Jump to content
SecurityGuy42

Virginia 2A Rally 20 JAN 2020

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Liberty or Death said:

I will be there along with many of my colleagues.  

 

I hope to be there also. The way things are shaping up, quite a few of us from West Virginia will be bussing it to Richmond. I think this thing is going to be bigger than all expectations. It's kind of exciting and dreadful at the same time... Exciting that so many are responding in ACTION in support of our Constitution... dreadful that the Governor of Virginia would appear to want a war. 

If there ever was a time for dotting the i's and crossing the t's, it'll be at this event. We need to make a special effort whenever possible to keep the radical fringe from destroying our goals... There's nothing we can do about false flag soldiers if they're out there... Just remember, make no judgements on any incident until the facts are in. The modern Deep State press like to pounce of fake happenings, with false details, and try the whole event in the public square before the facts are gathered in an attempt to shed bad light on Constitutional agendas. We need take special care... and be ready... This isn't to be taken lightly. It really doesn't get any more serious than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not be coming.  At 65 I’m 4’10 with an extra 35lbs.  I’m beaten, banged, bruised, and broken.  I’m probably one of the heartiest and  most dedicated.  But I am a liability in a crowd. 
I will, however, be deeply praying for all of you.  
I have read estimates of as many as 10 political groups who have already swelled the the population of Richmond ( a small city of about 200K) by 10%.  And attendees haven’t begun to arrive.  Remember that not only are all these arms not on our side, they are not on each other’s side either.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2019 at 3:22 PM, GLCsector3295 said:

 

 

On 12/30/2019 at 10:09 PM, LetFreedomRing said:

13 States Planning to Join Gov Northam

 

 

Unless Wikipedia is running slow on updating their information, Ohio, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are controlled by Republicans.  The other states he mentioned, including Illinois (where I live) are possibilities.  But out of the 101 counties in Illinois, only seven or eight are controlled by the Democrats, and there is a growing Second Amendment Sanctuary movement, here.  The other states on his list could very well go "Virginia", on the subject of guns.

Edited by Headhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very very important:  DO NOT BRING LONG WEAPONS.   The people organizing this have rightly asked people not to bring long arms.

And: watch out for provocateurs.

 

This could be a huge victory for us -- if there are tens of thousands of people, peacefully but angrily protesting -- it will galvanize people all over the country.  It will be a huge setback for the Left.

 

But ... if it looks like there might be violence, even shooting -- many people will stay away. The demonstration will be smaller. If it's really small, then it will be a defeat, and a serious one.

If it's a large demonstration, but there is serious violence, that too will be a defeat.

 

Thre is good reason to believe that the Left is working overtime to try to provoke violence, by first of all encouraging unstable people to bring guns, and even to try to 'arrest' the governor.  Utterly mad.

 

They may also infiltrate provocateurs into the crowd, who will throw things at the police. Anyone doiNg this should be dealt  with immediately by the people standing around them: pick them by their arms and legs and pass them overhead to the edge of the crowd into the arms of the kindly policemen they were throwing things at.  If they lose their wallet and ID on the way, too bad.

 

FOR EVERYTHING, THERE IS A SEASON.  DO NOT BE PROVOKED.  DON'T DO ANYTHING STUPID.

                                     NOW IS THE TIME FOR FIRE DISCIPLINE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Well said Doug, the info on the long guns is appreciated. I may or may not comply with that request. I am less concerned about our people and more concerned about a false flag plant. If there is someone that you suspect,  keep eyes on that person and intercede if necessary.

 

 Although, I understand the request, not to bring a "long gun", I do consider that a failure in judgment. It would behoove the organizers to allocate a few if not many to just that. Not only as a means of deterrent and protection for the group, but also as a visual aid for those seeking to infringe on our rights.

 

 I know this goes without saying; but like Doug said. Trigger control people, Safety, Safety, Safety! One negligent discharge is all that is necessary for left to say; "See these guns are dangerous... bla bla bla." Unless you are put into a position to defend yourself, keep your firearm holstered! We all like a little show and tell, but now is not the time.

Edited by Matthew M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever we think of the requests of the organizers of this protest, I believe we should definitely comply with them.

 

Let me make another point. i hope this does not seem cold-blooded but ... what is true in physical war is sometimes just the opposite in political warfare. Put another way ... remember the saying, "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church"?  In physical warfare you win by killing your enemy. In political warfare, sometimes, you win when your enemy kills you.

 

Consider two possible scenarios: Anti-fa show up at this demonstration, throw 'milkshakes' into the crowd, throw half-bricks -- which can be lethal -- some patriots are injured, and one, goaded beyond constraint, pulls his Glock 40 and sends several Anti-Fa off to that great Gulag in the Sky in which they would like to put us.  How will this play out across America? How will the MSM treat it?  There will be a wave of condemnation of us, and a wave of sympathy for the poor anti-Fa martyrs.

 

On the other hand, suppose the same thing happens, but with lethal results for us. Suppose a nice Republican grandmother, ideally the mother of a boy killed fighting for his country, is hit by one of those half-bricks, and dies.  But our side does not shoot back.

 

This will be a huge victory for us!    Millions of people across the country will see Anti-Fa as the violent aggressors, and us as the innocent peaceful people just trying to defend our rights.  I repeat, I am not hoping this happens, I'm just being realistic.

 

Of course the MSM will always try to twist and spin every event ... but they are not all-powerful.. they cannot just invent reality.

 

The movement for Civil Rights for American Blacks was non-violent.  (Okay ... in reality that was not entirely true ... there were armed Black self-defense groups in the background. In fact,  believe it or not, I helped buy ammunition for one of them at the time. But it was largely true. More importantly, it was seen to be true.)

 

Now ... there were several Civil Rights workers who were killed. Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner. James Meredith. The four little Black girls who were blown to pieces in a Black church  bombed by the Ku Klux Klan. (If anyone has the least bit of sympathy for these scum ... you are either an evil person or don't know the facts. They are anti-patriots.)   Black people were beaten, dragged off buses, hosed down with firehoses, set on by police dogs. 

 

The Blacks would have been morally justified in meeting violence with violence, They didn't.  And it won them a huge victory -- it swung public opinion behind them, and forced the government to move to defend their rights. 

 

Now ... there may come a time in which considerations of political warfare fade away. We will have done all we can, the country will be deeply divided but we will have a large number of people on our side.  We will have lots of sympathyers and even members in the Armed Froces. We will have good relaitons with the police.  And the Left will be stupid and make a bid for power, via some sort of coup or mass demonstrations that then try to take over the government.  If something like that happens ... the political/physical opposition will flip over ... and the weapon of criticism will be replaced by the criticism of weapons.  Then we'll see how good that training was. 

 

But not yet.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my hope that a number of Militia Units have planned to stay outside of the city limits and find places to camp out.  I respect the VCDL request to not carry long guns.  Not my style, but, it's their rally.  Just seems like a bad situation waiting to happen to have several thousand people packed into an area only carrying pistols and otherwise poorly equipped.  As much as I'd love to see 10k people rallying to send a clear message... I'd be more comfortable with 7k in the city in coats and jeans and 3k in bdu's with rifles in the towns and woodlands outside the city just in case.  If the numbers go higher than 10k... the rally location is going to potentially be very congested.  Hopefully folks have planned for a fallback location in the event things go south and have maps at hand to navigate out to safety.  Hopefully some Militia's have planned ahead to be support in the event things go bad.  Some people will need to get out due to being under equipped... others will need to go in.  

 

Also hoping that patriots are packing gas masks in the event tear gas is deployed to deal with any unrest.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, like, there is NO LEGIT PROOF to prove that those 13 state ARE going to join the VA governor's ruling..... Where does it say that? Not that I wouldn't be surprised, but WHERE is the LEGIT sources from where he is getting this information from?? Best not to pass that around as FACT just yet other than just a POSSIBILITY...... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As bad as I hate that it's come to this, this may be the time to make the hard choices.

I feel like this is just as much my battle as it is Virginia's... Virginia is just at the tip of tyranny's spear right now.

 

MyMilitia-1.jpg.316158e5db4ef93411c45d125f839b6b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, New York Patriot Recruiter said:

Ok, like, there is NO LEGIT PROOF to prove that those 13 state ARE going to join the VA governor's ruling..... Where does it say that? Not that I wouldn't be surprised, but WHERE is the LEGIT sources from where he is getting this information from?? Best not to pass that around as FACT just yet other than just a POSSIBILITY...... 

 

There is a lot of speculation floating around at the moment.  

 

What we can say is this:  Legislation is being pushed in numerous states to either confiscate fire-arms (Red Flag), ban, or further limit the 2A rights of the citizenry.  This cannot be disputed.  How likely those bills are to pass in any given state is a matter of looking at who the representatives are that will vote on those bills.

 

The thing to remember is that just because a bill doesn't pass... that doesn't mean it goes away.  It is a reference point for future legislative attempts or even a bill that can be resurrected as is to be pushed at a later point.  They are laying ground work knowing that if it doesn't pass this time... it might the next time when they can get the majority or increase the size of their majority.  This is why local and state elections are so important.  This is also why demographic shifts are important to monitor.  If you live in Idaho... you've got a lot of Commiefornian's moving into the state.  That is going to change how that state votes in the future.  What is safe today may not be tomorrow.  These attempts being put forth are a sign to us that the gears and cogs are doing their thing behind the scenes - intentions precede actions.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, RevRifleman said:

intentions precede actions

 

Absolutely. I think the reason we are seeing such emboldened efforts right now suddenly coming down the pike, is that back off in a secret room where these campaign contributions were made, it was very quietly agreed that IF they gave the money and IF they got elected. THIS type of regislation would HAVE to be presented no matter what the majority of citizens want.

And that's what we are seeing. The new Virginia legislature is simply "paying back" those that contributed to getting them elected, Michael Bloomberg being the largest known donor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe something even bigger than individual gun control is coming.  I think they are going to go after the militias as such.

Because ... suppose they ban 'assault weapons', and all magazines with a capacity of more than ten rounds.

 

Well ... in the first place, how many people do you think will actually turn their AR15s in?  So many of them will be lost in boating accidents, or given to an elderly relative who has now died who lived in a distant state.

 

In the second place ... although a thirty-round magazine is handy ... we won WWII against the Nazis with a rifle that had an eight-round magazine.

 

I would far far far rather see 500,000 people organized and trained in local militia units, armed with M1 Garands,   supported by five million sympathyzers, than 1000 000 people with fully-automatic AR15s, each sitting at home "defying the government," or 'organized' with two or three friends, with no training, no chain of command, no specialists and division of labor that you get when you can bring together hundreds of people with a purpose,  having access to the knowledge and skills bought by American soldiers over the last fifty years and paid for in blood. 

 

Genuine wars are won by discipline ,  organization,  skillful leadership and deep moral committment on the part of the combatants.  We far outgunned the Viet Cong, but the Communists -- having wiped out their non-Communist nationalist competition during the Second World War -- pretty much had a monopoly on Vietnamese nationalism. This gave them a big advantage.

 

Napoleon said in  war, the moral is to the material as three to one, and he was right. But that committment has to be organized, which is why I think that the militia will soon be portrayed as 'private armies' made up of ultra-right wing terrorists.  Read the Huffington Post articles on the militia and you can see the political equivalent of an artillery 'prep' in action.

 

Our enemies don't really care about the weapons, or about the occasional mass-murdering lunatic (who will find ways to kill in any case): their

target is organized patriots.

 

So in the immediate future we need to prepare a propaganda counter-offensive.  This is why Virginia is important: we need large numbers of ordinary citizens turning up, NOT looking like scary sullen bearded men in camo with machine guns, NOT carrying swastikas and Confederate Flags, NOT threatening to arrest the governor on the basis of some arcane interpretation of the law, NOT muttering about Black Helicopters piloted by the Illuminati and carrying "UN soldiers".

 

Patriots are very poor at propaganda. Why? Because they tend to be naturally conservative, basically happy with their country. So they don't stay up late thinking about how to radically change it. We don't have a Saul Alinsky writing a  Reveille for Radicals book to get instructions from.  We just want to be left alone. But they don't want to leave us alone.

 

We're always playing defense. We have to start playing offense, learning how to win public opinion, how to carpe diem (seize the day) when a Bridge at Remagen moment comes along, as it did a few days ago with the Synagogue and Church attacks.  We need to play political judo -- offering to provide security for local mosques for example.  We need to build a pyramid of support around and below us, of people who are not directly militia members, but are part of support groups, parallel groups, social welfare groups supported by us.

 

What's the difference between a militia in America at the present time, and a professional army? 

 

The real difference is this: in terms of whom to wage war against, a professional army just follows the directions of its government. It can concentrate entirely on the technicalities of warfare. It may have a 'PR' department but it will just be a feeble adjunct, which no real soldier will want to be assigned to.

 

But today, in America, a militia has got to spend as much time 'doing politics' as it does in target practice and carrying out fire-and-maneuver exercises.  Our enemies have wisely chosen, from their point of view, to fight on that ground. Anti-fa know they would be turned into hamburger in any armed confrontation between them and us.   At the moment, the political field, defeating the propaganda war against us, is the 'high ground', and we've got to obey that basic rule of infantry warfare: take the high ground and hold it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Doug1943 said:

I believe something even bigger than individual gun control is coming.  I think they are going to go after the militias as such.

 

After thinking on it some this morning, it's pretty clear. They are coming after our entire way of life. If you are caught in a cross-fire of criminals murdering people around you, they want it to be illegal for you to be able to stop the criminal. If you are out with the family target shooting and picnicking, they want that illegal. They know we're all not going to stand around in our camo gear WITHOUT our guns and train together... so they want to make that illegal. They want to make it illegal for me to teach my children handgun safety at very early ages and how to operate a firearm at an early age. They don't want us to play with our GI Joe dolls anymore... they want to make that illegal. And above all, they want to be able to do ANYTHING they wish to us, knowing we have no way to effectively rebel.

Virginia wants all of that NOW.  RIGHT now.

 

What kind of choice does that leave us?

 

I know militias have a PR problem. But hell. The best President we've had in my lifetime has a PR problem. There is virtually no way NOT to have a PR problem. It doesn't matter what we do to try to get our message across, if our people have not been raised by a patriot, we can expect them to act like idiots, and they will seell their birthright for a bowl of stew because no one ever taught them the worth of what they already have.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun control is really about people control and that is what it is all about.  The elite and those that believe they are also part of the elite (because most of them are really unknowing dupes and tools of the real power behind the strings) want to be able to completely rule all of us with no chance for resistance by force.  They want to confiscate and remove all privately owned firearms in the United States, because that is the only thing keeping them from complete and open rule of our world.  Once private firearms are mostly gone in the United States we will have two kinds of people left, the few that died resisting and not complying, and the rest who are the peons, serfs and slaves of the elite ruling class.  Every additional infringement on any of our rights is one step closer to this down their slippery slope.  No more compromise, no more additional infringements, and we need to get back most of what has been lost so far.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LetFreedomRing said:

Gun control is really about people control and that is what it is all about.  The elite and those that believe they are also part of the elite (because most of them are really unknowing dupes and tools of the real power behind the strings) want to be able to completely rule all of us with no chance for resistance by force.  They want to confiscate and remove all privately owned firearms in the United States, because that is the only thing keeping them from complete and open rule of our world.  Once private firearms are mostly gone in the United States we will have two kinds of people left, the few that died resisting and not complying, and the rest who are the peons serfs and slaves of the elite ruling class.

 

And our Founders saw every damned WORD of what you just said down the road and around the curve.

They gave us hammers and nails to maintain our houses. Use them not and watch the roof fall in. What I would like to see organized the most? The construction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's frame it as a military problem, set in the days when the poor bloody infantry moved around by foot, as in the War Between the States.

 

Assume you are a general -- choose which side -- and your scouts bring you reports of the enemy massing towards one particular point. As you try to decide what to do, you have to take into account several factors:

 

(1) The Enemy Order of Battle [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle], and your own. What does your enemy have, in terms of numbers, of the principal combat arms , how are they organized, what are their strengths and their weaknesses .... and the same for yourself. Until Grant took over, the Union generals frequently wildly over-estimated the numbers of the their Southern opponents.

 

(2) The geographic position of the elements of both sides.  Then as now, fighting units were dispersed. They had to be brought together in order to have a major engagement.  How far away is each of your armies? How far away  are the enemy's? What kind of terrain will they have to cross in order to reach the battlefield? How long will it take?  (Napoleon was on the verge of winning Waterloo, when, as the sun was going down, the Prussians under the admirable Field Marshall von  Blücher came up on his right flank, having fought their way through his blocking elements and carried the day for the Allies. Napoleon had underestimated the ability of the Prussians to get to the battlefield in time.)

 

We have to make the same judgement today, except that the first calculation has to be of total numbers, not of total armed numbers. Put it this way ... at this point in time, any serious attempt at armed resistance to the government will result in a crushing defeat for our side, not only militarily, but, far more importantly, politically. It would drive people towards the government side.

 

And what would our aim be? To replace a democratically-elected government with a minority-supported one, which holds power because it has the preponderance of armed force?  Really?  But it would not happen: the military will stay loyal, and the militia would melt like snow in hot summer in the face of the American military. 

 

Right now, the militia does not have mass support among the American people. Its forces have not arrived on the battlefield yet. Our fight is necessarily defensive -- since they will try to crush us in the egg -- and our main aim must be to grow: not just in active members, but in the numbers of people who think well of us.

 

The Union forces won the Battle of Gettysburg by getting to the high ground first, and then just holding it.  That's our position at the moment.  The laws seizing weapons will be fought in the courts, right up the Supreme Court, where we hold the advantage. They can be resisted in the same way unjust laws were resisted in the South -- by non-compliance, by civil disobedience, by ceaseless agitating and campaigning. 

 

Armed violence by our side at the present moment is EXACTLY what the other side is hoping for, and probably what they are trying, in various ways, to provoke.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Doug1943 said:

Let's frame it as a military problem, set in the days when the poor bloody infantry moved around by foot, as in the War Between the States.

 

Assume you are a general -- choose which side -- and your scouts bring you reports of the enemy massing towards one particular point. As you try to decide what to do, you have to take into account several factors:

 

(1) The Enemy Order of Battle [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle], and your own. What does your enemy have, in terms of numbers, of the principal combat arms , how are they organized, what are their strengths and their weaknesses .... and the same for yourself. Until Grant took over, the Union generals frequently wildly over-estimated the numbers of the their Southern opponents.

 

(2) The geographic position of the elements of both sides.  Then as now, fighting units were dispersed. They had to be brought together in order to have a major engagement.  How far away is each of your armies? How far away  are the enemy's? What kind of terrain will they have to cross in order to reach the battlefield? How long will it take?  (Napoleon was on the verge of winning Waterloo, when, as the sun was going down, the Prussians under the admirable Field Marshall von  Blücher came up on his right flank, having fought their way through his blocking elements and carried the day for the Allies. Napoleon had underestimated the ability of the Prussians to get to the battlefield in time.)

 

We have to make the same judgement today, except that the first calculation has to be of total numbers, not of total armed numbers. Put it this way ... at this point in time, any serious attempt at armed resistance to the government will result in a crushing defeat for our side, not only militarily, but, far more importantly, politically. It would drive people towards the government side.

 

And what would our aim be? To replace a democratically-elected government with a minority-supported one, which holds power because it has the preponderance of armed force?  Really?  But it would not happen: the military will stay loyal, and the militia would melt like snow in hot summer in the face of the American military. 

 

Right now, the militia does not have mass support among the American people. Its forces have not arrived on the battlefield yet. Our fight is necessarily defensive -- since they will try to crush us in the egg -- and our main aim must be to grow: not just in active members, but in the numbers of people who think well of us.

 

The Union forces won the Battle of Gettysburg by getting to the high ground first, and then just holding it.  That's our position at the moment.  The laws seizing weapons will be fought in the courts, right up the Supreme Court, where we hold the advantage. They can be resisted in the same way unjust laws were resisted in the South -- by non-compliance, by civil disobedience, by ceaseless agitating and campaigning. 

 

Armed violence by our side at the present moment is EXACTLY what the other side is hoping for, and probably what they are trying, in various ways, to provoke.

 

 

 

 

The side that fires first loses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Doug1943 said:

Let's frame it as a military problem, set in the days when the poor bloody infantry moved around by foot, as in the War Between the States.

 

Assume you are a general -- choose which side -- and your scouts bring you reports of the enemy massing towards one particular point. As you try to decide what to do, you have to take into account several factors:

 

(1) The Enemy Order of Battle [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle], and your own. What does your enemy have, in terms of numbers, of the principal combat arms , how are they organized, what are their strengths and their weaknesses .... and the same for yourself. Until Grant took over, the Union generals frequently wildly over-estimated the numbers of the their Southern opponents.

 

(2) The geographic position of the elements of both sides.  Then as now, fighting units were dispersed. They had to be brought together in order to have a major engagement.  How far away is each of your armies? How far away  are the enemy's? What kind of terrain will they have to cross in order to reach the battlefield? How long will it take?  (Napoleon was on the verge of winning Waterloo, when, as the sun was going down, the Prussians under the admirable Field Marshall von  Blücher came up on his right flank, having fought their way through his blocking elements and carried the day for the Allies. Napoleon had underestimated the ability of the Prussians to get to the battlefield in time.)

 

We have to make the same judgement today, except that the first calculation has to be of total numbers, not of total armed numbers. Put it this way ... at this point in time, any serious attempt at armed resistance to the government will result in a crushing defeat for our side, not only militarily, but, far more importantly, politically. It would drive people towards the government side.

 

And what would our aim be? To replace a democratically-elected government with a minority-supported one, which holds power because it has the preponderance of armed force?  Really?  But it would not happen: the military will stay loyal, and the militia would melt like snow in hot summer in the face of the American military. 

 

Right now, the militia does not have mass support among the American people. Its forces have not arrived on the battlefield yet. Our fight is necessarily defensive -- since they will try to crush us in the egg -- and our main aim must be to grow: not just in active members, but in the numbers of people who think well of us.

 

The Union forces won the Battle of Gettysburg by getting to the high ground first, and then just holding it.  That's our position at the moment.  The laws seizing weapons will be fought in the courts, right up the Supreme Court, where we hold the advantage. They can be resisted in the same way unjust laws were resisted in the South -- by non-compliance, by civil disobedience, by ceaseless agitating and campaigning. 

 

Armed violence by our side at the present moment is EXACTLY what the other side is hoping for, and probably what they are trying, in various ways, to provoke.

 

 

I agree with a vast majority of what is said here, with one slight deviation. We are assuming that any opposition would be organized as an army, culminating at one or more main locations. The fact of the matter is; "the people" should and would be organized in a fashion more reminiscent of our four fathers. Meaning; small groups working in accordance with one another, striking hard then fading away. In reality "the people" would function more like insurgents of the middle east.

Edited by Matthew M
clarification. This mobile site doesn't like the "paste" function. to overcome this type some random shit then attempt to paste over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...