…when they came for the gunowners, there was no one left to speak out.

Tom DeLay had his concealed carry permit rescinded because of his indictment. From Reuters:

Rep. Tom DeLay, once one of the most powerful figures in the U.S. Congress, wants his right to pack a pistol restored after the state of Texas revoked his permit following his indictment last year.

The former House Majority Leader’s licence to carry a concealed handgun was taken away after he was indicted on campaign finance charges, but he has appealed the revocation, DeLay spokeswoman Shannon Flaherty said on Tuesday.

She would not say whether DeLay, a “gun rights” advocate who spoke last year at the National Rifle Association annual convention in Houston, carries a gun.

“That’s the point of having a CHL (concealed handgun licence) in Texas — potential criminals should assume everyone is (carrying),” Flaherty said in an email.

Texas Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Tela Mange said she could not disclose how long DeLay has had the gun permit, but that state law dictates it be revoked upon indictment on felony charges.

Normally, I’d be more than willing to stand up for DeLay’s constitutional rights. Considering DeLay’s actions which curtailed our constitutional rights on issues ranging from medical marijuana to the Patriot Act, I’m not at all sympethetic. Perhaps DeLay (and his Republican cronies) should read the famous Niemöller quotation from time to time.

15 Comments
  1. No, Tom DeLay’s not terribly sympathetic.

    Neither, sad to say, are many Libertarians.

    We should stand on principle, though, and defend the rights of the unsympathetic, even when it’s not necessarily a popular thing to do.

  2. Seth,

    That was my point with the Niemöller quote — but aimed at Republicans, though :)

  3. I do not like DeLay at all. I fully support his right to carry and gun and so should all Libertarians…

    If there was a trained gun-owner in every household we would have FAR fewer burglaries…

    Mike Sylvester

  4. I’m not stating that I don’t support his right to KABA, merely that he’s certainly been guilty of depriving other’s of their rights, so perhaps it’s a fair penalty.

    Additionally, what I’m really trying to do is suggest that gun rights, privacy rights, medication rights, etc. are all in the same genre. Taking one is little different than taking some other.

  5. Permits? We don’t need no stinkin’ permits. Even a scumbag criminal like DeLay should be able to defend himself. After all, he’s gotta walk the same streets as numerous citizens that him and his gang have robbed, and now that his gang isn’t going to be protecting him as much, who will?

  6. Gun rights should exist even when you commit a felony. If it wasn’t a violent crime, especially. But, if you are out of prison, then you are believed to be able to come back to society, right?

    The right to bear arms can end at the prison gates, but not at a red mark on your legal record, like a felony. That’s what I say at least.

  7. Matt, you are absolutely right! When Joe ex-con gets out of the joint, he is likely to be in the same neighborhood where people he robbed, and enemy gangs, will want to do him harm. It is cruel and unusual punishment to tell him he is not allowed to protect himself.

    If his intent is to go back to a life of crime, not allowing him to have a gun won’t stop him; after all he is in the habit of breaking laws, so what’s one more? But if he really wants to make a change, this is just one more severely insane rule that will be used to trip him up and put him back in a cage, at a high cost to taxpayers.

    In the case of scumbag politicians who are the ones who pass such crazy laws, and engage in massive armed robbery and regulation-rape of taxvictim/citizens, it is tempting to subject them to the lynch mob which will surely be after them when the citizens see one of the ruling mob gang deprived of the protection of his pack. It would only be sporting to give him a fighting chance.

  8. I thought that DeLay was indicted but not yet convicted. Did I miss some news? Do you only have to be accused of something now to be stripped of your rights? Wait a minute, I guess so. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/rules.htm

    According to the rules, you can’t be behind in child support, owe taxes or be in default on student loan repayments either. You can’t be depressed or frequently intoxicated. There are many more barriers in the official rulebook, but my respite from work chaos is over and I must get back to it.

  9. Paulie Cannoli

    Do you own or have access to firearms? Do you pack? I’ll bet you will admit to it because you still fear the government and do not want to jeapordize your freedom.

    We need some martyrs so you might as well be the one since you are so intense on your anarchist positions. Once you are arrested and convicted, then all the anarchists will come to your defense, riot, loot and burn the town you are incarcerated in. You will be a real hero in your own eyes. I’m waiting.

    Be a standup person. Possess firearms and carry concealed even though you are a convicted felon. Now that would make you a real 13 percenter Anarchist hijacking the Libertarian Party. What are laws for anyway if not to be ignored?

    Hell, I guess outright murder and rape is OK if one wants to do it and it feels good at the moment.

    No good reason to mince words, might as well cut through the chase.

  10. Michelle Shinghal

    The answer to your question is yes. It seems that in this country under the current system, you are guilty until you can prove you are innocent. Even if one is proven innocent, it is still most likely he can be denied the Second Amendment right to bear arms just because….

  11. Do you own or have access to firearms? Do you pack?

    Do you have a permit to ask stupid questions?

    What are laws for anyway if not to be ignored?

    I don’t ignore the laws. I do ignore illegitimate regime diktats and edicts.

    Hell, I guess outright murder and rape is OK if one wants to do it and it feels good at the moment.

    Certainly, if you are part of the regime. They are perfectly fine in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo, secret prisons in former Soviet Communist countries, Waco, Ruby Ridge, World Trade Center, and other places too numerous to mention.

    Now that would make you a real 13 percenter Anarchist hijacking the Libertarian Party.”

    I don’t know what percent I am now, but I signed the oath without commiting fraud. Others, who are ignorant and/or dishonest, are signing it with the intent to hijack the party and change it into yet another staist party just like the others. That’s a shame.

  12. If his intent is to go back to a life of crime,

    I should have said, or go forward to a life of crime, since many people in prison were innocent, or convicted of breaking “laws” which were illegitimate in the first place when they went in; but emerge as real criminals.

  13. the problem is that he has lost the right to CONCEAL the gun, not the right to have it. the justification here is that since delay is a suspected felon, he simply would have to carry his gun openly instead of hiding it, thus alerting others that he indeed had a gun and allowing them to take precautions. CARRYING is an inalienable right in the US, CONCEALING isn’t