Jump to content
GLCsector3295

All Bark ? And a question or two

Recommended Posts

https://www.yahoo.com/news/businesses-chafing-under-covid-19-121824076.html

 

Okay so in this link, is an article about how some businesses are resorting to armed protesters to help them keep their businesses open in  the remaining states that are enforcing stay at home orders...

 

here is my question though.. 

 

What is the purpose of being armed  ? I can understand an armed protest to protest gun control laws and doing that at state capitals , to show, hey we have these rifles, we are not shooting up the town, etc.

But for these armed protesters to show up at businesses , the impression they give when they do this, is that they are ready to have an armed conflict with police.  An  then, when police show up with their guns drawn, everyone there throws their hands up, and hands over their weapons. an off to jail they go. An then if you read the link, I think some where in there someone is quoted as saying " we are ready to die for our freedom ".

 

okay * round of applause * great to hear, but if I am right with that being said, and that person is or has participated at one of these armed protests , then exactly why didn't he put into practice what he said when police show up ?  Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating violence. What I hope I am pointing out, is that when people say these things and do these kind of protests, that it is sending the wrong message to police. If one wants a peaceful protest to me, this isn't the way to go. Especially if they do not expect to be confronted with violence by counter protesters, nor intend on engaging police in an exchange of gun fire.

 

Now if the message to be sent is to send some fear into politicians ,  I do not know how that really pans out, I think that is for a case by case, comparison on the politician they want to scare.   To me all it does for democrat politicians ( or any party really )  is either scare them into changing their minds, or gives them more reason to lobby for gun control and or aggravates them more to just hold firm in their decision to keep areas closed as a form of retaliation.

 

To me, if anyone wants to do an armed protest, do it in a high crime area where people are not safe to walk outside and crime is rampant and demand the police take more proactive measures to enforce the law. But to do these kinds of protests where the impression given is that they are ready to engage the police, I find that troublesome, now granted they may not see what they are doing as being that an probably do not have that intent at all, but that is the impression some can take when they see these things happen.

 

Other than that my other question was in regards to the changing of the guard here, the original owner was speaking about coming under personal attack, is that correct ?

If that is true, then by whom and why ? and if anyone can link me to where that has been brought up an answered I would appreciate it, so i can catch up, as i am tardy to the party. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly bottom line,,, when constitutional law is suspended it is a act of war against the people.

Constitutional law is the law of the land. Without this law there's no law. 

Tyrants will never listen,, they have their agenda and it is in full force. 

Question is do we sit back and do nothing,,, then we deserve what we get.

Just as the German people got when they watched the Nazis take over. We are experiencing a take over of our constitution, what we do now is what are children will have to indure.

Educate yourself ,,,be Viligent,,be rational,,, take a stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They weren't there to start a fight.  They were there in support of the business owner and in protest of government overreach.  If they wanted to pick a fight, a few guys standing in a parking lot is about the worst possible 'plan of action' I can think of to accomplish that end.  They showed up with one of three outcomes in mind... being gunned down, going home, or staying the night in jail.  

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
On 5/14/2020 at 3:55 PM, Megatron said:

Because cops use guns as a show of force why shouldn't you

cops don't use guns as a show of force, they don't just randomly show up to places brandishing weapons as a show of force. 

 

For me, armed protesting is pretty pointless,  ,  i am a lil lost on the rest of the responses,   all these big chants of come and take it, an all the blow hard noise, and then police just waltz up an people willingly hand over their fire arm ,when in theory, they are peaceably protesting, so, if you are peaceably protesting, an you have this motto of, sounding a loud horn of come n get it an etc,  for the police to just walk up an go, hey you are going to jail for protesting ( which is your right )  an now we are taking your fire arm you will get it back later. 

 

just seems really pointless.

 

I mean if who ever is doing these kind of armed protests feels it is worth something, good on them. I mean if there was a follow up article that said some official saw the armed protests and it influenced him or her to change their mind,  on this issue, then okay at that point i can say, well there ya go looks like protesting . armed protesting isn't a waste of time.

 

An I am still lost on who was attacking the creator of this website . not like i am losing sleep over it, just curious.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
On 5/14/2020 at 3:34 PM, RevRifleman said:

 

They weren't there to start a fight.  They were there in support of the business owner and in protest of government overreach.  If they wanted to pick a fight, a few guys standing in a parking lot is about the worst possible 'plan of action' I can think of to accomplish that end.  They showed up with one of three outcomes in mind... being gunned down, going home, or staying the night in jail.  

 

 

 

 

that is my point, if people are showing up at places of business, to show support, exactly what is the purpose of bringing a firearm, my point was, all that bringing a firearm to a business that was ( for right or wrong ; told it has to stay closed for a period of time due to the virus )   all that image paints to the gullible  are people that are looking for some kind of conflict.  In a situation  where there is already a crisis and tensions are running high in society, exactly how does escalating that with an armed protest or support really de-escalate anything or make a point. ( on top of everything else i already stated )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, GLCsector3295 said:

cops don't use guns as a show of force, they don't just randomly show up to places brandishing weapons as a show of force. 

 

For me, armed protesting is pretty pointless,  ,  i am a lil lost on the rest of the responses,   all these big chants of come and take it, an all the blow hard noise, and then police just waltz up an people willingly hand over their fire arm ,when in theory, they are peaceably protesting, so, if you are peaceably protesting, an you have this motto of, sounding a loud horn of come n get it an etc,  for the police to just walk up an go, hey you are going to jail for protesting ( which is your right )  an now we are taking your fire arm you will get it back later. 

 

just seems really pointless.

 

I mean if who ever is doing these kind of armed protests feels it is worth something, good on them. I mean if there was a follow up article that said some official saw the armed protests and it influenced him or her to change their mind,  on this issue, then okay at that point i can say, well there ya go looks like protesting . armed protesting isn't a waste of time.

 

An I am still lost on who was attacking the creator of this website . not like i am losing sleep over it, just curious.

 

 

Right because the cops dont use a mrap or long guns for a show of force to change people's minds.  They showed up to waco with water guns hoping to show them peace and love.  If you have a love for the thin blue line killing dogs kids and women then I don't know what to say. 

 

Armed protesting is our right and what we need to do.  If you dont like it then move on and go join the nra and keep selling out the gun rights 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happens when you have two distinct historical events make a merge.  The whole armed protest thing really started picking up because of VCDL... not to say it didn't happen before.  Now this whole over-kill shut down thing is going on and it's getting people riled up due to gov't over-reach.  So... now you have protesting with guns at bars and barber shops.  Especially given that in some locations the state and local government are trying to shut down gun stores and make it difficult for people to purchase firearms/ammo.  Why did they take guns?  Because, that's where we are at right now due to the merge.  If VCDL and some of the other rallies didn't happen at the beginning of the year... I suspect there wouldn't be as many armed protests right now.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe not ,  people been protesting armed for a while but it's also a effective of other groups attacking people with blunt weapons and biological warfare weapons at rallies. 

 

Go armed scare the other side into fear and hopefully the shot will be heard around the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2020 at 1:27 PM, GLCsector3295 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/businesses-chafing-under-covid-19-121824076.html

 

Okay so in this link, is an article about how some businesses are resorting to armed protesters to help them keep their businesses open in  the remaining states that are enforcing stay at home orders...

 

here is my question though.. 

 

What is the purpose of being armed  ? I can understand an armed protest to protest gun control laws and doing that at state capitals , to show, hey we have these rifles, we are not shooting up the town, etc.

But for these armed protesters to show up at businesses , the impression they give when they do this, is that they are ready to have an armed conflict with police.  An  then, when police show up with their guns drawn, everyone there throws their hands up, and hands over their weapons. an off to jail they go. An then if you read the link, I think some where in there someone is quoted as saying " we are ready to die for our freedom ".

 

okay * round of applause * great to hear, but if I am right with that being said, and that person is or has participated at one of these armed protests , then exactly why didn't he put into practice what he said when police show up ?  Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating violence. What I hope I am pointing out, is that when people say these things and do these kind of protests, that it is sending the wrong message to police. If one wants a peaceful protest to me, this isn't the way to go. Especially if they do not expect to be confronted with violence by counter protesters, nor intend on engaging police in an exchange of gun fire.

 

Now if the message to be sent is to send some fear into politicians ,  I do not know how that really pans out, I think that is for a case by case, comparison on the politician they want to scare.   To me all it does for democrat politicians ( or any party really )  is either scare them into changing their minds, or gives them more reason to lobby for gun control and or aggravates them more to just hold firm in their decision to keep areas closed as a form of retaliation.

 

To me, if anyone wants to do an armed protest, do it in a high crime area where people are not safe to walk outside and crime is rampant and demand the police take more proactive measures to enforce the law. But to do these kinds of protests where the impression given is that they are ready to engage the police, I find that troublesome, now granted they may not see what they are doing as being that an probably do not have that intent at all, but that is the impression some can take when they see these things happen.

 

Other than that my other question was in regards to the changing of the guard here, the original owner was speaking about coming under personal attack, is that correct ?

If that is true, then by whom and why ? and if anyone can link me to where that has been brought up an answered I would appreciate it, so i can catch up, as i am tardy to the party. 

valid points...   I have watched the same things and anger just rages inside me to see them just tuck and run.   I personally have stayed away from such "protests" because 1) I have a real job and millons on welfare depend on me and 2) I know full well when I gather my gear and draw toe to toe with that blue line enforcer cult I am ready to fight to my death, I have no fantasy of getting out alive because they will call upon members of their band.   but all the same.  if these "protestors", "first amendment & second amendment auditors" are no willing to pull the trigger and die, they just merely prove that the coproaches are the rulers.  cause day after day, they prove they are very eager and willing to murder for their cult.  

 

 

-> 

Lysander Spooner (1870)

“Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it.”

“...only those who have the will and the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved.”
― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority

"So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon stolen money.  With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money.  And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money." -Lysander Spooner.
 

-The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution.

It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay any tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected.

But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life. And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.

The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.

 

The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you. He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.

The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves “the government,” are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman.

 

In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts. On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed. They say to the person thus designated:

Go to A— B—, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property. If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him. If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year. If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside.

 

If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band). If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him. If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may. Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed. See that the work of murder is thoroughly done, that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter. When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore.

It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid. And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to support “the government,” it needs no further argument to show. 

AP17271409417024.jpg

Guerrilla-dragged-through-the-streets-of-Cuscatlancingo.-March-1982[1].jpeg

tumblr_n0r4kaNrlr1stxu8xo2_1280.jpg

Screenshot_20200427-225719~2.png

Screenshot_20200428-133949~2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2020 at 2:01 PM, Liberty Prime said:

Pretty simple if they are playing smart. You need a specific transgression to file a suit. 

If they are playing the long game over short term activism it makes sense to legitimize their objections to the state of Affairs through legal actions. 

Resulting in a win will draw a line legally or they lose gaining legitimacy to their complaints. 

 

I get a lot of peoples opinion is to just boogaloo. Reality is without accurately voicing and allowing the accused party a chance to address the voiced opinions will  fail.

The general public needs to know what that party is guilty of, and that they chose not to address it reasonably.

This is pretty consistent across the board. 

 

do we today not need a shot heard round the world?   I argue we have already seen the transgression by arresting surfers, rolling in armed with armored vehicles upon Americans who are armed, you name it.  they have proven their intent.  they prove who's side they are on.   now just respond already.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2020 at 3:13 PM, Kenguythe rooster said:

Sadly bottom line,,, when constitutional law is suspended it is a act of war against the people.

Constitutional law is the law of the land. Without this law there's no law. 

Tyrants will never listen,, they have their agenda and it is in full force. 

Question is do we sit back and do nothing,,, then we deserve what we get.

Just as the German people got when they watched the Nazis take over. We are experiencing a take over of our constitution, what we do now is what are children will have to indure.

Educate yourself ,,,be Viligent,,be rational,,, take a stand.

 

there was a kid who walked into a Walmart kitted up the same as any blue line coproach.  remember?.

. THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND . OF THE UNITED STATES..

 

> *THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND*
The general misconception is that any statute or regulation passed by, or written by, "governmental" agencies or legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the *LAW OF THE LAND* .  *The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. CONSTITUTION is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND* , and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement.  It is impossible for a law which violates the CONSTITUTION to be valid.   This is succinctly stated as follows:

" *All laws which are repugnant to the CONSTITUTION are null and void* ."  Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Branch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

" *Where rights secured by the CONSTITUTION are involved* , *there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them* ." Miranda vs Arizona, 384, US 436 p. 491.

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the CONSTITUTION) was adopted, having been ratified by three-fourths of the states.

Amendment 14
All persons born or naturalized in the UNITED STATES (an AMERICAN) and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the UNITED STATES and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the UNITED STATES; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Every society is governed either by the rule of law or rule by whim. The oldest political states were ruled by the arbitrary whim of a ruler or group of rulers.  Rule by arbitrary whim creates a population that is trained to be submissive.  The rule of law is rule by a collection of constant general principles. This means that knowing what is to be  done within that  society is  always more or less a  matter of logical inference and calculation. It places every person within the society in a position to judge the legitimacy of every act.  If the state steps out of line everyone recognizes it, even if the policy remains in place for the time being. Under rule by arbitrary preference such a recognition is impossible in principle. The very popular doctrine that the CONSTITUTION has no objective meaning and therefore should be interpreted in whatever manner a judge, justice or "enforcers of such" "feels" appropriate is a doctrine of rule by arbitrary preference and not the rule of LAW.

And it is meaningless for advocates of this approach to assure us of how  carefully and judiciously the Progressive judge, justice, or "enforcers of such" intends to act, or of the many factors that he or she intends to consider.  Rule  by a “judicious” figure that is not bound by the letter of THE SUPREME LAW remains nothing but rule by arbitrary personal preference.

Marbury v. Madison is where the Court gave themselves the power of judicial review. This is not a Constitutionally granted power. And therefore you as a American citizen have no reasonable requirement to obey such arbitrary whim.   For THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND IS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES WHICH CLEARLY STATES.  "... the right of the People to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

 

and yet he ended up being disarmed and caged by costumed cowards wearing toy badges who claim to support and defend the Supreme Law of the Land.  

 

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”
― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2020 at 3:34 PM, RevRifleman said:

 

They weren't there to start a fight.  They were there in support of the business owner and in protest of government overreach.  If they wanted to pick a fight, a few guys standing in a parking lot is about the worst possible 'plan of action' I can think of to accomplish that end.  They showed up with one of three outcomes in mind... being gunned down, going home, or staying the night in jail.  

 

 

 

 

 

maybe we should start taking the fight to those who choose to tread on you.   or is it just a stupid platitude for Instagram like his 'we the people' tattoo. ?

 

tread-on-them-killdozer-farm-tshirt-mens-t-shirt.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GearBolt Tech said:

 

maybe we should start taking the fight to those who choose to tread on you.   or is it just a stupid platitude for Instagram like his 'we the people' tattoo. ?

 

tread-on-them-killdozer-farm-tshirt-mens-t-shirt.jpg

 

It's easy to criticize the actions of others.  Where is your unit and how many business owners have you went out to help protect? 

 

I'm in a red state with no official lock down in place.  There are guidelines issued that business owners are asked to follow, but, nobody is enforcing any of those things.  It is at the business owners discretion.

 

If these other states want to pick a fight and need backup... they need to get that info out to other militias in other states who may be able to provide support.  I don't hear anyone in Michigan, Jersey, Cali, Illinois, or NY making a call to action or request for support.  We're all looking at the mess and saying, well, someone should do something about that.  But, nobody in their right mind going to drag a unit of 50 people across the country to find that they have no support or supply chain to carry out an operation 1500 miles from home base.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real question is are you ready to make that sacrifice... Brother if you aren't at this point ,,, have to ask yourself why are others ready for that sacrifice..either way you decide IAM ready to make that sacrifice for you ... with all respect to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a waiting game,,, just a couple of months ago we were looking forward to fishing season,,or vacation,, not having to ruck up and use our Constitutional right to establish a government that will govern under supreme law. Forced vaccines containment, walking around with muzzles on,,, essential or none essential damn ... definitely is going to take some time to grasp the reality of it all,,, some of us didn't take to long,,, because we always new this day would come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 5:35 AM, GLCsector3295 said:

cops don't use guns as a show of force, they don't just randomly show up to places brandishing weapons as a show of force. 

 

For me, armed protesting is pretty pointless,  ,  i am a lil lost on the rest of the responses,   all these big chants of come and take it, an all the blow hard noise, and then police just waltz up an people willingly hand over their fire arm ,when in theory, they are peaceably protesting, so, if you are peaceably protesting, an you have this motto of, sounding a loud horn of come n get it an etc,  for the police to just walk up an go, hey you are going to jail for protesting ( which is your right )  an now we are taking your fire arm you will get it back later. 

 

just seems really pointless.

 

I mean if who ever is doing these kind of armed protests feels it is worth something, good on them. I mean if there was a follow up article that said some official saw the armed protests and it influenced him or her to change their mind,  on this issue, then okay at that point i can say, well there ya go looks like protesting . armed protesting isn't a waste of time.

 

An I am still lost on who was attacking the creator of this website . not like i am losing sleep over it, just curious.

 

 

I may have missed something -- and if I have I'm sure I'll be quickly corrected -- but the 'attack' was just a bog-standard liberal article in a leftwing British newspaper, that said something along the lines of  "Lockdown protestors are tied to the Far Right' -- and among the 'Far Right' they included this website, giving the owner's name and city of residence. To show that this website was somehow linked to the 'Far Right' they said (1) that some neo-Nazis appealed for help in a post here ... to which the answer is, so what, anyone can post almost anything here , and in any event  I could not find such a post in a search of the website and (2) the website owner hosts various other groups, one of which is a white supremacist record-making musical group, which was true. 

 

Note that the British liberal public get a wonderfully delicious frisson of fear when they read about 'the American militia'. So there's a market for this sort of stuff.

 

Just exactly the kind of attack we have to expect. In fact, the article was very poorly written, just from a technical point of view. It relied on Leftwing McCarthyism -- guilt-by-association. (Back in the early 50s, if you had, during the 30s, innocently signed a petition calling for support for Spain's democratic government against the fascists, or for government unemployment insurance, or against lynching of Blacks -- and it later turned out that the Communist Party had initiated the petition ... you were in trouble. You must be some sort of Commie sympathyzer.

 

We have to expect these kinds of attack. How do we defend ourselves? Well, if we are truly a movement that wants to unite all patriots, regardless of creed or color, then we have to make that clear, and exclude people who themselves want to exclude patriots based on their creed or color -- they're splitters.   And although if you own a bookshop, and a white supremacist buys a book from it, you won't be charged with being a sympathyzer of white supremacy ... if you rent a white supremacist group a building to work from, or space on a server, you will be.  So you've got to be vigilant in the latter case about whom you rent to.

 

So ... we can't be nice guys.  We can't be naive and trusting.  Many of us probably are, a bit anyway, by nature.  But we're in a war, and our enemies have no moral scruples.  They think we are all Nazis and that anything goes when fighting us. There are reasonably honest journalists in the media, so we need to deal with it. But there are also people who are deeply committed to a Leftist view of the world, who are too politically committed to be honest.

 

On the issue of showing up for demonstrations armed.  My instinct is that this is usually a bad idea ... but I am open to being convinced otherwise.  Here's what I do NOT believe: that the government is trembling in fear in the face of a mighty militia movement, knowing that in the event of an armed confrontation -- the 'boogaloo' -- it would be defeated by a mighty wave of angry, armed patriots, taking back their country.

 

Anyone who believes that has been into the medicinal marijuana, or worse.  What the government doesn't want is to be seen to kill a lot of us unnecessarily, a la Waco.

 

Here is the reality: the government got a bad reputation over Ruby Ridge and Waco. After that, they started doing what they should have done at Ruby Ridge and Waco ... being very cautious.  So there was no shootout at that nature reserve (although one protestor was killed later when he did something foolish at a roadblock) and there have been situations where the Federal agencies have backed off.  They're not stupid, and they know that bad publicity hurts them. Americans are fair-minded people, as shown by the jury verdicts in several cases: Randy Weaver was award more than a million in damages by a jury, for example, and the Bundy's have been acquitted by juries.  

 

My own guess is this: they're waiting for the big Democratic victory in a nationwide election, such as the one coming up in November.  Before that, or immediately afterward, expect to see a lot of articles in the press and on TV about how scary and dangerous the militia is, full of conspiracy nutters and people who hate the government, any government -- some people who post here will probably be quoted. 

 

Then there will be a legal assault: maybe state by state, to declare the militia movement a 'private army'. (Private armies are illegal in most states -- they just haven't tried to enforce the law against the miltia movement.) 

 

It's possible  at a national level that they will invoke the Smith Act, which makes actively advocating the violent overthrow of the government illegal.  (I'm going to post some of the relevant laws in my blog, You Can't Fool Life.)  However, before doing anything radical, they will probably wait for another mass shooting, ideally (from their point of view) done by someone who had attended some militia meetings. 

 

I don't think that they are so Machiavellian that they would have one of their people commit mass murder, but this would be the time for them to activate their sleepers inside the militia movement.

 

In the past, the movement has had people who stupidly fell for the line, "I know where we can get some [grenades/C4/machine guns ...].   In the Muslim community, their infiltrators have succeeded several times in persuading a young Muslim hotair merchant, who was just talking jihad, to take some actual steps towards it ... and then, bang, they're off to prison.  It's not quite entrapment (which is illegal) but not too far away from it. I don't lose any sleep over that, by the way.

 

Or they will sucker someone into selling the informant something illegal.  I knew someone in Texas -- fifty years ago -- who was a Black blowhard 'militant'. [Lee Otis Johnson, for anyone interested in looking up the details.] The police didn't like him. So an informant persuaded him to sell the informant a single marijuana joint. Result: a sentence of thirty years in prison. (He actually did four, before a higher court sprung him.)

 

Remember they have access to information about everyone, so if some not-very-deeply-committed person in a militia unit has been seeing a sweetie on the side (and of course not telling his wife), or has cheated on his income tax, or lied on his mortgage application, or lied about a criminal record when purchasing a firearm ... then he's open to blackmail, and there's your new informant.  I suspect these people are often the ones who spout the most hot air about "Standing up Now" and "Let's get the Boogaloo going!"  Several petty criminals in the militia movement and similar groups in the past have turned informant almost immediately when faced with jail time.

 

We need to think about how to respond to any such attacks.  It's absolutely elementary military wisdom that you have to try to plan out a response to all possible enemy attacks in advance, so you don't have to think about what to do when the tracers are zipping past your head.

 

So ... we need to start thinking now about at least three scenarios and how we should respond:

 

(1) A state, or national, ban on assault rifles.

(2) An attempt to indict some militia unit leaders under the Smith Act, for advocating violent overthrow of the government.

(3) An attempt to get the states to declare the militia an attempt to form a 'private army', which is illegal.

 

Take the names of all people who respond with any version of "That's when the boogaloo starts." There are your informants and provocateurs ... maybe working for free at the moment.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't second think your self.. makes no difference now. Power in Numbers and the American people want freedom. They have programmed you to be afraid,,,,, time to stop being afraid and take back your freedom or say screw it,,, I'm yours Mr government,,, go ahead beat me Mr police man. If you're afraid turn in your weapons and let real Patriots do it for you. Time of being afraid is over. They are braking the law,,, They are forcing  us into this,,,, I would rather die than live the rest of my life walking around with a muzzle on my face afraid to think on my own,,, live my life the way I choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kenguythe rooster said:

Can't second think your self.. makes no difference now. Power in Numbers and the American people want freedom. They have programmed you to be afraid,,,,, time to stop being afraid and take back your freedom or say screw it,,, I'm yours Mr government,,, go ahead beat me Mr police man. If you're afraid turn in your weapons and let real Patriots do it for you. Time of being afraid is over. They are braking the law,,, They are forcing  us into this,,,, I would rather die than live the rest of my life walking around with a muzzle on my face afraid to think on my own,,, live my life the way I choose.

I've been reading this sort of stuff for years.  "The time to act is now..." blah blah blah... "Get the boogaloo on!"  blah blah blah .... and yet ... nothing ever happens. 

 

There seem to be a lot of people who can Talk the Talk ... but they NEVER EVER Walk the Walk.  Millions of cubic feet of Big Tough Man Patented Hot Air is released. Ominous threats are made. Lots of scary words for Lefty journalists to eagerly record, to frighten their readers with.  Yet ... no action. 

 

Of course, if they're Russian trolls, or Lefty provocateurs, I understand why.  But probably at least a few of the "Let's start shooting now"  'Real Patriot' Big Talkers are, in their own way, sincere.  But they just keep sitting at home, and acting EXACTLY like the rest of us.  Well, maybe not EXACTLY ... I suspect these people are also the ones who never turn up at demonstrations, won't do any voter registration work,  won't try to get new members for the militia.  They'd probably rather watch Rambo again.

 

So ... lots and lots of talk, talk, talk.  Not one tiny little bit of action.

 

Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep seeing the same rhetoric of “cops use guns as a show of force” and “use guns to scare them”

well I occasionally have to use a syringe of sedatives for violet or agitated patients. Does that make me an oppressor? Why not just let that one guy break shit and yell and scare everyone? The short answer is I use a tool to calm them down ( AND don’t think I’d love to have a taser!) I do tell the person to either calm down or else. If anyone has been involved in crowd control you know that you are outnumbered and usually surrounded. That’s why the show force to even the odds. “IF” the police or whoever is unlawfully detaining or violating the persons rights then that’s TOTALLY different. Just to show up to protest and scare the opposition is not going to work. Let me elaborate. If you are a gun guy or if you’ve ever been hunting guns don’t scare you. People acting crazy is what scares you and it’s usually the guy that no one is watching the will be the problem.  The ones kitted out know that they are a target if you don’t then logic doesn’t apply to you. So who are you scaring? I’ve never seen a cop back down they just call for more assistance. It’s their job to show up it’s your decision to act up and their responsibility to enforce what ever law ( legal or unconstitutional ) that you may or may not be breaking. They aren’t there to be your friends. Don’t view every cop as your enemy if you do then why would you call them if you needed one? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...