Big Head Press


L. Neil Smith's
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 624, June 19, 2011

"Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be a
convenience store—NOT a government agency."


Previous Previous Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Hang 'Em High
by L. Neil Smith
lneil@netzero.com

Bookmark and Share

Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise

The headline at zerohedge.com reads, "Trading Of Over The Counter Gold And Silver To Be Illegal Beginning July 15". The story, by a Tyler Durden, goes into details of legislation I was unaware of until now, legislation that's about as evil as any legislation can possibly get.

Thanks to a vile act stealthily foisted on the American Productive Class by soon-to-be former Senator Christopher Dodd and an unspeakably despicable Barney Frank, under a blatantly unconstitutional law shoved through the United States Congress, a new regulation prohibiting U.S. residents from trading precious metals over the counter—including gold and silver—will extrude itself into effect on Friday, July 15, 2011.

In conjunction with this new regulation, FOREX.com has announced that it must discontinue metals trading for U.S. residents on Friday, July 15, 2011 at the close of trading at 5pm Eastern Time. As a result, all open metals positions must be closed by July 15, 2011 at 5PM.

Durden makes reference to Executive Order 6102, signed on April 5, 1933, according to Wikipedia, by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, third worst president of the United States, "forbidding the Hoarding of Gold Coin, Gold Bullion, and Gold Certificates" by American citizens. The order, in blatant violation of the Ninth Amendment, as well as Constitutional prohibitions against "illegal takings", criminalized the American public's ability to own gold as an investment vehicle. Appropriately, Durden calls the new Dodd/Frank legislation 6102 Part 2.

In my view, based on my experience of history and human nature, the only worse legislation Congress could pass would be the complete prohibition and confiscation of privately-owned weapons. This law may actually be a trial balloon to accomplish that. In any case it clearly constitutes a criminal breach of the public trust, and a direct attack on the individual and family's ability to remain independent of state oppression and survive the carefully-engineered collapse of the economy they're eager to bring about so they can rescue all of us to death.

What can we do? Two things. First, those in a position to do it should seek an injunction against the enforcement of this regulation, while grounds are sought to bring criminal charges against Dodd and Frank.

Yes, I'm well aware that there is a self-serving section of the Constitution, Article 1, Section 6, that offers slimeballs and scumbags like Dodd and Frank immunity from punishment for the criminal acts that they are guilty of. In the short run, libertarian lawyers must discover some way around that—or else what the hell good are they?

Second, in the longer run, that section of the Constitution must be repealed because it is one of the major causes of the mess we find ourselves in today. In addition, a penalty clause must added to the Bill of Rights, providing a life sentence for politicians who violate it.

How about this?

Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

Two observations: it isn't really necessary for either of these measures—repeal of Congressional immunity or a Bill of Rights penalty clause—actually to pass into law. If they merely become credible threats, reported and discussed here, there, and everywhere, Dodd and Franks' more timorous colleagues will compel them to back off.

Of course we keep working to pass them, anyway.

Second, a great many individuals criticize my proposed penalty clause because it doesn't call for the public executions of criminals, convicted under due process of law of violating the highest law of the land.

They may have a point.

Let me think about it.


TLE AFFILIATE


Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates.
We cheerfully accept donations!

Big Head Press