Claire Wolfe addition

[JimDiver]

Most excelent!! Love it!

I am passing the my copy of the artical on to everyone I know.

JD. Outlaw and proud of it.

[Tamara]

When I saw her name in the issue, it took me most of the rest of the day to wipe the idiot grin off my face. I was shoving SWAT in everyone's face at work, saying "Look! Look who's writing a column in SWAT! Is that not just the coolest?"

[Rich Lucibella]

I'm actually quite amazed that that first column didn't draw withering fire from some of our readers.

In any case, Claire is a bit of a hero of mine and we've been after her to contribute since 2001. She was the one who referred us to Rich Stevens who has done a phenomenal job with that column.

The August column is even better than July and her subject line-up for future columns is at least as edgy as what you've seen so far.


Rich

[Jeff Randall]

One of my heros, philosopher Ayn Rand, was preaching Individualism many years ago.

While I agree with Claire that we are over-regulated, over-taxed, and over-ruled I have also seen the aftermath when somone takes these "givens" and escalates beyond the definition of "outlaw" that Claire writes about. This is not to say that she is wrong for writing how she feels since every indvidual has to be repsonsible for his/her own actions.

I've spent many years studying extremism and "those who feel that politics is a contact sport" (to steal a phrase coined by a friend of mine). What I have learned is a good "leader" can take the average Joe citizen who wears his heart on his sleeve and wind him up into being a soldier. So, yes, it is possible to take the guy that's pissed about seat belt laws and eventually make a bomber out of him, as far-fetched as that may sound.

"Leaders" of revolutionary type organizations loathe Individualism since Individualists *usually* cannot be brainwashed into being soldiers for the often hidden "greater cause." I think that point should have been made more clear in Claire's article. I don't see her philosophy in this article as being "outlaw" since, as she writes none of us can truly be completely within the law. Rather I think the premise of her whole piece is "Individualism." All in all a good piece for those who truly understand the difference.

[The Antibubba]

Let me admit right off that I havn't read the article in question, so I don't know what she said. But it seems incongruous that Claire Wolfe, a champion of individual rights and vociferous critic of the State, would be writing articles for a magazine that emphasizes police tactics and law enforcement. I'm not in any way trying to imply that the cops are bad guys, but they are the enforcement arm of government-local, state, and federal. And police are allowed equipment and "passes" that the rest of us only dream of.

So what I am I not seeing? Can someone post the article?

[Tamara]

And police are allowed equipment ... that the rest of us only dream of.

S.W.A.T. is the magazine that says, in a disclaimer on the same page as the masthead, "Certain products represented in this magazine may be subject to prohibitions, restrictions or special licensing for sale, possession, or interstate transport. If this annoys you, Get Involved...support the Bill of Rights...all of them!"

Do you see that printed anywhere in, say, Guns and Weapons For The King's Men?

Can someone post the article?

It should still be on news stands.

[Sarge]

While I have neither read Ms. Wolfe's article or any current edition of SWAT magazine, I will chime in here as it is a topic of some relevance to my profession.

Here in MO we seem to grow a pretty decent extremist. This has been going on since the "border wars" of the 1860's. There will always be a certain person who is looking for a cause to champion, regardless of whether or not they are "oppressed" by gov't or anyone else. The "soldier tree" produces plenty of fruit without much tending, and luckily the best fruit generally winds up in the best baskets- those belonging to the armed forces of the USA. Thus it becomes more likely that the culls & fallen fruit will wind up in in the "whack basket".

There are also a lot of regular folks who are just plain tired of legislation and idiotic supreme court rulings, which encroach further and further into what used to be our private lives. It is much easier to blame "bad old government" than it is to accept responsibility for making bad choices in the voting booth- or (worse in my opinion) none at all.

The law enforcement perspective on these people varies tremendously from officer to officer, and agency to agency. We have had several state troopers killed by them in the last 25 years, and of course OKC was the death knell for domestic extremist groups in general. Many of my contemporaries now see a Tim McVeigh in any new group that rears its head; this includes your basic "tax objector" outfit, who contends that the government has no right to tax them or even write them a traffic ticket. "De law don't apply to me Bub, cause I don't recognize yo' gub'mit!" OK, fine.

Most of us take a little more realistic view of the problem. If Joe Schmuck is trying to shoot me, then Joe Schmuck is my immediate problem. My first order of business is to turn out his lights. We'll worry about whether he was a member of Posey Commytaters, or AAA, later.

Take care & stay safe.

[Don Gwinn]

Just so you know, Ms. Wolfe's column for this month is all about the difference between the "rights" of citizens and the "powers and privileges" of police.

It's titled:

CRIMINALS HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN POLICE
(And Be Very Glad They Do)

It's good stuff.

[KSFreeman]

Darn James Madison anywho!

[pax]

Very, very happy to see Claire Wolfe writing for SWAT. She's a great asset!

I do have one question: her first article for SWAT looked vaguely familiar to my eye. Is that just because I've been reading her works for years, or had that piece seen earlier publication somewhere?

pax

[techbrute]

it seems incongruous that Claire Wolfe, a champion of individual rights and vociferous critic of the State, would be writing articles for a magazine that emphasizes police tactics and law enforcement.

Have you read SWAT? I'm not really sure what "emphasizes police tactics and law enforcement" implies, but I don't recall any article in the last 2 years that spoke only to LEOs.

[IZinterrogator]

Don, you were right. I loved that article. Thumbs up to Claire.

[Rich Lucibella]

pax-
Good eye. She started off with an update of a Classic Claire Column.
Rich

[pax]

Rich ~

Thanks. I'd been trying to figure out for days whether it was simply an intense case of deja vu all over again ...

Glad she's aboard.

pax

[longbaugh]

Its exciting to find a publication that would hire such a writer, maybe I can get the BX to order it for me since I am overseas and cant get to a news stand.

[Matis]

CRIMINALS HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN POLICE
(And Be Very Glad They Do)
_____________________________________________

Yes, Don Guinn, it can be quite frustrating at times, but I am glad!


I rec'd my first issue - August - and I'm glad to see Claire Wolf writing for S.W.A.T.

I'm enjoying the issue. Topics are explored in greater depth than the typical gun rag I'm used to, and -- either the editing is better -- or -- the authors can actually write! Maybe even both. (big grin)

I'm glad I subscribed.

matis

[VaughnT]

I think the big question is, Did Claire say anything that didn't have the ring of truth in it?

Maybe that truth is the underlying reason for the sense of unease that some people have with her writings. Personally, I enjoyed the article. I can see how a person could use it to bolster their extremist views, but those people can find meaning in anything.

I'll look forward to more in the future. Thanks to all hands for putting a mag like this on the store shelves.

[Denny Hansen]

John Steinbeck was correct; the final weapon really is the brain.

Claire's articles, while they may be controversial, will get people to think.

Denny

[whiskyrebellion]

if anyone would like to read more Claire Wolfe articles, then go to the Backwoods Home magazine site.

she is a regular author there and is very well respected.