Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Home Owner Stockpiles Ammo: ATF Raids. NWO - Project Disarm

page: 1
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:00 AM
link   
www.liveleak.com...

The Crackdown is happening. If the NWO finds out you are stockpiling ammo and guns they can raid your home too.




posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:03 AM
link   
well, I would question it too. why does a homeowner need that many guns and ammunition? what's his motivation? he might use them to take revenge or harm someone. BTW I am all for disarming civilians or even destroying all hand weapons once and for all. In this case, I believe it was wise for them to raid his home.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:08 AM
link   
If you paid attention it says he didn't have any guns. I don't know what he'd be doing with all that ammo without guns, but they said there was none.
All because of the ex girlfriend.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:13 AM
link   
In response to JediMiller:
A man could use any weapon to harm someone if he wants. If a man has one gun and one bullet. Or if guns dont exist, then a knife or rock would suffice. So why get rid of guns? Having a large quantity of ammo and guns is the true premise of a militia, to allow the citizenry to counter an over reaching government. Our stockpiles are our defense. Also they will serve as excellent currency when the economy fails.

Listen to what this man who was raided believed, not unlike the majority of ATS writers, he shared the belief in a coming economic disaster, A confrontation with a NWO force and/or our own government. He was raided for his beliefs. If we dont stand up for him, who will stand up for us when our homes are raided?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Thats not good!!!
Be Afraid.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Here is another newslink for this Raid:
ATF RAID - PROJECT DISARM NEWS ARTICLE CLICK HERE

[edit on (9/4/07) by AllSeeingI]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Sorry, I could not read the article. it's blocked on this computer..but why a single man would need that many ammo is beyond belief.


I don't believe in guns. It's an easy way to kill someone. you said rocks and hammers would suffice, I find it really hard to believe that someone with a rock can kill me instantly. Plus I know how to defend myself, having taking numerous taichi, kungfu courses, it would be very hard to someone to kill me with a rock.


However, if we were to go to war and the people needed to ARM themselves to defend themselves, i'm all for it. this is the same ideology Bush used to invade iraq. but obviously, this guys is not defending anyone..he could be the agressor.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:18 AM
link   
The day due diligence died...

No reason to research, let's just post a video and follow like lemmings. Never mind that he had recently been under psychiatric evaluation, never mind that he had a restraining order against him... Nah, Virginia Tech?

Whatchatalkinabout Willis?

www.wlfi.com...

www.indystar.com.../20070901/LOCAL/709010540/1196

www.wndu.com...

Seems as though they had probable cause to me... And I'm about as big a Second Amendment type as you'll find.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by alaskan
 


He doesnt have any guns?
BS!
Of course he has guns!
The man had over 18,000 rounds of ammo!
If they didnt find any guns he must have them stashed somewhere else. The man was planning on using the ammo to "defend those he loves" during the comming economic failure.
Tell me how he would defend those he loves with bullets and no gun?
By throwing the ammo real hard?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jedimiller
 


um doesnt the constitution give us the rite to bear arms?i see nothing this guy did wrong and i myself if it wasnt for the fact that i have an 8 year old in the house would be stockpiling weapons and ammo right now.its that serious in the world lol do you not pay attention to current events?not meaning to bash you my friend but as a member of ats i would assume you would understand why one would want to stockpile weapons and i would also assume that you know its our constitutional rite to do just that...now on to the topic at hand i think we at ats need to rally behind this guy....this is just another step towards depleting the oppisition before martial law hits us in the face.violation of a restraining order does not constitute a raid on somebodys house....period..if people acctually shrug events like this off then i truely think we have a mountain to climb in the event of a us dictatorship or martial law scenario.




edit for speeling lol

[edit on 4-9-2007 by future flow]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:38 AM
link   
I'm new here. So I don't know where I'm supposed to stand. But I don't like taking sides. I do feel that weapons should be used as a group effort..to protect or fight back against oppression. if we are to get invaded by an Evil entity and we have to go out there and fight them, then we can all organize and distribute the guns and use them orderly, as a team. that's what the constitution grants us.

I feel that some people are abusing that right and going SOLO fighting their endless personal war and it has nothing to do with our rights to fight back. but if we collect and destroy all our weapons then we wouldnt be having this problem.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by jedimiller
 


Stand wherever you like... There's no rules as to what your opinion should be... After all... It's your opinion.


Just make sure you post within the Terms & Conditions Of Use.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by jedimiller
 


i see your logic my friend it would be great if we could gather up the worlds weapons and destroy them....but the reality is its not gone happen.and there is no side that your supposed to be on everyone is entitled to thier opinions and beliefs at ats so welcome its good to have you here....but as far as somebody invading and us handing out weapons and so forth not a good idea in my opinion because one i dont think it would work very well and two the people im worried about honestly arer not from another country lol its our own gov that im worried about....and thier blackwater soldiers




edit spelling again lol im doin bad tonight

[edit on 4-9-2007 by future flow]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 03:50 AM
link   
So all it takes for probable cause is someone filing a restraining order on you?!! What am I missing?

So all it takes is for someone to be judged mentally ill and we can't have ammo? Aren't we all mentally ill since we're on this forum?

Project Disarm?

This country is in deep trouble! All the more reason for everyone to get armed as a deterrence to government tyranny such as this.

Being prepared sounds rational to me.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Mirthful Me
 


I'm very curious to know what was on this restraining order... Typically, they only state that you can't be around someone within so much distance, and usually the orders don't go as far as to say anything about, "We think you're looney, so you can't have any guns/ammo."

Christ, the psychiatrist stated he was delusional, at best, and felt he was good enough to be let go... by your source.


"Whatever reason they were called out for it just wasn't there and the citizens of the neighborhood were never in any danger and they're not in any danger now,” Dave Thomas says.
source


Didn't sound like that much of a problem to me.

Anyrate, thus far there's not enough evidence to show me that there was a justifiable reason to rid this man of his rights... not yet, anyway.

Keeping him under a watchful eye is one thing... but, just assuming something doesn't make it look good for the rest of the "the world's gonna end" type delusional groups of people... especially for all those here at ATS.

It's fishy to me that it was just as simple as they made it out to be. I'll happily watch for updates to this.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:43 AM
link   


A man could use any weapon to harm someone if he wants. If a man has one gun and one bullet. Or if guns dont exist, then a knife or rock would suffice. So why get rid of guns?


Because guns make killing easy.




He doesnt have any guns?
BS!
Of course he has guns!
The man had over 18,000 rounds of ammo!
If they didnt find any guns he must have them stashed somewhere else. The man was planning on using the ammo to "defend those he loves" during the comming economic failure.
Tell me how he would defend those he loves with bullets and no gun?
By throwing the ammo real hard?


Um, he believes in a coming economic crisis. He believes a revolution is coming.

What if he doesnt want to get hurt?

How will he keep his standing and profit from such a time?

By selling Ammunition


v
i see your logic my friend it would be great if we could gather up the worlds weapons and destroy them


NO!

Only guns! Ancient weapons have a soul. Guns do not. They are merely an extension of your own strength and skill, even a crossbow requires winding.

But a gun is purely a weapon of the wallet. More money=bigger gun=faster shots=more deaths.



So all it takes for probable cause is someone filing a restraining order on you?!! What am I missing?


You want to give a person who has a restraining on them a gun?

ill prefer not, thank you.




So all it takes is for someone to be judged mentally ill and we can't have ammo? Aren't we all mentally ill since we're on this forum?


!!!

Lets just give all asylum inmates matches and see how that goes




Keeping him under a watchful eye is one thing...


yes, but the thing is that police wont have the time to intervene until after he strikes, if he chooses too.

Also, watching him at all hours would be a break in his right of privacy, would it not?

This way they are keeping an eye on him in a place where he cant do any real damage. If he can give a good justified reason why he has all the ammunition, and if he passes a psychiactric exam, then im sure they will let him go.


[edit on 4-9-2007 by Octavius Maximus]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 07:23 AM
link   
From the article:
"Investigators believe the man thought the global economy was on the verge of a collapse that would result in widespread violence, the affidavit says."

THis doesn't sound delusional to me!

Guns are necessary for people like myself who live in the country. As I've said before on ATS, it would take the police at least 15 min. to arrive at our house if someone threatened us and by that time I'd be dead. When my husband is gone, I like having a gun here to protect myself. Also, if raccoons or coyotes come after chickens or goats, or if a mountain lion goes after my horses, I can protect them.
Not to mention if there's any kind of social upheaval or martial law. If things go way south in our country, we'll at least be able to protect ourselves and our property from thieves, murderers, etc.

I was against guns all my life until I moved to the country.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jedimiller
well, I would question it too. why does a homeowner need that many guns and ammunition? what's his motivation? he might use them to take revenge or harm someone. BTW I am all for disarming civilians or even destroying all hand weapons once and for all. In this case, I believe it was wise for them to raid his home.


Yeah good idea if the elite, police, military and everyone else in the world throws away their weapons too.

Problem is, thats not going to happen. Everytime a goverment has banned and confiscated weapons, soon after horrible things happened. Dictatorships, rounding up and imprisoning civilians, murder, etc all right after weapons were taken from us.

Familiarize yourself with history. Hitler, Pol, Stalin, and many more brutal men all banned weapon ownership. Not to protect us from crime, but to make us unable to defend ourselves against them.

Our founding fathers of the United States gave us the right to bear arms for just this very reason. To defend ourselves against an overzealous goverment. In fact, we have the right to bear arms to also overthrow the goverment if it should fail to follow the constitution.

I have every right to own a million guns and a billion rounds of ammo if I so please. And when martial law comes, I wont be going gentle into that good night to quote dylan thomas.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 07:25 AM
link   
first let me start off by saying that...i LIKE guns. its not a macho thing, its not a tough guy thing, they were just part of the culture where i grew up.

a gun is a tool much like a hammer or screwdriver. i enjoy shooting. i hunt. if in an EXTREME case i can use it to defend myself. ive had concealed permits in the past and have excersised that right. ive also been confronted while carrying a gun and have never felt the need to draw down on anyone or even intimidate them. if some punk wants my wallet fine, its a few bucks and i can cancel my cards and replace my ID. if i felt that i or someone else was in immediate danger that would be different but ive yet to feel my life was in danger so i have never felt the need to use my gun in that aspect.

i DO believe in rational gun laws. i dont think the NWO or the USG is out to get my guns so i have no problems with registration laws.

i believe that the 2nd amendment is as much to protect US soil from foreign aggressors as much as it is to protect us in the event the consititution were to fail us.

i am all for laws that prevent those CONVICTED of domestic violence from owning or possessing guns. anyone that will abuse their loved ones is obviously too deranged to own a gun.

if this guy had a restraining order against him thats probably where they started looking at his ammo pile and felt that where theres a lot of ammo there just may be a gun or two and felt the need to check it out. yes, we're outraged but would we have been MORE outraged had he capped someone?

doin away with guns of ANY kind is NOT the answer. i like my "assault rifles" and i quote that becuase an AR15 isnt an assault rifle unless its got an illegal full auto conversion (not as easy as people think by the way). real assault rifles are full auto and fall under the class3 license. for the record i believe that theres only been ONE crime committed with a legal full auto in us history (at least to where they put the class 3 laws into effect)

so i mean if we're going to get silly and blame an object for peoples actions lets go all out. speed limit is 75 on most interstates yet many many cars will do over 100mph. why? i know guys been beaten with baseball bats by guys not going to a ball game. restrict those to sporting arenas only? hammers. if youre not licenesed no hammer for you.

see how crazy things could get in a real hurry? where is the line where "personal responsibililty" comes into play here? we're a nation of blame the other guy and sue everyone else. its crazy.

oh and jedi, not to be picky or anything but while most martial arts are for "self defense" isnt it also true that they can be used offensivly? so i have a spinal cord injury and dont think i could use any of my martial arts training anymore so why cant i carry a gun to protect myself in case someone like you doesnt like the color of my hat? again, extremes, wheres the line?

so as far as guns go, im ok with rational laws. registration. licenses, and mandatory training or psych evals before you can get a permit. but when someone tells me that my mini15, ar15, sig556 are overkill then i say so is your corvette or SUV (how many people take them offroad? just a big gas guzzling way to compensate i guess).



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
The day due diligence died...

No reason to research, let's just post a video and follow like lemmings. Never mind that he had recently been under psychiatric evaluation, never mind that he had a restraining order against him... Nah, Virginia Tech?

Whatchatalkinabout Willis?

www.wlfi.com...

www.indystar.com.../20070901/LOCAL/709010540/1196

www.wndu.com...

Seems as though they had probable cause to me... And I'm about as big a Second Amendment type as you'll find.


Dont you see the danger here ? Anyone who has ever taken an antidepresent medication could be considered "under medical evaluation"

And anyone can have a restraining order place upon them. All they have to do is ask a judge.

This is scary. The thinking of lets act before something could happen is not a road we should be heading down. Whats next, imprison anyone who might commit a crime ?





new topics

top topics



 
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join