“There was no doubt that there was a vast organization which was making fools of all the liberals in Hollywood and taking their money, that there was a police state among the Left element in Hollywood and Broadway.” —Elia Kazan
A Discussion Gets Real
In a recent discussion with colleagues at my school, I was asked by a Hollywood actor I know—who substitute teaches as a backup gig whenever there is no acting job—if it was true that California Senator Leland Yee, a Democrat, might be guilty of gun running. He had only recently become aware of the story about Senator Yee, due, I suppose, to the low-information culture of California media outlets. (I initially read the story in the New Media, which is nationwide in scope.)
Yee was a devout advocate of victim-disarmament policies that my colleague liked to refer to as “gun control.” But I had to point out that Democrats were not so much in favor of “gun control” as they were in favor of “people control.” “Come on,” I joked, “we all know Democrats get 100% of the criminal vote. Did you never wonder why that is?”
My liberal colleague laughed uncomfortably. Then my friend pointed to how the Obama Administration had been making the tools of military surplus available to police departments nationwide. Obama, he claimed, had liberalized military equipment-sharing with police departments. All true, I agreed, but there is a reason Obama is doing this, and Senator Yee’s gun running fits right in with the overall scheme.
Senator Leland Yee, of the California State Senate, left Federal Court in San Francisco back on March 26th, 2014, on federal weapons charges, after having posted $500,000 in bail. It was like a scene out of American Hustle, with Yee being depicted in a 137-page FBI affidavit as repeatedly offering to act as intermediary in illegal firearms deals in exchange for campaign contributions. He was outed by undercover FBI agents.
Yee, an Obama-style gun control advocate, has been charged with gun running for an organized crime ring in California that operates, allegedly, under the control of Crime Lord Kwok Cheung “Shrimp Boy” Chow. Chow is a mob boss who illegally imports guns into the US. What this helps to ensure is that criminals have access to weapons that have no serial numbers registered with the state. (Less than 1% of legally registered guns are used in the commission of a crime—and most crime reports involving legal guns are for such occurrences as failing to transport a gun correctly or other technicalities.) Criminals have always been able to come by weapons on the black market, and disarming the populace only gives them an added advantage by improving their working conditions.
Senator Yee was charged with bribery and corruption in conjunction with gun smuggling. He stands accused of having brought over two million dollars worth of weapons from the Philippines, including rocket launchers and machine guns, some of which Yee himself is said to have test-fired in Mindanao. But not all of the weapons Yee smuggled into the US were designated to stay in America; a portion of them were bound for North Africa.
This interesting alliance—between a statist California Democrat and the armed bad guys who invade your homes and mug you in the streets—actually makes sense, because it just speeds up the process that gun grabbers set in motion every time they pass a law to disarm victims. It is the process of disempowering the American people in a way that makes them increasingly dependent on the government to protect them.
Many will feel an uncritical gratitude towards a police state whose agents carry guns for use against criminals, especially if the public cannot do so on its own behalf, due to having been subjected to victim-disarmament laws. This shows why Democrats are pro-crime.
Take California, for example, which is letting numerous dangerous felons out of prison, in order to avoid paying a fine that would be levied against the state by a federal judge, because the state otherwise fails to comply with the magistrate’s standards for running a prison. Rather than pay the million-dollar-a-day fine out of the enormous budget for welfare programs (California has 12% of the US population and 31% of the welfare recipients), which would save many more lives, arguably, than the welfare programs do, Democrats choose to keep more people dependent on government relief and to create the conditions that—in absence of self-defense rights—will enable the strengthening of a police state.
Danger from an Unperceived Quarter
Another question one might pose is what danger there really is in America of a Big-Brother state assuming all authority over our lives. Do Americans not have a Constitution that limits state power? The answer to that question is “yes and no”; yes, because Americans have historically been able to insist on free speech and free press and search warrants and due process; and no, because now Americans will have to live with Obamacare, a law that puts Big Brother firmly in charge of the most intimate details of life.
How can anyone demand his or her civil rights, when the government can respond to such demands by canceling much-needed healthcare, such as a medical prescription or a surgical procedure? The government is now the grantor of all medical care. Dissenting politically or insisting on a search warrant could carry risks, especially if you are a conservative or a libertarian.
The Holy Trinity of Statism
So, in a nutshell, here is how Big-Brother Democrats ultimately rob Americans of their rights and freedoms: 1) disarm Americans; 2) prosecute a soft-on-crime agenda; and 3) manage every citizen’s healthcare. These three things are the holy trinity of statism. And Senator Yee knows it. There is absolutely no conflict of interest for victim-disarmament Democrats to be engaged in gun running.
No conflict whatsoever.