Craig’s previous article along this line ran almost a year ago. It turns out that the our views at the time were nearly prophetic. With the leak of proposed amendments to the FCA last week, this is a piece of writing that really hits home. As always with Craig’s writing, I did minimal editing and kept it as raw as he intended it to be. He originally wrote this in April 2017, and asked me to wait for the right time to publish it. Now is as good as any.
Trust Broken
In a previous article I wrote about Trust Broken.
Essentially it boils down to this – the powers-that-be continually negotiate in bad faith, and with ill intent, in order to advance the civil-disarmament agenda.
If this entails taking a few steps back for them before going forward, then so be it. They have time and resources on their side. Essentially it is a tactic taken out the Marxist playbook – compromise only to ensure that in the long-term you achieve your goal.
Again, the long-term goal is eradication of firearms in private ownership. If things continue as they are, who knows where we will be in 100 years. So, the fight is as much for the short-term as it is for our children and our great-grandchildren.
There was a time when the state trusted us (except for the politically disenfranchised – Ed), and one could simply approach a magistrate for a licence. Schools trained children how to shoot and hosted competitions. This happened during the life-time of many of our elders.
However, this has been taken away from us. The state no longer trusts gun owners. I mentioned previously that if you have to negotiate for something you already have, then you have already lost it.
The system we ought to have
How did we go from approaching a magistrate for a licence, having shooting sports at schools, and life-long gun licences to where we are today?
What then should our negotiation objectives be?
Those negotiating on our behalf should insist on a no-licence system for all firearms. Anyone who has the money should be able to purchase a firearm subject to a few reasonable restrictions based on age and maturity. Furthermore, there shouldn’t be a database of firearms in private hands.
If you baulk at this statement, then perhaps it is a sign how insidious and poisoned we have collectively become to the notion that good, free men and women should take responsibility for themselves. The law by definition does not apply to law-breakers as they will simply ignore it.
Again, those negotiating on our behalf should insist on a no-licence system, and that the firearms database be scrapped.
The need to replace a broken system
Why should this be our starting point? Simply this – we have entrusted those in power to make laws that would be for the common good of society and the individual.
Time has repeatedly proven that Parliament cannot be trusted to do so. They have repeatedly betrayed our trust with increasingly restrictive legislation, or by creating a system of regulations and inefficient processes that add needless expense to firearm licensing.
In the end it has not prevented or reduced crime. It has however been used to inexcusably complicate the lives of ordinary law-abiding citizens. The government and its agencies regularly do not even abide by the very laws and regulations that they themselves have promulgated. Even worse are the numerous times when police officers have been caught selling firearms to criminals. (And worse than that are the incidents we don’t even know about – Ed)
We negotiated our rights away for the illusion of safety
Some in our firearm-owning community would argue that they have negotiated a pretty good deal for us. The reason being that we can get most of the guns we want as long as we comply with a few legal conditions.
The idea is that we have been ring-fenced by laws which will protect us. This is akin to a laager or fortress mentality. The law encircles us, and as long as we behave nicely like good subjects we will be safe. You know, the law will protect us. Do we really have to trust Parliament again?
This trust has been broken repeatedly. In the near-future a new set of negotiations will begin. Either because a new president or minister has been appointed, or because they need to prove that they are “serious about crime”. And this will create the appearance of doing something for the electorate.
In fact, given the tumultuous events of the past week (April 2017) and the re-shuffling of cabinet, I predict that the new minister of police will do just that.
So, do not be complacent. Our so-called fortress of safety is actually a ghetto into which law-abiding citizens have been legally herded into and ostracised by greater society. The latter by means of emotionally-appealing disinformation campaigns that lack any foundation in rationality.
However, our negotiators will also need to make it clear to the authorities that they are not bluffing. They need to back themselves with concrete actions. The state backs itself with the justice system and security forces. Ultimately all government power comes from the barrel of a gun.
If you do not agree, I suggest you try to stop paying your taxes and see if the state sends rainbow-coloured unicorns and fairies to chat with you.
Passive resistance to active tyranny
If you think I am joking about unrestricted firearms ownership or deleting the CFR – I am not.
There is a principle called subsidisation, where the decision-making processes are devolved to the lowest possible level. This ensures that those about whom the decisions are being made actually have input and are more likely to cooperate. In other words, we know what is best for ourselves and our negotiators should be insisting on it.
On the flip-side, if our negotiators cannot get their way then they must be capable of bringing meaningful pressure to bear. Initially this can range from threats of non-compliance with such stupid concepts of relicencing (which already kind of happened unintentionally on a large scale! – Ed) or passive resistance by all gun owners by applying on the same day for their renewals. Taking it to the next level would be the burning of our licences.
This has been done in our country before. Remember the opposition to the pass laws and how they were resisted? For many of us this is an alien way of thinking. Resisting the government by means of passive acts makes us uncomfortable. And the majority of gun owners are above reproach when it comes to obeying laws.
Indeed gun owners own property and generally work hard. And if statistics are to be believed we are the most law-abiding sector of society. The authorities have our names, numbers and addresses because we gave it to them. So the state can intimidate us by raiding those individuals who are resisting. It is a reality that we will have to face. Those individuals would have much to lose if they stood on their own.
We need to change the way we think
I sincerely hope this never comes to pass. But if we continue on our present trajectory, where will we be in 25, or 50, or 100 years?
However, times are changing and folks are getting irritated with endless laws and betrayals by the authorities.
So, start to decolonise your mind of the alien concept that all guns have to be licensed, your safe must be inspected, and that we need a firearms registry. Think of how much time and money we can save, and the resources it releases for the police to actually do their job. You know, like catching the bad guys instead of waiting for a good guy to fail to submit the correct form on the correct date.
To those negotiating on our behalf – start insisting that firearm licencing and the CFR be scrapped. It’s a radical starting point, but it’s about time Parliament understood that gun owners are gatvol.
Written by Craig Gadd.
Craig is the owner of Tactical Quarter Master (TacQM), and does a regular podcast on Gunsite Radio called “Shootin’ the Breeze with Camouflage762”.
Rick Afonso
•6 years ago
WOW – IT seems Craig is a bit of a Prophet (Any advice on this weeks lotto numbers – HAHAHAHA)
Well written and scarily accurate.
So much for all the “Wait and see” comments / advice by various organisations – SAGA / SA Hunters etc – If we wait and see we may as well go turn them in now.
The government & shady Organisations involved in this draft amendment (IMO – GFSA has a hand without a doubt) – have made their intentions quite clear – there is NO TIME – to wait and see. We need to act and insist that those organisations we belong to wether it be SAGA or SA Hunters or SAPSA / SADPA / ICore / ………. WORK TOGETHER (for a change – instead of on their own Narrow self interests) and on our behalf.
MOLON LABE
David Smith
•6 years ago
Great article – quite prophetic and too true. At the end of the day as said, if you are an adult citizen in good standing with no criminal record, you are competent to own a firearm. If you feel that your life is in danger you should be able to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun to protect your self – online background check at the gun shop, buy gun – end of story. Threats to life do not have waiting periods – they happen now, today and for many people it is already too late.
Peter Moss
•6 years ago
The SAPS has never ever negotiated with firearm owners, never will either. It requires no prophet to repeat what the Firearm Forum and SALGO had already stated nearly twenty years ago. Even at that stage the SAPS had never negotiated in good faith promising firearm owners they would be included with further changes if they held back. When SAGA got wind of a then well into progress determination to introduce stringent legislation SAGA representatives to Safety and Security were rebuffed like little schoolboys and told “We know what you want to say and are no interested”. GFSA got office space at Safety and Security. That has been the attitude of the SAPS from day one and anyone stupid enough to think “negotiation” could take place with the SAPS must be a firearm organisation official. Nobody else on this earth could be that foolish unless it was deliberate and done in preference to actually fighting for members.
That unfortunately is exactly what firearm organisations have done. Instead of fight they have all told firearm owners to “just comply” you can still get a licence and shoot. These organisations have fallen over themselves to advertise and do the SAPS work of notification and requirements. To advise and promote the FCA and do nothing but complain about service delivery. Claiming that such was a great victory. A faster service is seen as a victory by these charlatans. Let me put that in perspective. The ANC leadership would have been lynched had they claimed that they has speeded up and improved passbook applications. That is exactly what these leaders tried to do and pass it off as “fighting”. They are the enemy within. The damage they have done may never be recovered from.
All who took them to task were subjected to a flood of personal and derogatory remarks. Eventually they had with their equally stupid followers removed all voices of opposition to their utter cowardice and unwillingness to actually represent firearm owners and fight. Collectively these organisations have wasted eighteen years that should have been used to build up for what had to come. Today we know better but it was very easily predicted and was. It was ignored then for a faster more efficient FCA sold as the answer to this problem. If you can believe it, sold as “fighting” by utter fools who refused to fight.
Now firearm owners get to start from square one, the platform they had that virtually silenced GFSA and organised nearly all if not all opposition to the FCA is long gone and forgotten. It’s lesson forgotten it’s members disillusioned by the lack of support they got from firearm organisations that wanted to fight only in court or “negotiate” as if they had anything but members rights to give away, which they did.
Can these organisations now rise to the occasion. I have very serious doubts. Possibly members should monitor those who want to wait and see or want to tackle this when in the public comment stage as if their word was worth something. It is not. They know it and will refuse to fight, demanding we be allowed to defend ourselves. That we have no need of useless laws that serve no crime fighting purpose. When your organisation refuses to fight by objection and organising VISIBLE OBJECTION you have a choice, vote management out or go under because cowards do not change their spots. Do not let them do it twice. You have been warned. What happens now is up to you. Please do not again be mislead by cowards who cannot and will no lead.