Brace for the Gulag
A Large Caliber Threat
If I were to tell you that the current administration has undertaken concrete steps towards criminalizing, and jailing vast swaths of opposition what would you say? You might laugh at the ludicrousness of the assertion. After all nothing approaching this level of late-republic shenanigans has headlined even among conservative news outlets. I ask that you reserve judgement and allow me the opportunity to make my case for the above assertion (and then some). In this essay I will introduce the reader to the intersection of two often distinct interests of mine: politics, and armaments; and I will seek to instruct you, dear reader, on what the first steps to a modern gulag look like.
The theory of American governance was that in placing the powers of government to make, to interpret, and to enact law upon the people within three complementary, but competitive coequal branches it would prove capable of preserving liberty in perpetuity as each branch zealously guarded their own powers, and thereby acted as a check and balance against the accumulation of powers within any one branch. We may never know if this could have proven correct, as the Progressive movement of the early twentieth century sought to dispense with the judicial, and legislative branches in favor of vesting all powers with the executive. Though our republic proved more sturdy than other worldly systems it was substantially weakened by the onslaught of Progress, and thus the “administrative state” was born out of the executive. This bureaucratic apparatus would grow to usurp the powers of the legislature, and judiciary within its own unitary, tripartite branch.
The “executive” now boasts orders of magnitude more criminal “laws” than the legislature, and contrary to linguistic principles of mutual exclusion the “administrative judge” exist to keep the judiciary out of the people’s business. This process has rendered the legislature, and to a lesser the degree the courts, vestigial – playing their roles only within the confines not yet occupied by the bureaucratic leviathan. This is fundamentally why it may not matter whether the Supreme Court holds as formulated — the “executive” may just say, (and truly mean it this time) “you’ve made your decision, now let’s see you enforce it” (to paraphrase Andrew Jackson). Marx would truly blush seeing what the Progressives have built.
The terms “executive,” and “administrate” exist now as mere relics, and I propose the correct terminology for our current government is “regime,” as we are surely seeing a totalizing ideological rule by fiat, and not due care to faithfully execute law, nor administer justice under the Constitution. To wit, this regime, through its Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, has just introduced a new “interpretation” of the near century old National Firearms Act. This change modifies the language of the act to change the definition of short barreled rifle (SBR).
The problem with the NFA, like all such laws, is that it is quite difficult to be exacting with language such that problems do not arise with enforceability while seeking to exercise arbitrary power. The nature of being “arbitrary” renders it not in accordance with fundamental realities, and natural law, and thereby lends towards all manner of circumvention. Some of the more hilarious evasions of bad law have been used for centuries to subvert tyrants: from the supposed legend of showing ones middle finger to the King’s enforcers to demonstrate your continued possession of the means to sling arrows after the prohibition on possession of bows, to the Chinese dissidents memeing Winnie-the-Pooh as a swipe at Xi Xinping without invoking the name of the despot.
Enter the “pistol brace.” Originally introduced to the market by SB Tactical, and Sig Sauer this device (prosthetic) was designed to aid the disabled shooter with properly using a sort of heavy pistol (as designated by law to be fired with one hand), by conforming the firearm somehow to the forearm of the shooter, thereby reducing required hand and wrist strength to wield the weapon.
As technology advanced in firearms and ballistics over the preceding decades the distinction between “rifle” and “pistol” has become less and less meaningful in real terms. The result was an increasing demand within the marketplace to possess new smaller (shorter, lighter) versions of yesteryears rifles. This natural demand was significantly curtailed by the NFA classification of the SBR as a highly regulated item. However, while SBR’s are tightly controlled there is no prohibition in law against turning these new lighter versions into pistols (designing, and classifying them for one-handed use), and thereby avoiding the regulatory burden.
While significantly lighter these new pistol types are still in the heavy-for-pistol weight class, and benefit greatly from the addition of a stabilizing brace. Years ago these pistol braces were formally approved (tantamount to a promise of non-prosecution as an unregistered SBR) for use. The changes now proposed would reverse this years-old promise of non-prosecution to the threat of ten years in federal prison by subverting the language of the law, and thereby cut off our middle fingers in the absence of any bow.
Given the universe of powers now residing in Biden the practice of “reinterpreting” law undertaken by this “executive” – being now unitary, yet tripartite – branch is wholly violable of the Constitutional principle against the implementation of ex post facto laws. The implementation of any law that makes one law-abiding in the morning, yet a felon in the afternoon is anathema to the American creed, and a bridge too far. It is the surest sign yet of a regime that views its own legacy in terms of Historicism, and us as mere obstacles in the way of Progress.
This is no small measure. The official Congressional report indicates that millions of Americans will be made felons by this change, and this estimate is conservative by perhaps a factor of ten. It is not clear yet how this detestable policy would be pursued, but it is abundantly clear that this regime cannot be given the benefit of any doubt, and this change must be considered in terms consistent with what it has already shown us: the mass incarceration of political opposition, and the advent of the American gulag. After all, look at how those charged with mere misdemeanors are currently being treated in our nation’s capital. Look further to how the statistics break down among those owning the dreaded black rifle, and those opposed to the regime. Look once more again at how the jails have been emptied of real criminals. A less cynical outlook might be to presume the regime will only act against those agitating against it effectively. What does “Alexi Nalvany” translate to in American? Is it your name? Is it mine?