Alan Korwin: We Need Consequences For Infringements

To gun owners and journalists, the name Alan Korwin has been known for years. He is the author if various states gunowner's guides. Indeed, as he shows here, he is the go to person when you have a question about gun laws. And, in fact, keeping and bearing arms it is pretty confusing and risky as each state has different gun laws, and in some cases, just moving from one county or city to another jurisdiction can put gun owners in serious jeapardy. Therefore, Korwin's work is invaluable.

With that introduction to who Alan Korwin is, let us take a look at his recent article at Townhall.com entitled Giving The Constitution Teeth: The Truth About Aggravated Infringement - A Felony. Korwin's point is absolutely correct, there is no way to hold people accountable for violations, or infringements of rights and provision of the Constitution itself, for the Constitution assumes that those who have taken an oath to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic will keep their word. Too many have proven they will not do so. Here is what Korwin proposes:

The U.S. Constitution, for all its strengths, revered and imitated worldwide, has a fatal flaw. A weakness of Greek-tragedy proportions. The Constitution lacks punishment for those who would violate its terms. Yes, there are avenues of recourse, but these have been neutered and rendered feckless in so many ways.

Politicians these days believe they can get away with anything, right? Graft, bribes, gaslighting, obtaining office by any means legal or otherwise, all-out bald-faced lies, scare tactics, misappropriation of funds... They’ll use the organs of government to assault domestic opposition (not the same as domestic enemies), place them under arrest, strangle their voices by deplatforming, controlling so-called “news” media and playing them like stenographers, it has gotten totally out of hand. Why? And what to do about it? Even when they’re exposed, red-handed—did you review John Durham’s report?—they seem to skate. Here’s why:

The ultimate protection of our “Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness”—a way to force government into compliance—is use of force. Our Declaration of Independence recognized and encouraged that “...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."

That option, which held more meaning right after our bloody founding, has lost some if not all its impact. It’s too extreme, too hard, too violent for subtle infringements and little incursions on our liberties. That allows the thousand cuts to build up until they are intolerable acts. Then use of force is too late. We’re there now. But there’s hope.

What America needs, what our Republic and Constitution need, is strict adherence to a policy of, “No infringement shall be tolerated.” Small encroachments—like licenses to carry arms or speech codes—must subject people proposing such violations to penalties. Gross infringements like, “We’re going to take away your favorite rifle—and of course we’ll keep ours,” require prison terms. Stiff penalties.

I can already hear gentle readers mumbling to themselves "Yeah? Who is going to enforce it. Don't we already have something about depriving people of rights acknowledged by the Constitution under color of law? Why, yes we do. It is 18 U.S Code Section 242. But really doesn't apply to the politicians themselves, though it could apply to the officials of the Deep State. But again, who will enforce it against them when it is the Attorney General himself who is directing these bad actors. But let's hear Korwin out, shall we?

Talking about violating constitutional rights is fine. That’s free speech, protected to an almost holy level. Acting to violate the rights though, like by proposing laws in clear usurpation beyond delegated powers, that is Simple Infringement, a misdemeanor.

Formally proposing infringement legislation is a bad thing. But acting on existing infringements, that is Aggravated Infringement, a felony, with stiff sentences and strict liability, even for a first offense. You cannot offer such tripe into the legislative hopper. It’s like proposing slavery. Argue for it with speech, this is an American’s prerogative. So many of my liberal friends argue for banning guns, taking away guns you own, outlawing the purchase of new guns, making new categories of prohibited people. We must support this, it is a right to speak.

You politicians, elected or appointed, and your bureaucratic functionaries—hired, appointed or in office by law—you are banned from doing these things. Without teeth though, the ban is feckless, as we see all around us. Under these proposed new statutes—you get fined for a first offense, jailed for repeat offenses. Don’t do it.

Unfortunately, Korwin never really answers the question of just who or what institution will enforce these laws. The Supreme Court has proven to be feckless very often. In any case, the cost to get something in front of the court...maybe...would bankrupt the average citizen many times over. The Attorney General is often part of the problem. Even if it is Federal judges, these are appointed individuals who are, sadly not angels themselves.

I agree with Mr. Korwin's idea, but I have my doubts as to its practicality.