Hold On Tight, 'Cause Here We Go!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds good, but we've seen the courts uphold things that are blatantly unconstitutional. Anything in the constitution is pretty much worthless if it doesn't agree with the "values" of the courts.

People growing marijuana for medicinal use by genuinely sick people in their immediate vicinity, legal in the state where they live, are jailed under the Commerce Clause because the mere existence of said pot "could affect interstate commerce," even though the pot would never cross state lines or be sold.

A private parking lot for a private company is "public use" under the 4th amendment, so someone's home can legally be seized at a lowball price, if the city council wants to.

Restrictions and bans on small-caliber military-style weapons are not an "infringement" under the 2nd amendment.

No-knock warrants are fine, even in circumstances that are not extraordinary. People who mistakenly shoot cops busting down the wrong door at 2am without identifying themselves get the death penalty, while 17-year-old cold-blooded killers can't get said penalty because it's "unusual" in Europe.

McCain-Feingold is not a violation of the 1st amendment's protection of political speech.

Late-term abortions -- baby-killing, that is, and I'm pro-choice -- are a Constitutional right under some unwritten right to privacy. (I actually like the privacy thing, but I'd rather see it spelled out.) But private acts like smoking a joint in your own home are NOT protected by this right to privacy, nor is carrying a concealed weapon without unlawful intent. It's completely random.

SCOTUS will save us. That's right.:uhoh:
 
What the people at the Brady center think, and what the Democrats do, will be two different things.

Other than the 1/2 dozen or so rabid anti gun dems, talk to a Democrat in office. I have.

They have not forgot what the gun issue did to them in 94, Gores loss in 2000 and to Kerry in 04'.

They know damn well that pushing the gun issue will assure them a loss in 08' and future elections.

Even Bill Mahr on Larry King last night said that the best thing the Democrats can do is leave guns alone and quit pushing for the ability for gays to marry.

Don't worry about the Democrats, worry about jr Bush continuing to mishandle the Iraq/Afganistan affair and trying to fool the general public by replacing Rumsfeld with an Iran/Contra key player.

Thats trading one fool for another. It will be up to Bush whether the Republicans retain the White House in 08 and running McCain, won't do it.
He's a wolf in sheeps clothing.
 
One thing that makes me want to puke....

I just realized last night that Indiana is now a blue state. Indiana state house flipped to dems, vast majority of US house members are now Dems, and one of our senators is a Dem.

Never thought I'd see the day.

Our dillweed (Republican) governor drove all around the state in a motor home before he was elected. Wanted to get in touch with the people. After he got elected he's rammed through all kinds of crap the average voter doesn't want. He was in no small way responsible for the Dem sweep here.

You young guys that hear dad or grandpa say...." remember when....."

40 years from now, you'll be saying "I remember when I had guns. When I could go hunting. When I could carry a pistol for defense"
 
I don't seen an outright ban on semi-auto firearms happening. I can see one of two ideas proposed:

1. A ban on "military-style" firearms and "cop killer magazines."

2. "Military-style" firearms assigned NFA status. Sure, you can get them...just pay the $200 tax, fingerprints, photo, CLEO signoff, and wait three months.
 
One plus, a lot of those Dems who won are moderates and even conservatives. Many are pro-gun.

Analysis of the election results versus GOA ratings does not support that. There has been no significant net change other than possibly negative in the Senate.
 
40 years from now, you'll be saying "I remember when I had guns. When I could go hunting. When I could carry a pistol for defense"

Not me. If anything my grandkids will be telling their friends that Grandpa went out blazing.:)
 
Sounds good, but we've seen the courts uphold things that are blatantly unconstitutional. Anything in the constitution is pretty much worthless if it doesn't agree with the "values" of the courts.

The courts do not have the power to nullify a constitutional ammendment, nomatter how many times they try. It only works because the masses choose to obey. When the weight of obeying becomes too much to bear and you choose to no longer obey, the constitiuton says you're within bounds- regardless of what the courts say.
 
Why do you shy away from the ultimate act of defiance: publicly gorging yourself with foods heavily laden with trans fat, while chain smoking cigarettes, as you drive down the highway without fastening your seatbelts?
 
Killing an American cop or soldier with a wife and a kid to resist a law passed in our Republic is full of mixed moral questions. How many would do it, or should?

Killing a foreign soldier on our soil, however, would be pretty easy for a man to do without hesitation or remorse. Maybe there aren't too many men left, but there are enough.

I believe the oath is "defend the constitution from all threats, foreign or domestic".
 
I don't seen an outright ban on semi-auto firearms happening. I can see one of two ideas proposed:

1. A ban on "military-style" firearms and "cop killer magazines."

2. "Military-style" firearms assigned NFA status. Sure, you can get them...just pay the $200 tax, fingerprints, photo, CLEO signoff, and wait three months.

#1 would include the AR-15, M1 Garand, the M1 Carbine, the SKS, the M1A and nearly every other semi-automatic rifle originally used in military service. After all, they aren't just "military style", they are military arms.

#2 won't happen because it isn't a ban. The anti-gunners won't go for it since the party leadership (for example Pelosi) are close friends of Sarah Brady. Their goal is the elimination of civilian ownership, just like IANSA wants.
 
The courts do not have the power to nullify a constitutional ammendment, nomatter how many times they try. It only works because the masses choose to obey. When the weight of obeying becomes too much to bear and you choose to no longer obey, the constitiuton says you're within bounds- regardless of what the courts say.

Sure, if you don't mind being shot dead or sent to prison. The courts do have the power to say it's okay for our "justice" system to do one of those things to you.
 
If the Dems start that again, they will guarantee another huge loss for themselves in 2008 in the Red States. Those folks do not tolerate gun control well.
So, I don't care if they get voted out AFTER they've taken my guns. The taking will still be permanant because they're NEVER going to fall for the "Sunset Provision" again.
 
Sure, if you don't mind being shot dead or sent to prison. The courts do have the power to say it's okay for our "justice" system to do one of those things to you.

Sir, "enemies foreign and domestic".. which part of that are you not understanding?
 
Don't worry about the Democrats, worry about jr Bush continuing to mishandle the Iraq/Afganistan affair and trying to fool the general public by replacing Rumsfeld with an Iran/Contra key player.

This is exactly what the Democrats will be saying for the next two years while they are pushing anti-gun bill all over the house and senate. They will try to keep our attention on President Bush and the Iraq war...or anything that will keep them in the shadows. Then one day we will look up to see that all is in place for extensive weapons ban! :(
 
Ain't going to happen if the Democrats are smart. They will want to get their roots buried pretty deep, this time, which means a new AW Bill being voted on might happen after the 2008 election but the Democrats won't be able to pass it without Republican support. Most people keep forgetting about the 1994 ban. Even though the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate under Clinton, the Bill still only passed by 2 votes (Final vote 216 for and 214 against) but 38 Republicans VOTED for that AW Ban. Lest you forget some Democrats did not vote for it either, 77 Democrats voted against that AW Ban to protect your gun rights. I'm not siding with either party as I think they both SUCK, just presenting the strait facts here in this forum. Neither party give's a $%&T about your gun rights.:uhoh:

BTW you can find the strait facts here:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1994/roll156.xml
 
Someone mentioned Germany 1938, you know what? Let's do what the Dems do, play the Nazi Card! What's the Nazi Card? Simple, you compare what you don't like (in this case, Gun Control) to what the Nazis did. Nothing is worse than a Nazi, so the Dems look bad. Get JPFO on the airwaves, people will listen. Noone wants to be called a Nazi. After all, only NAZIs confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens, and gun control has its roots in Nazism.

Also, most gun control is in major cities, run by Dems and is enforced to protect "people living in urban communities" (ie, Black people). The Dems say that white people own guns because they fear black people, I submit that the Dems ban guns in cities because they fear black people owning guns.

So, to summarize:

Only Nazis confiscate guns, and gun control in urban areas is used to discriminate against black people.

So, Senator Schummer, are you a Nazi or a racist?
 
So, to summarize:

Only Nazis confiscate guns, and gun control in urban areas is used to discriminate against black people.

So, Senator Schummer, are you a Nazi or a racist?

VERY good way to spin all of this; hopefully the JPFO and NRA get right on this bandwagon.
 
VERY good way to spin all of this; hopefully the JPFO and NRA get right on this bandwagon.
Welcome to the party; I've been doing this in FidoNet and usenet for more than twenty years! :D

The effectiveness of this strategy can be measured by the sheer venom of the response. If you're Black and want to have racial slurs screamed at you, not only refuse to support repressive gun controls when a White guy tells you to, point out the long association between gun control and racism in this country.

You know, there are some anti-gunners who are dumb enough to think that people don't archive what they say on-line for future reference... :D
 
I recently saw an NRA thing about gun confiscation in n'orleans. Y'all seen that? Pretty scary stuff (thanks, republicans!). I'm so glad there aren't many natural disasters where I live, and that we have an exit plan.
Anyway, I sure wasn't counting on Bush & co. to protect my gun rights, any more than I am counting on pelosi & co. or whoever gets elected next. After all, bush once said (but not to me) that there was no reason assault weapons should be around in our society.
I think it's mostly about the force of public opinion, rather than anybody's party line. Right now, my sense is that public opinion is more pro-gun than it was in 1994. Of course, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and we need to do what we can to keep/sway public opinion away from restricting gun ownership and use.
 
VERY good way to spin all of this; hopefully the JPFO and NRA get right on this bandwagon.

They have been. They've been reminding everyone that the '68 Gun Control Act was based off the weapons ban the Nazis passed in '38 or so.

Unfortunately, liberals don't care and the media won't report it. So, the net effect has been zip.
 
Coyote? I think there are a few of us that will resist with force,,,, but,,, I do not think our grandkids will be bragging about us. They will be hiding the fact that we could and did think for our selves and died for what we believed.
Remember that history is written by the winners. We are like rabbits running from a pack of coyotes. When we lose it is final. When they lose, it was just dinner, and they will find another rabbit.

Prince? I like the way you think and it sounds very sensible to me. I trust you do not mind if I take your argument with me for future use.
 
The most effective way to fight the hoplophobes is to take as many new shooters out shooting for the first time as you can. Innoculate them against the press statements that VPC and the Brady Bunch puts out (and are parroted verbatim by the press). Educate them as to the FUD that the gun-grabbers use to get their agenda enacted into law at the Federal and State level.
They usually do the right thing after that by voting the bums out that push these bills.
 
ksnecktieman has it right.
Those who will actually resist the confiscation efforts will die. Quietly and without ceremony. The media will not be there to report it. No story will be printed. No one will ever know the real facts. We will just be gone.

They will come for us one at a time, in the middle of the night and in force.
We will be singled out and arrested. If we go quietly the media may print or report some story about an arsenal being discovered or an illegal weapons cache being found and a sociopathic gun nut having been arrested.

If we resist, assuming we have enough warning that a raid is pending then we will die. One at a time. No story. No news. Nothing. No facts will be
allowed to surface to lend credence or support to any resistance.

"from my cold dead hands" is a line that evokes many thoughts. One thought about it that is usually not present is the anonymity of what will happen to those who are willing to die to protect a right that is being destroyed.

The idea that a few will die resisting and thus trigger a popular revolt against
the demons in DC who are savaging the constitution is a romantic thought.
Unlikely to be reality though.

The best we should probably hope for is if every true believer in the constitution manages to take a Washington based neonazi with him to the grave they will run out of willing raid team members.

When the balloon goes up and they come for our guns the media will be muzzled. No truth will be allowed out and even our families may never know for sure what happens.
 
Unfortunately, liberals don't care and the media won't report it. So, the net effect has been zip.

Oh, this would make good news. Blow it up into big enough of a stink, it'll hit FOX News for sure, followed by Fox News Wannabe MSNBC, then CNN. My next strategy, which has been posted on other forums:

Emasculate the antis

Not only are they racist Nazis for wanting to ban firearms, they don't have the balls to use them for personal defense.

For the love of God, these people are scared of inanimate objects.

While were at it, can someone ask the Pink Pistols to be more vocal. How can the dems argue down gay people, who comprise a large portion of their voting block... unless they hate jews, blacks, AND gays.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top