The Slippery Slope Essay

This is too long to copy and paste from the website so you'll have to use the link I'm afraid.

It isn't the shortest but it is well worth the read, in fact this link should be a sticky.

It comments on the UK and the loss of gun rights and civil liberties which goes hand-in-glove with FA restrictions. Restrictions we have in place right now. We have a more troubled history, and the warnings are ominous for us across all sectors of society. I have long argued that the FCA must removed entirely, and that nothing in it is either reasonable or sensible, and definitely not innocent. Same with the Dangerous Weapons Act. if you think it has anything to do with disarming protestors, you're dreaming.

I found this essay which says it much better than I can because the authors have researched their subject more and have demonstrably higher IQs than I do!

We're not just fighting for gun rights, its actually all our civil liberties that are at stake. Hence the need to expose this in the press at every opportunity. Pay attention to the slow but incremental restrictions as people get accustomed and accepting of restrictions their forebears, who may have shed blood for freedom, would never, ever contemplate. I personally found it quite chilling.

Maybe even need to change the message from gun rights to civil liberties? (Food for thought at least?)

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm

Cheers

ZK

Sounds great, thanks.

Now to find the time to read it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JS4

Sounds great, thanks.

Now to find the time to read it...

---

It does seem to be worthwhile, although I only skimmed through parts of it. But note the lessons contained in the conclusion:

Quote:

---

We also identified several factors about the political defense of gun rights in Great Britain that made the arms right vulnerable to the slippery slope. Most of these factors have parallels regarding the defense of other civil liberties in Britain:

the right was defended only on sporting grounds, and not on the basis that it protects people from dangerous criminals or from dangerously criminal governments;

the right's defenders accepted and even applauded a great deal of regulation of the right;

the right's defenders accepted the principle that the right could be further regulated whenever the government saw a need, rather than only when there was a genuine necessity for more regulation;

the right's defenders usually appeased the government, rather than resisting unjustifiable government demands for more controls;

people who exercised the right in one way were often unwilling to defend people who exercised the right in a different way.

---

Sounds familiar?

I spent the time last night... it makes for very sobering reading. The key takeaways for me was:
1. If you are willing to sacrifice one part of your rights (in the Brits' case the right to self-defense, and later the right to use handguns for sport) the rest of the rights will eventually crumble.
2. A strong, motivated and unifying lobby body (i.e. the NRA or the ACLU in the USA) is invaluable in the fight against the constant attack on our rights.

:- P

Finally got through it.

This is a must read for everybody, especially in light of what is coming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LoodDruppel

Sounds familiar?

---

Too familiar by far. :o(

Is it getting warmer in here...?