Gordon Fink
Member
Wllm. Legrand said:
Your worries about global communism and cultural decay aside, rarely have more insightful words been seen on the High Road. I encourage everyone to read them again.
~G. Fink
What is your last straw?
- Thread starter Deathrider1579
- Start date
- Status
Your worries about global communism and cultural decay aside, rarely have more insightful words been seen on the High Road. I encourage everyone to read them again.
~G. Fink
22-rimfire
Member
Wllm.Legrand said... "Unless a significant portion of the population is simpatico with your perspective, values, plans of action or change, and vision, you will be exorcised if you go against the flow. Now that significant portion (the critical mass of the population that shares an affinity to your views) may vary, but that is the difference between a "movement" or bloodless revolution..and a percieved lone-wolf nutcase."
Excellent summary of human nature. We don't want to be segregated into being lone wold nutcases.
Here lies the problem with a state that is ruled by the majority. Our constitution protects minorities and gun owers are a minority of the population. We have been seeing a GRADUAL reduction in the general population's access to firearms due to... cost, safety features (which add cost), paperwork, background checks, permits to own in some states, permits to purchase a firearm, cost of ammunition, reduced places to shoot affordably, our education system (teaching children that all guns are evil), propaganda ("Just Say NO") campaigns, isolating gun owners as not mainstream, the decline of hunting in America, and registration or pseudo registration of firearms.
With each increase in the difficulty of purchasing and owning a firearm, a certain segment of the population drops out of ownership. Look at smoking as a similar kind of issue. Eventually, the number of people owning and using firearms will be so small relative to the overall population that our rights will be legislated out of existence from a practical sense. Look at the kinds of legislation that has been recently introduced.... "assault weapon" ownership, serial numbers on ammunition, technology to identify the LEGAL shooter to use a firearm, requiring permits for ownership, training requirements, setting limits on the amount of ammunition on hand is legal, reducing the number of people who can legally own a firearm (ie spousal abuse, DUI offenders, etc.), and banning ownership of handguns in certain cities. Eventually the number of people who might rebel becomes statistically insignificant. People also have a tendancey to accept restrictions in the interest of safety or crime reduction even though statistics have shown that reducing legal gun ownership does not translate necessarily to reduced crime.
The future of gun ownership is "death by a thousand cuts" unfortunately. This is why it is important to be politically active and support such organizations as the NRA. For the most part, our legal authorities WILL enforce the law. If gun ownership is made illegal, it will be enforced by the law enforcement community which just happens to be your neighbors. It is up to the people to mold and shape law.
Excellent summary of human nature. We don't want to be segregated into being lone wold nutcases.
Here lies the problem with a state that is ruled by the majority. Our constitution protects minorities and gun owers are a minority of the population. We have been seeing a GRADUAL reduction in the general population's access to firearms due to... cost, safety features (which add cost), paperwork, background checks, permits to own in some states, permits to purchase a firearm, cost of ammunition, reduced places to shoot affordably, our education system (teaching children that all guns are evil), propaganda ("Just Say NO") campaigns, isolating gun owners as not mainstream, the decline of hunting in America, and registration or pseudo registration of firearms.
With each increase in the difficulty of purchasing and owning a firearm, a certain segment of the population drops out of ownership. Look at smoking as a similar kind of issue. Eventually, the number of people owning and using firearms will be so small relative to the overall population that our rights will be legislated out of existence from a practical sense. Look at the kinds of legislation that has been recently introduced.... "assault weapon" ownership, serial numbers on ammunition, technology to identify the LEGAL shooter to use a firearm, requiring permits for ownership, training requirements, setting limits on the amount of ammunition on hand is legal, reducing the number of people who can legally own a firearm (ie spousal abuse, DUI offenders, etc.), and banning ownership of handguns in certain cities. Eventually the number of people who might rebel becomes statistically insignificant. People also have a tendancey to accept restrictions in the interest of safety or crime reduction even though statistics have shown that reducing legal gun ownership does not translate necessarily to reduced crime.
The future of gun ownership is "death by a thousand cuts" unfortunately. This is why it is important to be politically active and support such organizations as the NRA. For the most part, our legal authorities WILL enforce the law. If gun ownership is made illegal, it will be enforced by the law enforcement community which just happens to be your neighbors. It is up to the people to mold and shape law.
Rockrivr1
Member
"Free people will never remain free if they are not willing to fight, if need be, to protect their freedom"
Perhaps you should take the advice of your own qoute.
Actually this is a good point. But in my mind I think there are many ways to fight that don't involve me dying while shooting LE officers trying to confiscate my firearms.
I joined the NRA and GOAL. I call and write my legislators. I attend legislative meetings like the one on the 50 Cal Ban. I make an effort to be informed when it's time for me to vote and I freely take people to the range who have never shot before. So far I've taught several people to shoot including a few teenagers who also talk very positively to their friends about it. I think that is the way that LE stays away from my door.
As one person posted - If they come to your door to confiscate your firearms, you've already lost. I'll be honest though and say I don't want to be the lone guy who goes out in a "blaze of glory" protecting his rights to RKBA. The point made by that will just fuel the antis. Now if there was ever a million gun owner march on Washington or a group of gun owners getting together as a solidified front I would be there in a second. Knowing when and where to fight so you have a chance to win is the best course in my mind.
Perhaps you should take the advice of your own qoute.
Actually this is a good point. But in my mind I think there are many ways to fight that don't involve me dying while shooting LE officers trying to confiscate my firearms.
I joined the NRA and GOAL. I call and write my legislators. I attend legislative meetings like the one on the 50 Cal Ban. I make an effort to be informed when it's time for me to vote and I freely take people to the range who have never shot before. So far I've taught several people to shoot including a few teenagers who also talk very positively to their friends about it. I think that is the way that LE stays away from my door.
As one person posted - If they come to your door to confiscate your firearms, you've already lost. I'll be honest though and say I don't want to be the lone guy who goes out in a "blaze of glory" protecting his rights to RKBA. The point made by that will just fuel the antis. Now if there was ever a million gun owner march on Washington or a group of gun owners getting together as a solidified front I would be there in a second. Knowing when and where to fight so you have a chance to win is the best course in my mind.
beaucoup ammo
Member
Last Straw
Don't know your age, Pete, but the streets ran red in Chicago and at Kent State in the '60's. Things got changed. VietNam was the last straw for millions of Americans then. Now, with lobbyists, politicos and Big Biz (Enron, et al) in bed together and the Middle Class American getting squeezed to the breaking point, we'll see if "Sheeple" is just a word some like to use..or if, in fact, that's what's happened to our fellow citizens.
My wife and I "camera count" when we go downtown, the malls, travel, etc. and they are EVERYWHERE. Good for finding bad guys..not good for seeing who's carrying ("Look! He's printing!") or deciding who "Looks" interesting.
If I had to guess, given the lack of back bone by so many, I'd say it's going to take a big honkin' bale of straw just to get the apathetic 80% of eligible voters who don't exercise that right to go to the polls!
As for the guns under my roof (and to legitimize my post in this thread)..don't even Think about trying to take mine.
Take Care
pete f said:
Don't know your age, Pete, but the streets ran red in Chicago and at Kent State in the '60's. Things got changed. VietNam was the last straw for millions of Americans then. Now, with lobbyists, politicos and Big Biz (Enron, et al) in bed together and the Middle Class American getting squeezed to the breaking point, we'll see if "Sheeple" is just a word some like to use..or if, in fact, that's what's happened to our fellow citizens.
My wife and I "camera count" when we go downtown, the malls, travel, etc. and they are EVERYWHERE. Good for finding bad guys..not good for seeing who's carrying ("Look! He's printing!") or deciding who "Looks" interesting.
If I had to guess, given the lack of back bone by so many, I'd say it's going to take a big honkin' bale of straw just to get the apathetic 80% of eligible voters who don't exercise that right to go to the polls!
As for the guns under my roof (and to legitimize my post in this thread)..don't even Think about trying to take mine.
Take Care
I dont like to think about it. Most likely it will never happen and the 2nd amendment will survive the petty attacks of brady and the UN.
If it does not, I fear there will only be an armed minority left by the time its obvious action needs to be taken.
People have a strange relationship with guns. They dont like to worry about them until its too late. Their easily convinced its something they just dont need anymore or that weapons can be removed from their world.
Many feel the governments there to protect them and believe it will never hurt them. They will continue to feel that way until the government, our good shepard, decides to shave the wool from our ass to pay its bills.
...oh, wait.
nevermind.
Maybe I should say they believe that way until things take a drastic turn for the worse in thier own town.
The forefathers knew this problem. No one wants to risk their life over what seems like a small issue. They had a crapload of convincing to do, just to rile a nation up enough for war. They also had the advantage of a populace who was absolutly dependant on weapons for hunting and survival.
I think thats why they put it in the constitution as clear as possible short of a required carry law. Its to remind us that bad things will always happen, and the middle of a fight is not the time to wish you brought a weapon.
It was a good lesson to hand down for the generations, I only wish more people understood it.
If it does not, I fear there will only be an armed minority left by the time its obvious action needs to be taken.
People have a strange relationship with guns. They dont like to worry about them until its too late. Their easily convinced its something they just dont need anymore or that weapons can be removed from their world.
Many feel the governments there to protect them and believe it will never hurt them. They will continue to feel that way until the government, our good shepard, decides to shave the wool from our ass to pay its bills.
...oh, wait.
nevermind.
Maybe I should say they believe that way until things take a drastic turn for the worse in thier own town.
The forefathers knew this problem. No one wants to risk their life over what seems like a small issue. They had a crapload of convincing to do, just to rile a nation up enough for war. They also had the advantage of a populace who was absolutly dependant on weapons for hunting and survival.
I think thats why they put it in the constitution as clear as possible short of a required carry law. Its to remind us that bad things will always happen, and the middle of a fight is not the time to wish you brought a weapon.
It was a good lesson to hand down for the generations, I only wish more people understood it.
azredhawk44
Member
Some of us focus on "what I will do when they come to my door."
Some of us focus on "how do I help make guns mainstream again."
It just hurts me to see that well-worded law is on the books, has been for 225 years, that affirms that guns belong in the hands of citizenry.
It hurts me to see that well-worded law is on the books saying that entry into this country is contingent upon playing by the established rules.
It hurts me to see that well-worded law is on the books saying that foreign military powers entering our boundaries uninvited with hostile intent must be repelled by either a standing army or militia.
But we have history-rewriters that try to change all of these laws (or atleast the meaning of the words therein) to the detriment of the health of their nation.
Fighting for only one issue, rather than the heart of this corruption, is admitting defeat. Guns are a tool to defend one's home and country, and are simply an accompaniment to a responsible citizen. They are not something to fight for, they are a tool of the fight. (No, they're not needed today, but maybe someday). Even honoring the argument with rational discourse is offensive.
Where is the root of it all? How do we combat the root cause of the corruption? It started before the 60's even. I suspect it started with the Great Society, with FDR's massive welfare programs, with the Pensioners' Army, with federal centralized education programs. We hit too much government. Reagan is right: Government is not the solution, government is the problem.
We don't need more programs to watch the government. We need less government. Less aides for senators. Less beaurocracy. Less HUD. Less department of education. Less social security. Less years in service as a representative OR A BEAUROCRAT.
We need mandatory term limits for all LAWS written excepting the Constitution, so congress is forced to re-address the need or validity of law as the nation evolves.
Some of us focus on "how do I help make guns mainstream again."
It just hurts me to see that well-worded law is on the books, has been for 225 years, that affirms that guns belong in the hands of citizenry.
It hurts me to see that well-worded law is on the books saying that entry into this country is contingent upon playing by the established rules.
It hurts me to see that well-worded law is on the books saying that foreign military powers entering our boundaries uninvited with hostile intent must be repelled by either a standing army or militia.
But we have history-rewriters that try to change all of these laws (or atleast the meaning of the words therein) to the detriment of the health of their nation.
Fighting for only one issue, rather than the heart of this corruption, is admitting defeat. Guns are a tool to defend one's home and country, and are simply an accompaniment to a responsible citizen. They are not something to fight for, they are a tool of the fight. (No, they're not needed today, but maybe someday). Even honoring the argument with rational discourse is offensive.
Where is the root of it all? How do we combat the root cause of the corruption? It started before the 60's even. I suspect it started with the Great Society, with FDR's massive welfare programs, with the Pensioners' Army, with federal centralized education programs. We hit too much government. Reagan is right: Government is not the solution, government is the problem.
We don't need more programs to watch the government. We need less government. Less aides for senators. Less beaurocracy. Less HUD. Less department of education. Less social security. Less years in service as a representative OR A BEAUROCRAT.
We need mandatory term limits for all LAWS written excepting the Constitution, so congress is forced to re-address the need or validity of law as the nation evolves.
feh. Everybody's being 'marginalized' in one way or another and there's no 'gun culture' except in the distorted minds of the wacked out left. The fact is, there are far too many gunowners in this country for confiscation ever to happen before serious consequences to the prevailing power structure. In other words, there's gonna be one hell of a fight before we turn over our guns.
This notion that the RKBA is a public relations campaign subject to opinion polls and negotiations is a weak, losing tactic IMO. Don't even get started down that road.
This notion that the RKBA is a public relations campaign subject to opinion polls and negotiations is a weak, losing tactic IMO. Don't even get started down that road.
silliman89
Member
+1 to ny32182!!!
I would never shoot or otherwise try to kill any employee of my government who was just trying to do their job as best they could.
Someone above mentioned the LEO at the door was his son. They're all someone's son (or daughter), and they're NOT the bad guys. Plus, there'll always be another LEO right behind them. The politicians (and the leftist anti's who voted for them) are our enemies. Anyone who fantasizes about shooting the LEO at their door needs to sit down and think it though again.
Now, that being said, I wouldn't help them. I currently keep my guns in 3 different locations. If the climate became even less gun friendly, I would stash my guns more seriously, including burying some in the woods.
Brother in Arms
Member
Sillman89
So are you suggesting we assasinate liberal politicians instead? I am not saying that people should become cop killers but if they do come to take your firearms you really only have 4 choices. 1.Hand them over. 2. "guns? what guns? I don't have any guns." while they tear your house apart and if they find any then you go to jail. 3. Physically resist, confiscation. 4. Not be at home when they come, in otherwords bug out before they come door to door.
Following the letter of the Law and trying to win politically would be the best course of action, but what if that fails? It has many times in the past on other issues.
So if that fails "bury your firearms!" I am really tired of hearing "im going to bury my firearms." what good does that do you? Do you think you are pulling a fast one on the government? Your firearms wont do you any good underground. Is it just to say you didn't give them up? Do you think that when they outlaw firearms, waiting to revolt is a good idea? At that point what are you waiting for? Please educate me as to how this is solution. Is it just "he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day?" or is there some tactical avantage to taking the only tool for your defense and hiding it where you can't use it.
"Mama put my guns in the ground I cant shoot them any more"
I think we will all be knocking on heavens door if we bury are guns.
Brother in Arms
So are you suggesting we assasinate liberal politicians instead? I am not saying that people should become cop killers but if they do come to take your firearms you really only have 4 choices. 1.Hand them over. 2. "guns? what guns? I don't have any guns." while they tear your house apart and if they find any then you go to jail. 3. Physically resist, confiscation. 4. Not be at home when they come, in otherwords bug out before they come door to door.
Following the letter of the Law and trying to win politically would be the best course of action, but what if that fails? It has many times in the past on other issues.
So if that fails "bury your firearms!" I am really tired of hearing "im going to bury my firearms." what good does that do you? Do you think you are pulling a fast one on the government? Your firearms wont do you any good underground. Is it just to say you didn't give them up? Do you think that when they outlaw firearms, waiting to revolt is a good idea? At that point what are you waiting for? Please educate me as to how this is solution. Is it just "he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day?" or is there some tactical avantage to taking the only tool for your defense and hiding it where you can't use it.
"Mama put my guns in the ground I cant shoot them any more"
I think we will all be knocking on heavens door if we bury are guns.
Brother in Arms
Wllm. Legrand
member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 219
R.H. Lee said:
That there is no "gun culture" is a ridiculous statement on its face. Do you need a definition? How about a loose one absent the genus/specie requirement?
The gun culture is the subculture in this country to which guns are more than mere possessions. These people exihibit an interest and skill in shooting arms that is usually in excess than that of the average soldier. Practitioners within one or several sub-disciplines (long-range rifle, handgun, competitive shooting, hunting, handloading, service rifle, rimfire, black powder, etc.) gun people are not to be confused with mere hunters, as most hunters are not gun people, and many shooters are not hunters. People of the gun culture are a small subset of the large number of gun owners who most of whom very rarely shoot their (sole) firearm. To the gun culture, guns and the power they represent to the individual, is a part of their persona. That is the power of the gun: the ability to inflict kinetic force, deadly force, at a distance. It is what turned the subject into a citizen. (attrib. to J. Cooper) The gun culture is divided loosely into two camps: Freedom lovers, whose views are more in line with the Constitution or Libertarian Party, who favor the values of the Founding Fathers, and State Lovers, whose values coincide roughly with that of the Republican Party. The second group purport to love America, but most of what they love can be distilled down to a mere love of the power the government projects.
THAT'S the gun culture...
As for people not turning in their guns, most of the people I know in business and in life in general are philosophic wimps to whom the idea of dying (or killing) on principle is beyond comprehension. This is not the culture of the first or second American revolutions (the second being the War of Secession), though the the economic and political strife to come may well elicit the third.
The prevailing power structure (now that's a definition, R.H. Lee, that you used, that I would like...of what is it composed, and how does "the law" relate to it in particular) plays the population like a violin. Witness your "War on Terror" and how those lies have manipulated many here. Once the "fear factor" gets going in people they WANT the government to do something...and most, probably 98% or more, will go along with what the government dictates. Breaking the law is just too difficult for most people to do, not to mention the possible consequences.
The militia movement, no matter how misconcieved it was in the 90s, suffered the marginalization to which I refer. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a pale shadow of its former self, and at such time as an appropriate "emergency" or some new facet of a NEW edition of a greater "War on ???" is produced, will be eliminated, as has the 9th and 10 Amendments by the government so may of you love. Most people (which includes most gun owners and most members of the gun culture) will go along the new "laws", or simply hide their guns and let them rust.
There will always be the Remnant. But so many classical virtues and values are anathema in this Age of the Welfare/Warfare State.
Old Dog
Member
Aside from this generalization:
I find myself actually in the somewhat amazing position of agreeing with Wllm. Legrand ...
So true, and so tragic.
Deathrider1579
Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Messages
- 198
I think the best way for us to preserve our RTKABA at THIS POINT (I am not talking ding- dong give up your firearms) is to educate people. I don't mean start programs and shooting schools and stuff like that though that stuff rocks no doubt about it. I am talking about what my brother and I call "makeing their heads explode". Let me explain, when in conversation with people I am a fairly limited person I talk about 3 things 1. God, 2. Guns, and 3. Politics (they just fit together so well) any how invariably conversation with me leads to one of those three and mostly to guns. I work at a school I hang out with my brother and his college buds (I am only 22 so its not that weird some of the guys are older than me) and tend to talk guns. When some one hears that I have guns they tend to say "really do you hunt?" I say no (sadly I have not yet been hunting) I keep mine for fun, self defence and defence of my country. They eventualy ask what I have and I stick to the "kreepy" guns AKA AR-15 & AK-47 they say "Why would you need such devices?" And I procede to explain how the 2nd isnt just for home defence and hunting but for protecting our libertys against all enemys and go from there. What we call their head "explodeing" is the look on their face when they start to process what we / I am /are saying. Its fun and educational more than once I have had people say "I am really going to think about that.
Any how thats all I feel I can do that really makes a difference now. That and I buy more guns and ammo lots of ammo.
-DR
Any how thats all I feel I can do that really makes a difference now. That and I buy more guns and ammo lots of ammo.
-DR
Unlike your other rights, the one extra detail that helps keep the right to own weapons in place is the threat of violent reaction. Its not something pro-gun should be proud of, nor something we should be asking people to do.
...but the risk of damage to a politicians career from another ruby ridge type incident is far more powerful than anything he could gain in a direct confiscation.
It dosnt mean anti-guns wont attempt to kill off the 2nd by other means.
The biggest threats are bans that limit us from purchasing new weapons and the supplies to use them. I fully expect to see things like bans on WD-40 and cleaning brushs in my lifetime.
No new guns = no new shooters.
...but the risk of damage to a politicians career from another ruby ridge type incident is far more powerful than anything he could gain in a direct confiscation.
It dosnt mean anti-guns wont attempt to kill off the 2nd by other means.
The biggest threats are bans that limit us from purchasing new weapons and the supplies to use them. I fully expect to see things like bans on WD-40 and cleaning brushs in my lifetime.
No new guns = no new shooters.
silliman89
Member
No. You get rid of politicians by voting them out of office. They suffer more that way.
The obvious answer is so that I can dig them up whenever I want. If properly packaged they won't rust, and while it may take some time and effort to bury them, they can be retrieved in less than an hour certainly.
To me guns only have two valid purposes: Legal usage (hunting, target shooting, collecting, just fun to look at, shooting bad guys that a jury of your peers would agree needed shooting, etc.); and war. I don't consider illegal usage of guns to be a valid option, call me boring.
Gun confiscation is not the same thing as war. (Just to be clear, I don't think either is likely in this country.) However war might quickly follow a gun confiscation law. Wouldn't it be nice to have a gun buried then?
Wllm. Legrand- Your comprehensive description of what you call the 'gun culture' is appreciated. It is, however, somewhat different than the contemporary meaning of the term commonly used by rabid anti gunners. They use 'gun culture' to describe BillyBob with a thutty-thutty killing Bambi and shooting holes in highway signs. It is this pejorative meaning that I reject.
Your points are well taken and I have no argument with them in principle. This is, however, 2006, and the days of rugged independence and personal initiative for most are long since gone. Those attributes have diminished as the power of the state, at all levels, has risen. It is now necessary for us to deal with what is rather than what was. We now find ourselves in the unenviable position of losing (or having lost) our culture. By 'culture' I mean a unique set of values, attitudes, beliefs, and opinions, a portion of which you describe. Now the FF attempted to embody this culture in their original writings as they laid the framework of this country. Over time, however, the perversion of those ideas became 'law' as various factions codified their self-interests above the interests of the people they purported to represent. These are the people I refer to as the 'prevailing power structure'.
That said™, we are long way from totalitarianism in this country. A tyrannical dictatorship does not happen overnight-especially over an armed populace. There are many, many more interim steps that would have to be taken before that could be accomplished. The primary, and most formidable barrier IMO, is economic. No tyrant would be willing to sacrifice the wealth of this nation in exchange for power. The productivity of the American people would come to a halt under a repressive regime. Conversely, we would have to completely lose our standard of living and approach third world status before we could be enslaved.
Now none of this discounts the very real decline of individual liberties and increasing dependence on government; that is the trend and it will most assuredly continue. However, a solution simply by way of reversion to older, superior, but long abandoned values is not workable; we've passed the 'point of no return' and, short of some catastrophe, alarmist appeals fall on deaf ears.
So my point is that although creeping incrementalism has been successful thus far, it has a limit. That limit is where push comes to shove, the proverbial balloon goes up and everyone is forced to take a stand. I would submit that is not going to happen, certainly not in our lifetimes. There is too much wealth at stake. Outright mass confiscation of firearms is not possible under the status quo.
Your points are well taken and I have no argument with them in principle. This is, however, 2006, and the days of rugged independence and personal initiative for most are long since gone. Those attributes have diminished as the power of the state, at all levels, has risen. It is now necessary for us to deal with what is rather than what was. We now find ourselves in the unenviable position of losing (or having lost) our culture. By 'culture' I mean a unique set of values, attitudes, beliefs, and opinions, a portion of which you describe. Now the FF attempted to embody this culture in their original writings as they laid the framework of this country. Over time, however, the perversion of those ideas became 'law' as various factions codified their self-interests above the interests of the people they purported to represent. These are the people I refer to as the 'prevailing power structure'.
That said™, we are long way from totalitarianism in this country. A tyrannical dictatorship does not happen overnight-especially over an armed populace. There are many, many more interim steps that would have to be taken before that could be accomplished. The primary, and most formidable barrier IMO, is economic. No tyrant would be willing to sacrifice the wealth of this nation in exchange for power. The productivity of the American people would come to a halt under a repressive regime. Conversely, we would have to completely lose our standard of living and approach third world status before we could be enslaved.
Now none of this discounts the very real decline of individual liberties and increasing dependence on government; that is the trend and it will most assuredly continue. However, a solution simply by way of reversion to older, superior, but long abandoned values is not workable; we've passed the 'point of no return' and, short of some catastrophe, alarmist appeals fall on deaf ears.
So my point is that although creeping incrementalism has been successful thus far, it has a limit. That limit is where push comes to shove, the proverbial balloon goes up and everyone is forced to take a stand. I would submit that is not going to happen, certainly not in our lifetimes. There is too much wealth at stake. Outright mass confiscation of firearms is not possible under the status quo.
beaucoup ammo
Member
Not Complacent...
..but the idea of house to house confiscation of firearms goes so far against the grain of American mind set.. this scenario is on my back burner for the present.
Take Care
..but the idea of house to house confiscation of firearms goes so far against the grain of American mind set.. this scenario is on my back burner for the present.
Take Care
And to return to the original topic, my 'last straw' is if/when someone/anyone under color of authority (or not) attempts to forcibly and permanently deprive me of my life, liberty or property (with or without 'due process'). Hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it will.
Old Dog
Member
R.H. Lee, my compliments on a thoughtful and well-written post. I find these statements
to be particularly germane to the discussion at hand and agree that this is just one more of the things that sets us apart from other nations ...
Sorry! But that dog just won't hunt.R. H. Lee said:
The only things tyrants care about is power and with power comes wealth. They really don't care about the wealth of the nation they rule - they will be well off regardless.
Pick a tyrant - any tyrant that didn't live like a king - no matter how poor his country was and you might have a point but more than likely it would be the exception to the rule and not the rule. (does the name Sadaam ring a bell?).
Breaking point came and went...they lost. I will NEVER vote Dem or Rep again!
Government is not stupid, although the collective of these do appear to be. They are not so stupid as to push too far, too fast. Witness the "pass" that Congress gave to the oil thieves! Two steps forward and one step back. Oil and gas prices are near double a couple years back--want to bet next week's check on where they go? Not too much higher. We would have a REVOLT, and yes, I am being serious. People would protest for certain. Congress, will NEVER pull out the sledge hammer when the ball hammer will work as well, one pop at a time. WE NEED CHANGE. They lost my vote, my wife's our daughter when she's old enough to vote, and basically every family member I have (extended). It's time for change folks. Get rid of EVERY politician who has voted anti!!!!! NO FORGIVENESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Vote them out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But, surrender my currently owned firearms--from my cold dead hands!
Doc2005
Government is not stupid, although the collective of these do appear to be. They are not so stupid as to push too far, too fast. Witness the "pass" that Congress gave to the oil thieves! Two steps forward and one step back. Oil and gas prices are near double a couple years back--want to bet next week's check on where they go? Not too much higher. We would have a REVOLT, and yes, I am being serious. People would protest for certain. Congress, will NEVER pull out the sledge hammer when the ball hammer will work as well, one pop at a time. WE NEED CHANGE. They lost my vote, my wife's our daughter when she's old enough to vote, and basically every family member I have (extended). It's time for change folks. Get rid of EVERY politician who has voted anti!!!!! NO FORGIVENESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Vote them out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But, surrender my currently owned firearms--from my cold dead hands!
Doc2005
Brother in Arms
Member
Doc2005
I feel the same way. I will never vote republican or Democrat. They are both the problem and enemies of liberty.
as for the last straw (to return to the topic) for me it would be the passing of the "maine assault weapons ban" which failed recently here in my home state. That or if the small arms proliferation "treaty" is signed wich ever comes first.
As for the mainse awb here is a link to the dead bill if you care to take a look at it, its even worse than California's.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/billtexts/LD157901-1.asp
Needless to say ethan strimling and his goons will be back again soon to try to pass it again. I will do all I can do to make sure it doesn't pass. And if it passes anway, I will be ready.
Brother in Arms
I feel the same way. I will never vote republican or Democrat. They are both the problem and enemies of liberty.
as for the last straw (to return to the topic) for me it would be the passing of the "maine assault weapons ban" which failed recently here in my home state. That or if the small arms proliferation "treaty" is signed wich ever comes first.
As for the mainse awb here is a link to the dead bill if you care to take a look at it, its even worse than California's.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/billtexts/LD157901-1.asp
Needless to say ethan strimling and his goons will be back again soon to try to pass it again. I will do all I can do to make sure it doesn't pass. And if it passes anway, I will be ready.
Brother in Arms
Indeed, I know its unpopular to say but I think most people that say from my cold dead hands are incredibly insincere with their actual actions. Where were they when chicago banned handguns? When DC made it illegal to think of guns? New Orleans confiscations? 1994 AWB? San Francisco handgun ban? I promise you they would be absent in Illinois if the proposed legislation to ban high capacity magazines, .50 cal, and other evil looking guns went through. If there were a national gun confiscation day at 2pm on a friday there might be resistance. There is no national conspiracy to ban firearms though. Its just bad unsafe politics playing out. Every ban, licensing, registration, logged transfer, waiting period, approved list is just another step closer. Every minor restriction that would be far too small to do anything about is a step closer to the end outcome. Concealed carry has some steam, but it could all change so fast if we don't watch the little things.Thefabulousfink said:I read this on an other board, I'll paraphrase b/c I can't remember where I found it:
England never had the pervasive gun culture that we do here in the US. Over the years, the English government slowly made guns harder and harder to own, slowly shrinking the number of people who would be willing to jump through all the hoops just to buy a gun. Now the gun owning population in England has been reduced to a very small minority, and when (not if) the government enacts an outright ban on all guns it will pass with only a whimper from a smell disgruntled group.
Now America has a much larger and more vocal gun owning population than England ever did, but that doesn't mean that the same can't happen to us if we let it.
It starts with, "oh it's just a little license fee" or "it's just a tax stamp", "it's just a 30-day waiting period to prevent crimes of passion". It will end with "we don't need centerfire rifles, only 2% of the population hunts anyway and there is no other leagal reason to own them".
Stay Vigilant
Ryder
Member
Individuals sacrifice themselves over what they perceive as the last straw all the time. Their downfall is celebrated and their message ignored. No definate plans to be famous here.
Notice they say "MY cold dead hands". That's because rights are personal. A free person defines their own rights. They are not on loan. It's socialists who want us to believe rights are collectively owned. Thus I suppose collectively defended? Well good luck helping Chicago defend their rights. Or should I say good luck doing it for them?
I refuse to go Rambo on my local cops over what happens outside our area. They have proven themselves honorable to me. I will continue to appreciate them and judge them based on their actions, not the actions of others.
Notice they say "MY cold dead hands". That's because rights are personal. A free person defines their own rights. They are not on loan. It's socialists who want us to believe rights are collectively owned. Thus I suppose collectively defended? Well good luck helping Chicago defend their rights. Or should I say good luck doing it for them?
I refuse to go Rambo on my local cops over what happens outside our area. They have proven themselves honorable to me. I will continue to appreciate them and judge them based on their actions, not the actions of others.
AStone
Member
If I counted right,
this is post #75.
(Bottom of page 3.)
More to come.
For now, thanks for this thread.
{Nice to be in such good company.}
Best,
Nem
this is post #75.
(Bottom of page 3.)
More to come.
For now, thanks for this thread.
{Nice to be in such good company.}
Best,
Nem
- Status
