Interesting: Princess Di's Revolver...

Apparently, Princess Di had a revolver made for her by a designer named Bijan, with a solid gold (or so it looked) chamber, now worth an approximate $250,000.

Maybe someone should mention that to the rest of the Royals...

As witnessed on Hard Copy, 8-24.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com
www.bladeforums.com
 
AFAIK, the British Royal family are all gunowners and shooters -- primarily shotguns, but I've heard the Queen was a particularly mean pistol shot.

In fact, they cop flak in the press here for their shooting and "love" of the blood sports.

Prince Phillip in particular has come out in public saying he believes the new UK bans on firearms are a total dead loss and waste of space. He copped heaps for that and was forced to publicly apologise -- but I bet he never really changed his opinion!! ;)

B
 
In "Diana Her True Story", there is a photo of the Princess shooting some sort of machine pistol at a police training center in Essex in 1990. Sensibly, at 7 meters.
 
BTW, there's a photo of a Detective Special decorated by Bijan in R. L. Wilson's book, "Colt: An American Legend." Definitely not the usual gun look, but not at all bad, either.
 
Is there maybe a little double standard? One law for the royals and political big shots and another for the peasants?

That is sure the case here - just look at the list of NYC pistol carry permits.

Jim
 
Diana Spencer (Remember: The Queen took away her title of Princess after the divorce) plinking away with her machine pistol or posing with a gold-plated revolver exemplies the reality that gun prohibition is about letting an elite few keep their guns while the rest of us give up or become criminals. Either way, the prospects of such an arrangement remain intolerable.
 
Do the Royals get to posess recreational pistols??

Or did they also lose such privelidges (sp?) as well?

Another question for the worldly ;): are concealed carry pistol permits still available in Northern Ireland (limited to like 20rds of ammo a year on these babies)?

I've always thought that the Royals pose much less threat to 'freedoms' in the old country than the COMMUNIST Labour party that now poses as New Labour.

If one listens to anti-royalists, one will also come often come to the conclusion that they are anti-hunting as well as anti-firearms.
 
Never forget that one of the reasons the United States of America was born was in order to breakaway from the historic feudal societies in which only the Sovereigns and their designated were allowed to bear arms in order to enforce the Sovereign's will.

In the USA; each of us are independent of sovereigns, and able to bear arms specifically in order to deprive the "sovereign" of enforcing it's will.

It's better to be free than to be king! There are more of us, and we're more trustworthy.
 
I'm no royalist, but I can't imagine in the UK today, with their anti-gun attitude PLUS their "stick it up the Royals" philosophy, that the Royal Family would be allowed to own guns the "peasants" can't.

Shotguns -- fine -- they are, after all, "landowners" and have a legitimate reason.

But with the security forces they have, why would they need, say, handguns, anyway??

B
 
Trevor,

Your apparent opinion concerning the paternalism and statism of the few is well founded. My (perhaps exessive) opinions about the "elite" show I stand 100% with you on this one.

Clearly I am not a supporter of the Brits, nor an apologist for Diana Spencer. However, we sometimes put a person like her in an untenable position.

1) She never was in a position to affect firearms legislation.

2) If she so much as looks at a firearm, it exemplifies "...an elite few keep their guns while the rest of us give up or become criminals."

3) If she refuses to look at a firearm, it makes her a poster child for the anti-gun people.

Personally, if someone in her position is willing to be involved with firearms in public, I believe it could mean any of many things:

1) Supreme hypocrisy.
2) Publicity.
3) An attempt not to embarrass her guests or those who created the situation.
4) An attempt to show she is a "normal" person "deep down".
5) Curiosity about firearms.
6) A rebellious nature.
7) A statement that she saw no real harm in supervised use of firearms.
8) A personal statement against gun control.
9) A chance to embarrass the Crown.

I'm not defending Diana. I am trying to point out that some few of the elite may be on our side but unwilling to express it for the same reasons many gun owners keep their opinions private (even hidden) and refuse to participate in public displays of support of our RKBA, (ref the Aug 21st flop of most demonstrations in our state capitals.)

If we can swing some of the elite to our side, we should do so.

Locally, we tried to convert Texas Governor Ann Richards. She already believed in the private ownership of "certain" firearms. She bragged about her prowess with a shotgun but she wouldn't even permit a vote on CCW.

Richards' stance on CCW launched the career of the elitist George Bush, Jr. (But that's a different thread.)

We agree on this: When those in power minimize citizens' RKBA, they should be converted or reviled (including publicizing their hypocrisy). When in public office, converted or replaced. Get 'em off the fence or fry 'em. That's what being a "leader" is all about.
 
Dennis: Your point is well-made. How do we induce cooperation from the elite of the ruling class? I agree that gunowners need at least some of them for support. Former governor Ann Richards is a case in point: She worked against CCW in Texas and paid a price for it. Yet, can George W. Bush be trusted to maintain his support for the RKBA? Too often politicians court the votes of gunowners in an election by telling them what they want to hear. Later, after they have won and are serving in office, they change their position and go anti-gun. John McCain is an example of this behavior. Gunowners let them get away with it too.

Behavior such as McCain's makes me have very little confidence in our elected leaders. Unlike many on this board, I am not a libertarian. I am a conservative that believes in some rational construction of authority to create a civil society. I believe that firearm ownership is inappropriate for the feeble, the insane, or patently criminal. Thus, firearms will be inevitably regulated. The question is how. Will it be by lying, cheating, drunken, sex-crazed, drug-addicted politicians, or by an elected body of dignified representatives that respect human rights, self-reliance, self-defense, and the rule of law? I fear it is the former, not the latter. Are we as a nation of self-ruling people ready to take on the unpleasant task of saving ourselves from a corrupt and abusive government? Somehow, I doubt it.

By the way, I am not playing devil's advocate here (as I have in some earlier posts). I am saying it straight for once. So, I ask you again, how do we induce cooperation from the people that matter?


[This message has been edited by Trevor (edited August 26, 1999).]
 
Trevor,
An honest question deserves an honest answer. I’ll do my best to share with you how I've
been muddling along.

To convert elitists, we must overpower their organizations. Let’s start with the
government.

The current federal government has violated both the letter and the spirit of the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights to an incredible extent - unsurpassed in history except
possibly during times of war.

I seem to be paraphrasing Patrick Henry again, but we can only judge the future actions of
our government by their past.
They told us how they would usurp power, and they did it.
They tell us how they will usurp more power. They will do it.

They tell us they will reduce the Right to Keep and Bear Arms to a memory. They
ruthlessly and relentlessly struggle toward that unworthy goal.

Apparently there is no end to their lust for totalitarian control. How can we stop them?

The power of the ballot box is illusionary. The same people who would enslave us choose
the candidates we can vote for. Is that an exaggeration?

What has happened to Senator Bob Smith? Since he left the Republican Party he has
become “the invisible man”.

What about Dr. Alan Keyes? His e-mail service shows that he campaigns with a vigor
unmatched by ANY candidate in recent memory! He is cheered and revered everywhere
he speaks! But what support does he have from his party? Virtually none. He is not the
anointed one. He espouses control OF government rather than control BY government.
He is a danger to the establishment therefore he will not achieve the candidacy - let alone
the Presidency.

We are permitted to vote only for those candidates acceptable to the major parties - both
of which in the past and in the present, promise more gun control, increasingly intrusive
control over our private lives and our families, and more violations of the Constitution and
Bill of Rights - precious documents already in tatters.

If we are to maintain our freedom, we must restore Constitutional Law. We must do this
at the ballot box before it is too late or we will be thrust into virtual enslavement or into
the fiery hell of war.

But to win peacefully at the ballot box, we must unite. We must realize that if the Second
Amendment falls our differing views on other subjects become irrelevant. The
government will TELL us how we are to live. They will inflict upon us their “enlightened”
views - even on the issues we presently permit to divide us: abortion, atheism,
environmental concerns, fishing, history, hunting, national parks, recreation, religion,
school vouchers, welfare, wetlands, or whatever. These issues will be irrelevant. THEY
will wield all power over US.

To avoid persecution or even an armed and violent insurrection, we must temporarily set
aside our divisive views on other subjects. We must unite to overcome the current
establishment and their blind, faithful, lemming-like followers who would lead our country
over the cliffs into the sea of totalitarianism.

Can we merely ask the current government to give up the power they currently have over
us? Can we ask them to cease and desist increasing that power with every Presidential
Executive Order, with every new legislative affront to liberty, with every new and
burdensome government directive?

That’s laughable. That is like shouting into a hurricane to reduce its winds. It’s like
asking a man about to be shot whether or not he wants a blindfold. What follows is
inevitable and irrevocable.

We must unite. We must vote the current regime out of office or we will continue down
that slippery slope into totalitarianism “for the greater good”, into persecution “for the
children”.

That, Trevor, is why I have forsaken the major parties. Although others disagree, even
disagree violently, I truly believe that to do anything less is to rationalize away our
birthright.

How does this answer your question? How do we induce cooperation from the people
that matter?

Let’s start from a position we all can agree upon. The wealthy, the powerful, the elite, the
upper class, whatever we decide to call them are in many ways like us. Most of them do
not want to reduce or even endanger their standard of living. They do not want to lose
their assets, possessions, influence and prospects for the future. They do not want to
suffer for their political views.

Consider Tom Selleck. A “hunk”. An acceptable actor and personality. Yet when the
establishment learned he was a conservative, he basically lost his career.

Consider Charleton Heston. A respected, accomplished member of Hollywood, ostracized
for his belief in our RKBA.

The “establishment” is against us. But the upper class can NOT withstand a united
common class.
That is why I went through this long tirade on why we must unite!

If we unite we have power! We have political and financial power. We can vote both at
the ballot box and with our dollars to support those who support us.

By withholding support from the opposition, and giving support to our supporters, we can
compel the elitists, the statists, the Socialists, the totalitarians, the entire lot of them to
work WITH us instead of AGAINST us. But we must unite. We must work together to
support those who wholeheartedly will re-establish the power and prestige of our
Constitution.

Support all the gun-rights organizations you can afford to.
Petition for redress from the government like the Californians are doing.
Calmly but firmly explain to our current government representatives that we will support
only those who support the Constitution. Explain your views to them by e-mail, letter,
fax, telegram, and in person. This will encourage defections from the totalitarian
movements.

Try to win converts. Overcome them with honest, believable facts. Be gentle with
fence-sitters. Destroy the credibility of the vehement anti-gunners. Teach firearms safety
and usage to those who will listen.

As much as possible, avoid buying the goods and services of those who are against us.
Consult the NRA list of organizations who donate to gun control organizations. Stop
buying their products and tell them why. Buy from vendors who do NOT support gun
control and tell them why. Then inform the gun control supporters what you’ve done and
why.

When people in power support us, support them. When people in power support the
downfall of our way of life, fight them and tell them why and how you are doing it!

If we do this in sufficient numbers, the greedy elitists will appreciate the threat to their
way of life. They will back off or even switch to our side. The “closet Americans” among
the elite will join us and induce other elitists to do the same - if we unite in sufficient
numbers.

But we must stop bickering among ourselves. We must stop picking at each other like
children. We must reduce the friction within our organization to maximize our power.
That must come first. Once we have power, the elitists MUST recognize us. They must
bow to the united power of the people or they will be replaced just as Texans replaced
Ann Richards.

Once we regain control over our government, and get them out of our lives, then we will
have regained our right to settle other problems to our individual satisfaction.

The Brownshirts tell us we are too late. They are wrong.
The weak among us cry for appeasement. That leads to sure defeat.
Only our united efforts can lead to victory.

The choice is still in our hands, but for how long?

RKBA!
 
Back
Top