So, someone decides the Awkward Stage is over...

[2nd Amendment]

I am specifically thinking of New London, I am specifically not predicting anything and I am specifically not supporting it at this time, BUT...

A homeowner there comes to the true end of the legalist system and is presented with the day of decision. Move out, take what they offer and walk away, or stand the ground and "shoot the bastards". How do you think this would play out?

Would the authorities make a public confrontation of it?

Would other people physically rally to this property owners defense?

Considering how public this is and how much of the population vehemently opposes the Kelo Decision, how would the MSM Spin it?

How would the average citizen, already unsettled by the SCOTUS decision, view such a person? And how much control over this would the media have?

How far reaching would the implications be? For the 2A, property rights and government authority in general?

Feel free to add to the questions. Those are just the ones that come to my mind immediately.

 

[hillbilly]

Uh, that's the whole problem.

Somebody is going to reach the end of his or her rope, and will fire shots over this idiotic ruling.

And then, who knows what happens next?

I have no idea.

But I really, really think that somebody will end up shooting at bulldozer drivers over this.

No matter what happens next, I don't think it's gonna be pretty.

hillbilly

 

[FeebMaster]

The government would annihilate him and 99.999% of people out there would cheer the government for it, including the vast majority of this forum.

 

[2nd Amendment]

The government would annihilate him and 99.999% of people out there would cheer the government for it, including the vast majority of this forum.

That's the possibility that bothers me most...

 

[rhubarb]

In the specific case in New London, the Powers that Be will surely do whatever it takes to resolve a conflict peacefully. Everybody's watching. Everybody, from all acrosst the political spectrum, says this ruling is bad. The PtB know that they are already the bad guys here. They'll do everything possible to not look any worster than they do now.

As for Joe Blow down the road here, he is toast. When he puts up armed resistance, everybody will know that he was a wacko gun nut that provoked a fight with the law and lost. A wacko, I tell you. You'll hear about the time he spit on an umpire at a Little League game. You'll hear about how he was despondant over his recent separation from his wife. You'll hear about how the local law had visited him numerous times for all the various reasons they deal with wackos. They offered him a fair deal to get out of the way and he chose the wacko way of the gun. Yep, couldn't be avoided. Oh well, fire up them there dozers, boys, new Wally World gotta open on time.

 

[Solo]

If armed resistance won't work, I guess its time to brush off my Ghandi autobiography.

 

[cpileri]

yup

The opening salvo of that conflict will determine the outcome of the rest.

Do you honestly think the wrecking crews aren'yt going to be accompanied by armed guards/police/SWAT/feds? Of course they will.
More likely, the residents will be given a date to evac by, and when they don't; highly militarised "extraction teams' will be sent to assist them. So they'll be gone long before the bulldozers show up.

But lets say they don't, and the thugs and bulldozers show up together.
If Kelo and neighbors stand firm, and open fire on the wrecking crews AND NO ONE IS THERE, RIFLE AND VIDEOCAMERA IN HAND, TO BACK THEM UP; ITS OVER!
The neighbors will be "waco'd" and you and me and the rest of this forum, and all forums, and the MSM and the whole country will see that for all our talk, all our professions of solidarity, our righteous rage at the traitors in our midst; NO ONE WAS THERE FOR THEM!

If none of us will go to to the people of New London, who then believes that anyone from these forums will come to their aid when its their turn?

Anybody?

OK, so who's going to new London?

Anybody?


The gov't DOES respond to FORCE. Unfortunate, but true is that force WORKS. The time to gather in New London is NOW. If several thousand folks are camping out, organized and watchful you can bet the negotiations will begin.
Once the stakes becomes the lives of the enemy, their cowardice will show.
If they prove tougher than I'd predict; well, then its time to poison the well and make the land an unuseable toxic dump.

C-

 

[hoppinglark]

I'll be there,
video camera, digital camera, maybe a spotlight or two, we need to document and stop evil!

I'll bring the kegs if you bring the chips...

 

[garyk/nm]

Most likely will be treated like any "man with a gun, barricaded in house" situation. Keep the media back far enough so they can't see, send in the smoke, and burn the house down (oops!).

Best defense for this would be gas masks, lots of witnesses and some tactically placed cameras or web-cams, assuming that one would have enough notice to set these measures in place.

Better yet, be proactive. Call a press conference and let all and sundry know what you are doing, so you don't end up another "nut with a gun" on the evening news.

Another proactive idea: if you live in an old home, see about getting listed on an Historic Registry. Would make life much more difficult for potential EDers. New London would be a prime location for such an idea.

Sorry, just some random rambling.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Cpileri +1

However,

(Puts tounge in cheek)

Remeber, Cuchulainn has already explained to us that resistance is futile. If you go to New London, (Which you won't ...according to Cuchulainn) and you begin armed rebellion (Which you won't ...according to Cuchulainn) then you will be destroyed by the Feds and nobody, repeat NOBODY will come to your aid (according to Cuchulainn).

Didn't you read that thread?

Resistance is futile...the true path lay in appeasement. Appease your oppressors and you will live another day to lick at the heels of your Master.

Give up your guns now, before you do something foolish, like, I don't know, use them as the framers of the Constitution suggested to keep the centralized Federal Gov't from becoming too powerful.

Aremed rebellion is doomed to failure.

Wouldn't you rather be alive and in chains? Remember, your children will be labeled as "spawn of the gun nut". Have you considered the repercussions on the 2A? Remeber armed rebellion is only going to hasten the death of the 2A (and all the BoR apparently)

Grow up and give up your childish rebellion fantasies for the sake of all those afraid to stand up for themselves...

(Removes tounge from cheek)

 

[AZRickD]

You might wish to check out The Ballad of Carl Drega by Vyn Suprinowicz.

Amazon.com description of the book:

Book Description
In a free country, individuals have almost limitless rights -- to travel as they please, carry private arms, consume any plant or drug, keep what they earn, raise their kids as they see fit ... all without showing any license or permit. Bureaucrats have few powers, specifically listed.
But that hardly describes America today, where the default settings fast approach those of a slave state. Bureaucrats claim expansive power and privilege; the rights of the individual are crushed. Carl Drega fought back ... and died. Peter McWilliams fought back ... and died. Garry Watson fought back ... and died. Donald Scott fought back ... and died. ...

Not all their desperate acts were wise or admirable. But Libertarian columnist Vin Suprynowicz insists we should at least start cataloguing and honoring the names of those who have given their lives in this War on Freedom, being waged against us from the lowliest government classroon and "code-enforcement office" to the loftiest temples of Washington. Because we're next. Eight died on that bridge at Concord, back in 1775. How many will it take this time?

 

[bjbarron]

It is only a matter of time.

Someone will resist.

The guv'mint will try to portray them as a wacko. That's a given. It will probably even work.

This time, however, the media might not be as forgiving. Remember that the media generally hates this government, and everybody, left and right, thinks this ruling was wrong. There are already folks supporting the homeowners. Although the town wasn't impressed....

“t didn’t affect anyone. It wasn’t on the agenda.” - Margaret Curtain, City Council

All it takes is one person defending their home to light a spark. All it takes is one corrupt developer bribing a town council to taint them all. All it takes is one failed strip mall to show the stupidity of this. All it takes is one new justice on SCOTUS to reverse this.

There are hundreds of cases going on now, and thousands in the works...this ruling is going to increase those numbers by an order of magnitude. Something bad is bound to happen.

 

[cracked butt]

Best defense for this would be gas masks, lots of witnesses and some tactically placed cameras or web-cams, assuming that one would have enough notice to set these measures in place.

People around here must have short memories. The people who tried doing the same to keep the JBTs from snatching Elian Gonzales got gassed, beaten, and their cameras confiscated and at least 1/2 of the country cheered them on.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

Guess you youngsters don't remember the standoff at Chavez Ravine when the homes of young couples were bulldozed for the Dodger Stadium.

One man decided to arm himself and hold off the wrecking crew. Went on for a few days and then a couple of LEOs from one organization or another worked their way in by pretending to be war buddies or some such. End of standoff.

I was rooting for the armed citizen as I had a passionate regard for property rights even then. I do not condone use of firearms here, but understood the desperation and cheered the fact that someone had put a halt in the matter even if just for a moment. I was hoping the pause would bring other solutions.

 

[RevDisk]

The government would annihilate him and 99.999% of people out there would cheer the government for it, including the vast majority of this forum.

Yep. Maybe not 99.999%, of course. But the solid majority. Those that don't cheer will merely stare at their feet. If they have the moral fortitude to do even that.

 

[Matthew748]

If I were put in this type of situation and if the buy out offer was fair I would probably take it. This would be especially true if I were in an “up and coming” area complete with monstrous real estate taxes, nosey neighbors, and bratty, uncontrollable kids running around at all hours of the day and night. I would be looking to get out of a place like that anyway.

If, however, I was in my dream house I would not give it up unless I was offered a ton of money and I approved of the proposed use of the land. Rich developer wanting to build townhouses, no. Free public shooting range, yes.

I think in the end this will come down to a law enforcement issue. If the police are not willing to enforce this corrupt ruling it will become meaningless. Sadly, I do not hold out any hope for this. If one department makes a stand there is always another one further up the chain that will not question orders.

 

[Bruce H]

The ideal situation would be while everybody is watching the holdout freedom minded people were cutting the throats of all involved against him. Suddenly all those trying to take property for their own personal gain are history. The holdout is free and clear because he couldn't have done it. Fear strikes the hearts of land grabbers and mini tyrants everywhere.

 

[shermacman]

Let me tell you how this will work out: Say there are 50 homes in a community that Theresa Kerry wants for its ocean view. The deal is announced and immediately ten of your neighbors take the money and run. Some were thinking of moving anyway. Some looked at the buy out as a gift from Heaven.

The bulldozers start in one house at a time, they aren't going to come on masse against an armed community. They start with the people who voluntarily sold. So now your community is pock marked with wrecking equipment, dumpsters, jack hammers, dirt and dust.

The reality dawns on many of the remaining home owners. Grab the money, this is inevitable. As time goes on your principled stand on the Fifth Amendment, backed by the Second Amendment looks ridiculous. Your once precious community is a construction zone with your green lawn covered in dust.

Finally, on the day the media and the public are distracted, it is over. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes announce they are getting divorced, and a boat load of cops and a moving van arrive.

No shots were fired, no judges hung by their black robes from a light post. Just a press conference that John Kerry has created 100 new jobs during the construction of a new house that will have a midnight basketball court open for the public, down the street.

 

[publius]

This question has already been answered in practice many times. Kelo upheld existing eminent domain decisions. Not much real difference between Kelo and the 1954 department store case.

What happens is, the property owner loses, the government wins, and few take notice of it all.

 

[hillbilly]

Here are two things that I know for sure.



1) I have learned to never, ever, ever doubt the capacity for pessimism and naysaying and gloom and doom of people on internet gun boards.

I've posted more than once about the pervading doom and gloom and pessimism of folks on internet gun boards.

Here is the mindset of doom and gloom folks on gun boards. If it's bad, it's going to happen. If it's wrong and stupid, and depends on people acting like mindless cowardly "sheeple" it will happen. If it's bad for freedom, it's guaranteed to happen just because that's the way it is. It's all bad, all the time.

Kerry will get elected.

The AWB will be renewed in a backroom deal designed just to screw us over.

The AWB will be not only renewed, but expanded to include everything that holds more than one cartridge at a time.

CCW in Missouri will never pass.

The authorities in Toledo, Ohio, will never be brought to taks for illegally trying to squash CCW, because that's just the way it is. That's why "the man" is "the man."





2) This eminent domain decision is different from anything else I've ever encountered in my life. It is different because of its scope and breadth. And everyone I talk to, even people who aren't overtly political in their outlooks, understand this one and they are angry about it.

It's bigger than the War on Terror , even.

Here's a specific example.

I spent the July 4th weekend at a lake cabin with very good friends. I have been going to this lake cabin with these people for 16 years. I know these people.

The eminent domain topic came up at least three times in conversation with these folks during the holiday weekend. These folks tend to avoid talking about political events. These folks are not gun owners.

The topic came up three times. And each time, they were speculating about what might happen when someone tried to seize their lake cabin property using eminent domain.

This group of folks includes people who voted for Bush and for Kerry last time. This group of folks has people with varying political views. But all of them were angry and concerned about the eminent domain issue.

In the years after 9-11, these folks never, ever, ever speculated about what would happen when the jihadist suicide bombers arrived at their lake cabin.

Nobody thinks the jihadist suicide bombers will show up at a lake cabin in Arkansas.

But everyone can easily think of somebody or some corporation or some set of events that would result in the eminent domain confiscation of their own home and property.

That's why this one is different. It can happen to you, even if you aren't in the subway system in London, or in a NYC high rise. It can happen to you, even if you aren't a member of the weird cult, or aren't harboring Cuban refugees in your house.

I think citizens will find all sorts of creative, pro-active ways to resist this peacefully while they still can.

I still think shots will be fired by some desperate individual over this.

But I don't think 99% of the population will cheer the crushing of those who resist, because this one is different.

Ninety-nine percent of the population likes owning property.

This situation does not require having to imagine yourself belonging to a weird, obscure religious cult in Waco, or harboring a Cuban refugee child in your bedroom.

This is not even like Chavez Ravine.

The stadium project in Chavez Ravine affected only those people in Chavez Ravine.

This Supreme Court decision affects every single property owner in the United States.

To put it simply, folks who own lakefront property in Arkansas wouldn't be disturbed by the Elian Gonzalez matter, or the Branch Davidians, or even the building of a baseball stadium somewhere in California.

But folks who own lakefront property in Arkansas are disturbed by a sweeping, all-encompassing, idiotic Supreme Court decision that says any one with more money and power can come take their lakefront property and the cabin that's been in their family for 40 years.

That's why this one is different.

It's a lot easier to be a "sheeple" if you can easily say, "Aw, that'd never happen here."

But with this decision, it's impossible to say "Aw, that'd never happen here" any more.

And even sheep will head-butt and kick and struggle when given no other options.

hillbilly

 

[tulsamal]

Good post hillbilly!

Gregg

 

[Nick1911]

Thanks for the excellent post hillbilly. In general I agree.

 

[TarpleyG]

I keep telling you all that in order for a successful victory in the "akward stage is over battle", it'll have to be done by a portion of our military gone rogue. The way I envision it is some high ranking officer gets folks over on his side and plots an uprising. Without something on that level, you have the "gun nut holed up in his house" scenario a couple of you have stated. There is no way to spin it that the government or media cannot control.

Greg

 

[TallPine]

The awkward stage seems to be over in Iraq ...

 

[Joejojoba111]

"But I don't think 99% of the population will cheer the crushing of those who resist, because this one is different.

Ninety-nine percent of the population likes owning property."

I don't like owning property, it's too expensive. My parents own property, city tells them it's very expensive. It used to be no the edge of a small city, now it's in the middle of a morass of houses. And the houses don't stop, the traffic gets worse, the developers continue to eat wine and cheese with the mayor and new developments keep happening farther adn farther out.

--Farmers lose their land to new 'housing' developments.
--My parents pay huge taxes on owning property, so that these new developments can have sewers and utilities.
--Traffic is horrible, everyone says so, but instead of buying busses and building towers they build roads at exponential rate, farther and farther from where people will work.
--The 'new' rich people live in the new developments far from what used to be the city, but they demand all the services. So they close schools and hospitals and stuff and build new ones in the new areas.
--Any old people who simply lived in their houses all their lives now find their taxes so high the only way to pay is to give the city their house in exchange for taxes. The tradition of passing wealth from generation to generation is disbanded, and who knows what effect that will have on society.


Why the Freak would anyone want to own property in a city? I've relatives that live almost an HOUR drive away from the city and even THEY are feeling the pain. Rich yuppies move into a farming community, and then abuse democracy to pass new laws, so only a limited number of trucks can drive down the roads per day, on smells, on all sorts of stuff. They move in and pass laws to turn the farming community into a 'pleasant suburb 1 hours drive from the city'.

It's possible that farmers could win the fight over their property miles from the city, but they will have to work really hard to keep these cockroaches out. An d even if they win the roaches will just infest another place nearby.

But to own property in a city? It's ridiculous, it's pointless, it's a losing proposition.

It's not just because I'm poor and couldn't afford a house if I wanted, it's just that one can rent for less than the interest on the mortgage + the taxes + upkeep.