Skip to main content

The Slippery Slope: When Good Intentions Erode Government Authority

By Matthew Hayward

The Slippery Slope: When Government Overreach Erodes Its Own Authority

Introduction

Governance and citizenry balance delicately on mutual understanding, trust, and respect. The bedrock of this pact? The expectation that government safeguards citizens' rights and freedoms. Yet, this trust erodes when governmental actions undermine their own authority—a specter haunting my experiences with escalating firearms laws in Washington State.

Background: The Gradual Tightening of the Noose

Federal laws have long existed in a state of forced compromise to my principles, not allowing me to purchase a suppressor or automatic weapon without an additional fee and registration. Similarly, Washington State laws compelled me to pay for permission to carry a firearm in a concealed manner.

However, Washington State disrupted the equilibrium between personal freedom and government regulation in 2014, introducing transfer fees on firearms, effectively creating a registry of gun owners. Despite my unease about firearms restrictions, I complied—this was one of the last compromises I was willing to make.

The 2014 law was a watershed moment. It cornered me into a position where legal firearm purchases became tantamount to the abandonment of my principles. Confronted with this, I chose my convictions over convenience, letting opportunities to acquire firearms pass by in favor of principle over registration. However, I was not 'yet' prepared to break the law.

The Onslaught of Restrictions

Post-2014, Washington State enacted a series of restrictive laws, each one a blow to rights enshrined in our State Constitution:

"The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men." Article 1, Section 24

Notable measures include:

Citizens' Response: From Silent Acceptance to Open Defiance

The relentless erosion of gun rights has triggered a spectrum of reactions. Austin Harlan, the owner of The Range in Yakima, noted a rush to purchase firearms ahead of the incoming legislation. This uptick not only reveals an escalating unease over diminishing rights but ironically undermines the intended effects of the legislation itself.

Yet, a more disturbing reaction takes shape: open defiance. An endless barrage of regulations has pushed some citizens, including myself, to disregard the State's authority. This chilling shift erodes respect for the rule of law and threatens to spawn a new class of dissenters.

The Unseen Cost of Overreach

Government overreach doesn't merely risk its own legitimacy; it threatens societal stability. When citizens begin to openly disregard laws, tensions rise, putting law enforcement in a quandary—particularly when these citizens are armed and resolute.

Final Thoughts

As lawmakers aim to reduce gun violence, they must ponder a poignant paradox: are they driving citizens to defend their rights with the very firearms they seek to regulate? Restoring trust calls for open dialogue, a reassessment of individual rights versus public safety, and unwavering respect for constitutional rights.

Even when well-intentioned, government overreach bears a steep cost: the erosion of faith and trust in the institution. We can ill afford this price, as it fractures the foundation of our society. We must find our way back from this brink, lest we plunge into the abyss.


"When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law" The Law By Frederic Bastiat.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price  Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...