When they come for your guns - what will you do?

Once again, the premise for the thread was that newly elected Kerry had just passed AWBII, and was in the process of confiscating military SA rifles. Not silly at all, such an action would be declared constitutional, by simply resurrecting Clinton's theory that the Second Amendment only referred to the National Guard. Remember that one? Get the 9th circuit or SCOTUS to issue a ruling that backs up this narrow legal thesis, and theroetically any and every gun could be legally confiscated from normal civilians. Perfectly legal and consistent; no 2nd amendment problem whatsoever.

One presumes that the "regular people" (hahaha) would be first in line to hand in their guns, then back at the keyboard to tell everyone how they complied with the rule of law. Exhorting folks to get busy making political signs, continue to critiicise other who would actively resist the new law (i.e., "armchair commandos" lol)

For those who have condemned any active civil disobedience, please tell us how effective the "regular people" in Australia or the UK have been, with their polite political activism.

 

Once again, the premise for the thread was that newly elected Kerry had just passed AWBII, and was in the process of confiscating military SA rifles. Not silly at all, such an action would be declared constitutional, by simply resurrecting Clinton's theory that the Second Amendment only referred to the National Guard. Remember that one? Get the 9th circuit or SCOTUS to issue a ruling that backs up this narrow legal thesis, and theroetically any and every gun could be legally confiscated from normal civilians. Perfectly legal and consistent; no 2nd amendment problem whatsoever.

One presumes that the "regular people" (hahaha) would be first in line to hand in their guns, then back at the keyboard to tell everyone how they complied with the rule of law. Exhorting folks to get busy making political signs, continue to critiicise otherw who would actively resist the new law (i.e., "armchair commandos" lol)

For those who have condemned any civil disobedience, please remind us againl us how effective the "regular people" in Australia or the UK have been, with their polite political activism.

 

Once again, the premise for the thread was that newly elected Kerry had just passed AWBII, and was in the process of confiscating military SA rifles. Not silly at all, such an action would be declared constitutional, by simply resurrecting Clinton's theory that the Second Amendment only referred to the National Guard. Remember that one? Get the 9th circuit or SCOTUS to issue a ruling that backs up this narrow legal thesis, and theroetically any and every gun could be legally confiscated from normal civilians. Perfectly legal and consistent; no 2nd amendment problem whatsoever.

One presumes that the "regular people" (hahaha) would be first in line to hand in their guns, then back at the keyboard to tell everyone how they complied with the rule of law. Exhorting folks to get busy making political signs, continue to critiicise otherw who would actively resist the new law (i.e., "armchair commandos" lol)

For those who have condemned any civil disobedience, please remind us again us how effective the "regular people" in Australia or the UK have been, with their polite political activism.

 

Wildalaska, I have my own forum.NYC Alliance for the Second Amendment. And we are close to bringing this political fight to the steps of city hall. So before you question anyones peaceful committment to the RKBA, get a clue and get off your high horse.

 

And just so YOU know wildalaska, here is our mission statement. Its straight and to the point. Its about reality.

http://p222.ezboard.com/fnycallianceforthesecondamendmentfrm1.showMessage?topicID=12.topic

 

Wow, you must be some legal scholar to be able to know exactly what the courts will do in any given situation!
By the way, "civil disobedience" would be going to jail to call attention to an unjust law, like Henry David Thoreau. You are spouting off about your own personal uprising against laws you don't agree with, more like John Wilkes Booth.

 

I swear, I feel like Im dealing with liberals.





Done.

 

Sir Winston Churchill
He was talking about an external threat. They were forced to use guns supplied from where? 60 years later (1 1/2 generations) look and see what an elected government can do/has done.

An interesting hypothesis, our government prosecuting formerly law abiding firearms owning unorganized militia type citizens. It could happen. Maybe.

"Good morning Ma'am. We know your husband is at work right now, but We just need to check out yer husband's AR15 our records show he owns ma'am. What records ma'am? Got the records straight from our federally licensed dealers bound book. Just to make sure we clear him as a non-suspect in the recent tragic sniper shootings, you understand. We'll return the rifle to him once we're done with the testing. Have him give me a call if he's concerned. It's all legal, Ma'am. No, we don't think he's in any trouble. Just doing our job. Thank you for your cooperation with Your Government. How long will the testing take? Couldn't say Ma'am, that's another department. Our job is to just pick them up."

Nah. Couldn't happen here in the good old US of A. Blood in the streets?
Just like rousting Japanese/Americans and putting them in camps for the duration. Never happen.
Just like SCOTUS saying one man is a piece of property. Could NOT happen.
Just like an amendment to the Constitution saying beer is verboten. Nope. Not this here land o' the free.

Get involved, get all political, beat em up from the ballot box. Make sure your elected representative KNOWS where you stand because she/he knows your face, your voice, your position.

 

'Search Warrant"....I don't think so. They will envoke some sort of catch-all from the Partiot Act [I, II, II or whatever we will be up to at that point].
They won't need no stinking search warrant. They will merely rule you 'an enemy combatant' or some such junk and kick in your door.
You will find it most difficult to engage entire van loads of Federal flunkies.

 

No, Mr. New York City, you'd do exactly what you are doing now under similar New York laws. You'd rant on the internet.

New York City (where you live) already has acted to disarm you, and all you do is rant on the internet.

New York State (where you live) already has acted to disarm you, and all you do is rant on the internet.

So we're supposed to believe you'd do anything different if and when the feds act to disarm you. Spare me. I'd bet my house and my retirement savings that you'd do nothing but move your "line in the sand" to some other target, like the UN.

Oh, I see. When you use a bomb big enough to blow up "hundreds or thousands" of people like you say, you would somehow magically assure that the dead:

A) would not include women, children and male civilians.
B) would not include innocent government workers.

Yes, you would use a magic bomb that killed only "hundreds or thousands" of JBTs. Would your magic bomb have some sort of JBT-seeking fireball? I heard that if you mix the right amount of kerosene and fertilizer that the fireball kills only JBTs while leaving the nearby innocent women and children unscathed. The fireball will pass harmlessly by women and children even if they are standing an mere inch away from the bomb. In fact, the fireball can actually tell if a government worker is innocent and decide not to harm her either.

I might have given you a pass if you'd said you'd shoot any JBT that busted down your door and came in with a gun. But you didn't. You spoke of blowing up thousands of people.

Blowing up thousands of people is not a "molon labe" act. It is not a kamakazi act. It is terrorism no matter how you slice it.

 

Excellent examples of bad laws being undone without an armed rebellion.

 

And if the SCOTUS and Congress (and POTUS) are in cahoots?

 

No chest thumping here just the facts as I see it, basically I think that the end result would be something along the lines of this.

A percentage of gunowners mostly the same ones who are the duckhunters and trapshooters, will more than likely turn their guns in and take up fishing or bird watching or something to that effect.
This percentage would be roughly 40 to 50 %

Another 40 to 45 percent would hide their guns and or say they lost them, sold them at a gun show something to that effect.

The other 5 to 10 percent are going to do one of 3 things IMO

1. Group together with those like minded be branded drug addicts, child molestors, gun runners etc etc. and basically attempt to defend themselves, and end up like the Branch Davidians.

2. Some will go it alone or with a few select friends, try and hold up somewhere be labeled gun runners, child molestors, drug addicts etc etc and end up with their friends and family killed by Agent Smuckatelli and comrades ala Randy Weaver. (May the Gods bless him and his family)

3. And a small group of us will end up Bushwackers, ala Outlaw Josey Wales and labeled terrorists and the Gods know what else and be hunted down like dogs, all the while giving the military and law enforcement one HELL of a beating. These folks will probably stay the way they are in society and no one will ever know what they have done or are doing until they are shot dead, or caught and captured.

I fall into the 0 to 100 percent range and aint saying what I will do so dont ask.

 

No chest thumping here just the facts as I see it, basically I think that the end result would be something along the lines of this.

A percentage of gunowners mostly the same ones who are the duckhunters and trapshooters, will more than likely turn their guns in and take up fishing or bird watching or something to that effect.
This percentage would be roughly 40 to 50 %

Another 40 to 45 percent would hide their guns and or say they lost them, sold them at a gun show something to that effect.

The other 5 to 10 percent are going to do one of 3 things IMO

1. Group together with those like minded be branded drug addicts, child molestors, gun runners etc etc. and basically attempt to defend themselves, and end up like the Branch Davidians.

2. Some will go it alone or with a few select friends, try and hold up somewhere be labeled gun runners, child molestors, drug addicts etc etc and end up with their friends and family killed by Agent Smuckatelli and comrades ala Randy Weaver. (May the Gods bless him and his family)

3. And a small group of us will end up Bushwackers, ala Outlaw Josey Wales and labeled terrorists and the Gods know what else and be hunted down like dogs, all the while giving the military and law enforcement one HELL of a beating. These folks will probably stay the way they are in society and no one will ever know what they have done or are doing until they are shot dead, or caught and captured.

I fall into the 0 to 100 percent range and aint saying what I will do so dont ask.

 

Mr. New York City? ... I like it. Kinda like being called Mr. Blonde.

Better than Mr. Pink.....right Mr. Virginia?

There are no laws in NYC or acts by the state that have yet to leave me bleeding in a hospital emergency room with bodily injuries for exercising my civil liberty. Nothing that would justify violence. I pay my unconstitutional renewal fees. And abide by these unjust laws hoping for change politically. Thats is a given. Most people who read my response understood that dischord.

The question was and IS , What Will You Do When They Come For Your Guns?
I had the cajones to speak my mind if my government turns criminal to the point of bloodshed. I would give my life and take as many JBT'S with me. What about you? Mr. Pink? Have any clue?

Judging from your rants here, your nothing but a flaming liberal who see's his gun as bargaining chip. Not a tool for liberty. In which the whole concept and purpose of keeping ARMS (not limited to guns) is lost.

And I have to tell you, I was not trying to be insulting when I asked what meds you were taking. You sound like your having a nervous breakdown in some of your posts.

 

As I said before, insult me all you want. It doesn't change the fact that you said you would blow up thousands of people.

If you had said something like "I'd shoot any JBT that tried to bust down my door," I'd have rolled my eyes and ignored you. However, you called for terrorism -- blowing up thousands of people.

It's not a hard concept. Protecting yourself against govt. thugs (the subject of the question) is not the same thing as murdering thousands of people (what you said you'd do).

 

Are you NUTS dischord? What is your major malfunction? Speak within the context.

So you would be comfortable, in your words, murdering , two? Three? Five?

How many dischord?

 

no offense bud, but starting a forum where you and your five gun buddies can engage in self congradulatory chatter about the evils of the world DOES NOTHING to convince Mr. and Mrs Everyman in Syosset that NY Gun Control laws are abhoorent...and surely allying yourself with 'persons" who think that holocaust victims deserved to die becasue they were sheep aint gonna carry much weight with Mr and Mr Liebowitz in Manhasset..

Do something productive...

WildenoughofthissillinessAlaska

 

25 "buddies".

Its a start wildalaska, its a start.

 

You said, "Maybe when they knock on the door. Maybe after they disarm me, I dont know. All I do know is that I would rather blow myself to bits and take a few hundred or thousand with me and let them taste the bitterness of the phrase "Dont Tread On Me" than live as a victim.

I take that to mean you might blow up yourself and thousands of people just because the wrong government agents simply knocked on your door.

You aren't getting it, are you? Blowing up thousands of people has nothing to do with protecting yourself against government thugs.

 

dischord, here is the question for YOU because your liberal mind does not get it...


At what point would you declare war against the government?

Id appreciate a direct answer to the question please.

 

Like I said a couple of times before, insult me all you want. It won't change the fact that you said you would blow up yourself and thousands of other people.

No, I won't play that game. You said you would blow up thousands of people. You were wrong. Stop trying to change the subject.

And by the way, blowing up yourself and thousands of other people is not war against the goverment. It is terrorism.

 

Answer the question and stop trying to dodge it with your liberal ramblings because this is no game....

At what point do YOU dischord, YOU declare war on the government?

Stop repeating yourself and answer a direct question.

 

I'm not dodging it. I'm refusing to let you change the subject. You were wrong to suggest that blowing up thousands of people would be appropriate. Neither insulting me nor trying to change the subject will change that.

 

Answer a direct question relevant to the issue at hand and stop being a coward...

At what point do YOU declare war on the government?