seems as if a certain cross-section of our community wants to say, “We Told You So! Neener, Neener, Neener! Your suit failed!” Childish. Not only childish, but it would mean they’d be gloating along with Sarah Brady, Chucky Schumer, Dianne Feinstein and other enemies of freedom. Just whose side are these people on? They aren’t on ours, and they aren’t staying quiet and working in parallel on their own cases. Their only goal seems to be sabotage of the case we do have. That is traitorous. That makes the Brady Bunch cackle with glee. The case is at SCOTUS. Support it, or step aside. But do everyone a favor, and keep your misgivings to yourself.