Boston Globe article calls for confiscation

[gamma19]

I wonder when people like him work out these little scenarios in their tiny minds why they seem to think they would be above the fray ?
Asymmetrical warfare is a gruesome thing and once you start calling for violence (And make no mistake that's what he's advocating. ), all bets are off .

Liberals think this way because they lack any sense of personal accountability. Gun confiscation? Send the police to do it. Want more money to fund welfare? Make people who actually work hard pay for it (or send men with guns to come take them to jail for not paying).

They sit in their ivory towers in academia, non-profits, and different echelons of government with smug, smarmy looks on their faces, knowing that they personally never have to get their hands dirty. They go home to their gated communities in suburbia while virtue signaling about racial diversity, but will cross the street and call the police if they see a Black err African American person in "their" neighborhood. They hate the police, but only want police to have guns.

There are a lot of these folks, and they vote.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Since we are all playing the "what if" game. What If they decide to use the military ?

Then their civilian contractors who supply them the hardware they use make themselves legit targets. They use drones to start striking homes - then the opposition starts striking at Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, etc. Those are soft targets upon which the military depends. Hell even oil companies, trucking, etc..... Those drones need fuel. You make it known that it's dangerous business to supply the military that suppresses it's own population on the homeland. Some soldiers may have signed up knowing combat was a possibility, but the factory assembly line worker at Boeing sure didn't.

 

[Skeeter]

Good points. Keep in mind that this would likely turn into ugly, dirty, asymmetric guerrilla warfare pretty quickly. The confiscators have families. The confiscators live among us. We live among them. The escalation in this folly would be fast and unbearably ugly.

Very good point here.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Good points. Keep in mind that this would likely turn into ugly, dirty, asymmetric guerrilla warfare pretty quickly. The confiscators have families. The confiscators live among us. We live among them. The escalation in this folly would be fast and unbearably ugly.

Exactly.

 

[Varmint]

Since we are all playing the "what if" game. What If they decide to use the military ?

Posse Comitatus Act makes it illegal to use the Army or AF for domestic law enforcement.

 

[Varmint]

I’m guessing a full confiscation in the greater boston area would go down with relatively little shooting. There would undoubtedly be people who decide to take a stand, but the first one would get a massive police response, with every news crew in the region descending and falling all over themselves to vilify the person. The tone would be set pretty quickly, and anyone resisting would be a terrorist who wants to kill cops, babies, etc.

It would be tactically foolish to resist when they come to your house in force. Hide your AR-15, give up your Hi-Points and go meet your like-minded patriot friends and plan a response on your terms.

 

[Picton]

Posse Comitatus Act makes it illegal to use the Army or AF for domestic law enforcement.

But the Constitution makes gun seizures illegal.

I’ll be clear: I don’t think confiscation will happen short of an amendment removing 2a. The .gov is not quite that dumb. But as long as we’re lobbing hypotheticals, if the .gov were to seize guns en masse, I wouldn’t count on Posse Commitatus to stop anyone.

If we’re ever at that point, the .gov will have been careful to get the .mil on board. I’m not worried about the phantom “UN troops,” either. I’d be more concerned with the National Guard.

 

[Lank]

If California, NY, Oregon, Connecticut and DPRMA finds a way to repeal the RKBA, I will happily join any secessionist RKBA movement to establish a new free country.

 

[AverageJoe]

Who gives a fk?

 

[Ranger007]

When you come to get mine you better bring yours.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Posse Comitatus Act makes it illegal to use the Army or AF for domestic law enforcement.

 

[Heathen]

Seems relevant
[video]https://youtu.be/JcW8VNwYvL0[/video]

 

[Horrible]

I wonder when people like him work out these little scenarios in their tiny minds why they seem to think they would be above the fray ?
Asymmetrical warfare is a gruesome thing and once you start calling for violence (And make no mistake that's what he's advocating. ), all bets are off .

Since most liberals don't think past their nose and have not a single clue of reality, my guess is the author of this article hasn't thought for a milisecond of the consequences of such an action.

 

[Horrible]

Liberals think this way because they lack any sense of personal accountability. Gun confiscation? Send the police to do it. Want more money to fund welfare? Make people who actually work hard pay for it (or send men with guns to come take them to jail for not paying).

They sit in their ivory towers in academia, non-profits, and different echelons of government with smug, smarmy looks on their faces, knowing that they personally never have to get their hands dirty. They go home to their gated communities in suburbia while virtue signaling about racial diversity, but will cross the street and call the police if they see a Black err African American person in "their" neighborhood. They hate the police, but only want police to have guns.

There are a lot of these folks, and they vote.

Spot on. And also will want COPs to go out and risk THEIR lives while they comfortablely reside in said ivory towers and tweet support for people like Colin Crappernick and all of the other spoiled kneelers

 

[goodzilla]

 

[soloman02]

Since we are all playing the "what if" game. What If they decide to use the military ?

Drone strikes are impossible to defend against.

Yes drone strikes are impossible to defend against. What else is impossible to defend against? The systematic targeting of all government officials, both low level and high level. No government employee will report to work if there is a high chance of death and the mid and high level ones will all demand police protection further grinding the government to a halt. Can't confiscate weapons or arrest anyone if all the police are guarding mid and high level government officials, and that only includes the ones willing to show up and clock in.

A number of people will remember their Matt Bracken and act accordingly.

https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/what-i-saw-at-the-coup/

And then the shooting started.

At a month and a half or so, it sometimes seemed that the plan was in danger of falling apart. I asked Dennis about it in private, but he appeared unworried. “It’s all part of the action-reaction calculus. It was all taken into account. We needed them to react. We’re in the second phase. We smoked them out into the open with phase one, and now we can go get them. Why do you think we bought billions of bullets for the DHS? Why do you think we paid for SWAT teams and armored cars in every Podunk town in America? We’ve been getting ready for this moment for years.”

“You knew this would happen? A civil war?”

He said, “It’s not a civil war—it’s a police action against criminals and domestic terrorists. But don’t worry: we’re ready. Now that they’re shooting at us, we can take the gloves off. The first two thousand arrests were just priming the pump. This phase will let us finish the job once and for all. Think about it: even now, nobody knows what happened to the first two thousand, or even that there were two thousand. In a month, nobody will remember if they were arrested before the shooting started, or after.”

Back to my story. The first real jolt indicating a serious problem with the plan came when television reporter Cathy Carlsen was killed in Norfolk, shot dead while covering the commissioning of the Harvey Milk, the Navy’s newest destroyer. That she was killed was bad enough. That it happened on a “secure” naval base—a federal installation—made it much worse. Her blood splattered across the Admirals’ white uniforms made quite a picture. The videos…

We were two women born in the same year, with similar academic backgrounds. We had known each other for decades, and her untimely death hit me hard. Cathy Carlsen had been a reliable voice on the progressive side of a supposedly impartial television news network. That a respected member of the media would be assassinated was big surprise, at least to me. Up to that point, only a few federal officials and high-ranking agents had been targeted.

Then a new photo was released on the internet. I had always thought the NSA could trace those things back to their origins, but apparently not. The photo was taken through the Norfolk sniper’s rifle scope just a few moments before the murder. It showed thin black crosshairs and other reference marks across Cathy’s smiling face. And it showed some text added just above her head:

If the media lies, the media dies.
You take a side, you’re along for the ride.
A traitor in front of a camera is still just a traitor.

This single act of domestic terrorism immediately dampened the enthusiasm of most of our formerly reliable reporters to continue to carry our water. More such photographs of other media figures appeared on the internet with crosshairs over their faces. Most of the pictures were bogus, just photoshop pranks, but they had a similar effect: our dependably cooperative reporters suddenly lost their nerve. The comments following the photos on the remaining right-wing web forums were perhaps the most frightening aspect. It was obvious that plenty of Americans were willing to voice their support for the assassinations of their enemies in both the media and the government. It became a game for them to walk up to the “fomenting domestic terrorism” line with carefully parsed words, and this glutted our SNA fusion centers with background noise.

The final outcome hinged on a simple equation based of the availability or non-availability of enough federal agents to make fresh rounds of arrests each day, crushing domestic terrorists and their internet supporters faster than they could proliferate. New arrests were being made, but still the assassinations of government officials and media figures continued to escalate. One a day. Five a day. Ten. Twenty. Some officials were killed by their very own bodyguards or aides, who then disappeared. The words “civil war” were being tossed around on both sides.

Even though the total number of murdered government officials was insignificant as a percentage of their total numbers, far too many of them reacted hysterically out of personal fear. Practically the entire Senior Executive Service demanded protection teams of federal agents to personally bodyguard them twenty-four hours a day. Soon there were no agents available to stamp out the internet insurrection with new arrests, much less somehow interdict a single domestic terrorist on a private sniper mission. Instead, all of the armed federal agents were kept occupied guarding terrified government leaders.

And that was the downfall of the plan: it just came down to numbers, manpower, and, perhaps, agent morale. I’ve seen reports that at least a third of the federal agents went on sick leave vacation, after word of the original two thousand political arrests began to spread within their ranks.

Dennis had always assumed that the combined might of our armed federal agents and their SWAT Teams, reinforced with local police and, if necessary, the National Guard or even the Army, could crush any conceivable right-wing reaction to his plan. But social network analysis couldn’t find snipers who were not part of any network. That’s when we began to hear of “The Militia of One.” In the end there were too many rifles, and too many willing shooters. A number that was constantly heard was twenty million. That was the number of Americans who supposedly went deer hunting every year, against less than 200,000 armed federal agents.

Local police evaporated from the equation once the going got tough. The most common sentiment heard expressed was, “You feds made your bed, so now sleep on it.” The National Guard, those units not already deployed overseas, proved hopelessly slow and cumbersome. That is, the few who reported for duty when called up.

While top federal officials hid inside buildings, a new and unanticipated escalation of the sniper war emerged. When no one of high rank was available to shoot, their outermost rings of security were targeted, even down to lowly GS-5s standing perimeter duty. Suddenly, competent and trustworthy guards were very hard to find.

On the remaining internet the threats multiplied as pictures and videos were shared and commented upon by millions. “Remember your oath” was a common theme. That whole tired shtick about “defending the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic,” with a heavy emphasis on domestic. All of that reactionary claptrap. Who knew that so many of them took that oath so damned seriously? Who knew? Mere words on paper, and yet, so many Americans were willing to kill and to die for them. Who knew?

The snipers grew ever more brazen and their numbers multiplied daily. They were emboldened by accounts of the murders of federal officials that were splashed across what was left of the internet, no matter how we tried to control and contain it. They freely posted comments such as, “You can take away our rights, but we still get to vote under Rule 308,” (which I have since learned refers to a popular rifle caliber). The shooters understood the critical manpower equation as well as we did. We were out-gunned a hundred to one by snipers we could neither see nor find, and they knew it.

 

[rsj]

Yes drone strikes are impossible to defend against. What else is impossible to defend against? The systematic targeting of all government officials, both low level and high level. No government employee will report to work if there is a high chance of death and the mid and high level ones will all demand police protection further grinding the government to a halt. Can't confiscate weapons or arrest anyone if all the police are guarding mid and high level government officials, and that only includes the ones willing to show up and clock in.

A number of people will remember their Matt Bracken and act accordingly.

https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/what-i-saw-at-the-coup/

The 'Deep State' would probably allow or even have some low-level politicians killed as a pretext to root out the dissidents. Turkey just had a failed coup that actually only benefitted the established regime- as if they instigated it in order to identify and remove the opposition.

MA, NY, CT, CA, MD, etc. will eventually outlaw semi-auto's and make legal gun ownership so onerous people will stop complying (like "firearm insurance"). Everything will just go black-market, and it will actually become easier then before to find guns illegally (just like drugs, expensive too)

In some scenario where there's an actual rebellion disarmament won't be the main weapon used by the powers that be:

Starving people can't fight. Ukraine was starved because that was where the core resistance to the Bolsheviks was. If you can't get a job outside a gun-free zone then you can't afford food, and growing/raising food beyond your own survival will be so tightly regulated as to be illegal. Everyone will already be skinny serfs anyway, that's the plan. Of course every known resistance group is infiltrated by law enforcement/military. People will only trust their friends (kind of like life now?)

Agenda 21 is for this. Everything outside the cities and the suburbs will be off limits to human activity.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

[video=youtube_share;T5WrYMcaKfQ]http://youtu.be/T5WrYMcaKfQ[/video]

 

[MaverickNH]

“But the buyback went forward peacefully, and it claimed an estimated one-fifth of Australia’s gun stock — one of the largest gun confiscations in modern history.”

And they recently figured that Australia’s gunstock was back up to and above pre-ban levels and had another amnesty.

But no “mass killings” defined as 5+ shot dead, excluding the shooter since! FBI dropped their definition from 4+ to 3+ but excludes intrafamily and multiple date/location shootings, as they are looking for an actionable figure wrt active shooters vs murder/suicides within the home, and drug gang shootouts. Of course, VPS counts “mass shootings” as 4+ shot, and double, triple and quadruple counts cases as well as suicides.

What’s next? Mass Shootings defined as 4+ heard a rumor someone had a gun?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[PL-52]

Posse Comitatus Act makes it illegal to use the Army or AF for domestic law enforcement.

Not one person who leads any of the forms of The Govt. follows any laws or the CotUS anyway so you think Posse Comitatus will stop them from quelling an insurrection?

 

[GM-GUY]

But the Constitution makes gun seizures illegal.

I’ll be clear: I don’t think confiscation will happen short of an amendment removing 2a. The .gov is not quite that dumb. But as long as we’re lobbing hypotheticals, if the .gov were to seize guns en masse, I wouldn’t count on Posse Commitatus to stop anyone.

If we’re ever at that point, the .gov will have been careful to get the .mil on board. I’m not worried about the phantom “UN troops,” either. I’d be more concerned with the National Guard.

The thing with 2A is that for years they have been banging the hunting drum and ‘reasonable’ has moved a lot from 1934 or 1968, go back to 1968 and try what they are doing now. The military is still honorable and constitutional, I don’t think they would participate, the NG - probably would as they have been warped into a police force for too long.


I would advise everyone to make their decisions where they stand now, if it starts you don’t want to be still deciding ‘what if’ you want to be able to move from planning to action.

 

[In God We Trust]

It would be tactically foolish to resist when they come to your house in force. Hide your AR-15, give up your Hi-Points and go meet your like-minded patriot friends and plan a response on your terms.

Guerrilla fighters don't go head on against the enemy army. They attack supply lines and support infrastructure.

The point of armed resistance to gun confiscation would be to make it stop. Make the people lose the will to support it. How many libtards do you guys know? THEY are ultimately the ones responsible for putting gun grabbers in power. And they are unarmed.

When every Prius in the country is getting riddled with bullets, when houses in Cambridge are getting torched in the night, when cops houses are being shot up, the political will for a civil war will quickly wane.

Of course I'm not advocating any of this, just my thoughts on how it would go down.

 

[Gak44]

Anyone and anything that supports the state would be a target, if they do set up a commie regime. That's my take on it. Just all out war. The best outcome would be the end of all government. At least for a while.

 

[Picton]

Anyone and anything that supports the state would be a target, if they do set up a commie regime. That's my take on it. Just all out war. The best outcome would be the end of all government. At least for a while.

“The end of all government” is nobody’s “best outcome.” Some of us here have been to parts of the world where law and order have become nonexistent. Rhetorically it sounds like a preference, but the reality on the ground is broken glass, arson, rape, three-legged rabid dogs everywhere, and the constant smell of shit. Oh, and the necessity for a 24-hour security plan. Indefinitely.

Feel free to desire that life; I can even suggest a list of countries you might wish to move to. But I’ve learned in my life that government is only horrible until you experience the total lack of it. I don’t care much for the American status quo either. But I’ll take it 100% of the time over the Syrian status quo.

 

[akma]

and the freedom of the press

Not sure the Commies that wrote this piece give much of a shit about any Constitutional right and likely won't until it's time to get on the trains...

+1 on both accounts. Commies/libs are short sighted at best in their philosophies. None have worked in the long term and leave death, destruction and ruin in their wake.

 

[Uzi2]

“The end of all government” is nobody’s “best outcome.” Some of us here have been to parts of the world where law and order have become nonexistent. Rhetorically it sounds like a preference, but the reality on the ground is broken glass, arson, rape, three-legged rabid dogs everywhere, and the constant smell of shit. Oh, and the necessity for a 24-hour security plan. Indefinitely.

Feel free to desire that life; I can even suggest a list of countries you might wish to move to. But I’ve learned in my life that government is only horrible until you experience the total lack of it. I don’t care much for the American status quo either. But I’ll take it 100% of the time over the Syrian status quo.

Nobody is advocating "the end of all government" here, we just want government to abide by its intended restraints and stop overstepping its bounds at every turn.

I will do what ever it takes to force that outcome if necessary.

 

[StevieP]

They're worried about a 30k gun deaths a year, 2/3's of which are suicides, so ~10K more. How many of them are from gang bangers and thugs in Democratic enclaves? Whatever, overall it's a pretty small number.

What they're suggesting will create a civil war where untold numbers of people will die. Who's going to do the confiscating? Police? Military? Who's protecting their families, and those of the politicians who called for the confiscation? Who ever said police and .mil would follow the confiscation orders in the first place?

Trying to save 10K gang bangers would result in hundreds of thousands, if not more, dead from the resulting civil war. And guess what, those of us with guns aren't likely to lose a civil war against progressives who can't even decide which bathroom to use.

 

[Uzi2]

They're worried about a 30k gun deaths a year, 2/3's of which are suicides, so ~10K more. How many of them are from gang bangers and thugs in Democratic enclaves? Whatever, overall it's a pretty small number.

What they're suggesting will create a civil war where untold numbers of people will die. Who's going to do the confiscating? Police? Military? Who's protecting their families, and those of the politicians who called for the confiscation? Who ever said police and .mil would follow the confiscation orders in the first place?

Trying to save 10K gang bangers would result in hundreds of thousands, if not more, dead from the resulting civil war. And guess what, those of us with guns aren't likely to lose a civil war against progressives who can't even decide which bathroom to use.

The politicians (the ones who sent the gestapo) will be the very first targets along with their families.

 

[Dadstoys]

The politicians (the ones who sent the gestapo) will be the very first targets along with their families.

I would never advocate for something like that of course , but the reality of the situation is that would be the most likely outcome.
Me, I'd rather follow the laws set down by our constitution then spend the rest of my life peeing down my leg every time a car door slammed.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

I would never advocate for something like that of course , but the reality of the situation is that would be the most likely outcome.
Me, I'd rather follow the laws set down by our constitution then spend the rest of my life peeing down my leg every time a car door slammed.

What happens when that constitution is gone?