Yeager Fallout begins....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cardinal Ximinez said:
Well, first off, we seem to have 2 extremes here.....
Click to expand...

Freedom is an extreme view and should be guarded with extreme measures. Not doing so is how we ended up in this fricking twilight zone world where politicians can go around blatantly lying about how 2A is for hunting and target shooting.

2A is for shooting people who overstep their bounds and abridge your freedoms. Plain and simple. If those people doing the abridging happen to be politicians they still get shot like the rest.
 
I posted this in another thread, maybe the knowledge can be used here as well.

http://takimag.com/article/the_tyranny_of_anecdotes_gavin_mcinnes/print#disqus_thread

Yeager said: “Vice President [Joe] Biden is asking the president to bypass Congress and use executive privilege, executive order to ban assault rifles and to impose stricter gun control. F*ck that.”

“I’m telling you that if that happens, it’s going to spark a civil war, and I’ll be glad to fire the first shot. I’m not putting up with it. You shouldn’t put up with it. And I need all you patriots to start thinking about what you’re going to do, load your damn mags, make sure your rifle’s clean, pack a backpack with some food in it and get ready to fight.”
“I’m not f*cking putting up with this. I’m not letting my country be ruled by a dictator. I’m not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I’m going to start killing people.”
Click to expand...

Is it my turn to buy a round?
 
Last edited:
ChrisATX said:
It's tough. I'm a staunch constitutionalist, and in a lot of ways, the idea of criminal threatening is like "pre-crime". But I think the 1st amendment is incredibly powerful and comes with some serious responsibilities on the part of Americans to think before things come out of their mouth. Yeager didn't do that.
Click to expand...

Yeah but what he did I don't think crosses the line into criminal threatening. If it did then why didn't they arrest him and charge him with said crime? They didn't because they know it won't fly. It clearly didn't- it was vague and non specific. What he said is not that much different than when a few million americans all spouted after 9/11 "If they hit us again I am going to start killing towelheads" etc. Threats have to be specific and appear credible before someone can get arrested for making them. If people got arrested every time someone made a vague threat the jails would be full.

-Mike
 
xtry51 said:
2A is for shooting people who overstep their bounds and abridge your freedoms. Plain and simple. If those people doing the abridging happen to be politicians they still get shot like the rest.
Click to expand...

Sadly many people posting in this thread simply don't get it.

"Lets wait and see what they do to us first...."
 
Willey3055 said:
Cardinal, that was my second point. Let's wait to see what Biden reports to Maobama on Tuesday!
Click to expand...

I don't even care what Biden tells the Big Zero. Everything right now is political theater. I don't think they have the votes in Congress, nor do I think Obama's balls are big enough to write some unilateral Executive Order.
 
The technicality of the registration requirements and process.... Too tired to get into it now. I honestly should have gone to sleep hours ago.

Mike
 
Willey3055 said:
Derek, explain where I am wrong to educate the rest of us.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you're wrong to educate. What I am saying is it's perfectly fine for an American to remind the .gov that if they so choose to go against the Constitution there will be a price to pay. Those statement should be made BEFORE bills are introduced as "fair warning". If the pols decide to vote for them well they put themselves on "the list"
 
Read it for yourself -

Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.
 
Willey3055 said:
Read it for yourself -

Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.
Click to expand...

Not everyone lives in MA, and the guy we're talking about certainly didn't.
 
Willey3055 said:
Read it for yourself -

Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.
Click to expand...

**** your MGL's, this is america.
 
Willey3055 said:
Read it for yourself -

Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.
Click to expand...

The transactions for ever have not been put in a database. The database is new.

If you have purchased 30 guns in the last 10 years via fa-10 in MA it will take the state.gov months if not years to find all those carbon copies to figure out what you have and don't have.
 
Derek, I totally agree with you, but Biden is not presenting LAWS to Maobama on Tuesday. He is presenting information from which Maobama may or may not use to bypass the Congress.
 
Willey3055 said:
Read it for yourself -

Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.
Click to expand...

Willey, we're all familiar with the statute. But we also know that the data in the database is crap. It is effectively useless for law enforcement purposes.
 
Willey3055 said:
Derek, I totally agree with you, but Biden is not presenting LAWS to Maobama on Tuesday. He is presenting information from which Maobama may or may not use to bypass the Congress.
Click to expand...

If Biden and company had a feeling that the populace will strike back against any anti-gun legislation he might be compelled to file anti-criminal legislation. Biden is pretty dumb so anything is possible, however I like to give people the benefit of the double before I check the mirage.
 
M1911,

I am speaking from experience. I had my Class A LTC suspended for 6 months. The police department, where I now live has an inventory of my gun collection, so it doesn't matter if the state records are crap. Furthermore, if you are ever faced with the same situation, you better be sure that any of your guns inventoried by the police are on record with the state FRB.
 
Willey3055 said:
I am speaking from experience. I had my Class A LTC suspended for 6 months. The police department, where I now live has an inventory of my gun collection, so it doesn't matter if the state records are crap. Furthermore, if you are ever faced with the same situation, you better be sure that any of your guns inventoried by the police are on record with the state FRB.
Click to expand...

Why? There is nothing under MGL requiring such. Nothing. Please show us the law. And no, S128A/B doesn't count. That's reporting of transfers. There's nothing under MGL mandating consistency of data with the state database. Nothing. Some LEO may have tried to blow some smoke up your ass, but they'e full of shit. There is no "failure to have something registered" charge in MGL.

-Mike
 
SteelShooter said:
I think he actually said he doesn't take back anything that he said. I don't know who the guy is, but if you haven't had similar feelings over the last few weeks with all the attacks on we the people, you probably need to reevaluate what you believe in. Should he have said it on YouTube? Maybe, maybe not, but I think the .gov has got to get the message that their actions could have consequences. They are trying to do exactly what the constitution forbids them to do, and the Declaration of Independence gives us a road map of what we are required to do. The founding fathers knew that this would come about, they knew what power does to people. And while I think he probably shouldn't have said it in that forum, I think it's not for the same reasons you do. But if him saying that makes one of the politicians think twice about grabbing our rights away and changes their mind, then that's a good thing. It's not too late yet to ensure that they don't go the route of shitting on the Constitution, but if they do they need to realize they could be changing the course of the nation forever. At what point would it be too much for you? Maybe when they have the blue helmets sleeping in your living room?
Click to expand...

You make very good points, and if this guy wants to be the poster child for barking at the government then you and the others are right we should give him our full support. I understand the seriousness of what is happening and we can debate whether what he said crossed the line or not all night long but fact remains that he is in a weaker position now than he was before. Now perhaps it was worth it, if as you say, "it sent a message", we can't know that for certain though. And of course DHS is making an example out of him, that is why I think the guy is an idiot, he's doing exactly what they want.

#8 Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it

The full force of the people isn't going to be felt by the words of one man on Youtube, it will be when the citizenry is moved to action and descends upon DC by the millions. Now perhaps Yeager will be the spark for that action should the government choose unwisely, maybe not, but in the meantime, he's kicking himself in the ass right now for falling right into their trap.
 
Last edited:
Willey3055 said:
I am speaking from experience. I had my Class A LTC suspended for 6 months. The police department, where I now live has an inventory of my gun collection, so it doesn't matter if the state records are crap. Furthermore, if you are ever faced with the same situation, you better be sure that any of your guns inventoried by the police are on record with the state FRB.
Click to expand...

You have asserted that the FRB knows what guns we have. They don't. They have records, but their records are inaccurate.

I bought a bunch of guns before the state started using the machine readable form. Those old forms were never computerized. They were kept in shoeboxes in a storeroom at the Framingham State Police barracks. Those dusty, moldy forms, covered in mouse droppings, were discarded.

The new computerized forms are scanned but there is no quality control, so scanning errors are not caught. As a result, even the new records are inaccurate. Furthermore, if you sell a gun, it is NEVER taken off of the list of guns that you own, even though you send them an FA-10.

Consequently, the FRB list of my guns includes guns that I have already sold and doesn't include other guns that I bought before the start of the computerized forms.

So when you say that the FRB knows all of the guns we have, that simply isn't true. They have a list, but in many (most?) cases, that list is inaccurate.
 
Derek, there is no mirage with Biden on gun control. He was the key player in the 1994 AWB, as written in a NYT article:

"President Bill Clinton’s White House and House Democrats worried that the gun ban would end up taking down the entire crime bill, which authorized 100,000 more police officers, expanded the death penalty, built more prisons, cracked down on hate crimes and violence against women, and financed prevention programs. In the end, it passed, in significant part because of Mr. Biden. “I think there were days the chairman didn’t sleep,” said Karen Robb, who worked for the committee at the time. “It never would have made it out of the Senate without his help, period. It never would have made it out of conference without him.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Illinois Sh*t Show Begins
Replies
19
Views
912
VetteGirlMA
VetteGirlMA
Healey administration begins training police in how to inspect gun dealers amid concern laws aren’t being enforced
3 4 5
Replies
122
Views
6K
SFC13557
S
James Yeager may have ALS
3 4 5
Replies
141
Views
8K
meh
meh
IT BEGINS: Biden Admin Running Secret Lists Used to Prevent Outspoken Political Opponents from Owning Guns
Replies
6
Views
521
John4166
John4166
ATF RAID Polymer80: it begins
Replies
1
Views
493
Rococo
Rococo
Back
Top Bottom