They’re coming for your guns

[Deleted member 12999]

So we're supposed to play rock, paper, scissors, at a gunfight? When the 2nd AMD is pretty clear? Got it.

 

[todd c]

Like I've said many times, I believe in the Con, ALL the time. Not just when it suits my needs. I'll try this again, please don't bash till it's over:

The Con. says that the state has a right to pas laws. The body that passes these laws must be made up of US, people. If the state passes a bogus law, then the poeple US fight it in court. We go to court, appeal (laid out in Con.) and it goes alllll the way up to SJC in MA. Of Supreme Court. There they decide if its Constitutional or "lawful". I didn't decide this process.

So to me, if SOMEHOW something was passed and went through ALL of the processes legitimately, then I'd follow it UNLESS it was something obvious such as "murder all people wearing purple". That is why the guys who just sit home buy ammo and dig trenches aren't helping anyone. I swore to uphold the WHOLE Con. not jsut certain pieces.

NOW: We have the Natural Rights portion. I belive in defense of one's life. I believe you have the right to protect yourself. But you can protect yourself with sticks, stones, knives, etc. The Natural Rights were around waaayyyy before there were AR-15s. And will be there after them. So to hang anyones whole argument on them doesn't fly.

your true colors are coming out in the bottom paragraph, your not leo. LEO's have daughters or sons who may need the 2nd amendment one day. The ones i deal with wouldn't post this paragraph on THIS forum. An AR is just a semi auto why refer to this ?

 

[ochmude]

Can't believe I'm wading into the clusterf*ck of a thread, I should know better.
Some people, depending how and where they were raised will address someone as "sir" as a default salutation. You'll find it a lot with the more gentile Southeners and especially those with strict military backgrounds. It's the way I was raised and it takes considerable effort to break yourself of that.

I was born in Louisiana and come from an extremely strict black southern family. I'm also a former Marine. I understand the concept of calling people "Sir" out of habit. I also understand how to use the term naturally so it does not interrupt the flow of the sentence. Primus' usage sounds extremely forced and carries a somewhat condescending overtone, whether that is his intention or not.

 

[atilla]

So we're supposed to play rock, paper, scissors, at a gunfight? When the 2nd AMD is pretty clear? Got it.

thank you! THIS.

 

[PrimusTactical]

when the laws are unconstitutional and pushed through using unconstitutional methods such as the buying of votes, gerrymandering for redistricting to put moonbats in office, etc. what happens then? that's what's happening now, dude.

on the surface it appears that all these processes are legitimate--but they clearly are not and full of holes and bullshit if you look. so what then? what now?

sticks and stones won't do much good when you've handed over your rifle and it is now in the personal collection of one of your own oppressors. think about it.

So what is your proposal?

 

[atilla]

like i said about the four boxes. we're currently on box 3. call, write, demonstrate, donate, volunteer. right now we're all doing it right.

the fourth box has an asterisk next to it though: if you run outside with your rifle and you're alone--just go back inside, it's not time yet.

 

[KDeez]

I belive in defense of one's life. I believe you have the right to protect yourself. But you can protect yourself with sticks, stones, knives, etc. The Natural Rights were around waaayyyy before there were AR-15s. And will be there after them.

 

[drgrant]

So to me, if SOMEHOW something was passed and went through ALL of the processes legitimately, then I'd follow it UNLESS it was something obvious such as "murder all people wearing purple". That is why the guys who just sit home buy ammo and dig trenches aren't helping anyone. I swore to uphold the WHOLE Con. not jsut certain pieces.

To some of us the government using the full extent of due process to take guns away from everyone is still pretty "obvious"- as "obvious" as killing people wearing purple. It's no different, or any less offensive... and I don't give a shit whether or not AR-15s were around during the pleistocene era or not, it's the principle of the whole thing that matters. Legally invalidating the constitution does not invalidate the ideas and values behind it.

-Mike

 

[Bob Palermo]

NOW: We have the Natural Rights portion. I belive in defense of one's life. I believe you have the right to protect yourself. But you can protect yourself with sticks, stones, knives, etc. The Natural Rights were around waaayyyy before there were AR-15s. And will be there after them. So to hang anyones whole argument on them doesn't fly.

We have the right to defend ourselves using a force EQUAL to that of which is being used agaisnt us by our aggressors. That means anything that LEOs and Mil can own, we should be able to own. We are already handicaped by the NFA34 and FOPA86, and now the government wants an even more of an unbalanced playing field.

That begs the question, why?

 

[ChevyGuy91]

NOW: We have the Natural Rights portion. I belive in defense of one's life. I believe you have the right to protect yourself. But you can protect yourself with sticks, stones, knives, etc. The Natural Rights were around waaayyyy before there were AR-15s. And will be there after them. So to hang anyones whole argument on them doesn't fly.

I am of the opinion that the 2A is more about the ability to apply an equal or more effective amount of force on an aggressor, whether that aggressor is privately or publicly funded, than it is about guns in particular. Natural rights to self preservation is part of it, the other is the security of a free state. So having the leverage to keep a tyrannical state in check, is where military hardware comes into play. If it is good enough for you, it is good enough for me.

 

[drgrant]

When that happens, the country is already lost. We already have more liberals than conservatives within our borders. So even an all out revolution wont change much at that point as the liberals will simply vote more liberals back into office. I know this sucks to hear, but more and more conservatives are starting to think this way.

A revolution, or a threat of one might force a reorganizaiton. It's not just about "liberals and conservatives" either, per se. Happy fun ball would be if all the producers all migrated to the same parts/states of the country, and then everyone else would be more or less left with their ass in their hands... because they'd have nobody left to steal from.

-Mike

 

[WBspectrum]

I was born in Louisiana and come from an extremely strict black southern family. I'm also a former Marine. I understand the concept of calling people "Sir" out of habit. I also understand how to use the term naturally so it does not interrupt the flow of the sentence. Primus' usage sounds extremely forced and carries a somewhat condescending overtone, whether that is his intention or not.

OK, you would know better than me, carry on

 

[Bill Katt]

"a banana-suit-wearing apparent homosexual in love with peasant rifles who is a rampant advocate of freedom and liberty but has no sense of social decorum and says whatever, whenever. this person is to be avoided at all costs."

...and that's why we love you.

 

[PrimusTactical]

So where do I get the Abrams from? I could use a few claymores around the house, just hope the local dog doesn't trip it would make a mess.... (I'm kidding)

I appreciate everyone of you guys and this entire thread. It's great to hear guys views (even if they involve killing others). I'm stepping out for a while will check back later.

 

[G30]

We have the right to defend ourselves using a force EQUAL to that of which is being used agaisnt us by our aggressors. That means anything that LEOs and Mil can own, we should be able to own. We are already handicaped by the NFA34 and FOPA86, and now the government wants an even more of an unbalanced playing field.

That begs the question, why?

I agree...I hate when people try and argue "the founding fathers couldn't predict we would have these evil super powerful assault weapons, they were talking about muskets!!!".....if you think about it back then THAT'S ALL THEY HAD...the MILITARY used muskets and they made sure in an AMENDMENT that the citizens had the SAME weapons as the military...which I'm sure they assumed would keep pace as weapons evolved.

 

[Boghog1]

Anyone seen the UK lately? Ireland? Are there gas chambers there? THAT STATEMENT IS NOT ME ADVOCATING GUN BANS. That statement is trying to offset some of what was just said. Thats all.

Sir, if the Con. was ammended to take away the 2a, what would you do?

- - - Updated - - -



I get it sir, scrap all laws, give everyone guns and ammo, and let everyone me moral on their own..... Been to the Congo lately?

have you checked out the violent crime in those places? gas chambers will come eventually in order to take care of the "bad" people and the trouble makers

 

[Bob Palermo]

A revolution, or a threat of one might force a reorganizaiton. It's not just about "liberals and conservatives" either, per se. Happy fun ball would be if all the producers all migrated to the same parts/states of the country, and then everyone else would be more or less left with their ass in their hands... because they'd have nobody left to steal from.

-Mike

So not so much a revolution, but more like a civil war. Red states vs Blue states? Blue states go bankrupt while the Red states have all the guns.

 

[Boghog1]

So not so much a revolution, but more like a civil war. Red states vs Blue states? Blue states go bankrupt while the Red states have all the guns.

I wish it were that simple problem is there are a lot of takers in Red states too

 

[Bill Katt]

I agree...I hate when people try and argue "the founding fathers couldn't predict we would have these evil super powerful assault weapons, they were talking about muskets!!!".....if you think about it back then THAT'S ALL THEY HAD...the MILITARY used muskets and they made sure in an AMENDMENT that the citizens had the SAME weapons as the military...which I'm sure they assumed would keep pace as weapons evolved.

Not to mention that those "weapons of war" were also the state of the art firearms at the time.

 

[RealQuick]

To me, the argument about the founding fathers not knowing what weapons would be like in the future is getting old. My interpretation is that we (as people of the USA) have the right to life and liberty by whatever means are available at the time. For them, it was muskets. For us, it is whatever is available nowadays. We are restricted already to what we can own, so don't restrict us anymore from owning "commonly used" weapons. AR15 with 30rd STANDARD magazines is common... 4 million of them out there.

 

[Billsail]

Like I've said many times, I believe in the Con, ALL the time. Not just when it suits my needs. I'll try this again, please don't bash till it's over:

The Con. says that the state has a right to pas laws. The body that passes these laws must be made up of US, people. If the state passes a bogus law, then the poeple US fight it in court. We go to court, appeal (laid out in Con.) and it goes alllll the way up to SJC in MA. Of Supreme Court. There they decide if its Constitutional or "lawful". I didn't decide this process.

So to me, if SOMEHOW something was passed and went through ALL of the processes legitimately, then I'd follow it UNLESS it was something obvious such as "murder all people wearing purple". That is why the guys who just sit home buy ammo and dig trenches aren't helping anyone. I swore to uphold the WHOLE Con. not jsut certain pieces.

NOW: We have the Natural Rights portion. I belive in defense of one's life. I believe you have the right to protect yourself. But you can protect yourself with sticks, stones, knives, etc. The Natural Rights were around waaayyyy before there were AR-15s. And will be there after them. So to hang anyones whole argument on them doesn't fly.

You continually advocate changing laws we don't agree with. Do you think we have not been trying? Do you think we have not been running into brick walls at every turn we make? One step forward, two steps back. You DO realize this is Massachusetts? We are constantly being bombarded with heinous legislation. Have you seen the latest bills, up for consideration? It's not that easy, and being in the minority (especially in this state), and having limited resources, and backing, it is an exercise in frustration, at best.

Tell me what you REALLY think. Is it, you would like to see the populace disarmed, so that only the "Authorities" have guns? I know what you've said in this thread, but I would appreciate some candor.

I know how you will answer this question, so don't bother. I just needed to say that!

 

[atilla]

It's great to hear guys views (even if they involve killing others).

passive-aggressive condescension much? no one said any such thing. don't for a second think we're all sitting here with murder-boners just waiting for "the balloon to go up".

which leftist rag is your piece for?

 

[LR308_GNR]

60 pages and you guys are still feeding the troll!

PrimusTactical is a donkey and he's baiting everyone here perfectly... agreeing just enough to keep you involved, but disagreeing enough to keep you enraged.

 

[Billsail]

60 pages and you guys are still feeding the troll!

PrimusTactical is a donkey and he's baiting everyone here perfectly... agreeing just enough to keep you involved, but disagreeing enough to keep you enraged.

Don't hate the thread dude! We're enjoying this.

 

[LR308_GNR]

Don't hate the thread dude! We're enjoying this.

Ahh... its a troll trolling event.

I apologize, carry on.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

passive-aggressive condescension much? no one said any such thing. don't for a second think we're all sitting here with murder-boners just waiting for "the balloon to go up".

which leftist rag is your piece for?

Ok, I lied, its not my final post, "murder boners"!!!! hahahahahahah, rep inbound!

 

[ChevyGuy91]

passive-aggressive condescension much? no one said any such thing. don't for a second think we're all sitting here with murder-boners just waiting for "the balloon to go up".

which leftist rag is your piece for?

This is why we are friends. LOL murder-boners.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to atilla again.

 

[ColdDayInHell]

Wow atilla that's one of the best posts I've ever read . This thread delivers

 

[xtry51]

I've seen plenty of SWAT teams with murder-boners just "delivering a few messages".

 

[atilla]

I've seen plenty of SWAT teams with murder-boners just "delivering a few messages".

yup, i wonder what jose guerena would have to say about this.

oh, wait.

if guns kill people mine sure as shit don't work right.