A common—and compelling—argument against gun registration is that those who comply are merely putting themselves on a list to have their firearms stolen by government officials in the future. As if to emphasize this, the New Zealand government recently confiscated the firearms licenses and the weapons they covered from 62 people because of their political ideology. The situation is an important reminder that the warnings against registering firearms are correct. But it also raises a red flag about the willingness of governments to punish people for the ideas they believe.

Under the influence of ideology

“Sixty-two firearms license holders with views aligned with the Sovereign Citizens movement have had their licenses revoked after a police intelligence operation,” Catherine Hubbard reported for Waikato Times on October 13. “Nationally, police identified 1,400 people as acting under the influence of Sovereign Citizen ideologies, and of that number, 158 were firearms license holders.”

If you’re not familiar with the term, “sovereign citizen” is a general description for various people who deny the legitimacy of government and claim to live under common law separate from state-imposed rules. That is, they go beyond the skepticism of government legitimacy shared by many people, including philosophical anarchists like Michael Huemer (I recommend his book, The problem of political authority) and sometimes try to live by their ideas. They might refuse to use license plates and file warrants against government officials while using muddled legal arguments that they incorrectly believe will drive away unimpressed police and judges.

Like anyone else, they are sometimes dangerous. But mostly, they’re that guy who corners you at a party to tell you about his magic constitutional revelation that will immunize you against income tax.

Sovereign citizens have found fertile ground in New Zealand, given a boost of the country’s tough COVID era limitation. And, for some reason, they do indeed upset government officials in the respective country.

“The Police Security Intelligence and Threats Group’s Belfast operation in September 2022 aimed to identify security risks to staff from individuals influenced by Sovereign Citizen ideologies,” Hubbard added in his article. “In most cases, no charges have been laid in a revocation proceeding, unless the former licensee committed a crime.”

Beliefs that are not “fit and proper”

That’s right, the country’s police have conducted an internal intelligence operation to identify people who hold extreme ideological beliefs. Their gun licenses were withdrawn because they were no longer deemed “fit and proper” to possess them.

I raised the situation with the New Zealand Police, but the media people refused to answer my questions. “Due to our resources and obligations to New Zealand media, we are declining your service request,” I was told via email.

Strictly speaking, I wasn’t asking for an oil change or a massage, just the kind of answers that media representatives usually cough up as part of their jobs. But if these are a service, I have not received them.

However, the Waikato Times the article gave me enough information to search through Firearms Safety Authority websitewhere we found a requirement that an applicant for a firearms license be “a person fit and proper to possess and use firearms”. Among the potential disqualifiers for this status is if a person has “demonstrated, encouraged or promoted violence, hatred or extremism”.

“Extremism” is in the eye of the beholder politician

Extremism it’s one of those words that politicians find very useful in defaming their critics. Opposing viewpoints are always extreme to the speaker, so it is quite easy for those in power to point the finger at those who disagree with them and demand unleashing the censors.

In fact, the governments of New Zealand and France co-founded The Christchurch appeala campaign against “violent extremist content online”. campaign it immediately became an amorphous blow against the speech of government officials I just don’t like it. Former Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern, who tried to forbid “hate speech” when in office and has he compared words to weapons of warnow he dedicates himself to “combating extremism online”.

“For the last five years, New Zealand has been led by someone who has never really understood what free speech is or why it is so important,” Dr James Kierstead, a researcher at the New Zealand Initiative think tank, wrote in 2022 about then Prime Minister Ardern.

So perhaps it’s no surprise that New Zealand officials believe that simply espousing the views of the powers that be are considered “extreme” is reason enough to deprive people of some of their freedom.

Warnings for Americans

While most Americans do not need licenses to own firearms, and we enjoy First Amendment protections for our speech and Second Amendment protections for owning means of self-defense, we must still consider the example of a liberal democratic government that oversees its own people. and limiting the freedom of those who adopt “unacceptable” ideas. Just two years ago, the FBI passed around a guide to “symbols of domestic terrorism” that could indicate a trend for “violent militia extremism”. Among the symbols allegedly of concern were the Gadsden flag, the Betsy Ross flag, a black and gold anarcho-capitalist flag, and “Revolutionary War imagery.” Being labeled an extremist is not difficult.

At the same time, the government tried to suppress discussion on social media when they crossed imaginary lines of acceptable dissent from government policy or were merely inconvenient for politicians.

“For law-abiding American gun owners, Kiwi’s plight should serve as a stark reminder of the dangers of gun registration, especially when coupled with a government that doesn’t care about a person’s inherent rights, like would be the right of their citizens. to defend themselves and their families,” WARNINGS The Second Amendment Foundation.

It is absolutely true. While it’s not always possible to evade government warrants, registering your guns just puts them on a shopping list for sticky-fingered officials. That’s true registration nothing that you value and that powerful people might fear or covet.

Even more troubling, however, is the prospect of governments in supposedly free societies conducting intelligence operations against their own people and punishing those who hold disapproved ideas. This is a great argument for getting rid of the need for government permission to run our lives. Politicians will never approve of those who disagree with them, but we shouldn’t need their approval.