Made Common Citizens Think


PDA






def4pos8
July 12, 2008, 03:23 PM
I work as an armed guard, making sure that a bunch of nice folks go home in one piece after a shift. Since I'm "The Gun Guy", more than one of 'em has asked my opinion of the Heller decision.

I start my response by stating that we were one vote shy of causing the first armed rebellion in this country in 150 years.

This tends to stun the listener.

Most think on it for a while but do understand the implications. The usual response is: "Yeah, you're right! Gee! That WAS a close call!"


Don't be shy! Be prepared to discuss Heller with common citizens. They're not, all, freaked-out, Brady types -- and they do tend to vote. . . .

If you enjoyed reading about "Made Common Citizens Think" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
kingpin008
July 12, 2008, 03:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but that's not the response I'd want to give people, especially if I have no idea what their views on guns and gun rights are.

Hell, even as a gunnie, it seems a bit...reactionary. Now, I know where you're coming from, and in a way I agree, but to joe average, I think it paints a rather extreme picture.

As always, just my two cents.

XD Fan
July 12, 2008, 03:45 PM
we were one vote shy of causing the first armed rebellion in this country in 150 years


I think this is a bit of an overstatement. Losing Heller would have been devastating, but it would not have caused armed rebellion. Our nation is too apathetic. It would take a bigger shock than a Supreme Court decision to cause armed rebellion.

Just my two cents.

sqlbullet
July 12, 2008, 03:53 PM
Perhaps many of you aren't aware Montana's situation. A resolution expressed their intent to dissolve the Montana Compact if the court held other than an individual right. I think armed conflict may have been much more likely than most Americans want to admit.

rainbowbob
July 12, 2008, 04:01 PM
I think it paints a rather extreme picture.

I also don't think it is accurate. Whatever your sentiments, a different decision on Heller would not have automatically made our possession of guns illegal. It simply (at least in the short term) would have allowed DC to continue their handgun ban. There was no armed rebellion before Heller - and there would not likely have been one as a reaction to a different ruling.

CajunBass
July 12, 2008, 04:03 PM
Made Common Citizens Think

Be prepared to discuss Heller with common citizens.

Perhaps a tad arrogant m'lord? :rolleyes:

41magsnub
July 12, 2008, 04:06 PM
Next he will show the violence inherent in the system!

Bartkowski
July 12, 2008, 04:09 PM
I think that it would have had a greater effect than most of us think.(then again less than some of us think, like def4pos8)

There probably wouldn't have been an immediate armed rebellion, but constant protests/riots. And if Montana did leave the U.S. that could easily put other ideas about rebellion in motion.

XD Fan
July 12, 2008, 04:09 PM
Perhaps many of you aren't aware Montana's situation. A resolution expressed their intent to dissolve the Montana Compact if the court held other than an individual right. I think armed conflict may have been much more likely than most Americans want to admit.

Link, please.

bnkrazy
July 12, 2008, 04:57 PM
Link, please.

Here are a few.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=341705
http://www.reason.com/news/show/126063.html
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS240&q=+Montana+heller+secede&btnG=Search

Standing Wolf
July 12, 2008, 08:30 PM
...even as a gunnie, it seems a bit...reactionary.

Oh, yeah? I have a hunch the founding fathers would have grabbed their muskets and plenty of powder and ball.

cambeul41
July 12, 2008, 08:46 PM
I have a hunch the founding fathers would have grabbed their muskets and plenty of powder and ball.

Yeah, but do people today have what it takes?

yokel
July 12, 2008, 09:03 PM
Any sort of swaggering and threatening talk of CW2 is silly, ineffective, and could even be counterproductive.

oldfart
July 12, 2008, 09:39 PM
"Any sort of swaggering and threatening talk of CW2 is silly, ineffective, and could even be counterproductive."

Yeah, but if we don't say it once in awhile they'll think we've forgotten about it. Worse, we might forget about it.

bogie
July 12, 2008, 09:45 PM
Hearts and minds, campers...

Being aggressive, confrontational and antagonistic just reinforces all the stereotypes which the non-gun folks want the fence-sitters to believe.

Be nice.

Be a Good Example.

And lead, instead of push.

yokel
July 12, 2008, 10:02 PM
Yeah, but if we don't say it once in awhile they'll think we've forgotten about it. Worse, we might forget about it.

I reckon that anyone who is dead serious about engaging in violent and destructive action would be too busy planning and executing to talk about it.

See what I mean?

I've studied a little history and I know the kinds of body counts and horrors that even 'successful' revolutions can produce.

def4pos8
July 13, 2008, 12:19 AM
I think that those of us who exercise our Right to arms on a regular basis are NOT common citizens. We are not the norm in today's society. We are not better or worse than other citizens in our general behavior but our understanding of the implications of the Second Amendment sets us apart.

I think that most citizens don't understand the free exercise of our Second Amendment -- or the others codified in the Bill of Rights and the balance of the Constitution. This is a sad situation.

After grabbing their attention with my shock line, I push the conversation into a general discussion of Constitutional issues.

I see Heller as a good decision that represents a tidal shift, reversing a forty-year trend of government encroachment. If it had gone the other way, things could have, eventually, slow as a glacier, gone very bad. That it likely won't degenerate to violence is a good thing.

Brian Dale
July 13, 2008, 04:30 AM
def4pos8, you gave us the context:I work as an armed guard... Since I'm "The Gun Guy", more than one of 'em has asked my opinion of the Heller decision.I think that your "shock line" was excellent, coming from you, at work. Stay pleasant and professional, stimulate thought, and fulfill your mission: ...making sure that a bunch of nice folks go home in one piece after a shift. You might by your polite teaching influence folks to help themselves and others to stay alive elsewhere, too.

Good thread.

sacp81170a
July 13, 2008, 08:42 AM
I think def4pos8 is exactly right.

This tends to stun the listener.

Probably the reason this tends to stun them is that it has a real grain of truth. We hear the history of the founding of our nation and it all seems so distant to us in our chemically and electronically over stimulated world. The Heller decision reaches all the way back to the reason for the Revolution and ties today's world directly to it. Makes ya think, which most folks aren't in the habit of doing, therefore the stunned reaction.

5 watt load on a 2 watt circuit... ;)

Picard
July 14, 2008, 10:33 AM
I very well think that it might have caused an armed rebellion. It could eventually lead to the confiscation of all firearms.

What would infuriate me more is how clear it is to see the original intent of the Constitution, yet 4 Supreme Court Justices, people who should be more knowledgeable than any of us on the subject, did not agree.

jaak
July 14, 2008, 10:54 AM
i would not rule out the possibility that an armed rebellion COULD have happened. would it? i doubt it. but nothing is impossible.

Rokyudai
July 14, 2008, 11:03 AM
Next he will show the violence inherent in the system!

You saw him repressing me? Didn't you!?

Love Python!

Seancass
July 14, 2008, 12:40 PM
i just remind people that the criminals already had the guns and now the lawful can have them too! it's simpler and everybody believes it.

geekWithA.45
July 14, 2008, 12:47 PM
This is called the "macho flash", and it has its place, to be used sparingly and with judicious discretion.


we were one vote shy of causing the first armed rebellion in this country in 150 years
I think this is a bit of an overstatement.

I actually don't think it an overstatement at all.

Certainly, I'm not saying that gunfire would have erupted on June 27, but I think that had Heller gone against us, future history books would have noted that it was the moment at which armed internal conflict had become inevitable.

TexasSkyhawk
July 14, 2008, 12:59 PM
Perhaps many of you aren't aware Montana's situation. A resolution expressed their intent to dissolve the Montana Compact if the court held other than an individual right. I think armed conflict may have been much more likely than most Americans want to admit.

I do know from my old fed LE pals that better than two-dozen large, organized militias were watching this decision VERY intensely. I also know from them that there were some folks at DHS that were getting a severe case of the sweats in the days leading up to the decision.

Some of the younger guys at our VFW post who worked special ops over in Sandland and Taliban-land told us that they were definitely typical of the specwar guys in believing STRONGLY in the Second Amendment--especially after fighting in a land in which only the bad guys have weapons, and it was part of their job to help arm the good guys and teach them how to overthrow the bad guys.

I'm not a reactionist by any stretch, and I seen more than one civil war. And while I don't think the Heller decision, had it gone against us would have resulted in a civil war, I have no doubt that it would have lit the long fuse on a large powder keg.

Jeff

Jdude
July 14, 2008, 01:19 PM
This was the most widely watched and read case in decades.
I have no doubts that many groups would immediately move to violence, insurrection and secession, up as high as the state level.

My personal plans in the event of loss were to visit the local state house and vocally express my opinion. I planned to have left immediately after the decision was released.

I am much happier with the results we did get.

Jorg Nysgerrig
July 14, 2008, 01:58 PM
This tends to stun the listener.

Perhaps they weren't prepared to be hit with blatant and stupid hyperbole. Nothing sells the RKBA quite like the threat that we're going to start shooting the second something doesn't go our way. :rolleyes:

Tyris
July 14, 2008, 01:59 PM
No way.

This is internet-commando bravery taken to its most extreme.

When CA passed all of its anti-gun laws, nothing happened.
When the AWB was passed, nothing happened.
When CA, NJ, MA, NY, etc rolls out another anti-gun bill we roll our eyes.
When President Barak Obama tries to push anti-gun legislation, nothing will happen.

People quiver in fear of having too many "foreign parts" in their rifles, even though I cant find a single case of someone being busted for a 922(r) violation. (how do they check anways? I've never seen BATFE doing parts count inspections at the local ranges..)

People are too busy paying their mortgage, and worrying about the 30% interest on their 5-digit credit card debt. They're too busy watching "america's favorite past time" on tee-vee, never mind actually playing it. They steadily ignore the 50% decline of the US dollar in recent years and the 9 trillion dollar debt along with the 200B per year we funnel into Iraq. As long as the bread and circuses continue, the status quo shall be maintained.

-T

MJRW
July 14, 2008, 02:55 PM
JohnBlaze is correct.

JohnBlaze
July 14, 2008, 03:02 PM
he already did, read the thread.

Nitrogen
July 14, 2008, 03:05 PM
So you're above common citizens? What are you, a Duke? A Knight? Some other type of nobleman?

No, you're just a common citizen, too.

TexasSkyhawk
July 14, 2008, 04:31 PM
This is internet-commando bravery taken to its most extreme.

When CA passed all of its anti-gun laws, nothing happened.
When the AWB was passed, nothing happened.
When CA, NJ, MA, NY, etc rolls out another anti-gun bill we roll our eyes.

That's why a lot of us have already written off those areas and populations. Gun control isn't the only problem they have.

Down here in Texas, we have the Minuteman Project. When it became clear that the gov't wasn't going to do a damn thing about the illegals INVADING our country, we took matters into our own hands.

We have more and more suburbs and townships passing ordinances and laws that are anti-illegal alien. ACLU and other pro-criminal organizations file injunctions with pro-criminal judges, and the cities comply.

But the landlords aren't. Nor are the employers. Both are demanding tougher proof of legal residency before they rent or hire.

I've fired two landscape maintenance crews at my house in just the last year. I make it clear that I expect legal residents to work on my property--not illegal. I even added a clause to my "contract" to state both this and that if I catch illegals working on my property, the contract is null.

This has caught on and our entire little housing development area has followed suit. Not one illegal is working in our neighborhood as a domestic.

Maybe not much, but it's a start.

My stance on guns is even more hard-line. So please, do not lump me and others in with the likes of CA or MA or NY.

Jeff

jaak
July 14, 2008, 04:47 PM
lol at 922r. i dont lose an ounce of sleep over 922r. all i will say is this. as a free man, i have a CHOICE. thats all i have to say.

Samuel Adams
July 15, 2008, 03:03 AM
No way.

This is internet-commando bravery taken to its most extreme.

When CA passed all of its anti-gun laws, nothing happened.
When the AWB was passed, nothing happened.
When CA, NJ, MA, NY, etc rolls out another anti-gun bill we roll our eyes.
When President Barak Obama tries to push anti-gun legislation, nothing will happen.

People quiver in fear of having too many "foreign parts" in their rifles, even though I cant find a single case of someone being busted for a 922(r) violation. (how do they check anways? I've never seen BATFE doing parts count inspections at the local ranges..)

People are too busy paying their mortgage, and worrying about the 30% interest on their 5-digit credit card debt. They're too busy watching "america's favorite past time" on tee-vee, never mind actually playing it. They steadily ignore the 50% decline of the US dollar in recent years and the 9 trillion dollar debt along with the 200B per year we funnel into Iraq. As long as the bread and circuses continue, the status quo shall be maintained.

-T
+1

loneviking
July 15, 2008, 06:47 AM
I think that the long fuse has been lit and quite a few Americans are more awake than some give credit for. The Minutemen movement and the militia movement are but two examples that refute the idea of American complacency. Heller itself refutes the idea of American complacency in the face of actions by 'big brother'.

CNN this weekend had a piece by former President Clinton on 'Are we becoming more polarized?'--the answer to which is 'absolutely yes!'. The red states vs. the blue states, and those who believe strongly in what the constitution says and those who want to 're-interpret' it. The biggest piece of evidence to me of a lit fuse are the conflicts between Mr. Nutter and his police chief vs. the NRA/State of Penn.; or the head of the Atlanta airport that wants to create a 'gun free zone' and the legislator challenging the zone as unlawful--to name just two examples.

On the one hand, you have elected officials who refuse to honor the oath of office that they took and instead take actions that are against the laws of their state. On the other hand, you have increasingly vocal, active and well financed individuals in the gun organizations who are exposing these traitors (and that's what they are). These 2nd Amendment issues are the rallying point for both sides, and the outcome directly affects how the Bill of Rights is read and used.

In our first civil war of 1861, states rights and slavery was the polarizing issue with the 'northern' states and the 'southern' states. Today, it is 2nd Amendment rights and individual freedoms, with 'Red' states and 'Blue' states. Then, as now, the issues are being initially fought over in the legislatures and courthouses. That didn't solve the problem in 1861, and I have my doubts that it will do so today with the blatant, unlawful actions of folks like Mayor Nutter and others.

jrfoxx
July 15, 2008, 07:33 AM
People quiver in fear of having too many "foreign parts" in their rifles, even though I cant find a single case of someone being busted for a 922(r) violation. (how do they check anways? I've never seen BATFE doing parts count inspections at the local ranges..)

People are too busy paying their mortgage, and worrying about the 30% interest on their 5-digit credit card debt. They're too busy watching "america's favorite past time" on tee-vee, never mind actually playing it. They steadily ignore the 50% decline of the US dollar in recent years and the 9 trillion dollar debt along with the 200B per year we funnel into Iraq. As long as the bread and circuses continue, the status quo shall be maintained.

You may be right in that this is true about 95% of the population, but, as Texasskyhawk mentions, there ARE a fair number of people, many of whom are armed, organized, and motivated, to whom it DOESNT apply, and whose to say if all those groups the feds were worried about with a "bad" Heller ruling started shooting, it wouldnt spread fairly quickly to others? I'm inclined to thing that if 1 or 2 "millitias" and 20+ states decided to start shooting, it would snowball pretty quickly, and things would get pretty serious, fairly quick, with people having to choose a side. Now, I'll agree that most of that original 95% would stay on the governments side (or be neutral), many people WOULD join the millitias and would now be inclined to act as part of the group, when they wouldnt have as an individual.

So, now theres a lot of millita people shooting it out with the government, so likely NG and regular troops get called in to help. How many would be inclined to fire on American's, on american soil? Some would, some wouldnt. Some of those who wouldnt would just do nothing, others may not take kindly to seeing fellow soldiers firing on Americans, and may fire on THOSE soldiers to stop it. Not the shooting has spread to cause a split in the military, even if a relatively small one. So now its not just a bunch of "wanna-be's" vs cops and soldiers, now there are some well trained, heavily armed soldier involved in the fighting aginst the government, and it just sreads, and spreads, and spreads......

Certainly a possibility. It doesnt have to start with a mass uprising of gun owners. It could start with just a few hundred or so "extremeist" millitia goups, and spiral out from their.

Ltlabner
July 15, 2008, 07:48 AM
Every "special interest" group seems to want to lay claim to the start of the next American Civil War. I'd be willing to bet money that right now on a forum about abortion, or religion or extreme environmental views there are people posting about how the fuse has been lit for revolution because XYZ didn't go the way they wanted.

Tyris is dead on. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of laws have been passed across the country abridging a right that is clearly spelled out in the 2ndA. What's happened? Nothing.

Heck, National Guard troops opened fire on US citizens at Kent State....nothing happened. Nothing spiarled out of control. And that was at a time when the US population had been a bubbling caldron of civil unrest.

Most people don't care much about guns. Most people's knowledge of firearms extends to the shotgun their Grandpappy let them hold back in 1954. We are passionate because they are our interest.

As Tyris pointed out, most people are worried about their interests, their pet projects and their problems.

All this talk of "armed rebellion" is just that. Internet bravado.

I'd rather put my energy into helping people understand the Constitution rather than make them think I'm a raving lunatic frothing at the mouth to pick up arms and re-enact Red Dawn.

CYANIDEGENOCIDE
July 15, 2008, 07:55 AM
don't let the common people see this!! ELECTRIC movable type, we landed gentry type could be in a lot of trouble!!

Phil DeGraves
July 15, 2008, 08:36 AM
I very well think that it might have caused an armed rebellion. It could eventually lead to the confiscation of all firearms.


Well, certainly the armed rebellion would result in the confiscation of all firearms...

This was the most widely watched and read case in decades.

And yet, most everybody I know had no idea what it was and cared less.

i would not rule out the possibility that an armed rebellion COULD have happened.
But it wouldn't be organized and anyone rebelling would be characterized as a right wing wacko...See the above...

If you enjoyed reading about "Made Common Citizens Think" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!